We now had a working grid tied solar electric system. But we didn’t let it operate all the time. Why not?

The salespersons for these solar installers usually claim that after installing their solar electric systems, your power meter could run backwards. This may be true of the old spinning-aluminum-disk type power meters. But it isn’t true of the typical new digital readout power meters, at least the ones Progress Energy uses. The new standard digital meters can’t tell which direction power flows. So you get billed for all the power that flows through the meter, whether you are consuming electricity or you are generating electricity and putting it back on the power grid. You need a special bidirectional meter installed which can detect which direction the power is flowing.

How did we determine this? Normally, our house uses an average of 3 kWh of electricity a day. The installation of the grid tied portion of our system was finished around 11 AM in the morning. The inverter indicated that the PV (photovoltaic) system generated about 10 kWh of electricity for the rest of that first day of operation. Yet our power meter indicated that our consumption was about 11 kWh over the same period (about eight hours of sunlight). The only things running in our house during that time were the refrigerator, a clock, and a telephone answering machine (and the utility power meter, which consumes about the same as an answering machine; you didn’t realize that the power meter draws power and you are paying for it, did you?). No lights, water heater, computer, modem, TV (we haven’t had a working TV since 1982), oven clock, microwave oven clock and controls, doorbell (ours is powered by lithium batteries), heat pump controls, garage door opener controls, or any other “phantom” loads were running, which is typical in our house and one big reason our electric use is so low. So, from experience, our use over that eight hour period, one third of a day, should have been less than 1 kWh. The less than 1 kWh that the stuff in the house was using plus the 10 kWh generated by the solar system equals 11 kWh, which is what the power meter indicated.

I have never seen any information from the power company warning that their typical meters can’t tell which direction the power is flowing. Is this just another way “the man” is trying to screw the little guy?

Not really. They probably wanted the cheapest power meter that met their needs to minimize their, and their customers’, costs. At present, for at least 99.9 % of their customers, the power only flows one way, into the customer’s house or business. As an electronics engineer, if I were given the assignment to design this power meter, none of the easiest and cheapest ways I can think of can determine which direction power flows. It takes a little more circuitry and cost to determine which direction the power is flowing. So the power company’s meter choice makes good sense for them and the majority of their customers.

So, until you get a new bidirectional power meter, that is, a meter that can record how much power is flowing in each direction, you will be billed for ALL the power that flows through the meter, whether consumed or generated. But the meter only measures the NET power flowing through it, that is, the difference between what is generated and what is consumed. For example, if your PV system is generating 2 kWh and you are using 3 kWh, your meter will indicate 1 kWh has flowed through the meter. So, in this case, your PV system has saved you the cost of 2 kWh of electricity. But if your PV system is generating 3 kWh and you are using only 1 kWh, your meter will indicate 2 kWh has flowed through the meter and you will be billed for that 2 kWh, even though you generated it.

So, if you are certain that you ALWAYS consume more power than you generate, you can leave your PV system running even with the standard power meter and it will save you money. But if you usually use less power than your PV system generates, then you are better off with your PV system shut down until you receive a new bidirectional power meter, unless you have battery backup and can run offline, that is, disconnected from the power grid.

Consequently, until we had the battery back up portion of our PV system installed, we had our PV system turned off except during times when we were certain we were continuously consuming more power than our PV system was generating. An example of such a situation was when we were running our electric clothes dryer, which consumes about 5 kWh per hour of operation and typically runs 1.5 to 2 hr per load. Remember, our system has a peak power output of about 2 kW.

Figure 1 shows what the bidirection power meter we finally received from Progress Energy looks like. To Progress Energy’s credit, we received this new meter withing two days of dropping our application in the mail. Since I suspect virtually none of the power company’s customers are aware that they are being billed for the electricity they generate while they still have the old power meter (I found no mention on the Internet of these power meters not being able to determine the direction of power flow), Progress Energy could have waited until the legal limit to replace the meter (in Florida, they have ten working days after they receive a valid application to replace the meter) and potentially collected a few extra dollars. But the goodwill and impression of being a “green” company by responding very promptly are far more valuable than those few extra bucks that they may have got by delaying swapping meters. This makes good business sense.

As Figure 1 shows, the new bidirectional meter has two readouts. Though I have yet to receive an explanation from the power company on how to read the meter (probably with the next bill), reading it is fairly obvious. The smaller leftmost reading is the readout mode and the bigger rightmost readout is the total power in that mode. The readout switches between modes every couple seconds. When the mode is “00,” the rightmost readout is the total net power drawn into the house. In this case, the meter shows that a net of 69 kWh has flowed into our house since the meter was installed. When the mode is “01,” as shown in Figure 2, the rightmost reading indicates the total net power output from the house, which in this case is 155 kWh since the meter was installed. Incidentally, the meter was installed around 10:25 AM Feb. 3, 2010, and both pictures were taken around 9:48 AM Feb. 26, 2010. So, in this case, the meter indicates our house has generated over twice as much power as it has consumed.

Why is this obvious? Well, for one thing, the rightmost reading in the “01” mode absolutely NEVER changes at night. It only changes during the day and in proportion to how sunny it is. In fact, the change in the “01” mode reading is always slightly less that the total power generated by my solar array, as indicated by my SB3000 inverter, unless I have some unusually heavy (for us) loads running that day, such as our clothes dryer (only once during this period) or our geothermal heat pump (only about four hours during this time period and always after sunset). Also, the “00” mode reading changes pretty much as our old power meter did whenever I turn on and off some unusually heavy load, such as the water heater.

Note that these readings do not indicate the total power used and total power generated over this period, but only the NET power flowing through the meter during this time. The power meter can’t tell what is happening inside the house. It can only measure what is flowing through it, which is the difference of what is used in the house and what is generated by the PV system. For example, if your PV system is generating 2 kW over a one hour period and you are using a constant 3 kW over that same period, the “00” reading will increase by 1 kWh over that one hour period and the “01” won’t change. If your PV system is generating 3 kW over a one hour period and you are using only 2 kW over that same period, the “01” reading will increase by 1 kWh over that one hour period and the “00” won’t change. This assumes the power used and generated is constant (not fluctuating too much) over these periods. So, over more than a day or two, both the “00” and “01” reading will almost always be less than what was actually consumed and generated, respectively, over that period, since some of that consumption and generation happened at the same time and canceled each other out before it was seen by the power meter.

So, the last week in October, 2009, I gave Harrimans Inc the go-ahead and a down payment for installing a solar electric system on our house. Three weeks later they notified me that they had all the plans, permits, and parts with one exception: They still hadn’t received the battery backup inverter, an SMA SI5048, which wasn’t expected for another couple of weeks. So they planned to install all the grid tie stuff first and add the battery backup stuff after the SI5048 was received.

They installed the photovoltaic (PV) panels, the grid tie inverter, and all the appropriate wiring and disconnects in less than a day and a half. Figure 1 shows the ten 200 Watt Sanyo HIP-200BA19 PV panels mounted on our south facing roof section. These panels are electrically identical to the older HIP-200BA3 panels, with the only change I could find being a slight change in width due to a slight change in the frame. These panels give the minimum of 2000 Watts total we desired.

Most all of the larger modern inverters have maximum power point tracking (MPPT), which automatically adjusts the load characteristics of the inverter on the panels so that the PV panels operate at the point where they are outputting the maximum possible power for the present light and temperature conditions. This maximum output power point can vary significantly with the type, orientation, and temperature conditions of the PV panels. Consequently, you want all the panels tied to a particular MPPT inverter to be matched as close as possible, that is, the same manufacturer and model and mounted in the same plane with approximately the same light and temperature conditions.

Figure 1 shows that these panels take up almost the entire south roof. We might be able to squeeze two more panels in with a bit of effort, but these additional panels would probably overhang the roof ridge caps. We wouldn’t want to add panels on the other roof sections to the existing inverter because these panels would experience much different light and temperature conditions, giving the inverter conflicting information on what the maximum power point should be. This would probably cause the inverter to operate in a condition that is not optimum for any of the panels, assuming the inverter is able to find a stable operating point and doesn’t start oscillating. Even mounting the additional panels on angled standoffs on the east or west roof sections so that they would face south and be at the same angle as the panels on the south roof section would still result in different temperature conditions for the added panels than those of the panels on the south roof. So ten panels is the practical maximum possible on our south roof, with twelve panels being the maximum possible with a bit of effort.

Figure 2 shows the two additional power disconnects added on the outside of our house by the power meter. One is for disconnecting the direct current (DC) output of the solar panels from the inverter. This is required by many communities so emergency personnel, such as firemen, can shut off all electrical power in the house before they perform their emergency tasks. The other is an alternating current (AC) disconnect between the inverter output and the rest of the AC circuits in the house. This makes it possible for the power company to disconnect the solar electric system from the utility power grid in case they have to do maintenance on the local grid. This disconnect is also often required in many communities, though the power company will probably just remove the power meter to absolutely guarantee that the solar installation can’t back feed the power grid during maintenance conditions.

Figure 3 shows the SMA Sunny Boy inverter mounted inside the garage by the main breaker panel. The inverter’s 240 VAC output goes to the outside disconnect first, and then to an added breaker in the panel before tying to our AC power within the house. The smaller box at the bottom of the inverter provides a DC output disconnect for the sloar panels that is inside the garage.

Figure 3 - SMA Sunny Boy inverter mounted inside the garage by the main breaker panel.

The inspections, an electrical and a structural inspection, both went without any problems. This particular electrical inspector was exceptionally thorough, removing the covers off of everything and tracing all the wiring against the permit drawings, which was commendable and unusual. But one thing he missed and I didn’t notice until the inspection was that Harrimans installed the wrong inverter; they installed an SB4000 and the contract and permit drawings called out an SB3000. The SB3000 and SB4000 are the same size and shape and look identical, with the only external clues to distinguish them being a very small print label on the side of the unit and the model number being flashed across the screen for a few seconds during power up.

Now in most cases this would not be a problem and would actually be a free upgrade, as the SB4000 costs about 25 % more and handles 33 % more power than the originally specified SB3000. The SB4000 could allow significant future expansion of the number of solar panels. But, as discussed previously, we have little room for expansion on this south roof. Also, I ran our particular Sanyo PV panels through the inverter manufacturer’s compatibility software (http://www.sma-america.com/en_US/products/software/sunny-design.html) and found out that the total output voltage of the PV array would vary from 240 VDC to about 374 VDC over worst case conditions. The SB3000 was specified for correct operation between 200 to 400 VDC, whereas the SB4000 was specified for 250 to 480 VDC operation. So our particular PV array would operate well within the SB3000 specifications but outside the SB4000 specs.

I contacted Harrimans about this. They said they checked the compatibility of the panels and the SB4000 with SMA software and found the SB4000 was compatible with between 4 to 8 Sanyo HIP-200BA19 PV panels per series string, with my system having 5 per string. It turns out they used SMA’s online software (http://america.sma.de/newstringsizing.aspx), which you run online from the SMA website, whereas I used SMA’s download software, which runs on your own computer. I tried the online software and got the same result as Harrimans. But then I noticed a “Predicted Outputs” button in the lower right hand corner of the results. I clicked on this button and the resulting data showed that the minimum voltage at 104 degrees F outdoor temperature from these Sanyo panels would be 236 VDC, lower than the 250 VDC minimum shown for the SB4000. In fact, this data showed that only 6 to 8 of these Sanyo panels per string was compatible with the SB4000, which conflicts with the 4 to 8 panels per string results shown on the previous web page. This same software showed that the SB3000 was compatible with 5 or 6 of these Sanyo panels per series string, as the downloaded software did.

I called SMA’s toll free help line and the technical person who responded was very emphatic about using the SB3000 and not the SB4000 in our installation, though she wouldn’t say what the consequences of using the SB4000 would be. So I called Harrimans and pointed out that the data for both compatibility software programs indicated that the lowest possible voltages out of the Sanyo PV array was outside the specified operating range for the SB4000. They agreed to replace the SB4000 with the originally specified SB3000.

Note that the system was operating correctly at that time with the SB4000. But it was also the end of November, when temperatures tend to be cooler in Florida. The low voltage condition would tend to occur during hotter temperatures, such as those typical during the Florida summer. In fact, most people would probably never notice the problem, but may only notice they weren’t getting as much power out of the system as expected during the summer. But without any previous experience with PV systems, most might think this is normal.

Note also that I don’t blame Harrimans for this problem as they did check for compatibility and the SMA software did initially indicate that five of these Sanyo panels per string was compatible with the SB4000. The problem is really with SMA in that they have inconsistent results in their software, which SMA needs to fix. Once the problem was pointed out, Harrimans did swap the inverters with no fuss.

So now we had a working grid tied solar electric system. But we didn’t let it operate all the time. Why not? The answer to that is the subject of the next article.

How do you find and select an installer for a photovoltaic system for your home?

I considered installing it myself. But the state rebate program, as well as the power company (if you are going grid-tied) and my homeowner’s insurance insist that the system be installed by licensed professionals. Also, when I compared the cost of doing it myself, including permits and getting engineering drawings approved by licensed engineers, with the various quotes I got from licensed installers, there wasn’t much difference in price, not enough to justify all the extra work and risks on my part for installing it myself. The installers are probably getting much better discounts on the components than I could get, with the difference almost covering their labor costs.

You could find an installer by doing a net search for your area, looking in the telephone book, or attending various home shows or environmental expos in your area. The problem with these methods is that anyone can present their business through these methods, including amateurs and fly-by-night outfits. It would be better to select from a list that has been at least somewhat prescreened.

The ASES (American Solar Energy Society) has been offering a tour of solar installations one of the first weekends in October for the past few years (www.NationalSolarTour.org). They feature various solar installations in your area. The installers are listed for all the installations on their tour. You get a chance to see an example of these installers’ work. They also often provide a list of other installers in your area. But you don’t have to wait for a tour as they do have installer lists and other helpful info on their website.

In Florida, the Florida Solar Energy Center (FSEC) is another good source. By Florida law, all solar installations must be approved by the FSEC. They have a list online of the systems they have approved and the installers (http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/industry/testing/PVsystems/certified_systems/index.htm). You can check out the installers on this list that are in your area. One problem with this list is that they don’t appear to be updating it regularly on the website.

I used the last two mentioned resources for finding installers in my area. My preferences were installers that have been in business at least 10 years, with at least 50 photovoltaic installations, and can show that they have experience installing grid tied systems that have battery back-up.

As a reminder from my previous blog articles, I was looking for a system with a minimum of 2000 W of panels, grid tied, with at least 10 kW-hr of battery backup. See my previous articles for the reasons for these requirements.

I contacted around a dozen companies. Some no bid because they didn’t feel my system was big enough to justify the distances they would have to drive for the installation (these were mostly Orlando-area companies). Some just gave bids over the phone or Internet without even seeing my house. This didn’t give me a lot of confidence as they had no idea what my shading, roof construction, attic access, etc., was like, so they were quickly rejected, especially since their quotes weren’t much different than anyone else.

All the quotes fell between $22,700 and $25,900 except one (a company that didn’t visit my house) which was about $30,000. These quotes were received in October, 2009. I narrowed it down to three companies:

Solar Source was by far the cheapest. They are also the largest solar installer in Pinellas County, where I live (population just under 1 million), with probably more installs in this county than all the other installers combined. I could find info indicating they have been business since the mid 1980’s, so they probably wouldn’t disappear next month.

But a number of things bothered me about my contacts with the company. First, their salesman insisted they could only install the panels on my west facing roof section (I have a hip roof with slopes in all directions with no gables). My studies indicated that that was the most shaded section of my roof with the least average hours per day of direct sunlight. I really wanted the panels on my south facing section of my roof, which is typically best in the northern hemisphere, though my analyzes indicated that a south orientation would only get me about 8 percent more power than an east or west orientation, since I have a shallow 14 degree roof slope. This assumes no shade. But the south roof section has a lot less shade and the shade that is present I have more control over and can significantly reduce if I need to. When considering shade, my analyzes indicate that I would get between 30 to 50 % more power from panels on the south roof than on the either east or west roofs (the sun exposure on my east is not much better than on the west). My sizing study indicated that I could fit 2000 W of panels, though not much more, on my south roof. The others who saw my house and gave me quotes also felt they could fit the panels on my south roof.

The only reasons I could figure out for the Solar Source representative’s insistence that the panels be mounted on the west facing roof is 1) that is the second biggest continuous roof section, since the longest dimension of my house runs north-south, so it would make their installation the easiest, and 2) the front of my house faces west, so panels on the west roof would be the most visible to the general public and give them the most advertising. These seemed like very poor reasons for me to take a significant hit in the output of my solar installation.

I was also having a hard time getting them to list exactly what major components (manufacturer, model numbers) they would be using for my installation. Their attitude appeared to be “We’re the experts. Trust us, you’ll like whatever we give you.” But this is the second biggest purchase I’ve ever made in my life. If I were having a room added to my house, hearing the contractor say “Trust us, it will be this many square feet, have a floor, four walls, and a roof” would not be too assuring to me that I would like the room they build. I would want to know the room’s dimensions, how many and what kind of windows and doors and light fixtures and outlets and closets, etc. And a solar electric installation cost as much or more than the typical room addition. When I did finally get them to give me some specifics on the components they intended to use, I ran the panels they proposed through the inverter manufacturer’s compatibility software (http://www.sma-america.com/en_US/products/software/sunny-design.html) and found out that the panels they proposed would apply too much voltage to the inverter they proposed and potentially damage the inverter. So they obviously weren’t going to use these panels in this installation.

I suspect the reason they were reluctant to list specifically what they were going to use for my installation was so that they could have the flexibility to choose the cheapest equivalent components at the time of my installation to maximize their profit. But that would not assure giving me the most efficient system for my location and money. The importance of all this will be more apparent in future articles on this blog.

All this does not imply that Solar Source is a bad company. As I mentioned earlier, they have by far the most installations in my area, so they must be doing something right. I could find no complaints about them. The things I mentioned above are probably what allow them to bid so low and still make a profit. They were on my final selection shortlist, partly because they were the cheapest, but also because from what I learned about them I was confident that whatever they installed would work. It just would not be what I would consider optimum for my property. So, if you have a more ideal situation (big south facing roof with no shade), they are probably the way to go as you will save a lot of money with them. But with my far from ideal situation, cheapest is not necessarily the best.

Harrimans Inc. was the second company on my shortlist. My research indicated that they have been in business since the early 1970’s. They provided a list of about 75 references, with addresses and phone numbers, of photovoltaic installations they have done the previous two years. I saw one of their grid tied, battery backed-up installations on the solar tour. They are installing about two PV systems a week (as of winter 2009-2010), making them one of the largest installers in Florida. They were also the second most expensive of all my quotes.

Harrimans was confident they could install 2000 W of panels on my south facing roof. They proposed using Sanyo HIT panels, which are the most efficient panels readily available on the market, and consequently take up the least roof area for a given power out. These Sanyo panels also tend to perform better than most panels under shady and cloudy conditions, giving even a little more power output. They are also a bit more expensive, which probably accounts for part of the higher price of Harrimans quote.

Harrimans also did give me a detailed list of the major components they intended to use and listed them on the proposal/contract. They also only wanted about 25 % of the money up front with the rest due upon satisfactory completion of the job. Their salesperson also didn’t try to bulls–t his way around any technical questions, like some others did. If he didn’t know the answer, he immediately called whoever he felt in his company would have the answer. So, even though they were a little on the expensive side, I couldn’t find anything wrong in what they proposed and felt confident the job would be done right.

St. Pete Solar was the third on my shortlist. They had only been in business a couple of years and had only installed five grid tied systems as of Oct. 2009. They had never done a battery backed up, grid tied system. These facts don’t seem to support my initial requirements for an installer. So why were they on my shortlist?

One thing that has always bothered me about most solar installations is that the PV panels are mounted on the roof. Roofs eventually need to be replaced. Though I had just replaced my cement tile roof about less than seven years ago and it should be good for at least another 30 years (my first cement tile roof lasted 44 years), I still felt uncomfortable about putting the panels on my roof. St. Pete Solar was the only company that proposed putting the panels on a free-standing awning-type structure and they actually had experience with this type of installation (shown on their website).

This free-standing structure would have to be put in the area between my house and the southern border of my yard to avoid shade issues. Unfortunately, I have an easement there that prohibits any permanent structure there. During initial talks with the head county zoning official, he said he couldn’t outright approve a variance for putting these panels in the easement and that it would have to go before the zoning board, though the official said he would support such a variance if my neighbor to the south of me was OK with it, which he was. But, after thinking more about it, I realized a few other things:

1) Most modern solar panels are self-leaded with snap together connectors. These wires would be exposed in an awning installation. The inspectors may require these exposed wires to be in some sort of protective conduit, which would be difficult. If mounted on a roof, this is not usually an issue as few people have access to the roof and the wires are sandwiched between the roof and the panels so they aren’t really exposed. I didn’t really want to fight this battle.

2) Mounting on the roof does provide some shade for that roof area, which reduces air conditioning requirements a little.

3)The panels themselves are less likely to be damaged on the roof than they would be on an awning type structure that people could and would be walking under.

4) After talking with some people, I found out that removing and reinstalling the panels is much less expensive and not as big a deal as I originally thought it might be, though, with my relatively new roof, this may never be a concern in my lifetime.

So having the PV panels mounted someplace other than the roof was looking less attractive. Also, the cost of going with St. Pete Solar was not much cheaper than going with Harrimans and they had never done a grid tied, battery backed up system before. If they were significantly cheaper, like $6000 or more, which would more than pay for a potentially fried inverter, these concerns could probably be lived with. But the risks and extra hassles for my particular installation weren’t worth saving just one or two thousand bucks. But if I would have been going strictly grid tied with no battery backup and didn’t have the zoning issue, I probably would have gone with them as they seemed quite knowledgeable and I liked a lot of the things they did with their installations and they would have been a lot cheaper than all but maybe Solar Source.

So I ended up choosing Harrimans. It was worth it to me to pay a little more for a lot more power generated.

The most basic instinct common to virtually all, if not all, creatures is the survival instinct, the drive towards self preservation. This survival instinct, as well as the desire to reproduce, dominate the lives of most all creatures. But, curiously, this instinct seems to be disappearing in most Americans.

Some common examples that triggered this observation:

1) Many Americans these days will walk into a street without even looking to see if they may be walking into the path of some vehicle. I was taught as a child to look both ways for any traffic before entering a street. Many American adults apparently never learned this or even thought of it. And this problem is not just confined to pedestrians, for this problem also seems to be very prevalent among bicyclists.

2) Many Americans try to drive a motored vehicle while their minds and bodies are focused on some other task. Everyone is familiar with those who are too busy talking on their cell phones or text messaging to worry about driving. But I have also seen people eating, reading a book or newspaper, putting on make-up, changing a diaper, dancing (I assume that is what they were doing when they have both hands above their heads and they are moving in a rhythmic fashion), and even appearing to have sex while driving.

3) Many people will attempt to do some strenuous adventure, such as a hike or paddling trip, without any training or far beyond their skill level, that are well beyond their physical abilities, without consideration of their present health, the weather, political conditions, and/or without the proper gear, maps, or planning. I have seen many people like this on trips I have been on that the rest of the group have to “babysit” to get them though the trip. I have also heard many people like this bragging about their adventures, wondering how they ever managed to survive. Then we all have read or heard in the news those who weren’t so lucky, often jeopardizing the lives of others and/or causing big political crises.

4) Instead of buying the minimum home that meets their needs and that they can afford with some margin, many people buy the absolute biggest and fanciest house they can manage to convince someone to loan them money for, even if it is a stretch to make the payments and there is no margin for potential future problems.

5) People deliberately live in questionable places and do little to protect themselves. For example, much of New Orleans is below sea level and the city has flooded at least 27 times in its less than 300 year existence, yet people still insist on living there. People also live in the flood plain of rivers that are known to flood on a regular basis. And few Floridians have done much to protect their houses from hurricanes, even after the rather disastrous storms of 2004 and 2005.

How did this most basic instinct for survival manage to get suppressed in these people? At first it may seem that the survival instinct has been replaced or overwhelmed by the drive for pleasure. But many of these problems, such as entering a street without looking for any possible traffic, don’t appear to have any potential pleasure associated with them. The real problem appears to be that these people are out of touch with reality. They are oblivious to their surroundings.

Is it possible we live in too safe a society? Most of us haven’t had to worry about lions or other wild animals pouncing on us for many generations now. Most Americans haven’t and maybe never will experience an attack from a foreign power on American soil. Our school systems try to protect us from failure, with some educators suggesting not even grading students anymore. Our lawyers try to convince us that nothing that goes wrong is our fault but always someone else’s fault. The basic message from the government and the media is that we don’t have to do anything to protect ourselves; all our institutions are supposed to protect us from all harm.

But as 9/11, Hurricane Katrina, the present economic crises, etc., demonstrate, our institutions can’t anticipate every possible problem, may be slow to respond, and may not even survive some situations. People need to wake up, become aware of their surroundings, and start taking responsibility for their own lives if we expect to continue to exist as individuals and as a country.

The most common question I get is some form of: “When will you get your money back from your solar power installation? How long will it take to break even on your initial investment?”

My question is: Why are you adding this extra condition to anything that helps the environment? You don’t do this for most of other stuff you do.

For example, when do you get your money back from homeowner’s insurance? Hopefully never! But few homeowners in the US would even consider not having homeowner’s insurance. They get it to protect themselves in case something really bad happens. I view solar power the same way, to protect us from something really bad happening and to try to protect me in case something bad does happen.

When do you get your money back from trash collection service? You could (if local authorities permit) just cancel your trash service and let your trash pile up in your back yard. Or you could just dump it along the side of some less traveled road like apparently some people do. But most of us are willing to pay for trash service because the alternatives 1) are an eyesore, 2) can contaminate the environment, particularly the groundwater, 3) are a safety hazard, and 4) provide a breeding area for vermin which can then cause destruction and spread disease.

A lot of these same problems result from energy production by fossil fuels. Coal mines and oil wells are not pretty, contaminate the environment, and are local safety hazards. The emissions from fossil fuel plants are contributing to global warming and contaminating the environment. Solar power acts kind like trash collection in that it helps minimize these problems.

I’m writing this around Christmas time. Many people spend hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars on Christmas decorations and the energy to operate them. When will they get their money back from these expenditures on decorations? Most will reply that is not the point; they do it because they enjoy it. They also do it, though few will admit it, to attract attention to themselves. Well, I use solar power because I enjoy breathing, eating fish that isn’t contaminated with mercury, and prefer to live in a house that isn’t flooded by rising oceans.

When will you get your money back from swimming pools, hot tubs, iPods, big screen TVs, designer clothing and handbags, a turf grass lawn, a vacation to Europe, video games, movie theater and professional sports and concert tickets, eating in a restaurant, etc? Most of what we spend money on will never provide us any financial return. But we expect a financial return on something that will help continue the existence of the human species, as well as many of the other species on this planet.

The truth is that solar power is more like food. We will never get the money back we spend on food. In fact, spending money on food costs us more money in the long run, as we will hopefully end up living longer than if we don’t buy food, increasing our total living expenses. Shifting to renewable energy sources will hopefully allow our species and some of the other species to last a little bit longer on this planet.

If saving money is really so incredibly important, the best way to save money would be to take a loaded large caliber gun, put it to the side of your head, and pull the trigger. That simple act would dramatically reduce your future expenses.

That last paragraph sounds incredibly brutal, and most would not even think of such a thing. But this is exactly what we are doing with our present energy practices: Committing slow motion suicide. But because it is so slow in happening, we rationalize it away. And the most common rationalization, particularly among older people, though almost no one will admit it, is that it is not going to happen in their lifetime so why worry about it. Most older people feel it is not their problem and that they should just enjoy themselves and let the future generations worry about it.

The big problem is that those future generations who are going to be significantly affected by this are living right now. These problems will be on us sooner than most think. If I were a young person living right now, I would be very, very angry.

When people think about what the government should be doing to save energy, most think only of the government subsidizing massive, expensive research projects to develop major technological innovations for more energy efficient articles or alternate energy sources, or they think of tax credits, rebates, and grants to encourage people and businesses to implement energy saving measures. But much of the energy presently used is wasted. Most people put little effort into reducing this waste unless they are forced to or they can see a direct economic benefit and the change is relatively painless. Here are three suggestions for legislation that could encourage people to reduce this energy waste that require no technological breakthroughs and little cost:

1) Require ALL electrical devices to have a readily accessible on/off switch which turns off ALL power to the device. It is amazing how many products, such as microwave ovens, regular ovens, televisions, stereos, etc., still consume power when they are assumed to be "turned off." Many of the manufacturers of these products claim that the consumption of these "phantom loads" is negligible, but this isn’t true if this consumption is 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

For example, my microwave oven is plugged into a switched multi-outlet strip so that I can turn it on only when I want to use it. If it weren’t, I calculate that it would consume, over a year’s time, four times as much energy when it is "off" than when it is in use. You could just plug each existing appliance into its own switched multi-outlet strip, but this would be a ridiculous mess if you had to do this for every appliance you owned. Also, this isn’t practical for some items, like permanently installed items, such as built in microwaves, or items running on 240 VAC, such as ovens.

Some people may want to make an exception for clocks. The trouble is that many manufacturers will just add clocks to their devices to get around adding a switch, like they already do with microwaves, ovens, video players, etc. People will also want to make exceptions for chargers and “wall warts” (those transformers that plug directly into the wall outlet), but these devices are some of the worst offenders when it comes to wasting energy. So there should be NO exceptions, except possibly items with “suicide circuits,” which would completely turn off all power after some short period of time after last use.

2) Require manufacturers to include the power consumption of the product, both in use and when idle, on the product packaging. Presently, only the maximum consumption is listed, and usually only on the product itself in very small print. So someone presently trying to select between products can’t compare energy consumption without opening the packages for these items, and most packages these days are not easy to open without damaging the package. Listing the power consumption for the item on the package would help those of us who really do care in making our product choices. Of course, the manufacturers of inefficient products would probably resist this, but that should encourage them to make their products more efficient.

3) Eliminate the minimum charge per customer for electric rates and adjust the rates per kilowatt hour consumed accordingly so that all customer charges are based directly on the amount of electricity used. These minimum charges per customer punish those who conserve energy and rewards the energy gluttons. Since this charge is the same for every user, no matter how much electricity they use, the effective rate per kilowatt hour, that is, the total bill divided by the kilowatt hours used, is much higher for those who conserve energy than for those who don’t. Effectively, those who try to be good stewards of our earth’s resources are subsidizing electricity for those who are wasteful and don’t care, which definitely doesn’t encourage energy conservation.

In this age of concern for global warming and talk of carbon footprints and carbon taxes, much of it coming from our own President of the United States and his staff, we should be doing all we can to encourage all people to conserve energy and our resources. But we are also faced with massive budget deficits. The above suggestions allow our government to encourage energy conservation at virtually no cost.

As stated in my last blog article, our house has a lot of shade to the east and west but little to the south. Why does this matter?

Contrary to what some may believe (like whoever installed the City of St. Petersburg’s solar powered parking meters), these photovoltaic (PV) panels are SOLAR panels, not SKY panels or UP panels. They won’t work too well unless they are directly and completely exposed to the sun, not just facing the sky or facing up. Even if a small corner of a panel is shaded, that panel will have reduced output, if it isn’t completely shut down. And when that panel is part of an array of panels, if that panel has reduced output or is completely shut down, the entire array that this panel is part of will also have reduced output. The most common exception to this case, which still isn’t too common, is when there is some isolation means, such as a diode in each series string of panels, which are usually referred to as blocking diodes. But these isolation means often introduce some significant losses to the system, so they are rarely included in modern PV arrays.

Virtually all larger modern PV panels have bypass diodes in them. These bypass diodes allow the shaded portion of the panel to be bypassed, possibly allowing the panel to output some energy, depending upon how much of the panel is shaded. But the output is still reduced by the shaded section. If it is reduced below the control range of the inverter, the inverter will operate at a far lower efficiency and may even go offline to protect itself and anything it is connected to. So these bypass diodes don’t solve the problem of shading.

I’m talking above about hard shading, such as from a building, mountain, densely leafed tree or shrub, etc. Diffuse shade, such as from a power line located 40 feet from the array, will frequently have little impact on the array output, though this impact will increase with the size of the diffuse shading object, the number of these objects, and how close they are to the PV panels.

But hard shade can come from things you may not think of, such as chimneys, plumbing roof vent pipes, a big wet leaf, a big blotch of bird doo-doo, etc. And some diffuse shade generators, such as lots of dust or salt spray residue to the point of being very visible, can also significantly reduce the output of these PV panels. If you get fairly regular rains in your area, Mother Nature may take care of many of these potential environmentally caused problems for you. If you don’t get regular rains or if you notice a sudden drop in PV output, you may need to wash down your panels occasionally to maintain peak performance. But you do need to consider chimneys and such in the placement of your panels.

The “rule of thumb” in determining the impact of shading is that you want the panels to be totally exposed to the sun from 9 AM to 3 PM. That way you will get at least 80 % of the solar energy available to your site during a typical day. But like most “rules of thumb,” this is rather simplistic and has lots of exceptions.

For example, this assumes that solar noon, that is, when the sun is at its highest point in the sky, is at 12 noon on the clock. This is true in the winter in the US when we are on Standard Time. But when we are on Daylight Saving Time, this all shifts by one hour since the sun is now at its highest point around 1 PM. After all, if the change from Standard Time to Daylight Saving Time shifts the sunrises and sunsets by one hour, wouldn’t solar noon also change by one hour?

This rule of thumb also assumes you are in the center of your time zone and that center is located at a multiple of 15 degrees from zero degrees longitude, for example, 75 degrees for the US Eastern Time Zone, 90 degrees for the US Central Time Zone, etc. Few major US cities are located at a multiple of 15 degrees from zero degrees longitude. For every degree you are located east or west of this multiple of 15 degrees from zero degrees longitude, you have to subtract or add, respectively, 4 minutes to the time zone noon to find solar noon for your location. For example, Clearwater, Florida, where I live, is located at about 82 degrees, 50 minutes longitude. This is almost 8 degrees west of the expected center of the Eastern Time Zone, which is 75 degrees. So solar noon occurs over a half hour later, or about 12:30 PM Standard Time and 1:30 PM Daylight Saving Time, here in Clearwater than it would in Philadelphia, which is located almost in the middle of the time zone.

Why does all this matter? If you live in Clearwater, Florida, it is August (Daylight Saving Time), and you are trying to see how much shade impacts your potential solar installation, you would not be checking to assure you have no shade problems from 9 AM to 3 PM, but from about 10:30 AM to 4:30 PM. This is a big difference in this case.

Note that since the earth has an elliptical orbit around the sun, the rate at which it goes around the sun changes throughout the year. This changes solar noon up to an additional plus or minus 17 minutes. See http://www.idialstars.com/eot.htm for more information on this variation if you want to account for it.

Now that we have decided now is the time to buy, what kind of system should we buy?

Our electric use is incredibly low compared to the average American household. We typically use about 1100 kW-hr a year, or about 90 kW-hr a month, or 3 kW-hr a day. Using the online program PVWatts, we determined that a 1000 W of photovoltaic (PV) panels should meet all our electrical needs, even after rather severe derating.

Note that PV panels are rated when operating at 25 degrees C with no temperature rise above ambient. But they typically get rather hot when exposed to direct sunlight, as much as 35 degrees C or more above ambient. The power out of a PV panel also drops, typically about 0.48 %/degree C, as they heat up. So PV panels often put out a lot less power than expected, like 25 to 30 % of their rated power, during hot summer days, particularly here in Florida. When considered with other losses, such as voltage drops in the interconnects and wires, panel tolerances, inverter losses, etc, a system may put out only 50 to 60 % of its rated output during the hottest summer days.

The State of Florida will only rebate systems that are at least 2000 W. Since we calculate that a 2000 W system with the Florida state rebate is cheaper than a 1000 W system without the rebate, we want a minimum of 2000 W of PV panels. Most other people we know, who use considerably more energy, would probably need a 5000 W system to make a noticeable dent in their electric bills.

Our house also has a lot of shade to the east and west but little to the south. So we want the panels as close to the south end of the property as possible to avoid as much shading as possible. The house has its longest dimension running almost perfectly north to south. Since the roof is a hip roof, there is an angled section of the roof facing almost perfectly south, which is good. The problem is that it is also the shortest side of the house. Consequently, there isn’t much room on the south roof for PV panels. The fact that this roof section is also triangular makes matters worse. So it might be a challenge to even fit 2000 W of PV panels on this south-facing roof. So 2000 W is also the practical maximum we can use.

We also want a grid-tied system, since it is required for the Florida rebate. It also saves having to buy an additional inverter for the 240 V loads. It will also be necessary to qualify for any potential future feed-in tariffs or to sell carbon credits earned by the system.

Florida is noted for its hurricanes. The first thing damaged in most all major storms is the electric power grid. It often takes a week or more to get it back up. We are also running these days with a lot less reserve capacity, in both generation and particularly in transmission, than we were used to during the last century, and it is getting increasingly difficult to get approval for new electric power generating plants and particularly right-of-ways for power transmission lines. Consequently, we expect the grid to go down more frequently and for longer periods of time in the future. So having battery backup for critical loads is also a desirable feature.

Three to five days of storage capacity in the batteries should tide us until we get enough sunlight to recharge the batteries. This would indicate that we need about 10 to 15 kW-hr of storage. We would want these batteries to be AGM (absorbent glass mat) deep cycle lead acid batteries, preferably a type specifically designed for solar battery backup situations. These AGM batteries are sealed and don’t require any watering. Maintenance is minimal with these batteries, so they will probably outlast the typical flooded lead acid batteries which need to be constantly monitored and maintained for maximum life. AGM batteries cost about twice as much as equivalent flooded lead acid batteries, but will probably last about twice as long due to less critical maintenance requirements.

Battery back up doesn’t get any rebates from the Florida government. It does still get a 30 % tax credit from the Feds. So battery back up is kind of expensive insurance. But we feel it is worth it and far more likely to be used than the other forms of insurance we buy, other than health insurance.

We have for many years now been saying that we were going to eventually run our house and studio off solar power. Many of my friends have also asked me if they should add a solar electric system to their houses. But we have held off and I have been recommending to others to hold off because the time and economics weren’t right. That is, until the past couple months. I feel the time is optimum right now, at least here in Florida.

What has changed?

1) The US federal government is offering a 30 % tax credit on any solar electric system, good until 2016.

2) The state of Florida is offering a rebate of $4 per installed Watt for grid-tied photovoltaic systems. The system must have at least 2000 W of panels installed. Since the maximum rebate for a private residence is $20,000, the maximum installed Watts that will be rebated is 5000 W. The system must be professionally installed and the application received by June 20, 2010.

3) The costs of photovoltaic (PV) panels has dropped dramatically this year. High demand in other countries a few years ago spurred many manufacturers to build more production facilities and ramp up production. But the present deep recession has caused demand to plummet this past year. So, there is presently a glut of PV panels on the market. Add to this the threat of China dramatically increasing its PV panels production capability and potentially flooding the market in the future, which is further pushing down prices.

4) The Florida government has “convinced” the power companies to offer more favorable terms to consumers who feed PV power into the grid. Before, in my area (Pinellas County), the consumer was only credited the cheapest wholesale rate that the power company paid (typically about $ 0.025/kW-hr.) for any power he fed into the grid, and any excess credit beyond the consumer’s actual use was forfeited at the end of the year. Now, net metering is used, where the consumer is credited for any power fed into the grid at the same rate that he is charged for any power consumed from the grid. Any excess generated beyond what is consumed by the consumer is now credited at the end of the year at the average wholesale rate the power company pays (presently about $0.045/kW-hr). Also, the application procedure and requirements are much simpler, with no fees.

All this has made it much more attractive, financially, to install grid-tied PV power on a private residence here in the Sunshine State. The price of professionally installed systems has fallen from over $9 per installed Watt to around $7 to $8. $4 of that is rebated by the State of Florida. 30 % of the total is returned as a tax credit by the Federal government. These two things alone mean that a buyer can get between 60 % to 90 % of his initial cost back from the various governments. Add in the savings on electric bills, PV systems can now pay for themselves completely in less than 10 years, often much less. And this doesn’t even take into consideration possible income from carbon taxes, cap and trade, feed-in tariffs, or any of the other global warming mitigation initiatives being discussed and even going through legislature right now.

Since PV prices are falling, might it be better to wait some more? Probably not. PV panels themselves are right now selling for typically $4/W, with some selling for under $2.50/W. The Florida state rebate is $4/W and goes away at the end of June. Because of the present budget crunches, it will probably not get extended. With this rebate, Florida residences are effectively getting the panels for free or even being paid to buy the panels. PV panels prices would have to fall to being free or being paid to take them to match this rebate once it goes away. And a potential buyer must act now to select an installer, get the system scheduled and installed, and get the paperwork in by the end of June. Waiting any longer is cutting it close and risks missing out on the state rebate.

Why do people like socialism? The simple answer is because they never grew up and don’t want to grow up.

Before I explain this, I must tell you that I grew up and live in middle class United States. Consequently, the lifestyles and experiences I’m talking about refer to middle and upper class Americans, which is most Americans, which I’m confident is also true of most people in the industrialized countries (Canada, most of Europe, Japan, South Korea, etc.). I suspect this is also true of the middle and upper classes in the developing countries, such as all Latin America, India, China, Indonesia, etc. I can’t speak for the poor or those living subsistence lifestyles (where they make and raise most everything they have themselves) as I have no experience with these lifestyles. I also suspect the majority of those who read and respond to these blogs also can’t speak for the poor and subsistence lifestyles as they also have no real experience with these lifestyles.

Most children in the developed countries have a pretty worry-free life, at least financially. What emotional concerns these children have tend to be with other issues, such as divorce, sexual abuse, bullying, etc. But they rarely have to worry, except maybe during a (rare for most people) natural disaster (hurricane, earthquake, flooding, etc.), about whether there is a roof over their head or if there will be food on the table at mealtime. These things are just assumed to always be there. They definitely don’t have to worry about taxes and insurance and doctor bills and such. If they ever want anything, they just ask Mommy or Daddy for it. They may or may not get what they want, but they never have to worry about paying for it.

Then one day they are told they are now grown up and Mommy and/or Daddy kick them out of the house. Now, they are suddenly responsible for everything they want and need. If they mess up, they could be homeless and hungry.

Many will welcome this as an opportunity to grow and achieve their dreams. These people love this new freedom and are willing to accept, and even welcome, this added responsibility in exchange for the freedom and opportunity.

But many people don’t like this sudden responsibility. So they try to find a surrogate “Mommy” and/or “Daddy” to take care of these needs so they don’t have to worry about them. They are willing to surrender much of their freedom to relieve themselves of these responsibilities and concerns.

These people will often look to corporations, unions, or the government to be that surrogate “Mommy’ and/or “Daddy.” They will seek out jobs with great health and pension plans and, once hired, virtually guaranteed employment for the rest of their lives with pretty much well defined and fixed advancement. These people will be the last to try to start their own business.

There is no problem with this. “Different strokes for different folks.” There is enough room and diversity for everyone. Let those who love responsibility and the almost limitless opportunities, as well as the risks of failure, that come with it seek and have it, while those who hate responsibility can hide in their government, corporate, or union job with the security that comes with it.

The problem is that most of those who hate responsibility and never grew up also never grew out of their childhood jealousies. The “Her piece is bigger than mine!” mentality still rules their lives. They are jealous of the success attained by those who welcomed the responsibility and, with the freedom that comes with this responsibility, used their ambition, brains, and talent to attain great success. The responsibility-haters conveniently ignore all the sacrifices (I’m sure Bill Gates didn’t date that often or go to too many football games or concerts or wild and drunken and drug-enhanced parties as a teen and twenty-something – he was too busy writing software), risks, and even failures of the other many responsibility-welcomers.

Plus, the business environment changes over time. That means that the security that could be found in the corporate world may not be there twenty years, or even two years, from now, at least not with that same corporation. So, if a responsibility-hater chooses the wrong corporation, he could see his security vanish sometime in the future with a change in the business climate (though many of these changes are government induced and/or aggravated).

So the responsibility-haters seek socialism. Actually, it is not socialism they want, but a benevolent dictatorship. After all, a benevolent dictatorship is the closest you can come to the roll an ideal Mommy and Daddy plays in a child’s life, all powerful and controlling but with the best interest of the child foremost in his/her mind. But thanks to people like Idi Amin, Adoph Hitler, and such, dictators have a bad reputation and virtually no one will admit to wanting one. Plus, even initially good dictators have a tendency to go bad. So socialism is the next best substitute. In fact, experience to date indicates that the more socialist a country is, the more its government looks like a dictatorship by committee (China, Vietnam) if not by an individual (North Korea).

(Incidentally, this may be another reason, other than fear of death, that so many are drawn to religion. After all, the Supreme Being in all monotheistic religions I know of is presented as the ultimate Benevolent Dictator, in control of absolutely everything but with our best interests in mind. In fact, this Being is often referred to in these religions as Father, King, Lord, etc. But that is another long discussion I don’t want to get into.)

But there are a lot of problems with socialism. One is that we are “putting all our eggs in one basket.” Right now in the world, we have all these multibillion dollar corporations who have the assets to attract the absolute best talent available. But many of these corporate giants eventually fail or at least end up very much weakened and reduced in size. Many corporations once considered all powerful and “too big to fail” have failed just in the past year. But people are willing, even demand, that we put ALL our assets into one big corporation, that is, the government. What makes these people so confident that this one big corporation, the government, can be any more successful than all these other corporations? If this one big corporation, the government, fails, we are ALL screwed as there is no one else to fall back on and bail us out.

Second, socialists will argue that they can never be truly successful in running the economy unless they have complete control of the economy. They will blame any of their failures on this lack of control. That means no one can keep control of his own destiny and assume responsibility for his own life. This takes the freedom and opportunities that come with assuming responsibility for your own life away from the responsibility-welcomers.

The responsibility-haters will see no problem with this, as they have never outgrown their childhood jealousies. But the responsibility-welcomers are the ones responsible for virtually all progress attained by mankind. The lack of limits on their potential abilities and, probably more important, rewards, as well as competition with other like-minded individuals, is what drove them to achieve their accomplishments. With socialism, human progress will be dramatically slowed, if not completely stop.

But, some may argue, the Soviet Union did attain some remarkable scientific advancements. But they weren’t operating in a vacuum. They still had very severe competition from the countries that were mostly non-socialist, particularly the United States. And the socialist Soviet Union didn’t survive the competition. They have been replaced with a far more capitalist Russia, Ukraine, Estonia, etc. And China’s great progress these past twenty years have been mostly due to their absorption of various free market practices. This progress is not just in wealth, but also in health, human rights, opportunities, and the environment.

Also, with any government issue, it is the winner takes all. I get very few opportunities to vote directly for any government issue. I do get opportunities to vote for representatives who will then get an opportunity to vote with regards to these many government issues, but have little control over how these representatives will actually vote or even if they will vote. If I don’t like the result of these representatives’ votes, there is nothing I can do about it other than complain. If, for example, these representatives vote to invade another country, there is nothing I can do about it. If fact, I am forced to support this decision against my will. The government forces me through taxation to finance this war they chose to initiate. I cannot choose to refuse to give the government any money to finance this war without the government arresting me and throwing me into prison.

Corporations don’t have that power. If I don’t want to contribute to some corporation, I don’t have to. I can always find alternatives to the corporation’s products and services or do without. That is, unless the corporation influences the government to force me to contribute to the corporation (as discussed in recent articles on this blog). But, again, it is not the corporations who are forcing me but the government because we gave the government the power to do this.

And this gets us back to my much earlier article on “Why People Hate Capitalism.” I have received many private comments* on this article, most agreeing and some disagreeing. The common thread in absolutely all who disagreed is that they are unwilling to accept responsibility for their lives and destinies. They all feel “the devil made them do it” and all the world’s problems are someone else’s fault. And they are right! They have as individuals personally given up and refuse to accept any responsibility for their lives. They make no effort to change anything as they feel everything is beyond their control. I am wasting my efforts to try to convince them otherwise.

Corporations aren’t all powerful. If they were, none would ever go bankrupt. But they do go bankrupt, quite often. One of the most recent big examples was General Motors, which was at one time the largest and most powerful corporation in the world. Why do they fail? Mostly because either they can’t attract enough customers and/or their shareholders lose confidence in them and start withdrawing their money from the corporation. This is the collective act of many individuals, and usually not an organized collective act, but the end result of a bunch of individual decisions. Individuals can shut down any corporation or corporate act. Maybe not just one or even a couple individuals, but a lot of individuals who feel the same can.

This is not true with the government. The government has as much power as we give them. Usually this power includes the ability to significantly restrict a person’s freedom (prison), confiscate her property, and in some cases even kill her. And once the government has power, it is virtually impossible to nonviolently take it away.

It has been said by many that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. In a capitalist society, power is distributed. True, those with more money tend to have more power, but anyone with any money, no matter how little, has at least some power. The biggest potential problem for a capitalist, or any society, is a monopoly, because a monopoly can attain enough power to force out any competition and then attain absolute power. So all monopolies, business and political, are to be avoided at all cost.

With socialism, we are purposely creating the ultimate monopoly, that is, government control over everything. The government then has absolute power. And remember, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

*(Why not public comments on the blog? Is there a technical problem in posting or are people ashamed for the public to see their thoughts? I think I may only respond to public comments on this blog in the future. But if there is a technical problem, please let us know so we can try to fix it. Thanks!)