How Are Solar Shingles Installed Wrong
One of the newest types of solar photovoltaics (PV) available for home owners is the solar shingle. These are replacement shingles for standard asphalt (they are also available as Spanish tile replacements) on the rooftop. These solar cell arrays are made to look like the asphalt shingles they replace. For the suburban prepper, this makes them an ideal camouflage compared to large, obvious solar panels. It also makes them nearly impossible to steal. The Pirate Bay Crack Fifa 13. In addition, they are easier to maintain, have a good lifespan, and more.
These more aesthetic solar options have been around for about five years with recent breakthroughs making them more affordable and available than previously. These photovoltaic shingles use thin-film solar technology to retain the flexibility of the asphalt they replace and are sized and colored to match. Several companies in the industry are now manufacturing them, including SunPower, Dow, Atlantis Energy and others. How They Work These solar shingles work just like conventional solar panels.
Sunlight hits solar cells, which convert it to electricity. The shingles are sized at 12×86 inches – the size of conventional shingles. They can be stapled directly to the roofing cloth (often called “tar cloth”) as are conventional shingles.
Older PV shingle designs required vented plywood decking for heat dissipation and pre-laid wiring before the shingles were put into place. Newer designs eliminate these requirements. Installation takes about ten hours for the average roof, putting these solar shingles on par with their asphalt counterparts and making them lower per watt to install than traditional panels.
The circuits are automatically connected through the overlapping shingles’ connection, making the electrical nearly wireless in its installation. Desired voltages and total output depend on the number of shingles installed and the converter used. Output is DC, of course.
Comparable Output and Longevity Solar shingles have a better sunlight absorption rate than traditional solar panels thanks to their wide exposure. They are made from amorphous silicon, which allows higher exposure to sunlight without the requirement of a glass covering, which can filter some light. PV shingles shed moisture and provide weather protection in the same way their asphalt counterparts do and stick to one another using the same EVA compound. Their expected lifespan is 20 years, double that of many asphalt types and equal to most solar panels. In most southern areas of the U.S., they can repay their cost within five years in the electrical savings they produce. Each shingle produces between 50 and 200 watts, depending on its size, exposure, and specifications.
Read on to find out more about damages from solar installations, your liability, and what you need to know about your solar contractor. What Can Go Wrong with a Solar Installation? Therefore, it's worth quizzing your contractor about their leak prevention methods before they get up on your shingles.
The average roof of about 2,000 square feet, covered in PV shingles, can produce enough power to provide the home’s required electricity for the day. Most installations are tied to the home’s electrical and to the grid, allowing the homeowner to sell excess electricity to the utility and use utility-provided power at night or when the roof is not producing enough. Off-grid storage is also an option, of course. Cost Comparisons Currently, the national average utility power cost is about 10 cents per kilowatt hour. Most solar PV installations cost about 30-40 cents per kilowatt hour. Solar shingles cost 20-25 cents per kilowatt hour.
In areas like California or Arizona, the solar roof can pay for itself in 5-7 years on average, whereas in areas like Boston or Seattle, it may take 15 years to get the same return. Solar costs are dropping, however, thanks to increased competition and better, cheaper technologies. At the same time, utility costs are on the rise nationally, especially in areas where PV is more effective. Although a full rooftop of solar shingles may not be the total answer to off-grid power, it can be a major contributor to a full system. We live in TN and would love to go totally off grid. Does anyone know if this type of system would work? I don’t want to live like they did in the 1800’s, want to use my washer and drier, a/c, frig and freezer, laptops and t.v’sall the normal good stuff.
We would downsize to probably 2000 sq/ft or so and not sure if we can find a backup source of power. Cytomic The Glue Keygen Torrent here. We have been trying to find property that we could use hydro but so far it’s a no go so solar may be it.
Tying into the grid is not an option. Any ideassuggestions? Hello Scoobette13.Going totally off grid is possible but expensive.You’ll need a solar system that will generate about on the average 40 to 60 KWH/per day.This should supply you with enough power for the appliances you need.You could go 12 volts on lights and some appliances,such as frig/freezer.These items can be bought at a recycle travel trailer centers. Scoobette13, The average home needs 5kwh per day.
That’s 5000 watts. Some of the pv shingles are producing around 50 watts per ft/sq. The average home is around 1600 ft/sq. With that much square footage a roof can generate around 19.2 kwh. This is enough to operate your home, garage and a greenhouse or woodshop, etc, or 3 average size buildings and all the associated electronics of the average person. No need to downsize the house. The bigger the house the bigger the roof the more juice generated.
The worst part of it all is the circuitry needed to convert the electricity from dc to ac. One way around this is to use appliances set up to use dc power and then the inverter can be eliminated. The inverter is a costly piece that wears out relatively quickly. The reason we use ac power is that it is able to be shipped long distances over hi power lines. If one is generating on site the need to ship long distance is negated.
Honestly, 40 to 60 kw is nearly enough to run a WALMART store. Energy from solar panels can be stroed in batteries for when there is little sun light.
Its very expensive to install, maybe 8 grand upwards for home systems, hence its usually just used for heating up water etc. But average *home* system can take on maybe up to 40% of that household’s annual electricity useage.
It is rather expensive per square metre to buy as silicon is not so readily available to make it cheap. But once its up there it doesnt need much maintenance except to clean it, etc.wind turbines are expensive to install but once up, not much maintanence is needed, checked up maybe every few years. The energy can be stroed in batteries when there is no wind present.so, i guess its def not answer B and C.edit: wind and sunlight is free so it isnt expensive to *use*. I am surprised that people think that when the grid fails they could continue the same lifestyle as before. This is NOT the case, some lifestyle adjustment will be needed in addition to the prepared household.
What I mean is this for example: one can buy little hand washer gadget which can be rotated by hand and sealed hermetically so the clothes are under pressure. This is just one example. Use kerosene lamp with wicker. It is another example. If you think you can continue as before, you are kidding yourself. Have a wood stove, it is yet another example.
If you have food stashed, have kerosene lamp, wood stove, and water source (such as a dug well) with a minimal electricity you can get. By minimal electricity I mean solar/wind/hydro.
Assuming that one can generate electricity by these and live as before it is a totally wrong assumption. The heating, frig, freezer, washing can not depend on solar/wind/hydro electricity completely. These are heavy loads and one needs to find alternative solutions for these. It does not mean that you have to live like they lived in the 1800s but the solution is in the middle in a spectrum depending on how prepared you are.
All of this PV talk is very interesting, but not helpful. I live in Arizona where solar power should be KING! For the life of me, the sales people I have talked to can’t explain the differences between mono/poly pv let alone the building products. I tell them my average monthly electric bill is currently $220/month with SRP’s one price plan (not time of use). I ask them how many panels or PV products would I need to cover my electricity needs for the year. Every time I am met with either beating around the bush with absolutely no answer or a dumb stare that clearly states, “What the hell are you asking for?” I wish there were good quality salespeople that were fully versed in PV and especially their products. Then I “might” be able to get a usable answer.
I am NOT holding my breath as most salespeople have proven themselves to be knuckleheads. JS, Part of the communication issue seems to be relating all the information to a prospective buyer. It’s not cut n dried as it were. A survey must be conducted in order to find out how much exposure a particular area receives. As a rule of thumb; a single square foot of your roof can produce 50w.
But if there are any trees that block the light, the production is cut down. How ones roof is oriented as to north/south exposure is a factor as well. Some people are too quick to start rattling off what is needed or not needed and tend to make things way more complicated than necessary.
Without a proper solar survey, a sales person isn’t able to tell you what you need to make your home self sufficient. I am an old army infantryman (1982-1985) going to school in the engineering field. I can tell you that some of the things being produced nowadays is amazing. However the cost of leading edge tech is outrageous. There are materials available though, that will cover your needs sufficiently. I live in South Dakota. If I weren’t so far away I would take a trip to meet with you and show you just how well you could do with PV shingles/siding and a wind generator.
All this talk on here of wood gasifiers and stuff just blows my mind. KISS is as applicable today as it was at any other point in time. As far as mono and poly crystalline photovoltaics go; mono crystalline pv’s are a bit more efficient than the poly, and need less space to be so. However the total output by each is comparable. The newer crystals being produced now are amazing. 60%efficiency and are made with graphene, silicon and other elements.
Graphene is around $6000 per square inch/one atom thick. Just saying, lot’s of good stuff out there and lot’s more on the way. Hope this helps.
Maybe it shouldn't be on house. Screenshot via Tesla In a decade of covering Tesla, I never honestly thought I would write the name of the company and 'roofing' in the same sentence. But now that Tesla is acquiring SolarCity, a solar panel installer, and rolling out a rather lovely integrated solar roofing solution, the organization formerly known for creating futuristic electric cars is getting into a business that isn't exactly top-of-mind when it comes to most consumers. Even if you own a home, you think about your roof only once a decade or so. There are really two roofing businesses: residential and commercial.
If you do a little light research, you quickly learn that the industry is fairly regional, and that most roofing companies with any notable revenue focus on one or the other. The commercial side employs a lot more people and brings in more money.
The residential side is comparably smaller, with companies in the top 100 for revenue sometimes staffing in the low double digits. Remember Solyndra? For what it's worth, the last buzzy, innovative company in the solar space was the ill-fated Solyndra, which captured a lot of attention in Silicon Valley for a revolutionary solar design, but which also went bankrupt in 2011 amid charges of favoritism from the Obama administration. (Those charges were debatable.) And Solyndra's focus was commercial rooftops — large-scale installations bought by companies that could afford Solyndra's product. It's beautiful.
Darren Weaver SolarCity's business is mainly residential, so it makes perfect sense that the merger with Tesla would seek to enhance that side of things through the sort of 'this changes everything' approach that Tesla has applied to cars. But the thing is that the new solar-roof concept is aimed at changing solar installation in residential applications in ways that might not ultimately makes much sense. No one with a decent roof is going to replace it with a solar roof, and when it comes time to actually do a full replacement, homeowners are confronted with a really high cost — $10,000 or more, and for a large house, a lot more.
Tesla argues that the new solar-roof design will be both beautiful and less expensive than a regular, old-school roof long term because of the offsetting energy cost savings. We can give Tesla and CEO Elon Musk the benefit of the doubt there, but it's going to be rough going to get already financially shell-shocked homeowners to pony up for an even more expensive integrated solar roof when they can simply do the normal reshingling and throw in a limited number of solar panels, adding more later if they like the savings. SolarCity and Tesla are merging. Thomson Reuters Big commercial installations are where the real action is, but SolarCity hasn't penetrated that market, though it ranks first in residential solar,.
Alarmingly, it's unclear whether there's a clear way for SolarCity and Tesla to make a rapid-growth business, beyond current levels, out of residential solar. With 502 megawatts installed in 2014, SolarCity did more than three times as much business as its closest competitor, Vivint Solar. After that, dozens of contractors chop up the remaining market share.
Bigger money Back to Solyndra for a second. That company's technology was an attempt to radically improve large-scale rooftop solar installations, appealing to major customers who could undertake huge projects. Solar panels being installed.
Regardless of how you feel about the bankruptcy, the tech offered a meaningful opportunity to change the game in commercial solar, providing an alternative to old-fashioned, cheap solar panels that could flood the US market from places like China. It's not clear that SolarCity's pre-Tesla-acquisition move into commercial was achieving the company's goals; its was growing, but not nearly at the same rate as residential. Musk's logic Tesla's thinking is that a truly differentiated residential solar roof could turbocharge installations, improve SolarCity's entire business, and lend some support to Tesla's energy storage products. A gorgeous home solar roof is also better marketing than a commercial installation.
But selling the new solar roof could easily parallel the adoption that Tesla has seen with its vehicles: They're expensive, and they are selling, but they aren't meaningfully displacing gas-powered cars and trucks. The solar roof could move the needle, and there are obviously a lot more homes in the US than there are commercial rooftops. But my sense is that as good as Musk is at selling cars, he's going to find that selling pricey roofs is a lot more difficult.
Get the latest Tesla stock price.