Why doesn't Arizona use solar power? (Tucson, Kingman: rentals, credit, home)

[Prickly Pear]

Originally Posted by LordBalfor

Our friends have a home with solar panels. Their average monthly electric bill is ZERO, and they get money back at the end of each year from daytime power "sold" to the power company. So, how is that not efficient?

Ken

Yes but how much did it cost to install? What did their electric bills look like before the solar panels? How long would it take to cancel out?

[StealthRabbit]

AZ could trade power for water!

Or pump rising sea water inland / desalinizing while enroute at staged ponds,

Or..... Storing your excess summer asphalt and attic heat as 'annualized solar'. USA is WAY behind on that solar technology.

When Algae fuel gets commercialized affordably, AZ can buddy up with USA research leader NM and be fueling our airlines, locomotives, and OTR trucks & farming / construction users. That will contribute multiple times national emission improvements over your nasty neighbor CARB.

If so many idling cars were not waiting in the Starbucks and In-and-Out drive-ups... There would be a whole lot less heat and fumes.

[LordBalfor]

Originally Posted by :-D

Yes but how much did it cost to install? What did their electric bills look like before the solar panels? How long would it take to cancel out?

Solar installation typically costs $15,000 - $25,000 and power company subsidization can reduce that by half. Payback time will depend on how much power you typically use and the price of that power. From what I understand the payback time is generally from 15 to 45 years. In our friends' case, they bought the house with solar already installed.

Ken

[Mathguy]

Originally Posted by Millenial Hippy

It's getting to the point where if they don't do something soon, summers will be hotter and even more miserable across the state, in some places maybe unliveable. Solar panels are now almost as cheap as coal burning plants, so it seems the main anti-environment arguments are a tad stale. Plus, if there's one thing Arizona has tons of, it's sunshine. So why isn't there a push to develop solar power there?

You REALLY need to do more than scratch the surface of the topic before reaching your conclusions.

While it can supplement a power grid, it's inherently limited by power storage and lack of availability during things we like to call night as well as when you get 4 days of overcast etc.

Soooo, because of those limitations you would still need to have the other types like coal, nuke blah blah blah IN ADDITION that are capable of expanding to cover whatever % is solar. Either that or ask the population to support occasional days without power. Yeah...good luck with that Gen X-box.

As such even if the cost is the same as coal....you don't replace with solar you have to ADD solar and still KEEP coal for when it doesn't work. There goes your "costs the same" argument.

The REAL main arguments against widespread solar are basic physics of 24-7 power availability and storage. (please note I think Solar is great, it just has it's limitations)

If you've never heard the arguments I've presented above you need to ask yourself why the people that have been feeding you information are either so ill-informed or have been keeping part of the truth from you.

[JGMotorsport64]

Originally Posted by Mathguy

You REALLY need to do more than scratch the surface of the topic before reaching your conclusions.

While it can supplement a power grid, it's inherently limited by power storage and lack of availability during things we like to call night as well as when you get 4 days of overcast etc.

Soooo, because of those limitations you would still need to have the other types like coal, nuke blah blah blah IN ADDITION that are capable of expanding to cover whatever % is solar. Either that or ask the population to support occasional days without power. Yeah...good luck with that Gen X-box.

As such even if the cost is the same as coal....you don't replace with solar you have to ADD solar and still KEEP coal for when it doesn't work. There goes your "costs the same" argument.

The REAL main arguments against widespread solar are basic physics of 24-7 power availability and storage. (please note I think Solar is great, it just has it's limitations)

If you've never heard the arguments I've presented above you need to ask yourself why the people that have been feeding you information are either so ill-informed or have been keeping part of the truth from you.

Don't pat yourself too hard there. These are very basic arguments centered around the same premise.

[ftbowie]

And Mathguy just answered them...It's not economically feasible...

[LordBalfor]

Originally Posted by ftbowie

And Mathguy just answered them...It's not economically feasible...

Of course it is. My friends are a prime example. They generate MORE electricity in the daytime (even after accounting for summer cooling) than they use at night - hence their ZERO electric bill and check from the power company at the end of each year.

Ken

[LordBalfor]

Originally Posted by Mathguy

You REALLY need to do more than scratch the surface of the topic before reaching your conclusions.

While it can supplement a power grid, it's inherently limited by power storage and lack of availability during things we like to call night as well as when you get 4 days of overcast etc.

Soooo, because of those limitations you would still need to have the other types like coal, nuke blah blah blah IN ADDITION that are capable of expanding to cover whatever % is solar. Either that or ask the population to support occasional days without power. Yeah...good luck with that Gen X-box.

As such even if the cost is the same as coal....you don't replace with solar you have to ADD solar and still KEEP coal for when it doesn't work. There goes your "costs the same" argument.

The REAL main arguments against widespread solar are basic physics of 24-7 power availability and storage. (please note I think Solar is great, it just has it's limitations)

If you've never heard the arguments I've presented above you need to ask yourself why the people that have been feeding you information are either so ill-informed or have been keeping part of the truth from you.

Overcast weather doesn't stop production of electricity from solar. Heck, they even use solar up in the PNW - where it's cloudy MOST OF THE TIME.
Furthermore, as long as the daytime generates more than you use at night (which is pretty much ALWAYS the case here in AZ) it's a net gain.
Finally you CAN install batteries to hold that power until night - though that may not be worth the cost for most people. While it won't replace other sources of power completely, it can go a long way towards making those other sources stretch. There is currently enough solar installed in Arizona to supply 327,000 homes - more 50% more than the total number of occupied homes in Tucson. That's nothing to sneeze at.

Arizona Solar | SEIA
Moderator cut: link removed, linking to competitor sites is not allowed

Ken

[rambrush]

Heading out towards Valle Vista from Kingman they have cleared a old orchard and are getting ready to build a large solar production facility. So hopefully more information will begin to flow about what size and output projected.

[ftbowie]

Originally Posted by LordBalfor

Of course it is. My friends are a prime example. They generate MORE electricity in the daytime (even after accounting for summer cooling) than they use at night - hence their ZERO electric bill and check from the power company at the end of each year.

Ken

Again, you have to figure in the cost of instillation and the lifespan of your system. It's still cheaper to just use the public utilities. I spend $35.00 per month on electric..A system is $20,000 (roughly). By the time it pays for itself it's reached it's lifespan.