Category: Residential Solar

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 21 >>

01/29/15

  06:36:00 am, by Laurel Hamilton, Projects Coordinator, Run on Sun   , 406 words  
Categories: All About Solar Power, Solar Economics, Residential Solar

Its Official...Solar Boosts Home-Owners' Property Values!

Selling into the SunMany solar stakeholders have always assumed rooftop solar systems add to the resale value of a property. Homeowners and residential solar companies frequently use this benefit as one of the many reasons to invest in solar even though until recently there had been little statistical evidence to support the assumption.

So we were thrilled to read the new study, “Selling into the Sun: Price Premium Analysis of a Multi-State Dataset of Solar Homes,” which finally quantifies the resale value of residential photovoltaic  (PV) solar systems. The study was a collaborative effort including esteemed scientists from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley Lab, Adomatis Appraisal Services, Real Property Analytics/Texas A&M University, University of California at San Diego, San Diego State University, and Sandia National Laboratories.

The team analyzed some 22,000 home sales, of which nearly 4,000 had PV rooftop solar systems (more than double the number in previous studies), in eight states over a 12-year span including the housing market boom, bust, and recovery. This is by far the largest and broadest dataset ever analyzed on the subject.

Results prove that homebuyers are consistently willing to pay more for homes with host-owned solar systems — averaging about $4 per watt of PV installed — across various states, housing and PV markets, and home types. This amounts to a premium of about $15,000 for a typical rooftop system. Other important conclusions the team discovered are as follows:

  • PV premiums had little variability between new and existing homes.
  • The dollar per watt premium decreases incrementally as system sizes increase - with the best value at 4 kilowatts (average household PV size) or less.
  • As systems age, the PV premium depreciates sharply from $6/watt for systems less than two years old to $3/watt after about eight years.
  • PV premiums correlate to the net cost of the solar system — which take into account rebates and incentives — and appear to be independent of the PV system gross cost estimates.

As residential solar systems become more and more common, it is important to be able to value them accurately. The evidence of the added investment value shown from this study is a critical step for the growth of residential solar. And PV premiums are obviously a benefit homeowners should consider when doing their cost-benefit analysis of going solar.

Please note that this study only focused on host-owned solar, not those with leased systems. It would be interesting to see a future study including this growing portion of the PV market.

01/06/15

  07:15:00 am, by Jim Jenal - Founder & CEO   , 186 words  
Categories: All About Solar Power, Utilities, Commercial Solar, Residential Solar

Utilities Fighting Back - Same old, same old

New year, same battle.

We have reported for some time about efforts by the Investor-Owned Utilities (IOUs) like Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) to do what they can to make rooftop solar less attractive, if not kill it outright.  This report from NPR demonstrates how that fight is playing out here in California, and elsewhere.

As we begin the new year, this story is an important reminder that supportive public policy doesn’t just happen, and there are forces arrayed against this industry that would like nothing more than to make rooftop solar - the sort that homes and businesses can use - go away completely.  (Ironically, this is at the same time that utilities are investing ever more in their own solar facilities - such as this one in Colorado, or this one in California - as a hedge against carbon regulations and unpredictable fossil fuel prices.) 

If we are to defend and expand the ability of average home and business owners to lower their bills while reducing their carbon footprint, we will need to be proactive this year in supporting the policies, and politicians, that allow that to happen.

12/01/14

  10:49:00 am, by Jim Jenal - Founder & CEO   , 174 words  
Categories: All About Solar Power, Residential Solar

NPR gets the message - Solar is Now!

Readers of this blog know that solar is growing like crazy, and it looks like NPR has gotten the message. 
(H/T SolarWakeup.com)

Here is a Morning Edition story that you may have missed from last week amid the holiday hoopla:

Here are some key take aways:

  • Solar is growing fast - indeed, year-over-year growth of 30%+ is the hallmark of an exploding industry;
  • Costs are falling fast - with greater scale come the inevitable cost reductions making solar more affordable for more people;
  • Those falling costs don’t necessarily involve labor in China - LG modules that we use are made in South Korea;
  • Innovative financing is helping - true, but with a caveat. Residential leases are still a trap for people who aren’t good with math, but improved loan programs, the return of Home Equity Lines of Credit, and even HERO financing all have an important part to play.

Given that so many of our clients are NPR listeners, it is good to see that they are finally helping to spread the word that solar is here to stay!

Tags:

11/16/14

  12:01:00 pm, by Jim Jenal - Founder & CEO   , 1247 words  
Categories: Residential Solar, Safety, Ranting

BP Solar Flames Out - Leaves Consumers at Risk

Solar module manufacturer BP Solar - the “green” branch of energy giant British Petroleum (the same folks who brought you the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico) - exited the solar market in 2011.  But now a class-action lawsuit is alleging that BP Solar knew as early as 2005 that some of its solar modules, including ones that were widely sold in California, pose a serious risk of failure and even fires.  Will BP step up and do the right thing?  (For the record, Run on Sun never used BP Solar modules.) 

BP does not deny that they have a potential problem.   In a carefully worded 2012 Product Advisory, BP acknowledged the following:

This product advisory is being issued to communicate a potential risk when using certain BP Solar modules in specific types of installations. Testing has shown there is a limited risk of cable to busbar disconnection in the junction box that, in rare cases, may lead to a thermal event in certain applications of the products referenced below. A thermal event, depending upon the severity, can cause secondary damage to surrounding materials that are not fire resistant.

While BP’s advisory uses the overly lawyered phrase, “thermal event” to describe what can happen, others use less measured language.  A report on Bay Area television station KTVU/Fox 2 speaks of consumer complaints about solar modules with a bevy of problems including “burning up, shattering and putting homes in danger.”

 

BP is not the only entity to “lawyer-up."  The two-person law firm of Birka-White is challenging BP in a class action lawsuit (see the complaint here) that harkens back to David taking on Goliath.  Birka-White, which had previously sued Suntech over problems with solar roofing tiles, a problem we have documented in this blog, alleges in their suit that a defect in the junction box on the affected BP solar modules causes them to fail, “resulting in a loss of electric current and serious safety risks, including the risk of fire."  Despite that risk, the complaint alleges that BP continued to sell the defective modules until 2010, even though BP knew of the defects “since at least 2005." 

More specifically, the complaint alleges that:

Burn damage to BP solar modules17. The connection between Solar Panels is made at a junction box attached to each Solar Panel.  A defect in the junction box and the solder joints between the connecting cables causes the solder joint to overheat.

18. When the solder joint overheats, the connection between the Solar Panels breaks. This break in the circuit results in an arc of an electrical current which generates heat between 2000-3000 degrees Fahrenheit.

19. The heat caused by this failure melts the junction box, burns the cables and the Solar Panel and shatters the glass cover of the Solar Panel. Attached hereto as Exhibit D are photographs of BP Solar Panel junction box failures. If there is flammable material near the heat source, such a [sic] dry leaves, the junction box failure creates a high risk of fire. Fires caused by junction box failures have already occurred and there is a substantial risk that they will occur in the future.

20. Because of the defect in the junction box, all Solar Panels relevant to this litigation have failed or will fail before the end of their expected useful life.

The photos above are taken from Exhibit D and show the sort of “thermal event” that the affected homeowners (the potential members of the class to be certified as part of the litigation) could experience.

Faced with such compelling evidence of product defects, what has BP’s response been?  You guessed it - to hide behind their limited warranty and to offer consumers a financial remedy that falls far short of making them whole.

To be sure, any product can have a defect, and it is by no means uncommon for a corporation to seek shelter from liability for such defects by pointing to limiting language in its product warranties.  Yet BP, which had a net profit in 2013 of $13.4 billion, would certainly seem to be in a position to compensate the innocent victims of its product defects more fully.  Of course, having halted solar operations altogether, BP has no ongoing vested interest in avoiding the black eye that its stonewalling will inevitably create for the entire solar industry.  Indeed, how will other solar module manufacturers respond to BP’s failure and the ensuing litigation?  Strong statements from industry leaders affirming their commitment to address promptly, and beyond the fine print of their limited warranties, problems arising from product defects could go a long way to restoring consumer confidence damaged by these BP revelations.

Scope of the Problem in California

We decided to take a look into the CSI data to get a sense of how big an issue this might be in California.  BP’s product advisory asserts that only certain module models, and only those manufactured from March 1, 2005 to October 31, 2006 have the defect that can lead to “thermal events.” The complaint, however, disputes that limitation, alleging that, “the risk of junction box failure exists for all Solar Panels - not just the limited number listed in the Product Advisory - manufactured at any time - not just the limited time frame covered by the Product Advisory.”

Regardless of which position is determined to be accurate, the CSI data provides no visibility into installations prior to 2007.  And while the problem may or may not affect module models beyond those listed in the Product Advisory, as far as the data is concerned, the vast number of residential installations made use of only two BP models: BP175B and BP4175B - both of which are listed on the Product Advisory.  Both products appear in the data as of 2007 (which could easily include modules manufactured during the Product Advisory period) and continue into this year.  The peak year for installations of the 175B module was 2010, whereas the 4175B peaked the year later, in 2011.  Here is the distribution:

BP module distribution

At a minimum, those 135 installation in 2007 would likely have used modules from the Product Advisory period, and if plaintiffs are correct, there could be as many as 1,300+ installations based on these two modules alone.

While there is no doubt that individual homeowners are at greatest risk, there are more than 100 companies that installed these BP modules, potentially exposing them to liability for failures.  Affected companies include major players like SolarCity, Verengo, and Sungevity, as well as dozens of much smaller companies, many of which are no longer in business.  Those companies relied upon BP’s representations and are also victims here.

While larger companies might have the resources (if not necessarily the inclination) to help out their customers in this situation, smaller companies with more limited resources are not in a position to foot the bill for replacement systems (the remedy being sought in the litigation).  Never-the-less, they can and should offer free inspections to their affected customers.  It will be far better for the solar industry if a customer learns of a potential problem from the company that installed their system than if they hear about it in the media, or worse, suffer a “thermal event” on their own roof.

As solar installers, we depend upon manufactures to produce products that are safe and reliable, and to stand behind those products when there is an issue.  We cannot, sadly, control the outcome when a supposedly competent manufacturer introduces defective products and then refuses to act responsibly.  We can, and must, however, take all reasonable steps available to us to mitigate the harm - to our clients and to the industry - when such unpleasant circumstances arise.

10/11/14

  08:21:00 am, by Jim Jenal - Founder & CEO   , 360 words  
Categories: All About Solar Power, Energy Efficiency, Residential Solar

Keeping the Lights on...

We stumbled upon an interesting graphic that highlights just what it takes to keep the lights on in our homes and work places.  It is a tale of both efficiency and waste.  We thought it was worth sharing… (h/t The EnergyCollective.)

The starting point for the graphic (click on the image at left for the full size graphic) is an old fashioned (i.e., wasteful) 100 Watt incandescent light bulb.  If you turned on such a light and left it running for a year, how much energy would it consume?  That’s the easy calculation - 100 W = 0.1 kW.  There are 8,760 hours in a year (roughly - don’t go getting all leap year on me) so our light bulb uses:
0.1 kW x 8,760 hours = 876 kWh. 

Quite a lot, really, just to light a room!

The graphic proceeds to explore what it would take to produce that much power from each of our common energy sources.  Interestingly, only one of these sources is something you can own - and that, of course, is solar.  (While you could own a wind turbine, the one in the graphic is a 1.5 MW turbine, definitely not something to put in your backyard!)  To be fair, the graphic assumes an installation of 100 square meters which is 1,076 square feet, and that is significantly larger than most residential solar systems.  If your system is smaller, it takes longer for your system to keep the light on, but the end result is the same: your own power source meeting your needs, with no pollution or long-lived waste products to worry about.

On the other end of that scale is the coal plant where our light bulb requires us to burn nearly half a ton of coal and emit over a ton of CO2 in the process!

The good news is that both that wasteful incandescent light bulb, and coal-fired power plants are going away, just not fast enough.  (Changing out your old 100 Watt light bulbs with efficient LEDs will drop these numbers by more than a factor of five.)  Every solar installation directly reduces our greenhouse gas emissions - and saves the system owner substantial amounts of money over the lifetime of the system.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 21 >>

Jim Jenal is the Founder & CEO of Run on Sun, Pasadena's premier installer and integrator of top-of-the-line solar power installations.
In addition, Run on Sun offers solar consulting services, working with consumers, utilities and municipalities to help them make solar power affordable and reliable.

Ready to Save?

Let’s Get Started!

We're Social!



Follow Run on Sun on Twitter Like Run on Sun on Facebook

Search

Run on Sun helps fight Climate Change
powered by b2evolution