Re:Microsoft’s quest to go ‘carbon negative’ inspires $1B fund
by romaaeterna on Friday January 17, 2020 @09:37AM
(#22074897)
I just looked up the cost for my home for solar on Google's project Sunroof. It would cost me $14,000 upfront, after the personal tax incentives (tax $$) and some ungodly amount of tax-assisted R&D ($$$), and it will save me $8,000 over 20 years. It looks more like a dollar going into a dumpster fire to me.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Microsoft’s quest to go ‘carbon negative’ inspires $1B fund
by ben_w on Friday January 17, 2020 @09:56AM
(#22075058)
You’re in the USA? If so, your permit and installation costs are the single largest part of the whole thing. The actual panels and inverters are cheap, utility-scale PV is cheap even in the USA, and even home solar is cheap when the government isn’t getting in your way — my parents and my in-laws in the UK (the entirety of which is north of the entire contiguous USA and which is not known for lacking building regulations) have PV systems which each cost about half your quote and which generate about £1,000/year each.
The cost of solar is now about half what they spent.
Re:Microsoft’s quest to go ‘carbon negative’ inspires $1B fund
by mprev on Friday January 17, 2020 @11:36AM
(#22076141)
How much of that £1k is feed in tariff? The loss of that has made new installations much less affordable.
Re:Microsoft’s quest to go ‘carbon negative’ inspires $1B fund
by ben_w on Saturday January 18, 2020 @03:39AM
(#22083220)
Good question; I don’t know. If it’s “half” it’s still worth it though.
Re:Microsoft’s quest to go ‘carbon negative’ inspires $1B fund
by sterkekoffie on Friday January 17, 2020 @11:13AM
(#22075885)
A well-done rooftop solar installation in 2020 will last you more like 30 years. That $8,000 comes after the payback period, meaning you end up with a 60% ROI.
Re:Microsoft’s quest to go ‘carbon negative’ inspires $1B fund
by the42thdoctor on Friday January 17, 2020 @09:42AM
(#22074943)
Not if you have or plan to have kids though