BB. wrote: »
the average home bill is probably around 1,000 kWH per month. Those that live in hot climates can easily hit 1,000-2,000 kWH per month or more during summer.
If you have never done a real electrical energy audit before--It pretty possible that you can knock 25 to 50% off of your bill. If you have electric hot water and other large electric appliances (or, for example, a computer server or two that run 24x7), you could even do better.-Bill
inetdog wrote: »
I'm betting that those 4 watt LEDs are competitive with the 13 watt CFLs mostly because the place you are using them wastes a lot of the omnidirectional output from the CFLs, while the LEDs send more of their output in the direction you want. That does not make them any less competitive, but it means that they are not twice or three times as efficient by the conventional measurements.
SYKEKO wrote: »
Hi im new to this whole wind/solar power stuff, I've seen that canadian Tire was selling the Blue planet wind turbines. Now whats everyones thoughts on these? their priced at 240 bucks (reg 799). Im mostly interested in lowing my power bill, cause the numbers keep rising lol. Anyways would this be a good starter that could pay for itself and then some? or is this a complete waste of time
Cariboocoot wrote: »
It's come down a bit from the $1 per kW hour off-grid, $0.50 per grid-tie standard but on the whole it can't compete with most commercial utility rates without some incentive somewhere. I think Photowhit has managed a remarkable $0.26 per kW hour production cost for his system, which is still not on par with your thirteen cents utility rate.
In short, it may reduce your electric bill but that's not the same thing as saving money.
Lee Dodge wrote: »
I am coming up with very different results for three grid-tied solar PV systems that I am tracking here in a sunny part of Colorado (5.78 kWh/m^2/day annual avg.). The numbers that I get are $0.06/kWh, $0.08/kWh, and $0.08/kWh, not the $0.50/kWh that you are quoting. These results are based on actual costs in the U.S. (after rebates) and measured collected energy over about 2 years, and assume a degradation of 0.65% per year, and a lifetime of 25 years with an inverter replacement at 12.5 years. I have spelled out all the details here and see Table 3 for cost per kWh. Your $0.50/kWh value for a grid-tie system must be based on outdated data or places where the solar insolation is very poor. In fact, where did that value come from?
Electricity costs here are roughly U.S. average costs, $0.11/kWh from one utility and $0.13/kWh from the other. You can see that the grid-tied solar PV is more than competitive with these rates. I do use costs after rebates, since all the competitive energy sources also include various subsidies (e.g., Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act). I don't know what rebates/subsidies are available in Nova Scotia (where the original poster is from), and the solar insolation there appears to be not so great (3.91 kWh/m^2/day avg. in Sydney, NS).
solar_dave wrote: »
So what $$$ per watt X years is the return reasonable. For instance I am replacing $0.175 kWh power on peak with solar production on a 12.5 Kw system where is per watt cost per year? This should be pretty algorithmic. My initial out of pocket was $1.60 per watt. Say inverter replacement is $2900 X 2 for a pair of 6000 watt inverters would equal $0.464 per watt. The system produces 20,000 kWh annually per PVwatts, replacing $35,000 worth of purchased power @ $0.175 kWh over 10 years.This certain looks like a no brainer at about 5 or 6 years even including a inverter swap at 10 years.
Lee Dodge wrote: »
So I would generalize and extrapolate our results to say that in the southwestern part of the U.S., grid-tied solar PV at current typical subsidized rates can compete with utility-supplied electricity, which has its own set of subsidies. If subsidies for solar PV are abolished, and subsidies for other electricity generating sources are not abolished, then new solar PV might not be competitive.
SYKEKO wrote: »
THANK YOU, so idealy one would want a turbine built to make 100-200 watts+ at 10mph and to have somthing put in place so it cant reach higher speeds that would make it blow apart. Starting to see the picture here with trying to have your cake and eat it too. As for your neighbour in 20 years he never made any power?? even on the windy days?? Guess this would explain why most of you guys have solar panels and no wind turbines listed after your posts. Thanks again you'll saved me alot of headache and cash.
Now seeing as you have solar panels how are they working for you? I have 2 solar panels the blue planet 1.5 watt ones that you hook up to car batterys to trickle charge them. nothing like yours but im able to make 7 volts with them on a good day lol.