

Ikea's New Solar Panels: Sunshine Optional, Subsidies Required - Edvik
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-10-01/ikeas-new-solar-panels-sunshine-optional-subsidies-required

======
steven2012
I'm super excited about the promise of solar panels, because my house has
unobstructed exposure to the sun, and I live in the Bay Area, so we get
sunshine 300+ days per year.

However, every time I revisit the math, it never works out. Even if I purchase
it myself, the payoff times are never less than around 17-20 years, depending
on how aggressive I project the rise in electricity rates. Given that solar
panels have a serviceable life about 20 years, it still isn't cost effective
yet.

But I'm getting more and more optimistic that in the next few years, we'll
reach a level where solar panels make sense.

~~~
JRobertson
If you're sincerely interested in solar panels you should look into doing it
yourself. It's not as complicated as many of the solar retailers want to make
it out to be.

Step 1) Buy panels direct with mounts Step 2) Mount the panels yourself. They
aren't super heavy, just fragile. The tricky part here is measuring and
drilling the holes you need to get them secured to your roof properly. Or
buying a slanted frame if you have a flat roof. Step 3) Hire a licensed
electrician to wire them up.

That's pretty much it. Total cost for a 9kw system will run about 13-15k after
the electrician. You'll get 30% (almost 4k) back in rebates bringing your
total cost out somewhere around 10k. That's a 5-7 year payback for your
average american home.

There are a number of online solar panel distributors that are reliable and
have been in business for quite some time.

~~~
marvin
Isn't there a good, cheap solar tracking system available yet? Seems like you
are leaving a lot of money on the table by not keeping a ~90 degree angle with
the sun at most times during the day.

~~~
ansible
Good, cheap, reliable? Not that I know of. Mounting costs are higher too; you
something like a post in concrete to attach the panel, rather than just screw
it to your roof.

People are still working on that sort of thing. An interesting system I saw a
few years back was one based on the sunlight heating up a fluid. The fluid
(maybe it was a gas) expands a cylinder that keeps the panel pointed at the
sun. At night, the fluid cools, and the system resets to its default state,
pointing east for the next day. So 100% mechanical, without any active
control.

------
cperciva
_Britain isn’t known for an abundance of sunshine, but Hanergy’s solar panels
are designed to generate electricity from ultraviolet rays rather than
sunlight._

Seems to me that these solar panels are designed to generate government
subsidies more than anything else...

~~~
7952
The government in the UK is by far the biggest player in the energy market.
For example in any offshore energy development they are the land owner,
planning authority, biggest planning consultee, regulator, and may tax and
subsidize.

Market competition in energy is arguably more about access to capital than
consumer choice. Currently individuals provide most of the money through tax
and bills but only large energy companies can easily access the resulting
capital. It is wrong to criticize individuals for wanting access to this
money.

------
walshemj
The problem is that this is a tax dodge for rich middle class people - at one
time selling your solar energy back to the grid you got 8% return for 20 years
guaranteed by the government.

Even after the scheme was amended its a nice little subsidy for richer people
it's the poor sods on key/coin meters that are paying for this.

~~~
bborud
I find it disheartening that every technology that takes us in the right
direction, but which is not yet cost effective, is constantly pissed on by
people who expect immediate solutions and who fail to see that these things
are not going to develop themselves.

Sure, it is a tax dodge for rich middle class people, but if people could just
keep their envy in check for the decade or two it is going to take to bring
costs down and sustainability up, this is going to benefit a lot of people.

How else are we going to incentivise companies to develop better solar panels?
Seriously, I really want to know.

We are seeing the same thing with the Tesla Model S in Norway right now. On
one hand people dismiss electric cars because they are not yet as sustainable
as we would like them to be. On the other hand they get their panties in a
bunch because you can now buy a really good car (with amazing performance) at
the same price as a regular car. In Norway the Model S costs ~550k NOK. A
petrol-powered car with the same performance figures costs ~1,500k NOK --
nearly 1,000k NOK being taxes. (Interestingly, the Model S is the first
electric car that many people would consider buying as their only car. So far,
electric cars have been toys for people who can afford a second or third car,
and who want to park for free and use the public transport lanes).

It is going to take a lot of development to make solar panels sustainable. The
more of a market we can create for them, the quicker development will take
place and the quicker they will become available to broader segments of
consumers. And we'll just have to tolerate that to push the industry forward,
we will have to dangle some incentives in front of those who are able to take
part.

~~~
walshemj
Yes but giving vast tax breaks to upper middle class people isn't the way to
do it and i say that as some one who could easily have done that (we have a v
nice roof facing in just the right direction)

Did you not see the original 8% tax free return for 20 years I mentioned - the
uk 10 year yield is currently 2.7%

~~~
bborud
Then how do you suggest we get people to install solar panels?

~~~
walshemj
I wouldn't I would put Rnd cash into fuel cell's both for local use and for
vehicles.

Spare wind/wave energy can then be stored as hydrogen and used as fuel for
both aplications.

~~~
bborud
OK, I'll humor you: So how would you go about getting people to install
hydrogen fuel cells if subsidies and tax breaks are off the table?

The main issue here is that solar panels are not yet cost effective (or energy
neutral) -- not whether or not we believe in the technology. To make progress
you need to get the ball rolling by creating a market so that you can fund
development and gather practical experience. So the question remains: what
mechanism is the appropriate mechanism for stimulating the necessary
development?

------
jdmitch
It doesn't sound like it is sustainable to have these subsidies for very long:

 _\- At current rates the Feed-in Tariff pays you 14.9p for every kWh you
produce, whether you use it or not. The Feed-in Tariff is TAX FREE and RPI
Linked._

 _\- Export your excess electricity to the grid and earn an additional 4.6p
/kWh._

([http://www.hanergy.co.uk/why-solar/feed-in-
tariff](http://www.hanergy.co.uk/why-solar/feed-in-tariff))

~~~
xbryanx
It does if you factor in the extremely expensive, yet largely unaccounted for,
costs associated with generating electricity from coal.

~~~
TheCraiggers
Where are you getting your information? What assumptions are you making here?

It looks to me that coal is one of the cheapest forms of generating
electricity there currently is. [1]

[1]: [http://en.openei.org/apps/TCDB/](http://en.openei.org/apps/TCDB/)

~~~
polshaw
I believe xbryanx was referring to the externalities (ie the costs arising
from pollution, global warming, etc that traditionally go unpaid by the
producer) rather than just the financial cost of producing the power.

~~~
TheCraiggers
Perhaps. But you don't hear about those things with the green power
alternatives, either. Like, for instance, the pollutants created when
manufacturing solar panels, or the amount of energy consumed in making them
and safely disposing of them every 15 years or so. I'm not going to cite any
articles here, because at my knowledge level, it's near impossible to separate
the biased articles on topics like this. But a simple search for "pollutants
from making solar panels" will garner some things to read about it.

I suppose I should say at this point that I'm all for green, cleaner energy,
and wouldn't go so far as to say I'm "pro coal". I do, however, think that
living in Michigan (which is lucky to have a single sunny day a week) makes me
a tad pessimistic about using solar to power my house. I'm well aware that it
makes more sense in places that can practically guarantee sunny days 6/7 days
a week, but the TCO will need to improve _massively_ for it to make sense in
my region.

------
qwerta
I find this article bit too skeptical. Solar panels improved a lot in recent
years, and you can break even with investment even in UK without subsidies.

My friend in Czech Republic is a software developer. He works from home and
his house is not connected to grid. He has 12-volt house grid with dozen car
batteries. His office has 2 LED screens. Everything is powered by solar
energy, except once a week he runs a generator for one hour to do a laundry.
Heating and cooking is done by solid fuels and gas. Investment into solar
panels and grid was about 6000 euro.

~~~
spongle
I could do the same myself and certainly will next year. The only appliance I
have that consumes mega power is the washing machine. I've got a gas Aga that
can be converted to solid fuel if need be and provides most of the heating as
well and the only other things already work on 12v.

I don't own a toaster, dryer, kettle, microwave or massive television. I have
LED lighting everywhere as well and have programmed my family to turn the
lights off.

3 children, 2 adults, 2 guinea pigs = £230 a year in electricity!

Not bad for a tech family.

only problem is losses associated with 12v wiring.

I probably don't have to fish out €6000 either for my needs.

~~~
qwerta
Most electronics use low-voltage DC internally. You only need DC-DC converter
with stabilizer to run 32" TV. My friend also has microwave and fridge, all
12V.

------
DanBC
IKEA has a bizarre complex business setup which ends up with IKEA being the
world's largest (and nearly least generous) charity.
([http://www.economist.com/node/6919139/print?story_id=6919139](http://www.economist.com/node/6919139/print?story_id=6919139))

~~~
quarterto
I don't see how that's relevant to the article in hand.

~~~
DanBC
IKEA promotes itself as ethical and clean. Selling solar panels is part of
this marketing buzz that IKEA has created. This submission is a direct result
of IKEA marketing.

Some people may not want to buy from a company engaged in such vigorous tax
avoidance.

~~~
ctdonath
Some people may not want to re-elect a government which creates such lucrative
tax avoidance incentives ... including by confiscating so much of income as to
necessitate aggressive leveraging of such deductions.

Sure, Ikea isn't doing it out of sheer altruism. They're doing it because,
under the laws they're subject to, it's a sensible business strategy.

------
infinotize
Tangental observation: it's interesting that a large number of people are
really enthusiastic about changing to solar, moving away from carbon-producing
energy sources, etc. But when it comes down to it, even for those people the
response is usually "the math just doesn't work" for solar. I wonder if in
surveys how many people would say they would pay a little extra for clean
energy, until it's actually time to shell out?

~~~
mjn
One place to look for numbers more solid than people just claiming they
_would_ pay more, could be in areas with deregulated markets for home
electricity, like Texas, where people have a choice of generation provider.
Since generation is decoupled from transmission and maintenance, providers
don't compete on reliability, but mainly on price and environmentalism. The
"green" plans are typically $0.02-$0.04/kWh more expensive than the cheapest
plans. Would be interesting to know what proportion of people opt for one.

Examples of such a provider and the plans:
[http://www.greenmountain.com/texas-oncor](http://www.greenmountain.com/texas-
oncor)

~~~
ag80
Centerpoint has some overall price data they monitor at
[http://www.mytruecost.com](http://www.mytruecost.com), though at present it
doesn't include distinctions between electricity sources. I submitted some
feedback via their contact form suggesting they should put some data together.

~~~
ag80
They put a blog post up here: [http://www.mytruecost.com/news/2013/10/3/how-
green-are-truec...](http://www.mytruecost.com/news/2013/10/3/how-green-are-
truecost-users)

------
DanBC
I'm a bit surprised that China has produced too many panels. People keep
talking about the coming eco-apocalypse from countries like India and China
becoming more developed and needing more electricity, and not having the
capacity to generate that cleanly.

Chinese mining has a lousy safety record, even for a dangerous industry. (15
people PER DAY dying just from volatile gases, in 2010) Anything that offloads
electricity generation from dangerous mining for coal powered stations is a
good thing for China. So I'm not sure why they're not just putting these solar
panels on every roof.

([http://www.wvcoalmining.com/coal-news/reducing-chinese-
coal-...](http://www.wvcoalmining.com/coal-news/reducing-chinese-coal-mining-
deaths-new-technology.html))

([http://www.mining.com/coal-mining-deaths-in-china-lead-to-
mo...](http://www.mining.com/coal-mining-deaths-in-china-lead-to-more-
imports/))

([http://www.scanimetrics.com/condition-monitoring-
news/13-equ...](http://www.scanimetrics.com/condition-monitoring-
news/13-equipment-failures/82-coal-mining-deaths-in-china-linked-to-equipment-
problems))

------
teamonkey
> Photovoltaic panel systems costing £5,200 ($9,212)

With the exchange rate at 1.62 USD to the GBP, I can't imagine how they got
that dollar figure. Remember that UK prices include sales tax @20%, so that
puts the retail price at about USD$7000 pre-tax.

~~~
objclxt
> _Remember that UK prices include sales tax @20%_

Solar panels are charged only 5% VAT, not 20%.

------
petercooper
I have the means and the property (albeit small) to do this but.. no chance.
The main payback (ignoring the environmentalism externality) is dependent upon
a government subsidy rather than actual savings or efficiency gains and as
soon as it suits them, the government can yank the benefit away and you're sat
with an expensive piece of plastic on your roof that'll take 20 or more years
to pay for itself. (I seem to recall the government encouraging the use of
diesel in the 80s and LPG in the 00s through reduced duties, yet both are now
in the same sky high ballpark as petrol once their respective efficiencies are
taken into account.)

~~~
dangravell
Is that true for these particular subsidies? Or has the UK government
committed to them over the coming 15-20 years? I thought the latter.

~~~
petercooper
Hopefully someone who knows for sure will comment, as I didn't know that. Even
if they did, though, I'm not sure I trust the government to stick to a long-
term promise because I'm not even convinced the state pension will still exist
when I reach my 70s ;-)

------
xutopia
If they put as much effort into this as they did in the kitchen cabinet
software they built I expect to see a lot of people using this.

IKEA has a knack for packaging things in such a way that works for people.

~~~
spongle
Although I can say that nothing I've bought at Ikea has lasted a terribly long
time.

Tend to go for non chipboard and non UV sensitive plastic stuff now that you
can actually clean and leave in the sun without destroying it.

------
rwmj
Does anyone know if this includes the inverter?

I just built an office which has 4x3m of roof on which I could easily put
panels (fit them myself, I don't need someone to do that). But the cost of the
inverter has put me off, and there doesn't seem to be any alternative way to
power computers from it. Ideally I'd have a battery and 12V supply just to
power the computers and gadgets, I don't need full mains voltage, nor do I
need to feed back into the grid.

~~~
miahi
Depending on hardware, you can get a PicoPSU or similar ATX power supply at
~$50, but they are usually limited to 160-200W - so no fancy quad core desktop
CPU or powerful graphics, but 200W is plenty for a normal PC.

Some LED displays also have an external power brick - if that's 12V then you
can wire them to your grid. Unfortunately most of them will have higher
voltage to reduce wire costs and losses.

If you can replace at least part of the AC power with 12V DC power, you can
then buy a lower power (cheaper) inverter for the AC power.

------
DrPhish
You can get a 6.5kW system from wholesalesolar (with inverter and gridtie kit)
for almost exactly the same price. I don't know what the ikea system is rated
for, but I'm guessing less than that. 6.5kW should do for pretty much any
domestic residence, clouds or no, assuming you have the room for 24 panels.
I'll be picking one of these up once prices dip down to $1/W all costs
included (it's about $1.50 right now, with racking still extra)

------
wehadfun
KB Homes makes solar panels an option
[http://content.usatoday.com/communities/greenhouse/post/2011...](http://content.usatoday.com/communities/greenhouse/post/2011/03/kb-
home-solar-standard-green-feature/1#.Ukw2nFIo5oI)

------
mmagin
_yawn_ Nothing much to see here.

Do something about the labor and permitting costs of a solar install in the
developed world and I'll actually be impressed.

