Are you doing the math all in present dollars? Because the return is 7% after inflation but >10% before. So you'd have >500.000 in 2047 dollars. In this case it's important to do that adjustment because you're doing an investment upfront for payoffs over 30 years so the value of money adjustment is extremely important. It should only make your case stronger though if you haven't done that yet.
For example from "Market failures and barriers as a basis for clean energy policies by Marilyn A. Brown" we read:
"Meier and Whittier (1983) studied a case in which consumers were given a choice in stores throughout the United States of two refrigerators that were identical in all respects except two: energy efficiency and price. The energy-efficient model (which saved 410 kilowatt hours per year, more than 25% of energy usage) cost $60 more than the standard model. The energy-efficient model was highly cost-effective in almost all locations of the country. In most regions, it provided an annual return on investment of about 50%. In spite of these favorable economics, which were easily observed by the purchaser, more than half of all purchasers chose the inefficient model. The higher purchase price of the efficient model was presumably the principal barrier to its purchase."
An annual ROI of 50% is left on the table because people have to pay something upfront for benefits later!
Tesla's pricing strategy here is quite blunt. They hope people don't care about the costs, only the looks and the sustainability.
Disclaimer: I don't know how sustainable the manufacturing process of this solution is.
I think if this is the case, they certainly don't want to hint at it incase they lose consumers who will sit back and wait for the cheaper option they ironically wouldn't arrive.
Current expert thinking is that there is a 4% equity risk premium over cash interest rates. Current cash rates are 1% nominal or -1% real. If you are an optimist like the Fed, cash rates will rise to 3% over the long term - which gets you to 7% nominal/5% real at best.
Solar is not going to have a similar impact on (say) Ireland in the next 30 years.
Probably the bigger impact is bad incentives for the people building the grid, who are often able to do what they like and get a guaranteed percentage return on top, which pushes them to spend more than they need to. This has been particularly pronounced in Australia I believe.
This might also be why utility companies have been furiously lobbying against rooftop solar subsidies and Barclays have downgraded US utility bonds.
This depends quite strongly on where you are. Your numbers are very close to the ones I get if I use my correct address, which is in the Puget Sound area of Washington State.
If I keep everything the same except the address, changing that to one in Merced, California, then it says I'd get $75000 worth of energy over 30 years.
PS: it looks like they try to use the address for more than just finding the location in order to estimate how much sun is available. I tried an address that I had lived at in Pasadena, California, and it did not ask me for the house size and number of floors. Instead, it did the calculation using about 6000 sq ft, which is about the size of the apartment building that is at that address. For my Seattle-area and Merced addresses, it did ask me for the house information.
GMail however is a 20% project. :)
He was only allowed to take his 20% project to 100% after his manager wrote up a justification XD
My turn to be pedantic, I guess, but 80 and 443 are only two of many available ports. The internet is much bigger than just the web, even if lots of people never bother to look beyond their browser.
It's kind of comforting to know that my academic and computing experiences thus far are shared both across the globe and across decades.
Isn't it amazing how big of a disconnect there is between "people who are capable of identifying/executing on big ideas" (aka Tim and his manager)....
and "the projects that businesses/agencies want their employees to do"
In Colorado it's against the laws for HOAs to ban solar systems, there are some tricks though because they can require certain roofs that you can't really put solar on. Certain tiles and 'presidential' grade roofing which typically cost more than normal shingles as it is. If you live in one of those types of places and want an energy system, then this is what you want. Honestly, I've not heard a lot of complaints about the aesthetics of a conventional solar system, in fact I think some people like it because it's really obvious looking; but if you have the funds and really value the look, then there is an option for you.
It's probably not that different from the market for a Model S vs a Honda Accord. The S is 3+x the cost of the Accord, has fewer fueling stations, can't be serviced nearly as easily, probably is less 'practical' in a handful of other ways but there are still people that buy and drive Model S Tesla cars.
...and the cost to remove your current perfectly good roof! I think I smell a bargain!
Which you probably sink into a second layer of asphalt shingles 15-20 years in (at least up here in upstate NY where there's plenty of rain/snow). Hopefully it's not a tear-off, as that'll cost more.
This is terrible. They've gotta be just trying to snipe rich early-adopter-for-the-status types.
Since Tesla's products are expensive, it would be a regressive tax even if we all bought enough solar panels for our needs.
Yes, solar roofs are a bad investment NOW, but they might be a good idea in 20 years, once all these businesses have done this research on them.
1) It should be in exchange for preferred stock/bonds in the company; and/or
2) the tax credit should favour lower prices, not higher
Tesla? The company that brought you the Roadster first, then the Model S and X, and only later the Model 3? I'm shocked. ;)
Please don't seriously suggest Tesla's solar roof will last the lifetime of a house to people.
The real warranty is 30 years for power and weatherization.
Its misleading marketing speak (at best).
https://www.tesla.com/solarroof#order
> Weatherization means that there will be no water leaks or other weather intrusions during the 30 year warranty period that result from our installation.
It will almost certainly require replacing and/or serious repair long before the "lifetime of the house" is up.
stock market isn't a very safe investment (that is, risk is much higher than putting in a bank), you can't make a comparison against buying some equipment, which is zero risk. A closer comparison is putting the $40,000 in a bank that guarentees interest (or treasury bonds, which is also pretty much risk free like a bank) - you'd get $99,457, which is $59,457 over your initial investment.
Equipment isn't zero risk. It could fail and need replacement, or need dramatic repairs. Or the price of electricity could drop dramatically and your investment won't be saving you as much in electricity bills...
Maybe Tesla goes out of business or drops support for this product? Maybe they aren't as durable as planned? Also, a roof is part of a house which is a very illiquid investment, and there are a lot of other factors affecting the price of a house.
But, presumably people aren't buying this just as an investment. If you're going to put a lot of money into a house anyway, maybe a fancy roof isn't so bad.
Tesla's calculator estimates $40,500 for a roof that generates half our power needs, and should provide $20,400 worth of energy over 30-years.
Add in a PowerWall and federal tax credit, and I'm still losing $15,400 over 30-years.
If I put that same $40,000 in an index fund that got the stock market's historical 7% average, and waited 30 years, I'd have $308,000.
To put it in another perspective, the last estimates I got for a solar system that covered 100% of our average power needs came in at $32,000 installed, before the same $11K tax credit that Tesla includes in their calculations.
So, I could pay under $20,000 for a "traditional" solar system that covered 100% of our energy bills, or $40,000 for a Tesla solar roof that covered 50% of our energy bills.
That's quite literally half the value, at twice the price.
If I put in a traditional solar system tomorrow, it would pay for itself in year 9. If I put in a Tesla solar roof tomorrow, I'd still be out $15K at year 30.