Energy Efficiencies wrote: »
Sorry, but I couldnt handle reading 11 pages of posts...I dont offer any type of lease program to clients because I figure if they have good enough credit to qualify for a lease, then they should buy the system outright with a second mortgage, remodel loan, etc. The payback here is around 7 years with the local rebates from the utilities and feds, and less than 4 for business because of MACRS..not including rate increases..so why would you even think of leasing...other than the no out of pocket some leasing companies offer...get real. This poster is going to pay out of pocket probably significantly close to buying the system. if you are paying for example 15% less on your bill for EVER, you can just as easily pay a loan off monthly and own the equipment in less time than you can buy out on the typical lease... Leasing companies are there to make money. PERIOD.
One other thing....when they come take the solar property off your roof, do they re-shinge? If not, what covers the roof penetrations that were made to install the system?
russ wrote: »
@ Energy Efficiencies - Agreed 100% - The old saying that when something sounds too good to be true it usually is applies.
Claims are made that are totally unsupported - no supporting documents offered. The leasing sites do NOT offer their lease up for public inspection - wonder why?
Utilities are much more controlled and regulated. The leasing companies are much more like Kirby vacuum cleaner or home siding salesmen - get in and get a deal - the details are none of the suckers business anyway. The offer of a 500 dollar kickback if you line up a friend or neighbor is really low in my opinion.
lesyl wrote: »
I’m the original poster. It’s taken me a long time to screw up the nerve to make this post, but I hate it when someone starts a thread and then doesn't follow up with a eventual conclusion. So here it goes.
So, there you have it. Let the I told you so's begin.
lesyl wrote: »
The system was turned on Dec. 6. It’s produced 275 kWh hours in that time; 224 of which has gone on the grid as surplus.
lesyl wrote: »
The system was turned on Dec. 6. It’s produced 275 kWh hours in that time; 224 of which has gone on the grid as surplus. .
russ wrote: »
All in all, the lease seemed more fair than I had expected.
BB. wrote: »
One thing I will caution you about adding solar PV system to your home... I would not count on it adding any value to your home... Perhaps you might be able to justify $0.30 on the dollar in the sales price to a potential buyer--but many folks are afraid of solar PV and it may actually decrease the value of your home (unless you remove it).
Solar Experience wrote: »
Panels will probably become more aesthetic as more flexible materials technologies advance.
Moore's law applies to solar circuits and they will become increasingly efficient. When considering future value, ask yourself how much demand there is for a ten to twenty year old computer system, and you will have some insight into how much value those will have to a prospective home buyer several years from now.
Bringing back an old thread on Solar Leasing...
Interesting article on SunRun's business model vs how it affects the home owners, estates, and eventual sales:
Basically, conservation saved much more money (new owners, less energy intensive lifestyle--Aka, not a HAM radio person):
Two days after walking through Jug’s ham shack, we made an offer. A week later, just before we entered escrow, we learned the solar array hadn’t belonged to Jug. It was, in the language of the industry, a third-party-owner, or TPO, system, belonging to Sunrun Inc., the largest provider of residential solar in the U.S. I started looking into the TPO model. It’s used less often than it once was, but it’s been important in making residential solar, once out of reach for most people, much more widespread. The reason is simple: Homeowners usually pay nothing upfront. A company like Sunrun puts solar panels on your roof, connects them to your home, and claims a tax benefit for owning the system. Going forward, you pay Sunrun to provide the bulk of your electricity needs instead of your utility.
I’d soon learn that the system was tied to the title of the house. It appeared that if we bought Jug’s place, we’d have to assume his lease arrangement with Sunrun. I wasn’t sure how I felt about this as a buyer, but it definitely piqued my curiosity as a journalist. I set out to examine the value proposition carefully.
There’s more to the story, including the fact that Jug’s solar panels never worked at full efficiency. This was because of what Sunrun characterized as “severe shading” caused by the next-door neighbor’s tree. That’s right: Sunrun installed the system beneath a big old tree. This makes me again question the judgment of Jug’s salesperson. Sunrun has a production guarantee—if the system underperforms, you get a credit. In Jug’s case, $203 was credited to his account on July 17, 2017, half a year after his death.
As I write this I’m pregnant. The life Alex and I pictured the first time we walked through Jug’s house, now our house, is taking shape. And let me tell you about our electricity bill. Had we assumed Jug’s lease, we’d be paying $79 a month to Sunrun (the second escalator would have kicked in) plus at least $10 to SoCal Edison to stay on the grid, minus $7.50 for net metering. We’ve been in the house 10 months, and our average SoCal Edison bill is $30. Compared with becoming Sunrun customers, we’re saving $50 a month. We’re going to give some of that to help protect the environment.
FYI--Somebody is making money with GT Solar "financing deals"--But it is probably not you.