Connect with us

Published

on

Anyone considering investing in solar panels will of course expect that it will be a while before they have paid for themselves producing valuable electricity. How long it will take to reach break even depends on many factors: The initial price of the system including full installation, the longevity of the hardware components of the system itself, the price rate structure of the utility energy provider including the grid operator, taxes on both sell and buy rates, whether you opt to include battery storage, and how much the system changes the value of the building on which the it is installed. Of course you could have a situation where panels are just installed and you pay on a monthly basis without actually owning the system in which case none of the following matters, except maybe the electric vehicle bits.

A Typical Solar Installation

To be honest, the overall question of this article is in reality impossible to answer accurately for any given system, but since I’ve had my solar panels for exactly 10 years know, I can at least provide some data for you to look at. These basic data of how much electricity is generated is useful for making more precise calculations for your local pricing structure, and thus help you forecast how long a given system you are interested in would be able to pay for itself. But first, some specifications on my system:

  • 16 panels with a total peak capacity of 4 kWp (I have only come close to this output at noon on very cold and windy summer days).
  • 2 inverters capable of 2 kW throughput each (at the time this was cheaper than 1 single 4 kW inverter and would make it easier to install an extra 2 kWp had I needed it).
  • Price including all hardware, installation, and tax credit (in 2011 the labour cost was deductible in Denmark): 100,000 DKK ($16,000). A similar system price today 10 years later: 50,000 — 70,000 DKK ($8,000 — 11,000) depending on local tax credits.
  • Geographical attributes: Panels facing south at a 30 degree angle, latitude and longitude (Decimal degrees): 56.3332, 10.3826.

Why not 6 kW, which is the largest allowed grid connected system on private property in my area? Well, although it would easily fit on my roof, I simply could not afford it at the time, and up until I got an electric car it would have more capacity than I needed all things considered.

Things to consider that can have a positive impact utilizing excess energy periods when not having opted for a battery as storage:

  • Fridge and deep freezer with timer.
  • Water heater with timer.
  • HVAC system with timer and zone optimisation.
  • Electric vehicle with timer and rate configuration of charge.
  • Training you own sense of when to use electricity, like vacuuming and washing when the sun is shining.

Of the points above I have really only focused on the last two in my everyday routines, and when the electric vehicle came into play, it became a challenge to micromanage the system to optimize the utilization of the system. It just so happened that the local net metering scheme changed at about the same time I purchased my latest EV, and it actually resulted in choosing the larger battery option in the car than I had originally planned. I have described the detailed considerations in an earlier article, and it seems obvious now 2 years later that the larger EV battery was worth it.

My calculations at the time showed that a battery that was 20 kWh larger would pay for itself within 10 years if I could manage the charging just by prioritizing sunshine. Since then I have changed my electricity supplier to one that sells electricity cheaper when wind turbines produce more power, thus making me prioritize charging in windy situations too.

Electricity consumption

First and foremost let’s look at electricity consumption. On average I use 3,000 kWh of electricity every year in my household. I do not use electricity for heating or cooling my house which is why total consumption might seem low. I am connected to district heating, and in Denmark the average outdoor temperature is so low that use of air conditioning systems (HVAC) for cooling is rare.

In the graph below covering a decade of net electricity consumption I have highlighted 4 years:

  • 2010 (blue): No solar panels and no EV. This represents my baseline electricity consumption in a typical full year.
  • 2014 (yellow): Solar panels installed, but still no EV. From March through September I get a surplus of electricity production.
  • 2016 (green): First full year of driving an EV, Nissan Leaf, 25,000 km/year (16,000 miles/year). Electricity consumption doubles to 6,000 kWh, and only in the summer is it possible to balance out consumption and production.
  • 2021 (red): With a Tesla Model 3 long range 75 kWh driving 35,000 km/year (22,000 miles/year) and the yearly net metering out the window, I prioritize free referral code Supercharging in the winter when solar power is low.

When I bought my panels a net metering scheme based on yearly accounting was in effect, but 2 years ago it was replaced with hourly accounting, which left many private solar system owners angry and a class-action lawsuit was initiated but dismissed in court. For nearly 8 years I had conveniently been able to do the math once a year: Subtract kWh consumed from kWh produced and as it turned out the average 3,750 kWh produced each year covered with a comfortable margin the 3,000 kWh consumed.

Getting and EV in the household countered to some degree the disadvantage of net metering on a yearly basis to an hourly basis by making sure to charge as often as possible when the panel generated a surplus of electricity. As mentioned this is the reason I chose a larger range EV than I had planned for. The 20+ kWh of battery capacity in the long range Tesla Model 3 made it easier to charge less often in order to prioritize the sunshine. Not perfect, but still noticeable in terms of freedom of when to charge compared to the low range Nissan Leaf and BMW i3 I had been driving the years prior.

Electricity Production

In order to get a sense of when an investment in a solar power installation will have paid for itself it is of course essential to pay close attention to how much electricity is being generated by the system.

In the graphs below it’s evident that I live relatively far north on the northern hemisphere. Note that this year in red actually deviates quite a lot from the yearly average since May and July usually are the best performing months due to slightly lower average temperatures than June. Solar panels perform best with clear skies and low temperatures preferably with a breeze cooling the panel even more. That’s why you see record outputs in May and July because June is often hotter and more humid. Except this year giving the exact opposite of the norm.

You might think that the sun is up the longest in June and thus should give more power, but since the panels are oriented south and given how far north I live, the sun rises in the north-east and sets in the north-west, sunlight in those very early and late hours do not fall on the panels.

What about degradation? Well, 10 years is of course not a lot to go by, but if the trend in the graph showing total year output persists there might be a couple of percent performance loss per decade. The big risk with panels is more in terms of build quality. If they puncture and moisture gets inside they will fail fast. I chose a high quality brand at the time, even though there where many much cheaper options available. In fact I could have saved 30 — 40% in total costs, but I figured that might cut the lifetime by maybe 50% thinking 4 decades out, and indeed I have spotted many solar panels of the same age and lower price beginning to deteriorate. Since production of silicon based solar panels is an energy intensive process, the longer they sit on the roof producing energy the better.

Note: In Denmark I pay roughly 2.2 DKK/kWh (35 cents/kWh) for grid electricity including taxes. When I sell surplus electricity to the grid I get paid a maximum of 0.3 DKK/kWh (5 cents/kWh) because taxes are not a part of it. No, this is not a typo, there is a lot of tax on energy in this country. This incentifies me to use my generated electricity rather than sell it, which is a challenge with hourly net metering. This is where a home battery and/or EV helps a lot.

Break Even

So, when will the system have paid for itself? Well, in my situation, accounting for the many variable parameters, it looks as if it will be another 2 years before I can say the panels finally produces energy for free. That’s 12 years total, which is not bad considering the panels themselves has a 20 year warranty on construction defects. I expect no less than 30 years of operation.

Checking prices today, I find that an equivalent quality system would cost 60% of what I paid 10 years ago including installation, so investing in solar just makes even more sense now, and more so going forward. Solar panel prices has fallen almost 10× in the last 15 years!

However, it gets more complicated when an EV is included in the mix. You could argue that the EV is part of the system, and that you would now have to look at the combined cost of the solar system and electric vehicle as one single utility since they are practically dependent of each other. I save money on energy to move the car around, and I am able to soak up the surplus energy from the panels much more efficiently.

I could choose to ask the question of when the whole package has paid for it self compared to buying all the electricity from the grid or compare the payback time of the electric vehicle to an equivalent fossil fueled vehicle. In any case solar and EV is without a doubt a win-win.

The share of global solar energy will certainly accelerate with battery storage pricing plummeting. Will I invest in a home battery? I will consider it when energy arbitrage and virtual power plants becomes the norm. In such a scenario it might even be feasible to move the old panels over on top of my garage and replace my whole 50 year old roof with solar tiles. Who knows?

The Takeaway

So, as I said, it’s no easy task to answer the main question of this article, and it is clear that the financial parameters change all the time, so maybe one should not spend too much time trying to calculate this to perfection, but rather just get on with investing in a solar system and rejoice over the savings from day one. It probably will pay off in the end no matter what.

And remember, it is clear that if you plan to include an EV into the mix sooner or later, a matching installed solar capacity could greatly lower the payback time for the combined financial expenditure, more so the more your driving needs.

Below is a few photos of the installation of my panels 10 years ago:

16 panels each with a peak output of 250 Watts

Panels are configured in 2 strands connected to 2 separate 2 kW inverters

The finished system busy doing its photon to electron magic



 


Have a tip for CleanTechnica, want to advertise, or want to suggest a guest for our CleanTech Talk podcast? Contact us here.

Continue Reading

Environment

Tesla Semi suffers more delays and ‘dramatic’ price increase

Published

on

By

Tesla Semi suffers more delays and 'dramatic' price increase

According to a Tesla Semi customer, the electric truck program is suffering more delays and a price increase that is described as “dramatic.”

Tesla Semi has seen many delays, more than any other vehicle program at Tesla.

It was initially unveiled in 2017, and CEO Elon Musk claimed that it would go into production in 2019.

In late 2022, Tesla held an event where it unveiled the “production version” of the Tesla Semi and delivered the first few units to a “customer-partner”: PepsiCo.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Tesla Semi PepsiCo truck u/Tutrifor
Tesla Semi Image credit: u/Tutrifor

More than 3 years later, the vehicle never went into volume production. Instead, Tesla only ran a very low volume pilot production at a factory in Nevada and only delivered a few dozen trucks to customers as part of test programs.

But Tesla promised that things would finally happen for the Tesla Semi this year.

Tesla has been building a new high-volume production factory specifically for the Tesla Semi program in a new building next to Gigafactory Nevada.

The goal was to start production in 2025, start customer deliveries, and ramp up to 50,000 trucks yearly.

Now, Ryder, a large transportation company and early customer-partner in Tesla’s semi truck program, is talking about further delays. The company also refers to a significant price increase.

California’s Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (MSRC) awarded Ryder funding for a project to deploy Tesla Semi trucks and Megachargers at two of its facilities in the state.

Ryder had previously asked for extensions amid the delays in the Tesla Semi program.

In a new letter sent to MSRC last week and obtained by Electrek, Ryder asked the agency for another 28-month delay. The letter references delays in “Tesla product design, vehicle production” and it mentions “dramatic changes to the Tesla product economics”:

This extension is needed due to delays in Tesla product design, vehicle production and dramatic changes to the Tesla product economics. These delays have caused us to reevaluate the current Ryder fleet in the area.

The logistics company now says it plans to “deploy 18 Tesla Semi vehicles by June 2026.”

The reference to “dramatic changes to the Tesla product economics” points to a significant price increase for the Tesla Semi, which further communication with MSRC confirms.

In the agenda of a meeting to discuss the extension and changes to the project yesterday, MSRC confirms that the project went from 42 to 18 Tesla Semi trucks while the project commitment is not changing:

Ryder has indicated that their electric tractor manufacturer partner, Tesla, has experienced continued delays in product design and production. There have also been dramatic changes to the product economics. Ryder requests to reduce the number of vehicles from 42 to 18, stating that this would maintain their $7.5 million private match commitment.

In addition to the electric trucks, the project originally involved installing two integrated power centers and four Tesla Megachargers, split between two locations. Ryder is also looking to now install 3 Megachargers per location for a total of 6 instead of 4.

Tesla Semi Megacharger hero

The project changes also mention that “Ryder states that Tesla now requires 600kW chargers rather than the 750kW units originally engineered.”

Tesla Semi Price

When originally unveiling the Tesla Semi in 2017, the automaker mentioned prices of $150,000 for a 300-mile range truck and $180,000 for the 500-mile version. Tesla also took orders for a “Founder’s Series Semi” at $200,000.

However, Tesla didn’t update the prices when launching the “production version” of the truck in late 2023. Price increases have been speculated, but the company has never confirmed them.

New diesel-powered Class 8 semi trucks in the US today often range between $150,000 and $220,000.

The combination of a reasonable purchase price and low operation costs, thanks to cheaper electric rates than diesel, made the Tesla Semi a potentially revolutionary product to reduce the overall costs of operation in trucking while reducing emissions.

However, Ryder now points to a “dramatic” price increase for the Tesla Semi.

What is the cost of a Tesla Semi electric truck now?

Electrek’s Take

As I have often stated, Tesla Semi is the vehicle program I am most excited about at Tesla right now.

If Tesla can produce class 8 trucks capable of moving cargo of similar weight as diesel trucks over 500 miles on a single charge in high volume at a reasonable price point, they have a revolutionary product on their hands.

But the reasonable price part is now being questioned.

After reading the communications between Ryder and MSRC, while not clear, it looks like the program could be interpreted as MSRC covering the costs of installing the charging stations while Ryder committed $7.5 million to buying the trucks.

The math makes sense for the original funding request since $7.5 million divided by 42 trucks results in around $180,000 per truck — what Tesla first quoted for the 500-mile Tesla Semi truck.

Now, with just 18 trucks, it would point to a price of $415,000 per Tesla Semi truck. It’s possible that some of Ryder’s commitment could also go to an increase in Megacharger prices – either per charger or due to the two additional chargers. MSRC said that they don’t give more money when prices go up after an extension.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the 500-mile Tesla Semi ends up costing $350,000 to $400,000.

If that’s the case, Tesla Semi is impressive, but it won’t be the revolutionary product that will change the trucking industry.

It will need to be closer to $250,000-$300,000 to have a significant impact, which is not impossible with higher-volume production but would be difficult.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

BP chair Helge Lund to step down after oil major pledges strategic reset

Published

on

By

BP chair Helge Lund to step down after oil major pledges strategic reset

British oil and gasoline company BP (British Petroleum) signage is being pictured in Warsaw, Poland, on July 29, 2024.

Nurphoto | Nurphoto | Getty Images

British oil major BP on Friday said its chair Helge Lund will soon step down, kickstarting a succession process shortly after the company launched a fundamental strategic reset.

“Having fundamentally reset our strategy, bp’s focus now is on delivering the strategy at pace, improving performance and growing shareholder value,” Lund said in a statement.

“Now is the right time to start the process to find my successor and enable an orderly and seamless handover,” he added.

Lund is expected to step down in 2026. BP said the succession process will be led by Amanda Blanc in her capacity as senior independent director.

Shares of BP traded 2.2% lower on Friday morning. The London-listed firm has lagged its industry rivals in recent years.

BP announced in February that it plans to ramp up annual oil and gas investment to $10 billion through 2027 and slash spending on renewables as part of its new strategic direction.

Analysts have broadly welcomed BP’s renewed focus on hydrocarbons, although the beleaguered energy giant remains under significant pressure from activist investors.

U.S. hedge fund Elliott Management has built a stake of around 5% to become one of BP’s largest shareholders, according to Reuters.

Activist investor Follow This, meanwhile, recently pushed for investors to vote against Lund’s reappointment as chair at BP’s April 17 shareholder meeting in protest over the firm’s recent strategy U-turn.

Lund had previously backed BP’s 2020 strategy, when Bernard Looney was CEO, to boost investment in renewables and cut production of oil and gas by 40% by 2030.

BP CEO Murray Auchincloss, who took the helm on a permanent basis in January last year, is under significant pressure to reassure investors that the company is on the right track to improve its financial performance.

‘A more clearly defined break’

“Elliott continues to press BP for a sharper, more clearly defined break with the strategy to pivot more quickly toward renewables, that was outlined by Bernard Looney when he was CEO,” Russ Mould, AJ Bell’s investment director, told CNBC via email on Friday.

“Mr Lund was chair then and so he is firmly associated with that plan, which current boss Murray Auchincloss is refining,” he added.

Mould said activist campaigns tend to have “fairly classic thrusts,” such as a change in management or governance, higher shareholder distributions, an overhaul of corporate structure and operational improvements.

“In BP’s case, we now have a shift in capital allocation and a change in management, so it will be interesting to see if this appeases Elliott, though it would be no surprise if it feels more can and should be done,” Mould said.

Continue Reading

Environment

Quick Charge | hydrogen hype falls flat amid very public failures

Published

on

By

Quick Charge | hydrogen hype falls flat amid very public failures

On today’s hyped up hydrogen episode of Quick Charge, we look at some of the fuel’s recent failures and billion dollar bungles as the fuel cell crowd continues to lose the credibility race against a rapidly evolving battery electric market.

We’re taking a look at some of the recent hydrogen failures of 2025 – including nine-figure product cancellations in the US and Korea, a series of simultaneous bus failures in Poland, and European executives, experts, and economists calling for EU governments to ditch hydrogen and focus on the deployment of a more widespread electric trucking infrastructure.

Prefer listening to your podcasts? Audio-only versions of Quick Charge are now available on Apple PodcastsSpotifyTuneIn, and our RSS feed for Overcast and other podcast players.

New episodes of Quick Charge are recorded, usually, Monday through Thursday (and sometimes Sunday). We’ll be posting bonus audio content from time to time as well, so be sure to follow and subscribe so you don’t miss a minute of Electrek’s high-voltage daily news.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Got news? Let us know!
Drop us a line at tips@electrek.co. You can also rate us on Apple Podcasts and Spotify, or recommend us in Overcast to help more people discover the show.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending