Residential Solar Panels
The primitive man was well aware of the power contained in the warmth of the sun. Solar cookers, water desalination and home heating were among the earliest methods through which human beings harnessed solar energy for their own benefit (PRLog, 2009)
Within the last few hundred years, however, mankind has made incredible advances in both understanding and employing the suns vast energy. While only a fraction of the radiation that actually leaves the sun reaches the earths surface, there is still enough to create entire power plants which derive their energy from the suns rays (PRLog, 2009)
The late 1800s saw the creation of primitive solar panels and the discovery of photovoltaic processes. In 1921 famous scientist Albert Einstein received the Nobel Prize in physics for his work on the photoelectric effect and by the 1950s the first true solar panels were at work (PRLog, 2009)
At this time the panels were far too costly and inefficient to have any sort of broad based commercial or residential application, but the wave of environmental interest that began in the 1970s put solar panels and solar power on the fast track. Immense investments in research and industry expansion allowed solar energy and solar equipment to become widely available in less than twenty years. They are no longer confined to pocket calculators or small lighting fixtures for exterior use, but are available for DIY installation on homes and in everything from portable panels for hikers and campers, to lamp posts and spot lights for commercial use (PRLog, 2009)
The technology behind solar panels has varied widely throughout the past five or six decades and while solar cells were the true origin of modern solar panels, today researchers are shifting to new platforms and approaches to gathering energy from sunlight. What a modern consumer can expect to find are solar cells crafted from silicon semiconductors configured to trap and convert the suns energy which are coated in an antireflective coating and contained under a glass cover plate to protect the cell from the elements of weather. All of this is usually mounted in a strong frame which must be appropriately positioned and angled to gather as much solar energy as possible. Domestic applications currently include lighting, garden fixtures, pool and hot water heating systems, home heating and some electrical supply.
There is a great deal of information and enthusiasm today about the development and increased production of our global energy needs from alternative energy sources such as the solar. The enthusiasm everyone shares for these developments has in many ways created a sense of complacency that our future energy demands will easily be met.
Alternative energy is an interesting concept. It simply means that energy is produced from sources other than our primary energy supplies fossil fuels, coal, oil and natural gas- the three kinds of fossil fuels that we have mostly depended on for our energy needs, from home heating and electricity to fuel for our automobiles and mass transportation.
Fossil fuels are non-renewable. They are limited in supply and will one day be depleted. Fossil fuels are formed from plants and animals that lived hundreds of millions of years ago and became buried way underneath the Earths surface where their remains collectively transformed into the combustible materials we use for fuel.
Despite the promise of alternative energy sources -- more appropriately called renewable energy, collectively they provide only about seven percent (7) of the worlds energy needs (Energy Information Agency). This means that fossil fuels, along with nuclear energy- a controversial, non-renewable energy source -- are supplying 93 of the worlds energy resources ( McLamb, 2010)
Nuclear energy, which is primarily generated by splitting atoms, only provides six percent (6) of the worlds energy supplies. And it is not likely to be a major source of world energy consumption because of public pressure and the relative dangers associated withthe unleashing power of the atom. Yet, governments such as the United States see its vast potential and are placing pressure for further exploitation of the energy source.
Fossil fuels exist, and they provide a valuable service. However, the side effects of using them are causing problems. Burning fossil fuels generate carbon dioxide, the number one greenhouse gas contributing to global warming. Combustion of these fossil fuels is considered to be the largest contributing factor to the release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere (McLamb, 2010)
The impact of global warming on the environment is extensive and affects many areas. In the Arctic and Antarctica, warmer temperatures are causing the ice to melt which will increase sea level and change the composition of the surrounding sea water. Rising sea levels alone can impede processes ranging from settlement, agriculture and fishing both commercially and recreationally. Air pollution is also a direct result of the use of fossil fuels, resulting in smog and the degradation of human health and plant growth.
But theres also the great dangers posed to natural ecosystems that result from collecting fossil fuels, particularly coal and oil. Oil spills have devastated ecosystems and coal mining has stripped lands of their vitality. HYPERLINK httparctic.fws.gov t _blank Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)
.
The oil, coal and natural gas companies know these are serious problems. But until our renewable energy sources become more viable as major energy providers, the only alternative for our global population is for these companies to continue tapping into the fossil fuel reserves to meet our energy needs. And, you can pretty much count on these companies being there providing energy from renewable sources when the fossil fuels are depleted. Many oil companies, for example, are involved in the development of more reliable renewable energy technologies. For example, British Petroleum Company (BP), is one of the worlds leading providers of solar energy through its BP Solar division, a business that they are planning on eclipsing their oil production business in the near future.
Some estimates have indicated that our fossil fuel reserves will be depleted within 50 years, while others say it will be within 100-120 years. The fact is that neither one of these projections is very appealing for a global community that is so heavily dependent on fossil fuels to meet basic human needs. The bottom line We are going to run out of fossil fuels for energy and we have no choice but to prepare for the new age of energy production since, most certainly, human demands for energy will not decrease.
And here is one very important factor population growth. As the population grows upwards towards nine billion people over the next 50 years, the worlds energy demands will increase proportionately. Not only will it be important for renewable energy to keep up with the increasing population growth, but it must outpace not only these demands but begin replacing fossil fuel energy production if we are to meet future energy needs.
By the year 2020, world energy consumption is projected to increase by 50, or an additional 207 quadrillion BTUs. If the global consumption of renewable energy sources remains constant, the worlds available fossil fuel reserves will be consumed in 104 years or early in the 22nd century. (US Department of Energy) Clearly, renewable energy resources will play an increasingly vital role in the power generation mix over the next century.
There is no doubt that the earth is facing an all round environmental degradation largely due to human interference with nature. There is a growing realization now more than ever that human activities responsible for this degradation must be minimised or stopped altogether where possible and the degradation process reversed. Application of technological innovations such as the use of the sun and intervention in other renewable sources of energy are regarded as approaches that could help alleviate the bleak future.
The debate on the cost-benefit of solar panels for energy production has been going on for years with the general consensus being that traditional means of energy production are far more cost effective (Bizzarri, Morini, 2007). This analogy has been made with little regard given to the environmental impact of the said energy production.
In the endeavor to make renewable energy resources acceptable to a majority of people, several governments have been putting in place mechanisms that are aimed at raising awareness of the benefits of the green energy as well as encouraging adoption by making it accessible. The US Department of Energy (DOE) and other federal, state, local, and non-governmental agencies today offer a number of financial incentives and solicitations such as the ones enumerated here.
Federal Tax Credits. The federal government allows taxpayers to claim a solar tax credit of 30 of the installed price of a solar system. Expenditures with respect to the equipment are treated as made when the installation is completed. If the installation is on a new home, the placed in service date is the date of occupancy by the homeowner. Expenditures include labour costs for on site preparation, assembly or original system installation, and for piping or wiring to interconnect a system to the home. Beginning in 2009, there is no maximum on the tax credit that a taxpayer may claim (previously in 2008 the maximum was 2,000).
State Tax Benefits Quite a number of states offer additional tax incentives, grants and rebates with some offering cash-back rewards of up to 25 of the cost of the system. State tax benefits however, vary from state to state.
Additional Financial Incentives Beyond the tax benefits, there are a multiple of other programs offered by state agencies. Such programmes include property tax exemptions on solar systems, attraction of an additional 500 bonus paid to house owners whose houses qualify to become Energy Star Homes, and even net-metering where excess energy produced by solar systems connected to the grid may be sold to the electricity generating companies.
Industry Recruitment There has been attempts to focus attention on the promise of green jobs which ultimately would boost the ailing economies of many countries. The US federal government has enacted a 2.3 billion federal stimulus bill targeted for renewable energy manufacturers. In addition to the federal stimulus bills, five states (Arizona, Kansas, Louisiana, Tennessee and Utah) have created new incentives to attract renewable energy companies. Furthermore, at least a dozen states have indicated their intent to use federal stimulus funds to increase the amount available for industry recruitment and support manufacturing of renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies. Many industry recruitment incentives are tax based and tied to what the company will provide to the state in return.
Efforts by the various government agencies are aimed at making electricity from solar technologies more cost competitive with respect to conventional forms of electricity. Home solar systems, both off and on grid, are becoming popular and more readily available to consumers thanks to increased supply and a growing market.
Open, competitive solicitation process is designed to meet the top technology needs identified by industrys players. Solar Energy Technology Programme (SETP) funding opportunities encourage collaborative partnerships among industry, universities, national laboratories, federal, state, and local governments and non-government agencies and advocacy groups.
A cost-benefit analysis carried out by Bizzari and Morini (2007) on solar systems found that the total energy produced over a two-year period outweighs the energy used in manufacture, installation, and maintenance. The researchers say that their analysis holds even in countries with medium sunshine. This makes photovoltaic panels a viable alternative energy supply. With this in mind, the researchers analysed all the costs from cradle to grave - in terms of energy use, pollution and carbon footprint, and economic - to find out whether photovoltaic cells are a truly viable alternative energy source.
Three different kinds of photovoltaic devices were assessed single-crystalline silicon, polycrystalline silicon, and thin film copper indium diselenide. The team considered the costs from the point of manufacture to end-of-life disposal leading to the estimation of the energy, economic and emission
Bizzarri and Morini (2007) point out that cost should not be the only consideration. The total energy and pollution involved in sourcing the raw materials, manufacturing, installing, and maintaining any particular system should also be considered. After all, if it uses far more energy to install solar panels than the energy they can produce during their lifetime then it does not make environmental or economic sense to install them.
Their analysis also shows that the manufacture and use of photovoltaic panels produces less pollution than fossil fuel based electricity generation.
In their assessment of the three different photovoltaic panel types on the south-facing roof of a school in Ferrara, northern Italy, the team found that the energy produced by the panels over their lifetimes considerably overcomes the energy needed during manufacture. In fact, energy costs are recovered within two years in this medium sunshine climate.
The team also showed that carbon dioxide emissions are significantly lower over the photovoltaic panel lifetime from cradle-to-grave compared with conventional electricity generation.
The researchers suggest that their study, which takes into account all the hidden costs in terms of energy, pollution, and money, could provide a role model for policy makers considering renewable energy sources.
It seems then that the impression held by many people that solar electric power is not cost effective compared to grid power is not entirely correct. The market already indicates that photovoltaic cells are cost effective in US. Solar energy would be cheaper than electric grid power if a remote home located 2 miles from the grid was to be considered. The electricity power provider would charge at least 20,000 to extend the power lines two miles to the single homestead. Diesel electric generators (and other fossil fuel burning generators) would have relatively lower up front costs, but over a 30 year period they would cost a lot more to maintain and fuel.
Solar energy can also be cost competitive in homes that utilize very little electrical energy. For example, in Portland, Oregon, the minimum monthly fee charged by the electricity power provider, the Portland General Electric (PGE) is 10 for residential customers beginning 2002. This means that that fee must be paid even if no electricity was used during the month to cater for the cost of maintaining transmission lines, electric meter, and the meter reader. This amounts to 120year and 3,600 for a total of 30 years. Solar panels can be obtained for as low as 3.75watt from the market.
If the household went off the grid and ceased being an electric utility customer, it would no longer be subject to that fee. The 3,600 would thus be available to buy a 900 watt solar electric panel array. The minimumbase fee (also known as Basic Charge) charged by other utility providers may be much higher, translating into a bigger cost.
If a household receives an average of 4 to 5 peak hours of sunlight per day, then this array would generate 3.6 KWh (3,600 watt hours) to 4.5 KWh (4,500 watt hours) per day. Many households that are on solar power utilize about 3 to 4 KWhday. The savings from not being connected to the electric grid could thus purchase the needed photovoltaic panels.
Portland General Electric (PGE also charges 6.5 centsKWh for residential electric usage (Technically 6.359 centsKWh for usage below 225 KWhmonth and 7.359 centsKWh for usage above 225 KWhmonth. Rates for power generated from clean renewable energy cost nearly 1 centKWh more.). If a home used 3.6 KWhday this would equal 2,564.06 total over 30 years (including leap years). The 2,564.06 could be applied towards the cost of the photovoltaic racks, wiring, meters, controllers, batteries, and installation labour. At 4.5 KWhday the savings in electric utility usage costs 3,205.07
But the cost benefit gets even better
1) Electricity rates, both monthly basic and consumption charges are likely to rise over the next 30 years, whereas the solar energy system would already have been paid for and the sunshine is free. There would however be occasional battery bank replacements.
2) Tax rebates and other incentives offered by many states and the US federal government would substantially reduce the cost of putting up the solar energy system.
For simplicity, a few factors were left out of the above calculations. For example solar panels slowly loose some power output over time. For example Shell Solar (formerly Siemens Solar) guarantees that their monocrystalline silicon solar panels will produce at least 80 percent of rated power after 25 years. The good news is that even many panels installed in the 1970s are still producing power, though at a somewhat lower output.
Another factor left out of the calculations is the time value of money, such as present value and the Return on Investment.
CONCLUSION
Solar markets are booming in the United States due to consumer interest in green technologies, concern about energy prices, and financial incentives from the federal government, states, local governments and utilities.
Its hard to figure out the total cost of installing the solar panels, since there are so many tax credits and financial incentives. When figuring the cost, look at the total cost of the system, less the tax savings, and financial incentives. Divide the cost by the monthly savings to determine your break even points.
There are various calculators that help you determine the overall cost. Youll want to get your average kilowatt hours of electricity from your electric company before you start. Here are some that I liked