Get FREE SOLAR PANELS and lower electric bill!!!

[bulldog]

People need to be careful. First of all, nothing is free. Second, who is liable for your roof? What happens a year later when your roof leaks and they say it's on you? What happens 2 years later when they are out of business? What happens if it's not what you thought and want them removed? You sell your house? Who maintains them? Who maintains the interior equipment?

As someone suggested, have a lawyer read the contract. I have not seen any glowing recommendations on solar panels anywhere except from those selling them. Solar energy is not a good investment yet and may never be.

Yep, the roof is a big concern. A contractor buddy of mine figures that in about 5 years he'll start getting a lot of calls for damaged roofs. These solar systems are being installed on a roof design that was not intended for the huge amount of additional weight. Unless the roof is reinforced some way, it's nearly a certainty that you'll have problems down the line.

 

[glhs837]

Not to mention, roof systems are designed for a certain environment, part of which is the effects wind and sun have on the moisture that they receive. I have to imagine that having them shielded so closely by the panels has to have an effect.

 

[officeguy]

The biggest problem with those 'free' solar systems are the dimwitted monkeys who install them.

If I was a lawyer, I would go around and introduce myself now to all the homeowners who will have a claim for rotting roof rafters 5 years from now.

 

[officeguy]

I would recommend researching that too. I don't believe you can backfeed the grid. I know Pepco doesn't allow it and if anyyone could install these and get checks from the utility, everyone would be doing it.

These systems are entirely based on backfeeding and by law MD utilities have to accept the power being generated and are required to pay a silly inflated price for it, whether they have a need for power or not.
The utilities play along with this as it allows them to claim all this solar capacity when it comes to meeting state and federal renewable energy mandates. SMECO didn't build a solar powerplant in Hughesville because it makes sense, they built it to up their percentage of 'renewable' energy sources.

What a grid-tied solar system is NOT allowed to do is to backfeed during a period of outage. The inverters used on grid-tied systems are designed in a way that they immediately dump all the power into a ground-rail the second utility power goes out. While the utility power is up, the inverter will automatically sync to the utilities phase and feed whatever power it gets off the panels. The sync problems a rotating generator creates dont really apply to an inverter based system.

 

[sparkyaclown]

Yep, the roof is a big concern. A contractor buddy of mine figures that in about 5 years he'll start getting a lot of calls for damaged roofs. These solar systems are being installed on a roof design that was not intended for the huge amount of additional weight. Unless the roof is reinforced some way, it's nearly a certainty that you'll have problems down the line.

Weight isn't the only concern, my understanding is that they just sit it right on top of the shingles and screw through it. There is no effort made to slide it up and under the shingles so they aren't compromising them. While they throw some tar over the screw they just essentially put a hole in your roof that at bare minimum you will need to go up there and reseal every couple of years to prevent it from leaking. Of course most likely there are going to be some that can't be reached and will eventually start to leak.

 

[Goldenhawk]

While they throw some tar over the screw they just essentially put a hole in your roof that at bare minimum you will need to go up there and reseal every couple of years to prevent it from leaking.

Yeah I really hated when they did that to my roof. I really should call DirecTV and complain about the half-baked job the installer did so they can... oh, wait, we're talking about Solar City? Sorry.

Seriously, that's exactly how every dish installer operates. Nothing new there... except a LOT more holes that (as you point out) are harder to reach.

 

[PeoplesElbow]

Weight isn't the only concern, my understanding is that they just sit it right on top of the shingles and screw through it. There is no effort made to slide it up and under the shingles so they aren't compromising them. While they throw some tar over the screw they just essentially put a hole in your roof that at bare minimum you will need to go up there and reseal every couple of years to prevent it from leaking. Of course most likely there are going to be some that can't be reached and will eventually start to leak.

Im interested if hurricane force winds can get under the panels, roofs generally aren't designed for much strength in the pull direction.

 

[my-thyme]

Well, estimator was here today. They can't install on my standing seam roof.

I'm gonna do a LOT more research before I call anyone else.

 

[officeguy]

Well, estimator was here today. They can't install on my standing seam roof.

I'm gonna do a LOT more research before I call anyone else.

If the install is done at the time the roof is being built, standing seam is the best kind of roofing to do it with as it will outlive the panels. The panels have to go on frames that sit on stand-offs rather than just screwing them into the shingles the way they do it on a tar-paper roof.

 

[my-thyme]

Especially since the web site said they could work with standing seam.....

 

[officeguy]

Especially since the web site said they could work with standing seam.....

With the curent solar bonanza, many actors have moved into the field who can do one thing only: Bolt panels onto a tar roof, run the wires down the outside of the building and stick their inverters on the outside wall wherever they can fit them. Most of those solar installs look like they have been done by some ghanean 'fitter'.

Of course, the solar mafia got a law passed that HOAs can't keep someone from uglifying their house and shining reflections into their neighbors bedroom.

I love solar. I dont love the hack-jobs I see going up on roofs in the last year or two.

 

[Wrkn4livn]

We signed with Solar City. I had my son (attorney) read the contract. He didn't see anything in there about a "lien" on the property.

 

[DannyMotorcycle]

We signed with Solar City. I had my son (attorney) read the contract. He didn't see anything in there about a "lien" on the property.

it's probably in the law somewhere, not the contract.

As a matter of fact, if you lose any lawsuit, and dont' pay, i seem to recall MD law
having a provision where they can put a lien on your property.

 

[David]

I actually had Solar City come down and give me a bid. It was last year, so some mixed notes/thoughts on the whole process.

-- I seem to remember three options. 1 was a 20 year lease, the other was an outright purchase and I can't remember the 3rd. (They sent me a proposal which linked to their website and has since disappeared, so I can't just post it here.)

-- They do recommend a new roof on the house if there are only a few years left on the existing one. They did say that if a new roof had to be put on later, they would come down remove the equipment and reinstall it later. I seem to remember a fee; maybe it was free if you leased and a fee if you owned.

-- If you leased, they were responsible for all upkeep. They all insured the system in case of damage.

-- There was no battery storage. It all fed onto the grid or was consumed in your house. They claimed this was SMECO's doing/fault.

-- When you do this, SolarCity becomes your power provider, not SMECO. You pay SolarCity every month. Any money SMECO pays you for the power you generate goes to SolarCity directly.

-- They showed me an estimated 15% monthly savings. Saving $15-30/mo hardly seemed like the hassle, so I blew it off.

-- You pre-negotiate your kWH rate with SolarCity and that gets locked in for some time period. I seem to recall that there was a way to lock it in for a longer timeframe. If power cost were to double or triple in coming years, this would be a great deal. But who has a crystal ball.

The one thing that annoyed me is they sent a saleswoman down who had little technical knowledge. Their proposal was also full of pretty color graphs, but lacked any technical details. I told them I needed a detailed bill of materials so I could tell if the system and price they were giving me was a good deal, or if I could do better on my own. That never came. Then a few weeks later I got a call from some guy who wanted to know why I never went ahead with their great proposal. So, I told him about the lack of details and the revised proposal that never came, and he assured me he would see what could do---which of course was nothing. Then a few weeks later---you guessed it. Another guy called with the same pitch. I blew off that call and yet one more after that.

Overall, I would say that if you we going to save 40-50%/month on your power bill, it would be the way to go. But for 15% and all of those ugly panels and wires on your house??? I understand that they have to recoup their costs and then make some money. The problem is that solar power equipment is just too expensive at this time.

Here are some videos they sent me:

[video=youtube;qwvuSNcG96w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwvuSNcG96w[/video]

 

[David]

2nd video:

[video=youtube;6AuKCvfQfx0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AuKCvfQfx0[/video]

And here is an article they referred me to regarding a loan program they offer:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/uciliawang/2014/10/08/solarcity-offers-its-first-home-solar-loan/

 

[nutz]

Overall, I would say that if you we going to save 40-50%/month on your power bill, it would be the way to go. But for 15% and all of those ugly panels and wires on your house??? I understand that they have to recoup their costs and then make some money. The problem is that solar power equipment is just too expensive at this time.

Yes, solar is too expensive for the return. I still can't get over how "free" attracts so many people. Is it that difficult to understand that an electric bill of $200 transferred to a lease payment of $175 plus an electric bill of $25 isn't saving money? Oh, but let's not forget that after the lifecycle of the equipment expires, you get to keep it

 

[getbent]

So is the whole idea behind it that if you say lease the panels, that payment is supposed to be cheaper than paying SMECO each month?

 

[my-thyme]

I actually had Solar City come down and give me a bid. It was last year, so some mixed notes/thoughts on the whole process.

-- I seem to remember three options. 1 was a 20 year lease, the other was an outright purchase and I can't remember the 3rd. (They sent me a proposal which linked to their website and has since disappeared, so I can't just post it here.)

-- They do recommend a new roof on the house if there are only a few years left on the existing one. They did say that if a new roof had to be put on later, they would come down remove the equipment and reinstall it later. I seem to remember a fee; maybe it was free if you leased and a fee if you owned.

-- If you leased, they were responsible for all upkeep. They all insured the system in case of damage.

-- There was no battery storage. It all fed onto the grid or was consumed in your house. They claimed this was SMECO's doing/fault.

-- When you do this, SolarCity becomes your power provider, not SMECO. You pay SolarCity every month. Any money SMECO pays you for the power you generate goes to SolarCity directly.

-- They showed me an estimated 15% monthly savings. Saving $15-30/mo hardly seemed like the hassle, so I blew it off.

-- You pre-negotiate your kWH rate with SolarCity and that gets locked in for some time period. I seem to recall that there was a way to lock it in for a longer timeframe. If power cost were to double or triple in coming years, this would be a great deal. But who has a crystal ball.

The one thing that annoyed me is they sent a saleswoman down who had little technical knowledge. Their proposal was also full of pretty color graphs, but lacked any technical details. I told them I needed a detailed bill of materials so I could tell if the system and price they were giving me was a good deal, or if I could do better on my own. That never came. Then a few weeks later I got a call from some guy who wanted to know why I never went ahead with their great proposal. So, I told him about the lack of details and the revised proposal that never came, and he assured me he would see what could do---which of course was nothing. Then a few weeks later---you guessed it. Another guy called with the same pitch. I blew off that call and yet one more after that.

Overall, I would say that if you we going to save 40-50%/month on your power bill, it would be the way to go. But for 15% and all of those ugly panels and wires on your house??? I understand that they have to recoup their costs and then make some money. The problem is that solar power equipment is just too expensive at this time.

This was the experience we had. We're going to look further into DIY.

 

[Kinnakeet]

Its all bs I filled out one of those forms so they can estimate what my electric bill would be,I said I wanted it to power my whole house and at the end it came up with estimated monthly bill 170-180$ my bill last month was 150.00 for a 3100 sq/ft home,it will never pay its self off without batteries to store energy when it is dark or we have days without sunlight

 

[glhs837]

So is the whole idea behind it that if you say lease the panels, that payment is supposed to be cheaper than paying SMECO each month?

right, but this only works with the add-in of state and federal subsidies, and the requirement by the state that the energy company must not only buy power from these things, but they have to pay a stupid high rate for it too. Once those things go away, then it stops being profitable for the solar companies.