Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

TacticalBuschMaster t1_jdsfguk wrote

Yes add another 20% onto construction costs

25

Status_Silver_5114 t1_jdsmif2 wrote

Except that part where the electric bill will be that much less once it’s done. Win win!

6

midas617 t1_jdsosxg wrote

yes. win win! in the land of Make believe. with unicorns and fairy dust. 🦄

−7

Status_Silver_5114 t1_jdspulj wrote

You’re telling that to someone who hasn’t had an electric bill in seven years bc of solar panels but do go on.

24

Chance_Bad_7437 t1_jdt24wb wrote

My co-worker says the same thing. In the spring and summer, especially, he produces enough power to zero out his electricity bill and actually sell electricity back to power company. Says it all kind of evens out, though, because of the payment on the panels.

8

darkrom t1_jdtqvz0 wrote

How many more years until you break even on the panels and labor and total initial cost?

5

DesignRemote t1_jdtyk41 wrote

The price of electricity doesn’t go down. It goes up every month.

Let’s say the system cost 20,000 total. After government rebates . Let’s use say the Current electric bill is $200 a month. That’s 2,400 a year. Plus the electric company pays me monthly for the power I create about $100 a month. So 1200 per year.

So it would take you about 5/6 years to break even. At todays electricity prices

5

Status_Silver_5114 t1_jdurbfp wrote

We were already paying less than our Monthly bill has averaged out to since day 1 so were already saving money. Paid off in year 4. So yes we have free electricity. Not to mention the environmental impact. Healthy tax credits for installation and a state grant as well made paying it off even easier.

7

Status_Silver_5114 t1_jdus66n wrote

Also we make so Much extra by the summer we have $100-200 in credits to work off of even before it gets super sunny so the price increase doesn’t impact negatively- our net metering credits take care of that. As I said we don’t lease. A lease says company x puts your system in for free and you pay a lower fixed amount (ie we have friends in Wakefield who leased and pay 70 a month which is still lower and they didn’t have install costs).

We’re getting a battery this month and RIE then sends us 1400 a year to have us run on battery when there’s stress on the grid on hot days.

3

Status_Silver_5114 t1_jdurpcx wrote

We’ve been paid off since 2019. Before tax credit and grants I think it was 12k? Break even point was 2020 (we paid it off early) but we were already paying less per month to pay it off then we had been paying on pre solar elec. so it wasn’t costing us “more” to finance it. The money was going out to NG anyway even if we hadn’t bought a system so it’s not like skipping it was going to “save” money. And tax credit is now even higher than it was. When we installed it was only 22% now it’s 30%.

3

SweatyCockroach8212 t1_jdv75rb wrote

For me, it's 6 1/2 years. Panels have a 20 year warranty.

2

darkrom t1_jdv7krm wrote

That’s great that the breakeven is less than the warranty

2

SweatyCockroach8212 t1_jdv7o6v wrote

Yep, so 13+ years of free electricity.

3

Status_Silver_5114 t1_jdxih6j wrote

Also even at the twenty year mark the panels will still produce at roughly 95% so it’s not like on year 20 day 1 they stop working.

2

Coincel_pro t1_jdv8c6d wrote

My current finance payment on my solar array is slightly less than my average NGrid bill was before the big rate hike. I have 6 years left to pay on that and another ~20 years after that of a functioning array.

​

So, getting the array alone and switching a high monthly electric bill to a slightly lower finance bill it's already providing savings.

2

Status_Silver_5114 t1_jdxkzxt wrote

This is the part that the vehemently anti solar by reflex folks miss. It’s saving you money from day 1 - it’s not like you are going to decide to not go solar AND then not have an electric bill.

2

midas617 t1_jdt1prm wrote

I have three neighbors on my block who have solar panels. and they don't get free electricity. only "discounted rates"

no electric Bill because living in the parents basement is not the same as the solar panel delusion. again, delusional. thanks for proving my point.

−14

Status_Silver_5114 t1_jdt2qkg wrote

They probably have a leased system which is tied to lower rates. We own ours outright and haven't had a bill since installation in 2016. So much for your reading comprehension skills and assumptions. But you do you. A leased system the company that installed them is getting most of the credit - buy your system and it's a better deal in the long run.

7

Coincel_pro t1_jdv8kfp wrote

It's pretty clear you don't know what you're talking about. It's hard to get upset at the childish quips though when I just save so much goddamn money.

3

Coincel_pro t1_jdv82fr wrote

I don't pay for electricity anymore because of my solar array. My current finance payment on the array is less than my average electric bill was before the rate hike last year. My financing will be paid off in 6 more years and I will have at least another 19-21 years of array output. If you can't see the savings here (and their inflationary resistance) then maybe you're not smart enough to buy a home.

2

iandavid t1_jdtahj4 wrote

Probably not much more than 10% actually.

5

stosyfir t1_jdtbcjq wrote

Add $20k+ to the already ridiculous cost of a new home yeah that’s great. Which one of her cousins is running solar city?

15

ChronicCumShots t1_jdvbikj wrote

I could be wrong but I believe the bill is geared more towards commercial builds. I agree requiring smaller residential builds to have solar would be ridiculous

2

fishythepete t1_jdvwjli wrote

Instead of believing, you can read the bill. It’s linked in the article. You’re wrong.

4

ChronicCumShots t1_jdvydnf wrote

You’re right my bad. I don’t agree with mandating that on single family dwellings

2

MoreLab5278 t1_jdv8kwy wrote

As a person who worked in solar, this legislation is outright silly. I’m theory, sure it sounds nice. In practice, there will be loads of properties who are required to build solar, but due to their location, surrounding around their homes, putting solar on a home that is covered i shade from either trees or nearby buildings, is like trying to sail a boat with zero wind.

6

GhostOpera406 OP t1_jdwoesk wrote

This is a great point. You should testify on the legislation about this obvious oversight...

1

Proper_Boss523 t1_jdt2pu7 wrote

good, it's about time. and by about time, i mean far too late.

3

HistorianOk142 t1_jdvlr3a wrote

This is actually a great regulation to have in place. They have it in CA already and they are also trying to get it passed in MA. Doesn’t make sense to build a home without solar at this point. Especially with the 30% rebate from the feds for solar panels & installation. This will help RI get to 100% renewable electricity faster.

2

fishythepete t1_jdvxf7z wrote

No, it’s not. This is going to make homes take longer to build, and it’s going to make the purchase price higher (even if the ownership cost is neutral, the bank doesn’t care that you’re saving money on your electric bill when they’re underwriting the loan). Neither of those are good things when there is a housing crisis, or in general. If solar power is a slam dunk financially, you don’t need to pass a law to get it built. You need to educate consumers.

5

FourAM t1_jdw6w58 wrote

Climate won’t wait for a more equitable housing market. Costs will be made up later by lower or non-existent utility bill. Consumers are fed misinformation (just read some of the takes in this thread by brainwashed morons).

It doesn’t really matter because nobody can afford a house now anyway. You think landlords or NIMBYs gonna let prices come down? Hell no the want us all to rent forever and get rich off our backs. So if they’re the only ones that are going to be able to afford new housing at least let’s make them offset the ecological damage.

1

SweatyCockroach8212 t1_jdxitpd wrote

It takes less than 2 days to install solar panels.

Source: I had solar panels installed on my house in less than two days.

1

fishythepete t1_jdxjumw wrote

Cool story. Site isn’t suitable for solar? You’re going to need a variance. That takes time. There’s also a huge difference between the time it takes to get a single job done, and how that job impacts a construction schedule. Blew your install date because roofers didn’t start on time? It’s not gonna be two days once the roof is done. And that’s before even considering the rest of the bill. Don’t plan on buying an EV? Too bad - garage has to be wired for charging.

Again - the financial case is there. You don’t need a law. Educate consumers, and maybe solar companies could get some sales folks who aren’t total shysters.

1

SweatyCockroach8212 t1_jdxk47q wrote

By that logic, we should not ban lead paint or heroin. Just educate people and they'll always do what's best. Cool.

0

fishythepete t1_jdxkycx wrote

Uh nope. Not the same logic. There is already a pretty strong incentive to go solar - you get paid to do it. Removing lead paint and shooting heroin, not so much.

1

SweatyCockroach8212 t1_jdxmwy5 wrote

Except for the part where you don't get paid to go solar. I don't get paid. You pay for panels, you get electricity.

Your argument is people should be free to decide to do what they want. If they want panels, buy em. If they want lead paint, buy it. If not, don't. Same logic.

1

fishythepete t1_jdxnrb7 wrote

>Except for the part where you don't get paid to go solar. I don't get paid. You pay for panels, you get electricity.

What a silly argument. It’s like saying I don’t get paid for work. My employer puts money in the bank, and I get to use it.

I bought my system outright, but if I had financed it over 6 years, I would have saved a little money every month, and then stopped paying anything for electricity after 6 years. If you are net cash flow positive with no upfront investment, you are getting paid, and that’s what solar is for most people with a decent sunroof.

>Your argument is people should be free to decide to do what they want. If they want panels, buy em. If they want lead paint, buy it. If not, don't. Same logic.

My argument is people have a strong financial incentive to do this already. Less so with heroin and lead paint.

I have seen more solar panels go up in the last 3 years than I have in my life until then, and I am middle aged. The incentives are there, and working. Given our legislators and those who will need to implement this law have limited resources, maybe those resources would be better directed at solving a problem that wasn’t already solving itself before some kind savior from Barrington decided we needed her enlightened wisdom.

1

Sovereign-State t1_jdvwaov wrote

I would be ok if this was for new commercial construction over XX amount of square feet.

1

ChronicCumShots t1_jdvbd7f wrote

I could see requiring it for commercial builds but requiring it for residential is ridiculous at this point

0

Status_Silver_5114 t1_jdxl3ef wrote

Except the savings and environmental impact / yeah. Ridiculous huh?

0

ChronicCumShots t1_je0x26b wrote

North facing roofs will not benefit from solar, and in addition this bill ignores the challenges of adding a whole bunch of micro grids interconnected to the utility. I’m not saying it’s a bad idea but there’s more that needs to be taken into consideration

1

Status_Silver_5114 t1_je168q6 wrote

It's addressed in the bill .

"Developers could apply for an exemption if they can demonstrate solar would be impractical, if they provide alternative forms of renewable energy generation or if they are constructing affordable housing and don’t have sufficient funding."

1

OldSchoolStitcher t1_je1dyzy wrote

Fabricating solar panels requires caustic chemicals such as sodium hydroxide and hydrofluoric acid, and the process uses water as well as electricity, the production of which emits greenhouse gases. It also creates waste. Yeah, no impact here...

0

Status_Silver_5114 t1_je1evp8 wrote

this you?

"I listen to PragerU podcasts and videos. I learn so much while I'm stitching."

If you wonder the moment where folks start tuning out what you have to say - that's the moment.

1

barsoapguy t1_jdun1kg wrote

It’s been awhile since I’ve seen that map of world regions where solar really isn’t worthwhile when it comes to cost effectiveness vs other solutions.

I thought RI being in the northern hemisphere meant that other solutions should be taken before solar like Wind.

−1

SweatyCockroach8212 t1_jdv7gks wrote

Wind might be great and highly effective in RI but solar is also effective. I got panels in 2019 and have not paid anything to the electric company since then.

2

Swamp_yankee_ninja t1_jdtm2tl wrote

Wow, just when you think Government couldn’t reach any further in your pocket and transfer funds into theirs. Be careful who you elect they could be this guy.

−10

Swamp_yankee_ninja t1_jdxoyw0 wrote

Oh look down votes from people whom will likely never afford a new home in their lifetime.

1

[deleted] t1_jdsctwk wrote

[removed]

−19

GhostOpera406 OP t1_jdsd25d wrote

But importing natural gas from Yemen to power New England's grid is a-okay, right? Very American and patriotic!

17

midas617 t1_jdsf0b6 wrote

but importing communist china solar panels to power new England's grid is a-ok, right? very American and Patriotic!

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/visualizing-chinas-dominance-in-the-solar-panel-supply-chain/#:~:text=Even%20back%20in%202010%2C%20the,global%20large%2Dscale%20solar%20investment.

1

GhostOpera406 OP t1_jdsnsdo wrote

No, Gina Raimondo is hard at work at dealing with China's evasion of tariffs https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/us-says-solar-imports-four-southeast-asian-countries-were-dodging-china-tariffs-2022-12-02/

5

Chance_Bad_7437 t1_jdt34k9 wrote

To be fair... no one in the Biden administration is working hard on anything. Case in point, our secretary of transportation. Did nothing about the airlines when they violated the terms of the PPP loans, and most recently, he was busy speaking about how construction crews are too white, instead of hammering Norfolk Southern into bankruptcy over the East Palestine derailment. Really focusing on the important stuff.

−2

geffe71 t1_jdsqdkh wrote

She’s also a member of the “Moms demand the pool boys fuck us”

−2

GhostOpera406 OP t1_jdswo0w wrote

I thought they were called "Mayor Bloomberg's disarmament goons"

2

geffe71 t1_jdsel2g wrote

She should move to California if she wants their shit so bad.

−22

Guyincognito4269 t1_jdsojw5 wrote

And you should move to Mississippi or another shit hole state if you want to pay electric companies so badly.

8

geffe71 t1_jdsp2mn wrote

Have fun freezing your ass off with electric heat

I’m pro renewables, however New England needs to be tactical when implementing it.

Being gung ho about it will end with blackouts and people freezing to death

−13

heloguy1234 t1_jdspuo0 wrote

I heated my house with a heat pump powered by solar panels all winter. My electric bill was 0 and my house was 68. You’re talking out your ass.

13

JSchecter11 t1_jdsrns0 wrote

Except for how solar cells are actually more efficient in the cold 🤷🏻‍♀️

8

avidreider t1_jdttbv1 wrote

You know solar works even when it is cold right?

4