Solar leasing (Sungevity)-how does it work?
- Thread starter Badfish740
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil. -
Super Cedar firestarters 30% discount Use code Hearth2024 Click here
- Status
newburner
Burning Hunk
![[Hearth.com] Solar leasing (Sungevity)-how does it work?](/talk/data/attachments/147/147741-c5dbc11a89bae5b3855256c496f651dd.jpg?hash=WI4JdB-gA9)
![[Hearth.com] Solar leasing (Sungevity)-how does it work?](/talk/data/attachments/147/147743-c857572dfade7d5395ea3994d8314354.jpg?hash=XExNpmDn5n)
![[Hearth.com] Solar leasing (Sungevity)-how does it work?](/talk/data/attachments/147/147744-f91e539ac6c0c7c91d449222c18e4e02.jpg?hash=OqhiqtKCko)
NJ_Burner08002
Member
That is a professional clean looking instal. The only thing i don't like is the small panel they used, it's all ready full. They should of went the next size up and left a few open spaces for future expansion
/electrician
newburner
Burning Hunk
We are in the process of doing just that. I'm replacing all bulbs with LEDs. Its just going to take a few months because we can't afford to do them all at once. We replace one each week.
I never thought about that. To be honest, I was just happy to get the old fuse box replaced. The electrician said he did about $5k worth of work in the 2 days he was there. All compliments of SolarCity. There's no way I could've afforded those upgrades.
newburner
Burning Hunk
Great questions.
Roof leaks are covered under warranty. If one occurs, they come out and fix it for nothing.
As for the new roof, that's not so much of an issue for me because when the time comes, I plan on doing it myself. The panels are very easy to pop off, unplug and remove to allow for re-roofing.
Roof leaks are covered under warranty. If one occurs, they come out and fix it for nothing.
As for the new roof, that's not so much of an issue for me because when the time comes, I plan on doing it myself. The panels are very easy to pop off, unplug and remove to allow for re-roofing.
I like your approach. I installed my small system completely solo on 2nd floor roof. It really wouldn't be hard to set up a scaffold, move the panels and reroof. I used EPDM underlayment under my entire roof so I am not worried about leaks for a long time. In reality the roof under the panels will last a long time as they are effectively covered by a second roof. Heck if I could find matching shingles in 20 years I could just change the ones that are not covered by panels.
One of these days someone will come out with glazing system so we can dispense with the roofing and just use solar panels for the roof.
A few things come to mind....."roof leaks are covered" any and all roof leaks even if they have nothing to do with the install...in that case you are getting a Solar Setup and a roof GAURANTEE for 30 years regardless of the condition of the roof at the time of install? That would be a pretty good deal,,,also , while the panels might pop off easily , the support track system needs to be removed also, and layed out again on the new roof to accept the panels again...it will be a complete new install again....
As far as the panels protecting the roofing, that really remains to be seen, it's not only exposure that will wear on a shingle....excessive heat buildup under the panel will shorten the life, shingles will dry out just as a part of normal wear...debris buildup under the panel, roofing staying wet longer due to no sun exposure....many things remain to be seen...
newburner
Burning Hunk
Im not sure how other companies install but SolarCity doesnt use roof track systems. They install cleats directly into the rafters. When the panels are popped off, all that remains on the roof are these small cleats. Easily shingled around then re-sealed.
Last edited:
There are a couple of things in this thread that appear to be in error. First, I don't think National Grid is charging $ .26/kWh in Massachusetts, yet. You're probably looking at the projected cost in 5 years that Solar City's showing on their proposal. The all in rate for NGrid there is more like $ .15/kWh, although I understand that they're using the purported shortage of natural gas pipeline capacity to increase rates based on the cost of gas for generation of electricity. With that in mind, I could be a bit low on their current rate. In any case, I'd reexamine the first year savings you can expect because you're not going to cut your costs in half for 2015.
Second, the panels will absolutely protect the roof from the the thing that's most detrimental to it, the sun. You can expect the roof area under the panels to last around 50% longer than those that are not shaded by panels. There's a further benefit from their shading your roof, they'll keep the roof and attic space cooler, thus reduce summer a/c costs by as much as 10%.
Third, Hawaii, then New York City & Westchester county (Con-Ed), then Connecticut (UI and CL&P) have much higher rates than Mass.
I hope this is helpful information for folks trying to get their head around how solar truly works from a financial and a physical perspective. I'm happy to field further questions if anyone has them.
Second, the panels will absolutely protect the roof from the the thing that's most detrimental to it, the sun. You can expect the roof area under the panels to last around 50% longer than those that are not shaded by panels. There's a further benefit from their shading your roof, they'll keep the roof and attic space cooler, thus reduce summer a/c costs by as much as 10%.
Third, Hawaii, then New York City & Westchester county (Con-Ed), then Connecticut (UI and CL&P) have much higher rates than Mass.
I hope this is helpful information for folks trying to get their head around how solar truly works from a financial and a physical perspective. I'm happy to field further questions if anyone has them.
newburner
Burning Hunk
I can't speak to points 2 & 3 but you are incorrect about point number one. With the recent 37 percent rate increase, effective November 1, I am paying over 26 cents per kilowatt hour. That is not a projected rate I am paying that right now. The rate that Solar City used in their proposal was the old rate of 19 cents per kilowatt hour. This is one thing I am not confused about.
OMG, they are really putting it to you folks down there! That rate should be mitigated by the state because it's a huge gouge based upon the current cost of generation. Two years ago, NGrid was at less than $ .14/kWh in Mass. Rate payers must be up in arms over the current costs and I'm sure the solar companies are reveling in them because it makes selling solar into a near no-brainer.
The utilities decoupled from the generation side of the business a few years back and got many states to approve a variable rate structure that allows them to pass on generation costs to the consumers. Those rates are tied to the cost of generation and can vary each month and right now with the debates raging over construction of new gas pipelines, the cost of natural gas has skyrocketed, sending up the cost of generating power from gas fired turbines. I'd be super interested in looking at a copy of your most recent NGrid bill to see how they break down their rates by line item.
The utilities decoupled from the generation side of the business a few years back and got many states to approve a variable rate structure that allows them to pass on generation costs to the consumers. Those rates are tied to the cost of generation and can vary each month and right now with the debates raging over construction of new gas pipelines, the cost of natural gas has skyrocketed, sending up the cost of generating power from gas fired turbines. I'd be super interested in looking at a copy of your most recent NGrid bill to see how they break down their rates by line item.
newburner
Burning Hunk
You bet we are upset. It is the sole reason I moved towards solar. Without a doubt, the only reason. Not because it gave me the warm and fuzzies inside.
My bill jumped from $344/mo to $588 in November because of the increase.
My bill jumped from $344/mo to $588 in November because of the increase.
Its pretty simple in Mass, either pay to install solar or subsidize your neighbor to install solar (or any other renewable) through the higher electric rate. Unfortunately this socks it to the poor renters while the homeowners who can afford an outright install or sign a lease make out.
I am not a ratepayer but did find this sample NG bill
http://www.nationalgridus.com/masselectric/non_html/supplier_samplebillr.pdf
There is one surcharge for renewables and one for energy conservation (a portion of which pays for firms to meet efficiency goals).
I don't know where they hide the cost for state mandated renewable energy minimum limits. Every firm that sells power needs to meet a certain percentage renewable and that goes up every year. It is somewhere over 20% now. Mass declared biomass generated power non renewable last year so they need to replace the lost generation from wood that they were buying with some other renewable and the options all are much more expensive.
http://www.nationalgridus.com/masselectric/non_html/supplier_samplebillr.pdf
There is one surcharge for renewables and one for energy conservation (a portion of which pays for firms to meet efficiency goals).
I don't know where they hide the cost for state mandated renewable energy minimum limits. Every firm that sells power needs to meet a certain percentage renewable and that goes up every year. It is somewhere over 20% now. Mass declared biomass generated power non renewable last year so they need to replace the lost generation from wood that they were buying with some other renewable and the options all are much more expensive.
Thanks. At 1/20 cents per kWh for the RE charge, I don't suspect it is a huge problem. The folks running Cape Wind are trying to get all other RE systems in MA redefined as non-RE, so they can set their price to meet the mandate. Shameful.
Actually, solar power is a very cost effective renewable energy source that plays no role in increasing rates. You can thank the natural gas industry for the crazy increases there, in MA. Further, solar is a distributed generation source, which reduces loads on the grid and the very expensive upgrades that would be required to deliver point source generation to a society that's ever hungrier for electricity.
I dont know where your info is coming from but mass utilities are paying a major premium for Solar FITs, that they dont pay for conventional generation. Someone is paying for it and it isnt the utility, so the rate base is paying for these enhanced incentives for solar.
Further, solar is a distributed generation source, which reduces loads on the grid and the very expensive upgrades that would be required to deliver point source generation to a society that's ever hungrier for electricity. Its a nice concept that makes everyone feel good, but barring a significant change in demand management, the grid needs to be capable of supplying as much power as customers want on dark cold night in January so having distributed solar on the grid really doesnt help anything from an infrastructure basis. The utilities are arguing that it makes things worse as they have to install more diesel fired peakers to deal with the demand when solar is offline due to time of day or cloudy weather. Texas is currently the poster child for what bad things happen when a high variable uncontrolled renewable load is hung off the grid.
Further, solar is a distributed generation source, which reduces loads on the grid and the very expensive upgrades that would be required to deliver point source generation to a society that's ever hungrier for electricity. Its a nice concept that makes everyone feel good, but barring a significant change in demand management, the grid needs to be capable of supplying as much power as customers want on dark cold night in January so having distributed solar on the grid really doesnt help anything from an infrastructure basis. The utilities are arguing that it makes things worse as they have to install more diesel fired peakers to deal with the demand when solar is offline due to time of day or cloudy weather. Texas is currently the poster child for what bad things happen when a high variable uncontrolled renewable load is hung off the grid.
Mass has a feed in tariff program? I'd like to see where you found that because it's the first I've heard of such a program there.
Regarding peak demand- in the northeast, that comes on sunny summer days. That's when the a/c's the coolers and freezers in every convenience store and the pool pumps in people's backyards are maxed out. Solar power production meshes really well with that demand, so it not only reduces demand on the grid, it also keeps the utilities from having to buy more power on the spot market which is extremely expensive. That aspect alone provides substantial savings to the utility company.
I have no first hand knowledge of how that works in Texas, but would think it's similar for them.
Last edited:
If you Google "electricity duck curve" you will no doubt see the nature of the problem with solar PV generation. At 5pm (or a little later in the summer), the solar PV generation capacity drops off, but the demand stays constant from 5pm to 9pm. That is why there is a lot of focus now on some storage or demand-reducton capability, being driven (mainly) by new California and New York initiatives.
- Status
