« First « Previous Comments 21,889 - 21,928 of 46,695 Next » Last » Search these comments
21926
Ceffer
2023 Mar 4, 11:31am
Ceffer
2023 Mar 4, 11:31am
What about 'designed to fail' didn't you understand? Nothing like promoting marginal technologies with no legs, using them to launder tax money and profits to elites, then sequestering the the energy assets that actually work to hold society hostage.
https://t.me/greatreject/48801
https://t.me/greatreject/48801
21927
SunnyvaleCA
2023 Mar 4, 12:02pm
Ceffer says
The billing complexity out here is enough to scare me off. That said, you're saying a 100W panel costs $100. If it generates 0.5 kWh per day, you're looking at 182.5 kWh per year. At your specified $0.13 per kWh that's $23.73 generated per year for a total payoff within 5 years. Double the costs to account for labor and the inverter hardware, but triple the $0.13 because... California. So a solar panel system would seem to make sense in an area like mine. (Again, if someone can explain all the crazy billing stuff, I might consider it.)
Clif High's audit of solar panels. Still wildly optimistic, because I doubt that solar panels will perform in any meaningful sense over 20 years. Electronics tend to deteriorate a lot between 10 and 15 years just through materials stresses
The billing complexity out here is enough to scare me off. That said, you're saying a 100W panel costs $100. If it generates 0.5 kWh per day, you're looking at 182.5 kWh per year. At your specified $0.13 per kWh that's $23.73 generated per year for a total payoff within 5 years. Double the costs to account for labor and the inverter hardware, but triple the $0.13 because... California. So a solar panel system would seem to make sense in an area like mine. (Again, if someone can explain all the crazy billing stuff, I might consider it.)
« First « Previous Comments 21,889 - 21,928 of 46,695 Next » Last » Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,363,095 comments by 15,743 users - RWSGFY, stereotomy online now