FireFighterHill
Banned
- 1,540
- 62
- 0
- Location
- Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
I thought there was now regulation in some states that they had to buy back electricity at the same rate they sell it.
Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!
I am not aware of any regulations like that but I left the world of power consulting nearly two years ago so I am not as well versed and up to date as I used to be.I thought there was now regulation in some states that they had to buy back electricity at the same rate they sell it.
The Detroit Edison company has a program called "Currents" under Michigan law the utility must buy every KWh produced at the current Commercial rate charged to the commercial customer.I thought there was now regulation in some states that they had to buy back electricity at the same rate they sell it.
I'm not suggesting that the OP is making anything up but I think there was a whole lot of money from the state and "Uncle Sugar" in the books. Solar isn't going to make that kind of ROI, the cost per watt is just too high.
I was unaware of that program; of course I don't live in Michigan. That sounds awesome though. At this point in time I guess that for solar to be financially viable you need to have a program like that in your area and you need to have deep enough pockets to buy the panels/equipment in bulk.The Detroit Edison company has a program called "Currents" under Michigan law the utility must buy every KWh produced at the current Commercial rate charged to the commercial customer.
When I did the math I used an average of 24v. The solar panel is rated at normal operating 30.2vdc so I underrated the output. Even at the 24vdc rate, the output to the grid is well over 36,000 amps constant for 5-6 hours on a sunny day. + or - 18% for an hour for the sun rising and setting. I hope I have explained this so you understand the operation.
I guess we can agree to disagree. The system I have been working on has 4,200+ panels, how many panels are you working with. This is not my first rodeo, but its the biggest one yet. There are a series of 6 net meters, I will keep track of the production with pictures to follow through. I came up with the 19 months by doing the math. I even discounted winters cloud cover.I really question the ability of this system to pay for itself in 2 years . The local city government here is installing a much smaller system and at 22.9 cents per kilowatt hour consumers engery has agreed to pay ( This is 2.5 times what the city currently pays per kilowatt hour ) it is going to take 30 to 50 years to pay back the original costs . This system uses a state of the art tilting system by Nexteer that turns the panels to follow the sun to increase efficiency between 30 and 50 percent . The design of the system here has both Hemlock Semiconductor Corp. ( the worlds largest silicon producer and Nexteer involved in the design . There are approximately 4000 sq.ft. of panel and they will only generate $6,150 a year in revenue . This system is being built 60 to 70 miles north of the clarkson project. I can't wait to see some actual numbers on what the system in Clarkston actually produces once online ,but with the limited sun in Michigan it sounds like a 2 year pay-off is not likely .
96 4-foot by 10-foot solar panels.I guess we can agree to disagree. The system I have been working on has 4,200+ panels, how many panels are you working with. This is not my first rodeo, but its the biggest one yet. There are a series of 6 net meters, I will keep track of the production with pictures to follow through. I came up with the 19 months by doing the math. I even discounted winters cloud cover.
If I am wrong and it takes an extra 6 months to a year then I was wrong, but its still a good green investment for years to come and some good intel to share.
Have a nice day..!
They are only going to make $6,150 per year not month on the complete set-up and that is get getting 2.5 times the rate they currently pay per kilowatt hour .the purple line in post # 31 explains the whole set-up .Hey PP, your system has 96 panels say its 100 so by your math they are going to make $6,150 per month x 12 months = $73,800.00 per year for the installation of 100 panels in Saginaw.
Now take $73,800.00 X 42 and you get $3,099,600 per year. Don't discount the inphase micro inverters with a 20%+ increase and keep in mind I rated each panel at 24 volts instead of the full load capacity of 30.2vdc . Either way you look at it, It's a win win for everyone.
The trick is buying the panels in bulk and having the money to do so. We even got the suppler to eat half of the freight. Whats expensive is the security for the 8 month project, 24/7 manned and armed..I will do the access controls and will be installing the Security Gate System with cameras in a month or so when the project is complete.
Remember that traditional fossil fuels are artificially low because of "Uncle Sugar" as well.I'm not suggesting that the OP is making anything up but I think there was a whole lot of money from the state and "Uncle Sugar" in the books. Solar isn't going to make that kind of ROI, the cost per watt is just too high.
Yeah I thought those results seemed a little off. So what is the actual ROI, 19 years? If so, that seams more reasonable. Actually that still shorter ROI than solar usually is. Must be because of the Michigan incentives/regulations and buying the equipment in bulk.Oh gotcha, I thought it was per month. My bad. I will check the stats over the first 6 months and post the results.
Just a thought at 36,326.4 constant amps being dumped back into the grid equates to 101,376 watts per hour for 5 hours a day @ 22 cents a Kwh, I come up with $22,302.72
That seems way to high, what am I doing wrong with my math....?