GM is pulling back on EVs

[Gregs24]

We have looked at a couple of set ups that would allow us to disconnect from the grid. We have that option where I’m at. We can petition the city but we can’t get a guarantee of how the panels will do and once installed we are stuck with them they won’t refund anything if they don’t work according to our needs. Why we haven’t pulled the trigger on them.

I've read that solar panels come with a performance guarantee/warranty. Maybe that is certain states.

Return is measured in 10/20/30 years not months or first couple of years. In other words what you noted above could be in line to what the manufacture promised... depending on how the numbers work. Does not look good with the limited info you provided but over a 25 year period, might be just fine.

Homes with solar also sell higher.

You could be right about poor installation, etc...

So trying to get back on topic against the odds...

I have solar PV's and they were installed in 2010. It is a 4kW array which is the largest that can be fitted domestically in the UK and since installed they have generated over 50,000kWh of electricity. They output over 95% now of what they did 12 years ago. There has been no maintenance required at all, not even cleaning.

The main point of failure is the invertor, the panels last virtually forever. It is always worth getting a good quality one rather than cheap and the easiest way of determining that is look at the warranty period! We have a Fronius invertor that has a 20 year guarantee. Also installation is important to avoid shadows at certain times of the day from things like vent pipes, chimneys etc.

As long as you have 6 or 7 years it is well worth doing.

Over the years here the pay back period has always been around 6 or 7 years. Yes the tariffs change, the panels get cheaper etc but it all tends to balance out.

Sponsored

 

[Burkey]

So trying to get back on topic against the odds...

I have solar PV's and they were installed in 2010. It is a 4kW array which is the largest that can be fitted domestically in the UK and since installed they have generated over 50,000kWh of electricity. They output over 95% now of what they did 12 years ago. There has been no maintenance required at all, not even cleaning.

The main point of failure is the invertor, the panels last virtually forever. It is always worth getting a good quality one rather than cheap and the easiest way of determining that is look at the warranty period! We have a Fronius invertor that has a 20 year guarantee. Also installation is important to avoid shadows at certain times of the day from things like vent pipes, chimneys etc.

As long as you have 6 or 7 years it is well worth doing.

Over the years here the pay back period has always been around 6 or 7 years. Yes the tariffs change, the panels get cheaper etc but it all tends to balance out.

As an A-grade electrician of 20 years experience and now almost 10 years as a linesman, it’s probably worth chiming in here.

Wr have 20Kw’s of panels on the roof and a 15Kw 3 phase inverter (5Kw per phase is the most they will allow back into the grid).

My original calculations had the break-even point at between 4-5 years, with 4 being the likely answer.

Real world use (actual data collected rather than theory) combined with rising electricity prices has seen that target shift to below 4 years.

In summer we produce between 100-130 Kwh per day, winter being roughly half that amount.

Living in one of the sunniest areas on one of the sunniest continents probably makes this a bit of an outlier in terms of global expectations.

One thing I will point out for those playing at home is that if you live in a dusty environment, an annual clean of the panels can make a world of difference.

I did the wiring on a super-massive mansion here many years ago. The solar panels went on the roof very early in the build stage. 2 years later the home was approaching completion, we energised the circuits and discovered that the panels were generating less than half of their capability, A quick wash of the panels more than doubled the output. Probably not a problem in the UK, but one that I can see happening in parts of the US quite easily.

For us, having such an abundant surplus of power and with battery storage incredibly difficult to make a business case for, an EV would make good use of the surplus electricity, rather than putting it back into the grid at vastly discounted prices (as we currently do).

 

[Tinpot]

Someone posted about recycling the Li-Ion batteries from vehicles once expired. I read an article approx 3-4 months ago - I no longer have the link - which stated that as recycling these things is so labour intensive, at the moment 99% of these batteries are simply sent to landfill as it is not cost effective.

 

[sk47]

So trying to get back on topic against the odds...

I have solar PV's and they were installed in 2010. It is a 4kW array which is the largest that can be fitted domestically in the UK and since installed they have generated over 50,000kWh of electricity. They output over 95% now of what they did 12 years ago. There has been no maintenance required at all, not even cleaning.

The main point of failure is the invertor, the panels last virtually forever. It is always worth getting a good quality one rather than cheap and the easiest way of determining that is look at the warranty period! We have a Fronius invertor that has a 20 year guarantee. Also installation is important to avoid shadows at certain times of the day from things like vent pipes, chimneys etc.

As long as you have 6 or 7 years it is well worth doing.

Over the years here the pay back period has always been around 6 or 7 years. Yes the tariffs change, the panels get cheaper etc but it all tends to balance out.

As an A-grade electrician of 20 years experience and now almost 10 years as a linesman, it’s probably worth chiming in here.

Wr have 20Kw’s of panels on the roof and a 15Kw 3 phase inverter (5Kw per phase is the most they will allow back into the grid).

My original calculations had the break-even point at between 4-5 years, with 4 being the likely answer.

Real world use (actual data collected rather than theory) combined with rising electricity prices has seen that target shift to below 4 years.

In summer we produce between 100-130 Kwh per day, winter being roughly half that amount.

Living in one of the sunniest areas on one of the sunniest continents probably makes this a bit of an outlier in terms of global expectations.

One thing I will point out for those playing at home is that if you live in a dusty environment, an annual clean of the panels can make a world of difference.

I did the wiring on a super-massive mansion here many years ago. The solar panels went on the roof very early in the build stage. 2 years later the home was approaching completion, we energised the circuits and discovered that the panels were generating less than half of their capability, A quick wash of the panels more than doubled the output. Probably not a problem in the UK, but one that I can see happening in parts of the US quite easily.

For us, having such an abundant surplus of power and with battery storage incredibly difficult to make a business case for, an EV would make good use of the surplus electricity, rather than putting it back into the grid at vastly discounted prices (as we currently do).

California cuts payments to homeowners for solar panels feeding energy back to the grid (msn.com)

Hello; Putting aside the local story out of Knoxville TN for a bit, there is still the story from the link above about how California is cutting payments. Has nothing to do with quality of the solar panels or the inverters or cleaning panels or any of the items in the two replies quoted above.
This reducing of payments is a policy change put in place AFTER many folks already had the panels installed. Such will change the payback period of panels after instillation. It will take longer to break even for the expense of purchase and installation.

I posted the link in part to get us back to the topic at hand. I get solar panels are not a directly on topic item but do understand that solar and wind are part of the green agenda in mostly the same way as the EV agenda.

The response from jtmat deflected from the topic as a challenge about the local Knoxville TN story and did not address the California cuts payments link. The responses from Burkey and Gregs24 deflect into comments about different aspects of solar panels. A deflection with possible interest and likely true in their own right, but do not address the payment cuts in California.
I get it. The news out of California is bad for the green agenda. The new policy will do some hurtful things. First being any who jump onto the solar panel band wagon will not have so sweet a deal as before. May be that some number of folks will decide the payback takes too long and not opt in. That sort of thing. Will have nothing to do with quality of equipment or instillation or keeping the dust off. In California it will cost more at least in the sense of payback of the principal invested because the payback will take more time. Higher interest rates may play into this as well.
Near as I can decipher part of the "green" agenda depends on folks being willing to spend more to save the planet. On the individuals level EV's cost a lot more than ICE and solar panels cost a lot to install. On the community level wind generators and a new grid will have to be paid for with taxpayer monies.

 

[sk47]

Someone posted about recycling the Li-Ion batteries from vehicles once expired. I read an article approx 3-4 months ago - I no longer have the link - which stated that as recycling these things is so labour intensive, at the moment 99% of these batteries are simply sent to landfill as it is not cost effective.

Hello; You are correct. I also recall similar stories. Before the science is cancelled thread became focused on Covid the battery recycling was a topic. At the time there was a promise of new battery recycling plant(s) being built. I do not know currently how much progress has been made in the area. Being one of the less shinny aspects of the "green agenda" it does not get much traction in the discussions. I usually think of it as one of the "someday" parts of the agenda. Things that need to happen but are not yet in place and if we have faith will happen "someday."

 

[jtmat]

Hello; You are correct. I also recall similar stories. Before the science is cancelled thread became focused on Covid the battery recycling was a topic. At the time there was a promise of new battery recycling plant(s) being built. I do not know currently how much progress has been made in the area. Being one of the less shinny aspects of the "green agenda" it does not get much traction in the discussions. I usually think of it as one of the "someday" parts of the agenda. Things that need to happen but are not yet in place and if we have faith will happen "someday."

Steps are being made now.... new ev battery recycling plants, updated methods to extract material, etc. Saving grace is EVs are "new" and not an "issue" at the moment. There are challenges, but I don't think anyone wants to see these batteries go into a landfill.

https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_batteries.html
https://blog.ucsusa.org/jessica-dunn/are-ev-batteries-recyclable/
https://www.engadget.com/redwood-materials-ev-battery-recycling-plant-south-carolina-183146247.html

 

[sk47]

Steps are being made now.... new ev battery recycling plants, updated methods to extract material, etc. Saving grace is EVs are "new" and not an "issue" at the moment. There are challenges, but I don't think anyone wants to see these batteries go into a landfill.

https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_batteries.html
https://blog.ucsusa.org/jessica-dunn/are-ev-batteries-recyclable/
https://www.engadget.com/redwood-materials-ev-battery-recycling-plant-south-carolina-183146247.html

Hello; Interesting reads. Learned in the first link that lithium can wind up in concrete. Guess that is a form of recycling.
The last link is about a plant for which ground will be broken in 2023.

So still a someday sort of thing. I guess the hope is recycling will keep pace with increased supply of old batteries.
I knew of the repurposed as home storage for excess electricity from solar panels. That is when the battery packs are not yet dead but too far gone to work in an EV.

Good post and on topic.

 

[Gregs24]

Someone posted about recycling the Li-Ion batteries from vehicles once expired. I read an article approx 3-4 months ago - I no longer have the link - which stated that as recycling these things is so labour intensive, at the moment 99% of these batteries are simply sent to landfill as it is not cost effective.

There are actually very few batteries coming through as they are lasting longer than anticipated (life of the vehicle Plus). Certainly can't go into landfill in / from Europe and why would you - they are valuable resources.

Electric car battery recycling: what happens to the dead batteries? | carwow

VW are recycling now as are other companies but most are being repurposed for other less strenuous uses.

 

[Burkey]

Hello; Putting aside the local story out of Knoxville TN for a bit, there is still the story from the link above about how California is cutting payments. Has nothing to do with quality of the solar panels or the inverters or cleaning panels or any of the items in the two replies quoted above.
This reducing of payments is a policy change put in place AFTER many folks already had the panels installed. Such will change the payback period of panels after instillation. It will take longer to break even for the expense of purchase and installation.

I posted the link in part to get us back to the topic at hand. I get solar panels are not a directly on topic item but do understand that solar and wind are part of the green agenda in mostly the same way as the EV agenda.

The response from jtmat deflected from the topic as a challenge about the local Knoxville TN story and did not address the California cuts payments link. The responses from Burkey and Gregs24 deflect into comments about different aspects of solar panels. A deflection with possible interest and likely true in their own right, but do not address the payment cuts in California.
I get it. The news out of California is bad for the green agenda. The new policy will do some hurtful things. First being any who jump onto the solar panel band wagon will not have so sweet a deal as before. May be that some number of folks will decide the payback takes too long and not opt in. That sort of thing. Will have nothing to do with quality of equipment or instillation or keeping the dust off. In California it will cost more at least in the sense of payback of the principal invested because the payback will take more time. Higher interest rates may play into this as well.
Near as I can decipher part of the "green" agenda depends on folks being willing to spend more to save the planet. On the individuals level EV's cost a lot more than ICE and solar panels cost a lot to install. On the community level wind generators and a new grid will have to be paid for with taxpayer monies.

Just to be clear, for most users, the amount that you receive in “feed-in tariffs” as we call them over here, has very little to do with the payback period. Maybe it’s a large factor in the US, or at least in some states?

What I didn’t mention earlier is that whilst power prices here are rising (like most places), the feed-in tariff is also dropping… From memory it was 16 cents and now under 10, or, in real terms less than 1/3 of the cost of buying it. Like any good capitalist, I’m not a huge fan of selling my commodifies at less than 1/3 of market value.

For most users here, it’s the actual reduced consumption that does most of the heavy lifting economically. The feed-in is just a bonus. In an ideal world, you probably wouldn’t be feeding much back into the grid, but rather sizing the system correctly and storing the surplus produced during the day, to be consumed at other times. But again, even that might vary depending on where you live on this planet. Nearer the equator will be vastly different than someone who lives nearer the poles…..

As I mentioned earlier, for most users, storage isn’t an economically viable option AT THIS TIME, but 20 years ago I couldn’t make a business case for the solar array either…. so I’m expecting that at some point in the not too distant future that storage will also become more cost-effective. An EV may even form part of that storage solution.

Time of use is a major factor that will determine the viability of solar panels with or without storage. Each user will have a unique situation that will dictate the best course of action for them and they may even be able to make some changes in the way they consume power that actually benefit them.

EDIT:
As much as a green agenda exists, the simple harsh reality for many people is that they simply can’t afford not to install a solar system on their home.

Option A) pay $1000 a quarter for power = $80,000 over 20 years (assuming power cost remains stable)

Option B) pay $15k upfront and enjoy free power for 20 years.

You don’t have to have a green agenda to make sense of it.

 

[sk47]

Just to be clear, for most users, the amount that you receive in “feed-in tariffs” as we call them over here, has very little to do with the payback period. Maybe it’s a large factor in the US, or at least in some states?

What I didn’t mention earlier is that whilst power prices here are rising (like most places), the feed-in tariff is also dropping… From memory it was 16 cents and now under 10, or, in real terms less than 1/3 of the cost of buying it. Like any good capitalist, I’m not a huge fan of selling my commodifies at less than 1/3 of market value.

For most users here, it’s the actual reduced consumption that does most of the heavy lifting economically. The feed-in is just a bonus. In an ideal world, you probably wouldn’t be feeding much back into the grid, but rather sizing the system correctly and storing the surplus produced during the day, to be consumed at other times. But again, even that might vary depending on where you live on this planet. Nearer the equator will be vastly different than someone who lives nearer the poles…..

As I mentioned earlier, for most users, storage isn’t an economically viable option AT THIS TIME, but 20 years ago I couldn’t make a business case for the solar array either…. so I’m expecting that at some point in the not too distant future that storage will also become more cost-effective. An EV may even form part of that storage solution.

Time of use is a major factor that will determine the viability of solar panels with or without storage. Each user will have a unique situation that will dictate the best course of action for them and they may even be able to make some changes in the way they consume power that actually benefit them.

EDIT:
As much as a green agenda exists, the simple harsh reality for many people is that they simply can’t afford not to install a solar system on their home.

Option A) pay $1000 a quarter for power = $80,000 over 20 years (assuming power cost remains stable)

Option B) pay $15k upfront and enjoy free power for 20 years.

You don’t have to have a green agenda to make sense of it.

Hello; likely I live in one of the questionable areas for solar panels. If I were younger a look into solar might make sense. However at 75 a 20 year window for return does not compute well.

I also do not pay so much for electricity. Assuming a quarter is three months, my cost is way below $1000. The three most expensive months for me are Dec, Jan & Feb. Highest bill in the last 12 years has been $112/month for one high month. Usually around $100/month those three months and much less the rest of the year. I admit I am an anomaly. I do know folks who pay much more per month. Some around the $300+ per month.

The $15,000 to get a system I could do. I will guess that does not get extras such as storage batteries. One thing I saw on the THIS OLD House TV series a while back is that solar could not be installed on metal roofs. They did not say exactly why but put down a shingle system under the area where the solar panels went for some reason.
I also have questions about the roof itself. My shingle roof is about five years old. At some point if I were to live long enough the roofing under the solar panels will need to be replaced. What is the deal then if you have solar panels? A new roof and new panels at the same time.
Another way to ask is if I have an older roof with less than ten years life left is the plane to put on a new roof before the panels??
My brother has a metal roof as do a large number of folks around here. Am I correct in that they cannot have solar panels?

 

[sk47]

This EV Without A Battery Could Be Elon Musk's Biggest Nightmare (msn.com)

Hello; Not too much to say about this possible technology. I do not know enough about it. Reminds me of a liquid battery i read about many years ago. The idea back then was the battery ingredients which held the charge were in a fluid. The idea was you could pull into a fuel center and change out the liquid in a few minutes. Drain the discharged fluid and refill with charged liquid. I have not heard more on this and do not know if the vehicle in the link works that way.

One additional thing may be on point. In the current climate of mandated anti fossil fuel legislation and incentives targeted at BEV's almost exclusively, we may be leaving out other good solutions. When I say let the best vehicle platform win out I am not talking about a contes only between traditional ICE and current battery EV. Locking in too much legislation and mandates in only one area may be like having blinders on.

 

[Gregs24]

Blah blah

 

[Burkey]

Hello; likely I live in one of the questionable areas for solar panels. If I were younger a look into solar might make sense. However at 75 a 20 year window for return does not compute well.

I also do not pay so much for electricity. Assuming a quarter is three months, my cost is way below $1000. The three most expensive months for me are Dec, Jan & Feb. Highest bill in the last 12 years has been $112/month for one high month. Usually around $100/month those three months and much less the rest of the year. I admit I am an anomaly. I do know folks who pay much more per month. Some around the $300+ per month.

The $15,000 to get a system I could do. I will guess that does not get extras such as storage batteries. One thing I saw on the THIS OLD House TV series a while back is that solar could not be installed on metal roofs. They did not say exactly why but put down a shingle system under the area where the solar panels went for some reason.
I also have questions about the roof itself. My shingle roof is about five years old. At some point if I were to live long enough the roofing under the solar panels will need to be replaced. What is the deal then if you have solar panels? A new roof and new panels at the same time.
Another way to ask is if I have an older roof with less than ten years life left is the plane to put on a new roof before the panels??
My brother has a metal roof as do a large number of folks around here. Am I correct in that they cannot have solar panels?

I can’t answer the question re steel roof. Our roof is steel, (like most over here) and there are no issues with it whatsoever. Makes me curious though, that’s for sure.

 

[sk47]

I can’t answer the question re steel roof. Our roof is steel, (like most over here) and there are no issues with it whatsoever. Makes me curious though, that’s for sure.

Hello; Did a little searching. Found sites that say solar can be on metal roofs.

 

[sk47]

EV cost of ownership is about the same as gas-powered vehicles: Study (msn.com)

Hello; This story is mainly about England, I think. Seems some fees are to be charged to EV drivers.

Near the end is a comment about Americans driving pickups.

Sponsored