Rough math is that if everyone who bought an EV also had a 2.5 kw solar system, it would offset ev charging (20k miles/yr, 4mi/kwhr). I think prices right now put that around $4k after tax, installation included.
I understand that many cannot afford an extra $4k but costs are going to come down and there may be incentives to do this. It seems like a simple way to even out the grid.
Mr_Asa said:Antihero (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to Mr_Asa :
If the panel is covered it's not producing electricity so a heater using the electricity it isn't producing won't really work without drawing from the battery bank. You pretty much never ever want to produce heat with a battery bank, it's horrid for them
I was stationed in DC and working for a week at one of our remote facilities one winter. We had a blizzard come through and knock out the power lines. There were generators hooked up to the station, and those generators had trickle chargers on the batteries and block warmers plumbed into the system.
Some damned fool didn't plug either of those into station power, so when the power lines went down I got to sit there in the glow of a backup UPS and listen to the generator try to crank itself over with a frozen battery. Was a cold night, but someone eventually got out there with enough juice to start the system up.
Cold absolutely hurts batteries but that's not my point.
Anything that produces heat draws a lot of power and batteries, especially deep cycles, really don't like huge draws. So if you are totally off grid you couldn't coul to have a solar power heater hooked to a battery bank, a generator would be a vastly better idea.
Or, just brush them off
Subscriber-unavailabile said:Besides the electric infrastructure. I'm curious how lithium mining will work out. More ICE vehicle more lithium, so prices will go up, then everything follows suit. If lithium on the market has a huge increase then cars will cost more.
Ding, ding, ding! When I was working in the EV business that was something that was a concern. Unless someone comes up with a different battery chemistry the demand for lithium is going to go crazy. Think about it, cars, cell phones, laptops, power walls... it's a lot of batteries.
In reply to wawazat :
Battle Creek
I think the thing so many fail to realize is there is no one answer for all of our energy needs. There are too many variances across the country. Mass transit works in dense population centers but is useless in rural locations. Solar is great for places like socal, or florida. But in northern states not so much. Wind has it's place. Electric cars are fantastic in urban environments, but not as ideal for cross country etc.
Once we realize that we need more than one option to handle our needs, we'll finally be on the right path. Until then, it's going to be more of the same idiocy we are used to.
ProDarwin said:Rough math is that if everyone who bought an EV also had a 2.5 kw solar system, it would offset ev charging (20k miles/yr, 4mi/kwhr). I think prices right now put that around $4k after tax, installation included.
I understand that many cannot afford an extra $4k but costs are going to come down and there may be incentives to do this. It seems like a simple way to even out the grid.
At $2.50/gallon and 30 mpg, that's about 2.5 years of gasoline. If you can finance that $4k over three years you'll actually be paying less per month until you're not paying anything.
bobzilla said:I think the thing so many fail to realize is there is no one answer for all of our energy needs. There are too many variances across the country. Mass transit works in dense population centers but is useless in rural locations.
We could discuss whether or not mass transit actually "works" in this country at all. If we look at the "Farebox Recovery Ratio" we see that most if not all mass transit companies in the US operate at a significant loss.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farebox_recovery_ratio
It's probably more accurate to describe mass transit systems as a social welfare program, and that's fine, but let's be realistic. Those who beat the mass transit drum the loudest tend to be those elitists who are least likely to use it and just want everybody else to use it so they can have the roads all to themselves.
1988RedT2 said:bobzilla said:I think the thing so many fail to realize is there is no one answer for all of our energy needs. There are too many variances across the country. Mass transit works in dense population centers but is useless in rural locations.
We could discuss whether or not mass transit actually "works" in this country at all. If we look at the "Farebox Recovery Ratio" we see that most if not all mass transit companies in the US operate at a significant loss.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farebox_recovery_ratio
It's probably more accurate to describe mass transit systems as a social welfare program, and that's fine, but let's be realistic. Those who beat the mass transit drum the loudest tend to be those elitists who are least likely to use it and just want everybody else to use it so they can have the roads all to themselves.
That is an overly simplistic way of looking at it. For instance, what is the cost of the time people are sitting in their cars? How much was that reduced by reducing the number of cars on the road?
In and of itself, it may be a loss, but it is generally a net positive.
Keith Tanner said:ProDarwin said:Rough math is that if everyone who bought an EV also had a 2.5 kw solar system, it would offset ev charging (20k miles/yr, 4mi/kwhr). I think prices right now put that around $4k after tax, installation included.
I understand that many cannot afford an extra $4k but costs are going to come down and there may be incentives to do this. It seems like a simple way to even out the grid.
At $2.50/gallon and 30 mpg, that's about 2.5 years of gasoline. If you can finance that $4k over three years you'll actually be paying less per month until you're not paying anything.
There are a lot of systems where solar panels are replacing roofing shingles, this might play into the affordability of it vs the standard replacement cost of a roof. At least, for what many of the US homes construction type is...
I am just going to say this: The Law of Unintended Consequences bites you in the ass every time.
I see a mandate that all new vehicles must be electric by X date as having a thousand unintended consequences. I doubt many of them will be good.
triumph7 said:Subscriber-unavailabile said:Besides the electric infrastructure. I'm curious how lithium mining will work out. More ICE vehicle more lithium, so prices will go up, then everything follows suit. If lithium on the market has a huge increase then cars will cost more.
Ding, ding, ding! When I was working in the EV business that was something that was a concern. Unless someone comes up with a different battery chemistry the demand for lithium is going to go crazy. Think about it, cars, cell phones, laptops, power walls... it's a lot of batteries.
Its something that has been in a center of attention, even back when I was in college in the Naughties (~2005). Its why you hear as much as you do about Hydrogen fuel cells.
Heres a very basic discussion of some stuff in this area.
https://www.power-technology.com/features/lithium-battery-alternatives/
So, there isnt as much of a dead end as you might fear, but you are right that a lithium mine is an ecological disaster and rare earths are a HUGE challenge across the board.
I always thought that some kind of Alge based bio-diesel was the future, but time has proven me wrong (so far at least). Ocean farming of alges just strikes me as the most expandable system that can also be used in excess production for carbon sequestration (pump the excess underground to put the carbon we pumped out in oil back down there for safekeeping for the environment, and hey, it a few thousand years it will be oil again!)
I was curious, so I looked it up. I'm using between 270 and 800 kWh over the past 12 months. Average of 445 kWh. I have gas heat, water heater, stove, and oven.
Solar would have a 14-33 year payback for me, depending on which calculator and company I use.
Full EV vehicles would increase that between 10% and 200%. Hard to say, as I'm not sure what our driving habits will be in the future. Past 12 months, and the 12 months prior to that, certainly are not representative of what our norm will be.
mtn (Forum Supporter) said:I was curious, so I looked it up. I'm using between 270 and 800 kWh over the past 12 months. Average of 445 kWh. I have gas heat, water heater, stove, and oven.
Solar would have a 14-33 year payback for me, depending on which calculator and company I use.
Full EV vehicles would increase that between 10% and 200%. Hard to say, as I'm not sure what our driving habits will be in the future. Past 12 months, and the 12 months prior to that, certainly are not representative of what our norm will be.
When you're doing that calculation, remember to apply the money you would be spending on gasoline to the solar payoff. From memory, going EV with an average distance of 27 miles/day saved us something like $120/mo on fuel costs after the cost of the electricity was taken into account. That's not why we did it but it adds up pretty nicely.
In reply to mtn (Forum Supporter) :
What's the cost difference you are calculating in the payback period with full EVs? You said 10- 200% more.
Are you picturing increased PV cells? Battery storage? What other factors?
Keith Tanner said:mtn (Forum Supporter) said:I was curious, so I looked it up. I'm using between 270 and 800 kWh over the past 12 months. Average of 445 kWh. I have gas heat, water heater, stove, and oven.
Solar would have a 14-33 year payback for me, depending on which calculator and company I use.
Full EV vehicles would increase that between 10% and 200%. Hard to say, as I'm not sure what our driving habits will be in the future. Past 12 months, and the 12 months prior to that, certainly are not representative of what our norm will be.
When you're doing that calculation, remember to apply the money you would be spending on gasoline to the solar payoff. From memory, going EV with an average distance of 27 miles/day saved us something like $120/mo on fuel costs after the cost of the electricity was taken into account. That's not why we did it but it adds up pretty nicely.
That doesn't make sense to me. Every kWh he generates has a certain value. It doesn't matter if it goes back to the grid or into his car. EV vs. Gas is an issue that can be calculated separately with or without solar.
The important thing to calculate there is the time-value of the money you spend up front on solar. If you invest it in the market, you will always beat solar. (I'm not saying don't do solar. Just don't make a flawed financial argument for it).
He's calculating the extra cost involved in running an EV, which assumes that the power goes into the car instead of the grid. Okay, there's an extra cost. But there's also a savings that comes from the car. If you're looking at the big picture, you should really be looking at both aspects.
Note: I am not an accountant, I studied pure math and money does not follow the rules of mathematics. This is based on a high level view of money going in vs money going out, and an EV will affect both sides of that.
Based on my experiences as an investor, the only way I could beat solar would be if I burned the house down using the solar.
What I am saying is, if you can sell solar back to the grid, your payoff is 0% related to how much electricity you use.
Amount generated * cost per unit energy is what it 'earns' you, whether you use it directly, or someone else does.
If you are selling back at a lower cost than buying it, it does mess with these calculations.
Then the EV isn't part of the equation. Either it is or it isn't, and if it is you need to look at both sides of the cost. If the EV increases the payback time of solar (because you're not selling the power back to the grid at wholesale?), then it seems only fair that the fuel you are not buying also gets taken into account unless you are purposely ignoring the whole picture.
Or you look at the solar completely independently, regardless of what is eating the electrons. I just don't see how it can be halfway.
I think we are in agreement... the EV is not part of the equation. Unless there is a buying vs. selling cost difference, in which case all energy usage is part of the equation.
My analysis wasn't that in depth.
Solar payback period is between 14 and 33 years right now, some of those calculations were using a Tesla roof. I'm sure that will get cheaper. I live in Chicagoland in a very old neighborhood with lots of mature shade-providing trees and a small house. I'm definitely not a good use case for Solar, I just don't get enough sun and don't have a lot of real estate to put the solar panels in.
For the EV cars, I didn't factor them into the solar cost. Different calculations entirely, not related, I could relate them but I'm not getting any solar anytime soon; an EV is probably years away as well. I just used 4 miles per kWh and the miles we drove over the past year to throw a ballpark number at it. But I don't know how much we will drive in the future. We've put on maybe 200 miles in the last 2 months. That certainly isn't representative, nor would my 40 mile roundtrip commute from pre-pandemic. I doubt I'll be in the office more than twice a week going forward, but it'll be 0 times a week until June at least. And that really hurts my case to get an EV - if I don't drive that often, what the hell do I care about the MPG? May as well get a Ramcharger and run it at WOT, won't make enough difference for my pocketbook to notice.
And while the environmental cost is a huge consideration for me, the biggest consideration is my pocketbook.
For those considering a system with a payback of up to 30 years or more, consider this: The average life expectancy of a photovoltaic system is between 25 and 30 years. Also relevant: Over their lifetime, panels very slowly degrade, meaning they may produce less and less electricity.
https://news.energysage.com/how-long-do-solar-panels-last/
AFAIK that's been a moving target. Panels are lasting longer and getting less expensive, so the lifespan has been increasing as the payback time drops.
we are averaging 1800-2200kWh per month. We are total electric, well, etc. Propane would be the only other option for heating/stove/water heater but that's a bit expensive around us (~$2.50/gal). We have enough mature trees around us solar isn't entirely beneficial. Wind would be good for us because of our location but no one wants to sell/install wind units. We looked into solar last year. $74k to install 2000W of solar panels, inverters etc to make the house function on or off grid. yes, there's rebates and tax cuts etc but we were still lookingat $26k out of pocket up front. at the current average of $200/month we are looking at 11 years to pay back the initial investment IF it covered our entire month's usage. Due to our location, that's a big question mark.
bobzilla said:we are averaging 1800-2200kWh per month. We are total electric, well, etc. Propane would be the only other option for heating/stove/water heater but that's a bit expensive around us (~$2.50/gal). We have enough mature trees around us solar isn't entirely beneficial. Wind would be good for us because of our location but no one wants to sell/install wind units. We looked into solar last year. $74k to install 2000W of solar panels, inverters etc to make the house function on or off grid. yes, there's rebates and tax cuts etc but we were still lookingat $26k out of pocket up front. at the current average of $200/month we are looking at 11 years to pay back the initial investment IF it covered our entire month's usage. Due to our location, that's a big question mark.
I love the idea of windmills, but those suckers are noisy if they're too close to your house, at least the one I've been near was. No clue if that is the norm.
In reply to mtn (Forum Supporter) :
I'm talking about home sized VAWG. They can be quiet but they also require more maintenance than a solar panel
You'll need to log in to post.
