Made the Move to Tesla

Solar panels on the roof CAN be ugly if they were retrofitted and it was not possible to integrate them properly into the design of the house. Or they can be unobtrusive if the building is designed with solar panels in mind so that they are integrated into the design. They can be built in as an architectural element. It basically just requires the roof to be oriented and sloped appropriately, and the landscaping can't have trees that would interfere.

IBW nice job with the garage.

One other thing. A big part of a building's energy consumption in my climate is determined by the actions of the occupants.

We're having daytime highs in the high-twenties C and nighttime lows in the teens. If the forecast high is above 25 C then I shut all the windows and close the blinds in the morning before leaving for work, and open everything up when the temperature starts dropping in the evening. The house stays comfortable without using either heat or air conditioning. What do I hear when I open up the windows in the evening? My neighbor's air conditioner ... I've only used the house a/c for about a week in late July when the temperature went up into the low thirties.

I do the same. But I do run the A/C, mostly because I hate humidity. And even with the A/C (and a pool) I've only had two electric bills in the past two years, one for $50 when the panels were covered with snow for 18 days, and one for $3. Not bad.

SFHGolfTDI said:

You either are very tall, are a pilot, can jump very high, or otherwise spend lots of time 20-40 feet in the air for unknown reasons. Solar can be fairly invisible at street level, but obviously that depends on the shape of the roof and direction of the house also.
Huge power plants are pretty ugly, too. Tar sands are ugly. Oil rigs and oil spills are ugly. Fracking is ugly. Nuclear waste is ugly. Many don't like wind turbines either. Rooftop solar is about as discrete as it gets for energy production.

Click to expand...

Very much personal taste, but I think solar PV on roofs are elegant and nice. The housing market seems to agree with me. Houses with owned PV systems are worth a lot more.

d2305 said:

Solar panels on the roof are ugly.

Click to expand...

Exactly what Anita says. AND we are not getting solar! Unquote. And she is 5' 1". End of discussion here.

nicklockard said:

Very much personal taste, but I think solar PV on roofs are elegant and nice. The housing market seems to agree with me. Houses with owned PV systems are worth a lot more.

Click to expand...

Owned PV systems cost a WHOLE lot more.

You really need to provide some valid studies to back that up. You know the kind that say a kitchen remodel get you back 60% of your investment.
The studies need to control for the recovering housing market and a bunch of other things.

I'm not sure you'll get any good data on resale value of owned systems. I predict the investment in mine will be paid off in about 3.5 years of use at current rates. But I don't know if it will add to the value of the house. It's probably like a swimming pool: valuable for some, a liability for others. I do like not having an electric bill, however.

john.jackson9213 said:

Owned PV systems cost a WHOLE lot more.

You really need to provide some valid studies to back that up. You know the kind that say a kitchen remodel get you back 60% of your investment.
The studies need to control for the recovering housing market and a bunch of other things.

Click to expand...

1. I can cover my home in an array for $18k.

2. Even better: check your MLS for SoCal, AZ, NV, NM, HI, anywhere sunny.

I don't need to source that. It's really danged obvious. My realtor ran comps when we bought our (1994 build date) house in 2014. He always excluded houses with owned PV because they're consistently $15k-$25k more. Go to Trulia or any home hunting website and compare similar houses of same class/size/feature set with and w/o owned PV arrays. The higher end the home, the bigger the premium (though admittedly they usually are better/more upscale installs of higher capacity.)

PV arrays hold their (relative) value--but the boost will obviously depreciate with quality of install, years in service, etcetera (panels wear out over a quarter century, and better ones come out). The systems installed in the last 5-7 years look a lot sleeker, low profile, and well integrated than systems of the 1980's and 1990's and even early 2000's. And, they're holding their value. Systems installed in the last 5 years have 20 years of service left w/o rebuild or retrofit.

2a. Were we to install said array, it would boost value of home by similar value. If we weren't saving for second home, It'd be a seriously evaluated option. (Disclaimer: we're massive cheapskates. our electric bill in Arizona summer peaks at $160/month, so the savings would be not as much for us than a typical family.)

Interesting data, Nick, I wonder if it applies outside the sunbelt. Of course we don't get the output here that you would, and a lot of people think it's folly to install solar panels this far north. However, since we have a well and no town water (or sewage, of course, none in our town), the only utility costs I now have is for heating oil and firewood. Now if I could do something about the property taxes...

We have solar systems solely powering two remote stations at work. Designed, installed, and upgraded by a licensed solar installed and using designed units from Outback Power Systems.

Don't waste your money on solar in the northeast, it's not worth it. On sunny days we produce power for 4 hours a day, max. But sunny days are few and far between and then there's the snowcover. We had to buy a suitcase generator to charge the battery bank for those times they're not replenished fast enough.

Neighbors of mine from away tried living off the grid and built their new house to accommodate that ideal, part of the decision was the power company wanted $70k to run power to their house.

After 1 winter they took out a loan and had power installed. Both are doctors and make good money but realized it just wasn't viable up here.

Individual businesses in the UK have their own hydro, which I think is the way to go.

Solar can work anywhere. It's all a matter of how big the array needs to be, the amount of storage required, whether or not you need backup power, and consumption. If your neighbors built a traditional house with normal power consumption, getting off the grid with current technology is pretty difficult and expensive.

My system made 7,112 kWh last year, enough to power my "traditional" house, including air conditioning and pool, on an array that's on the roof of a 24x28' garage. But the big difference is my ability to use the grid as backup. In the darkest months we run at a deficit, and use credits generated in the spring and fall when power generation is pretty high and consumption is low (no pool or A/C). I'd have to have one huge battery backup or run a generator without that feature. If your neighbors were willing to listen to a generator running some of the time in from mid-November to mid-February, they probably could have pulled it off.

IndigoBlueWagon said:

Solar can work anywhere. It's all a matter of how big the array needs to be, the amount of storage required, whether or not you need backup power, and consumption. If your neighbors built a traditional house with normal power consumption, getting off the grid with current technology is pretty difficult and expensive.

My system made 7,112 kWh last year, enough to power my "traditional" house, including air conditioning and pool, on an array that's on the roof of a 24x28' garage. But the big difference is my ability to use the grid as backup. In the darkest months we run at a deficit, and use credits generated in the spring and fall when power generation is pretty high and consumption is low (no pool or A/C). I'd have to have one huge battery backup or run a generator without that feature. If your neighbors were willing to listen to a generator running some of the time in from mid-November to mid-February, they probably could have pulled it off.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't go that far. It has to be analyzed for quality of solar resource. However, solar thermal using evacuated tube technology has proven to work at mid-scale in fairly high lattitudes in Canada. You obviously need a larger array since the total solar insolation averaged over a year is going to be less than in a better area. However, with the powerwall battery, the economics shift in favorable direction for users including small businesses, shops, homeowners because you can now 'bank' energy during the daytime and use it at night, plus you can arbitrage for best pricing (depends on your utility's rate scheduling).

My neighbors had a diesel generator they ran in the winter months, which were from November to early April, too long for them. They heated with wood and had radiant heating in the floor from a system that used the wood as a heat source. Open floor plan, passive and active solar in and out of the house, bulk propane tanks and battery bank. For them it just wasn't viable. I think they are doing the grid storage now that they're hooked up, but it'll be a long cost payback.

At work we have no provisions for grid backup, so we're stuck. We have 4 AGM8D batteries at $750 each that need replacing every 6 years and a 4 panel array supplying power. In the winter we turn the (power hungry) inverter off and run on 24V power but our $18,000 system still isn't enough.

We've had this system for awhile and have had the solar company back several times to upgrade/fix the system, which never seems to work any better, so we just gave up and start the generator when we're without sun for more than a week.

Ok, let's mosey on back to the topic at hand, shall we?

Abacus said:

Don't waste your money on solar in the northeast, it's not worth it.

Click to expand...

With my friend's $18k solar system and all the power he uses at home including running wireless network equipment and a few other 2-way radio systems plus charging his Tesla, his electric bill for the last month was "painfully high" at $-46 and this was one of his more expensive months. His system feeds unused power back into the grid which serves as his backup.

Driving a Tesla instead of a gasser or diesel simply WORKS for him. He drives almost as much as I do and does regular road trips from VT to FL in the Tesla.

I've driven a Tesla Model S P85 once and I've been a passenger in my friend's Tesla several times. It is an amazing car and an absolute blast to drive. The new dual-motor P90D version has ludicrous mode which blows the P85D's insane mode away with 0-60 in 2.8 seconds. Lateral road holding is amazingly sticky at 1.1G's. Definitely corners like it's on rails! If you get an opportunity to test drive a Tesla Model S, all I can say is definitely DO IT!!

Me want a P90D with ludicrous mode but can't afford right now. Electric doesn't quite work for me (yet) but it could work as a second vehicle however I don't need one because I've already got that covered with a second diesel vehicle.

tongsli said:

Here and on the documentary "Revenge of the Electric Car" 2011 they basically say as the grid gets cleaner so does the electric car. And that's the only vehicle that can make that claim.

Click to expand...

With second gen "renewable diesel", you get a greening effect that is available on all vehicles with a diesel plant. Lard, waste vegetable oil and natural gas has never looked so good. This has also been happening, to a lesser extent, with the adoption of biodiesel blends.
Full disclosure: I ride a bicycle for my daily commute. The family car is a 2001 Golf that runs on B100, and I've been using biodiesel for over a decade. Now that used Leaf's have dropped below $10k, I'm considering buying one as they work better for our shorter urban commutes. And I've got solar panels with a grid intertie system.

One of the other big benefits (aside from environmental) to electric cars I would enjoy is the simplicity of an electric engine over an IC engine and the lack of a transmission...

Lug_Nut said:

Nope, not even PV solar is lower than b100 from WVO

Lifetime CO2 equivalent emissions in grams per kWh for an assortment of energy sources:
Coal 1,001
Hygrogen (liquid) 512
Hydrogen (compressed gas) 479
Electricity (natural gas fired) 469
B100 (virgin soy) 450
B100 (virgin palm oil) 374
B100 (virgin canola) 360
Ethanol (virgin corn) 357
Gasoline 345
Diesel 341
Natural gas (liquified) 336
Ethanol (cane) 264
Natural gas (compressed gas) 245
Synthetic diesel (142)
Electricity (photovoltaic) 46
B100 (waste oil) 36
Electricity (nuclear) 16
Electricity (wind) 12

data sources: California Air Resources Board, International Council on Clean Transport, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Click to expand...

Lugnut, I believe you did not take into account the relative efficiency of electric motors when compared to diesel engines. CARB uses a factor of 2.7 for the EER (energy economy ratio) when comparing diesels to electric vehicles. So for BEVs compared to diesels you'd get:
Electricity (natural gas fired) 174 gCO2/kWh
Electricity (California marginal electricity mix of natural gas and renewable energy sources) 140

B100 (waste oil) 36
Electricity (photovoltaic) 17

when I did an HVAC update a few years ago (2009), I looked at all the options, including geo thermal, (which would pretty much give heat, ac and hot water for the cost of heat, after 8 years or so) which needs $12k worth of holes in the ground for heat exchange. checked with a realtor, who assured me that most folks never even ask about heating costs. comes way after location, location, location. (number of bedrooms..how many baths, how new the kitchen...) in the minds of most folks.

sunbelt places are more observant of the benefits, I suspect.

and on the ugly side of solar, a neighbor has these installed.

http://www.dowpowerhouse.com/

you really have to look close to see there is any difference. and since they double as roofing....

and a Tesla parked next to me at work today. baby seat holder in the back, beautiful car.

meerschm said:

and a Tesla parked next to me at work today. baby seat holder in the back, beautiful car.

Click to expand...

Saw one today in my travels around work. It is a beautiful car. I recently saw a P85D Model S on my way to work last week. 0-60 in the P85D version with their "insane mode" is 3.2 seconds. 0-60 in the P90D version with "ludicrous mode" is 2.8 seconds. The P90D is an upgraded P85D, IIRC. D = Dual motor, providing AWD. Non-D models are RWD. Performance is rivaling million dollar supercars and is entering motorcycle territory. And still getting some usable range (about 265 miles on a charge IIRC) comes as a bonus.

Hehe, maybe I can get my friend in VT to come to TDIfest2015 in Maine this year with his Tesla Model S P85.

Tesla Model S P90D, * DROOL *

meerschm said:

and a Tesla parked next to me at work today. baby seat holder in the back, beautiful car.

Click to expand...

Is the owner a co-worker of yours? If so, can you get a ride in it or even better, a test drive? It delivers instant, weapons-grade TORQUE that doesn't let up at all until you let off the pedal. Speaking from having driven a Tesla Model S P85 sedan and been a passenger in one several times, if you get an opportunity to test drive one, all I can say is definitely DO IT!!!!

instead of charging the car, why don't they look at replaceable battery packs that can be done quickly at a service station. You pull into the "station" and pay with your credit card for a pre-charged battery pack. A robot (or person) removes and installs the charged pack (probably located under the car for access).

Range per charge would mean nothing at that point (relatively).

greenskeeper said:

instead of charging the car, why don't they look at replaceable battery packs that can be done quickly at a service station. You pull into the "station" and pay with your credit card for a pre-charged battery pack. A robot (or person) removes and installs the charged pack (probably located under the car for access).
Range per charge would mean nothing at that point (relatively).

Click to expand...

IIRC, Tesla supposedly was planning to do this. Takes about 90 seconds to do a Tesla battery swap. Haven't heard anything more about this lately.

n1das said:

Saw one today in my travels around work. It is a beautiful car. I recently saw a P85D Model S on my way to work last week. 0-60 in the P85D version with their "insane mode" is 3.2 seconds. 0-60 in the P90D version with "ludicrous mode" is 2.8 seconds. The P90D is an upgraded P85D, IIRC. D = Dual motor, providing AWD. Non-D models are RWD. Performance is rivaling million dollar supercars and is entering motorcycle territory. And still getting some usable range (about 265 miles on a charge IIRC) comes as a bonus.

Hehe, maybe I can get my friend in VT to come to TDIfest2015 in Maine this year with his Tesla Model S P85.

Tesla Model S P90D, * DROOL *

Click to expand...

It would be cool to have him show up at TDIFest. Check to see if he is interested.

On the subject of solar power and EVs, my parents built a house in Washington State and are looking very seriously into solar. We figure that given their location, they can generate about 6 megawatts per year (6 kilowatt array). They have room to expand that to 10 if they want, but the system efficiency would suffer slightly due to the roof angles.

They're also considering an EV at some point in the future. Their retired lifestyle means the majority of their driving consists of trips less than 100 miles. The affordable/mainstream/baby Tesla is definitely on their radar whenever it becomes available.

If Germany can lead the world in solar production with their relatively small solar exposure, there is no reason why the US can't seriously boost its production and become a major solar energy generator (both PV and CSP).

I can't add to the conversation of the Tesla and I apologize for this but I am really enjoying everyone sharing the information on solar. Something I would really like to get into.

greengeeker said:

I can't add to the conversation of the Tesla and I apologize for this but I am really enjoying everyone sharing the information on solar. Something I would really like to get into.

Click to expand...

Well, count yourself lucky to have existed now. We might be entering a second golden age of solar. The first was during pioneer-era America, where passive solar was done without most people even really aware there was any other way to do it. Solar thermal is going to come out of the limelights, and PV is going to keep on trucking, too. I predict in five years there will be many university graduates of solar engineering. In 30 years, solar may overtake coal and gas combined.

There is a ridiculous amount of untapped and under-developed solar potential. There is also FUD, silly canards, and hot air against it.

greenskeeper said:

instead of charging the car, why don't they look at replaceable battery packs that can be done quickly at a service station. You pull into the "station" and pay with your credit card for a pre-charged battery pack. A robot (or person) removes and installs the charged pack (probably located under the car for access).
Range per charge would mean nothing at that point (relatively).

Click to expand...

The Tesla is swap-capable, and I believe they put in a couple of service centers to do it. And ... hardly anyone actually did it.

It seems that the car has a long enough range, and at least in that area there are enough "supercharger" stations, that no one is actually interested in swapping batteries. A half hour break at a supercharger station (after just having driven 200+ mi) seems like not a terrible thing to have to do.

The Tesla is (so far) the one and only EV that really is "good enough for most people" (if it weren't so darn expensive). Battery swapping is probably a decent idea if you can only drive for an hour or two and then have to spend several hours charging (like pretty much every other EV). If you can drive for 4 or 5 hours and then wait half an hour to be able to drive another 3 or 4 hours ... no big deal.

Wonderful cars, I wish I could afford one. One of the few things I would give up my Diesels for. I've had the privilege to be in a few and what a delight.
As for those claiming dubious environmental improvements, it is far far cleaner even when fueled by straight coal fired electricity if you charge at night better still. Also far easier to charge carbon free by installing rooftop solar, or wind, or hydro than farming crops with diesel fueled equipment then converting those to fuel.
Please Do enjoy the ride. I know of none that I would prefer owning.
I consider getting a used nissan Leaf to a) save miles on my wagon and b) save on diesel/ environment. I'd consider adding to existing solar to offset charging to make it "free" to fuel, but that would probably have to wait a year.

That's only true if you ignore the environmental impact of making and disposing of the multiple batteries over the life of the vehicle, which is naive, plain and simple. Lithium mining is a filthy process . . . not to mention the disposal of the deceased batteries . . .

Couple that with negligible range, and for me, it's a total 'not practical and zero interest' immature technology. I just did 1350 miles cross country . . . 800 one day, 550 the next. Not counting an overnight to sleep, total stops were *one*, duration 35 minutes. Legs of 475, 325, and 550 . . .

- Tim