OT: anyone put solar panels on their roof
- Thread starter Apoplectic_Objurgator
- Start date
No, but very interested. I haven't had much luck with solar for some small uses (to recharge phones, using it as a battery tender, etc.), but for small solar lights in the yard it works great. Hoping improvements are coming at a rapid pace.
If in north MS, my understanding is TVA is not very accommodating at least compared to other power companies.
I haven’t looked seriously into it, but it is dramatically cheaper to purchase and install than it used to be. I’ll look into it in a few years. By then it should be at the right price point for me.
^^^ This. But I have a HOA to work with as well and I don’t know what their thoughts are about solar so I’d have to find out.
We are looking to start this project. My son-in-law got it put on their house and it paid for itself and a new roof in around two years. He really did his homework as any good engineer would do, so I would advise the same. I am getting his help for our project.
Looking to put it on a rental in the panhandle. Noticed all the ones in my area were damage free from Sally. What is the regret?
No. Alabama Power charges solar users so much as a penalty that it's not to your advantage to have them here.
Because the Public Service Commission is run by the most openly corrupt trash politician the south has ever seen. Twinkle Cavanaugh (Yes that that is the name she runs on) is a bought and paid for subsidiary of Alabama Power. And Alabama Power doesn't want solar, the commission does what they say and makes it cost prohibitive.
Wake up and pay attention
Solar energy is very much in favor with the Biden Admin.
There is much $ to be made by somebody.
We are about to be overrun with ********.
State laws , can and will be bulldozed.
Solar energy is very much in favor with the Biden Admin.
There is much $ to be made by somebody.
We are about to be overrun with ********.
State laws , can and will be bulldozed.
Not sure where your son in law lives but if there was a true two year payback here people would be lined up to have it done. i have never been able to make my numbers come remotely close to that.
1. If you finance the panels you can't sell your home as they don't transfer.
2. Home appraisals go down with panels due to roof damage.
3. Title companies won't deal with homes with financed solar panels.
4. Zero payback, paying more than prior.
5. Insurance companies dropping insurance
I live where Michael hit and solar panels took a beating. It's almost like companies were looking for an excuse to cancel policies...go figure.
They almost certainly don’t charge a penalty. Most regulated utilities recover fixed costs with their energy charges. They do this because it makes intuitive sense that heavier users of electricity would pay more for the grid and because it tends to result in lower income consumers paying less on average (although that "on average" does a lot of work because a well insulated McMansion and old trailer probably use similar amounts of electricity when it’s very cold or very hot).
So when solar starts to take off, utilities have to either raise the monthly meter fee and lower the energy charge, or charge interconnected solar users a monthly fee. Most utilities start off with the latter because raising rates in poor communities is politically difficult.
Last edited:
hmm
Why would anyone finance solar panels separately from their home? Why wouldn't you simply pay for it out of a heloc, especially since the panels will literally be part of the home?
Why would anyone finance solar panels separately from their home? Why wouldn't you simply pay for it out of a heloc, especially since the panels will literally be part of the home?
Do they make it cost prohibitive? Or do they just not subsidize it? Unless something has changed in the last few years, rooftop solar is not going to make sense for most people in the south unless in addition to the 30% federal tax credit, there is some sort of state subsidy or cross subsidization from other ratepayers through something like net metering.
A lot of these other than 4 sound like local issues. There is a way to sell a home with solar panels, even panels that are financed separately. Might be a pain in the *** and make it expensive to sell your home, but it's certainly doable. The only exception would be if the homeowner was really upside down on the panels, in which case it's still not the panels per se causing the problems. I could see some title companies not wanting to deal with it and that being an issue in an area without much solar adoption. And I could certainly see solar panels being an easy trigger for which homes insurance companies want to drop in coastal areas.
How is it legal to charge a fee for someone generating their own power? Are they setting a minimum bill or do you just always pay $50 for having solar panels? A minimum bill makes sense so that you are paying for the upkeep of the grid, but a fee just for having panels seems wrong.
They charge you a fee for being connected to the grid if you have solar. And if you disconnect from the grid, they have your house condemned.
One thing that people forget to understand is that Florida, while called the sunshine state, typically has alot of cloudy days. It rains nearly everyday during the summer when the coastal showers roll in. If I was in a desert I would already have panels. For me it isn't worth it.
I dont know about condemnation but I own a house in the city other than where I live and electricity is required by the insurance company for some reason before they will insure it.
How does your PSC have the authority to have your home condemned? I get the idea behind forcing people to tie into sewer systems. I've never heard of forcing anybody to tie into an electric system.
It's not a fee for generating their own power. It's a charge to pay for their share of the distribution system and capacity. Other users pay for the distribution system and capacity mostly through their energy charges. SOlar users still want the grid available when they need it, but aren't paying for an equivalent share because they're not buying a lot of their energy from the grid. And if they are allowed to push power back onto the grid, they are actually creating challenges for the grid which can get to be pretty significant and result in real additional costs once solar is widespread enough. If it were an industrial client using their own generation, it would be recovered through a demand charge (i.e., your highest demand at the utility's peak load dictates how much capacity and grid you need, and that charge is used to recover those costs; utilities don't want to recover fixed costs through energy charges for industrial customers both because they want to give a competitive energy price and because they want those customers incentivized to try to have a good load profile).
Yup. See a lot of people confusing being hot with being good for solar. Mississippi is basically the same way. Certainly there are worse places for solar and a lot of worse places have a reasonably high adoption rate, but that's largely because they're being stupid. Mississippi is just good enough for solar that utility scale solar can pencil out after getting a 30% tax credit. Probably won't benefit you, but also probably won't hurt you, except to the extent somebody has to pay for the 30% credit.
The PSC doesn't. But the power company will contact the city if you disconnect and they will.
What is the city's justification for condemning? I'm sure the city's like to be on notice when power is disconnected so they can watch houses that remain disconnected as they will usually become a problem. But I've never heard of a city taking a position that you have to be connected to the grid. Maybe city's can/will do that in Mississippi too and you just never hear about it because it's so crazy expensive to have standalone generation that there probably aren't even a handful in the entire state.
I am pretty sure the US Govt will be paying you to put them on your house, until then you can not recoup your cost until over 10+ years.
In Alabama a building is considered uninhabitable unless connected to the power grid.
Alabama power owns this state.
It's not just sunshine days, but how cheap power is. The TVA region has very cheap power. Starkville is what, $0.09/kWh? Solar for there would have to be less than $0.03 kWh to make it make sense. And realistically, you have to have storage with that price too.
And someone has to pay for the grid as well.
All that said, Solar prices fell 75% since 2010, and could have fallen more if not for politics.
Johnson86-1 is 100% correct. When the sun shines solar is fine, until a reliable storage solution is economical those customers will still need the traditional grid. The fixed cost to operate that grid is not free and has to be recovered. The goal is for those cost to be recovered in an equitable manner. Non solar customers should not subsidize solar customers.
Austin. We had A LOT of sunshine in that time period with drought conditions and he is a miser when it comes to running their utilities. The house is pretty small as well maybe 1400 sq. ft.
That's pretty ridiculous. You'd think somebody willing to burn the money to be off the grid would be willing to to spend the money to sue over that. You're already willing to burn through some cash on principle, why not some more?
A couple of interesting charts. I worked with an electrical engineer 6-7 years ago who thought solar power was one of the greatest things ever, had researched it more than anyone I know. But he said it didn't make financial sense for homeowners in Mississippi. He said maybe if he was 25 years old and building a house he for sure would live in the next 40+ years, but no other scenario would make sense to him. In his opinion it would be smart to install them on schools or similar buildings - places where aesthetics aren't as important, and you know the building will be there / not sold for many years to come.
This one shows how "friendly" each state is to solar power. As you can see, MS and AL rank dead last.
State Solar Power Rankings
And I think this one basically shows how much sunlight the US gets. MS is not a good as the southwestern states, but not terrible either.
Solar Model
This one shows how "friendly" each state is to solar power. As you can see, MS and AL rank dead last.
State Solar Power Rankings
And I think this one basically shows how much sunlight the US gets. MS is not a good as the southwestern states, but not terrible either.
Solar Model
Latest
-
01
Maroon and White Football
Live Updates: Mississippi State vs. Alabama
-
02
Maroon and White Football
Last Call: Week 5 Predictions for No. 16 Mississippi State vs. No. 7 Alabama
-
03
Maroon and White Football
Mississippi State Keys to Victory against Alabama
-
04
Maroon and White
No. 16 Mississippi State vs. No. 7 Alabama: How, where and when to watch the Bulldogs
-
05
Maroon and White
Mississippi State Soccer preps for No. 11 South Carolina