Solar panels are getting cheap enough for grid hook-ups, installation and regulatory approval to become the bottlenecks.
Plug-in solar is suboptimal in many ways, but it does sidestep a lot of those hurdles. Not too surprised to see it on the rise.
Another thing that might be worth keeping in mind is that plug-in solar panels are often installed vertically - i.e. balcony solar. In which case the peak of the panel's generation is offset to the edge of the typical "duck curve". If it gets popular enough to affect the grid, it might get the solar-induced demand slump larger, but make the edges even sharper.
Would that make grid scale battery storage with its instant response even more important?
The plug in solar systems are small and usually mounted in ways that don’t capture as much energy as the same panels mounted on a roof. These systems aren’t going to get popular enough to make a big difference in anything.
I think it’s nice that they’re available for people to do some small scale offsets, but I think they’re more of a gateway to better solar installations. They also send people down the path of investigating battery storage add-ons, which might actually be a better long term solution for everyone.
If we can get to a point where we can buy plug-in batteries that are subsidized by requiring coordination with the grid, the power companies could get distributed, controlled battery storage to work with their demand curves. This can already happen with the bigger permanent install batteries.
Generally correct. Here in Washington I could get Signature Solar to ship me 31 excellent Canadian Solar bifacial panels on a pallet for $9200 plus tax and shipping (so add another grand or so). This would be 21kW of solar (plus a bit if bifacial gain kicks in), which is a ton - you could even do some winter work with that, if angled correctly.
This setup would cost north of $50k (possibly north of $75k, depending) if installed by contractors. Labor costs are extremely high here, since COL is extremely high.
A lot of the "labor" costs are just regulatory/permitting in disguise. An expedited approval regime with standards such that, permits-wise, installing solar panels was as easy as installing an EV charger would save a ton of money.
Perhaps also useful would be plug in batteries, especially if one has variable rates. Charge when cheap, discharge when expensive.
One constraint on these I've read is that if you have sources and sinks on the same circuit, you might overload the line without tripping the breaker at the box. If I'm understanding this correctly this has caused them to limit the power of plug-in solar to a fraction of what a single circuit could potentially carry.
The biggest problem with plugging a generator into an outlet is you need a double ended cord. If you use everything correctly they work fine, but there are too many ways things can go wrong. The most obvious one is you plug everything in, start the generator, and the trip over the cord on you way back inside, thus sending the live male end flying toward you. Once in a while a kid will see these dual male plugs and plug them in - lots of ways things can go wrong here.
There is also the problem of backfeeding, but this is more theoretical - even if you know to limit your power use, your neighbors won't and so your generator will trip its own breaker. Linemen are taught to either treat power lines like they are live, or to short them to ground - it can happen they don't do this and you kill a linemen, but still not as big a worry as it is made out.
They make generator "inlets" that sidestep all these problems when used correctly. Most common I've seen is a block so you can't have the inlet and the main breaker both on at once.
It's not so much being unplugged as it is sensing whether the mains power is down. If it is, they stop backfeeding immediately, just like hardwired solar inverters do.
If this weren't done, there would be risk of electricution to anyone working on wiring in the house or on the utility distribution network.
In addition to the electronics that others mentioned, they also have limited amperage. That way even if you are pulling from your mains power and the solar at the same time, your circuit hardware shouldn't melt or catch fire.
I hope the next step for this is plug-in battery storage. All the on-grid battery hybrid inverters I can find in the USA are either single leg 120V or 12kW for $5k. I just want like 3kW dual-leg with support for a dozen kWh of batteries
How do these work when plugged in to only one of the split phases on a US-style 120 system? Because I'm a nerd, I know which legs of the phase go to which outlet in my house, but I don't expect everyone to pay attention to that. I assume something has to take that into account somewhere.
There is no problem and so nothing needs to account for it. A split phase is just a transformer with the windings, and one is connected to the other. We call one side (high voltage) the primary, and the other two secondary, but the transformer doesn't care at all, it can send power either way (there are limits but we are well under the maximum rating of the transformer so we can ignore them). If you only draw 240 volts then the two connected windings act as a single secondary, if you only draw 120 then one of the two secondaries provides power. Any other combination - the transformer doesn't care.
It backfeeds onto the grid and becomes the utility companies problem to deal with. This is similar to them dealing with a house that is an unbalanced consumer between the legs.
To my understanding, it is basically a non-issue at residential voltages. To be a problem it would require all the houses on a transformer (there are typically just a few for each transformer) to be unbalanced significantly in the same direction. That would be the end of it, too, because the 240V split only happens at the transformer.
There are advantages to distributed infrastructure as well! You mentioned one of the biggest disadvantages.
I am thinking along the line of:
- You can just do it / upgrade it etc
- Robust against central failures for various reasons
- Resistant to those in charge of centralized infrastructure abusing their monopoly
Utility-scale solar might be cheaper but doesn't make my house resilient to grid failures. It also only benefits me when the grid is upgraded enough that ... well, it benefits me.
Plug in solar doesn't make your house resilient to grid failures either. You would need an inverter that can generate an AC output without having an existing one to follow; a disconnect to isolate you from the grid during an outage, batteries to smooth the output, an electrician to install it, and an inspection to certify that it was all done correctly.
If you are going through all of that, there is not much benefit to plug-in solar instead of traditional.
Most of the balcony solar packages already include what you need. They include a battery and on that battery is a receptacle that will supply power if there is no mains. The dogtail that you insert into your house outlet only supplies power if there is mains, but the receptacle on the battery supplies power regardless.
So when the power goes out you unplug your fridge from the wall and plug it into the battery. In essence it operates like the standard camping battery/"solar generator", a la Jackery et al.
To gp’s point, if you’re going through it all just implement it at your panel/subpanel. Mine does auto switch over to power the entire panel and I only know about it from an app notification. Then I can decide if and where I want to power down usage in the house to conserve battery.
Having to plug in individual appliances seems to defeat the entire purpose. What happens if you’re away on holiday? Come home to a fridge full of trash? If power is back, do you even know how long the outage lasted? What about other devices that generally should have nonstop power or are typically hardwired? Sump pumps, HVAC equipment, water heaters, etc.
This is the truth. Aside from solar there are plenty of folks with backup generators that automatically come on whenever grid power fails. When maintenance crews came through my neighborhood to upgrade the old pole fixtures, they grounded out each block to keep any backfeed off what they were working on.
No, it's more than that, it's not just a safety feature that you could disable: the plug-in panels need an existing waveform to synchronize to, if the grid is dead they can't produce an AC voltage signal on their own.
We know how to make inverters that can produce an AC voltage on their own. It is not particularly difficult or expensive. The reason why we do not put those inverters in plug-in solar units is entirely because we don't want them to have that ability.
It is easier to find a million people with a few hundred euros and a sunny balcony than finding one dude with a few hundred million euros and land on which building a solar farm is permitted.
Utility companies are not incentivized to lower prices because it means less money for them. Do you remember when power companies told people to conserve power and then people successfully did this? And then they raised rates because they weren't making enough money? This happens in California ALL THE TIME. I've lived here 30 years in Silicon Valley and it's the biggest scam that no one talks about. It happens with electricity and water. With water its even more egregious because they told us to conserve water because of the "drought" but once the drought was over, they raised rates because people weren't using enough water. My connection fee to water is over $100/month without spending a drop of water. That's why I stopped conserving water and water my lawn every single day because it turns out that my water costs are only about 1/3 of the actual water bill costs so fuck it!
It's the same playbook over and over again, there's no incentive to lower rates at all because it's an easy way to make money over an entire population of tens of millions of people.
Now PG&E is fighting to charge solar panel owners $100+/month just for the privilege of being connected to the grid. That would make having solar panels even more expensive than not having solar panels which is utter hypocrisy but no one seems to care or point this out. It's a complete and utter scam.
EDIT: I forgot to mention last year the rates were $0.37-0.45 per kWh, until this year when they implemented a base fee of $25/month, so they lowered it to $0.33-0.45/kWh. Rates in Nevada are 1/4 of that.
2015: $0.17-0.33 per kWh
2020: $0.24-0.38 per kWh
so prices have more than doubled in 10 years. Fucking criminals.
I live in Florida, and I'm building a water battery, so I can freeze it at night when electricity rates are cheap, and use it to cool the house during the day.
The day after the system goes live, they'll probably announce flat rates for any time of day, just to f' with me. :(
Where I live we have Time of Day electricity pricing where the prices jump 2-3x during high demand. Panels conveniently produce the most power around this time, so this can save people money.
By that logic literally everything should be distributed. That's going to be a big undertaking to re-architect our entire civilian infrastructure against that.
I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, I just don't see society taking that measure until it's either 1) cheaper, or 2) the threat moves from being just a threat to reality.
> 2) the threat moves from being just a threat to reality.
Completely agree. But I'm already there. Large scale economic disruption has just started. For that to remain peaceful over the next few decades would be a miracle. So we should plan for disruption, for which energy decentralization is a keystone, and the technology to make it practical is here.
California has a 600 MW Virtual Power Plant composed of Tesla Powerwall batteries in 85k homes. Central control of distributed generation removes a lot of inefficiencies. Household excess is available to the whole system.
Has no one been paying attention to how Ukraine/Russia and now Iran has been targeting civilian infrastructure? All of Spain's electricity was down last year from a cyberattack. This is completely a new line of threat that we need to address.
Solar panels are getting cheap enough for grid hook-ups, installation and regulatory approval to become the bottlenecks.
Plug-in solar is suboptimal in many ways, but it does sidestep a lot of those hurdles. Not too surprised to see it on the rise.
Another thing that might be worth keeping in mind is that plug-in solar panels are often installed vertically - i.e. balcony solar. In which case the peak of the panel's generation is offset to the edge of the typical "duck curve". If it gets popular enough to affect the grid, it might get the solar-induced demand slump larger, but make the edges even sharper.
Would that make grid scale battery storage with its instant response even more important?
> it gets popular enough to affect the grid,
The plug in solar systems are small and usually mounted in ways that don’t capture as much energy as the same panels mounted on a roof. These systems aren’t going to get popular enough to make a big difference in anything.
I think it’s nice that they’re available for people to do some small scale offsets, but I think they’re more of a gateway to better solar installations. They also send people down the path of investigating battery storage add-ons, which might actually be a better long term solution for everyone.
If we can get to a point where we can buy plug-in batteries that are subsidized by requiring coordination with the grid, the power companies could get distributed, controlled battery storage to work with their demand curves. This can already happen with the bigger permanent install batteries.
Solar panel installation costs, at least in the US haven't dropped in 15 years. It's still $25-30k to install 4kW-6kW worth of solar panels.
Dominated by labor costs, right? It'll probably just keep going up at this point, even if the panel cost went to zero.
Generally correct. Here in Washington I could get Signature Solar to ship me 31 excellent Canadian Solar bifacial panels on a pallet for $9200 plus tax and shipping (so add another grand or so). This would be 21kW of solar (plus a bit if bifacial gain kicks in), which is a ton - you could even do some winter work with that, if angled correctly.
This setup would cost north of $50k (possibly north of $75k, depending) if installed by contractors. Labor costs are extremely high here, since COL is extremely high.
A lot of the "labor" costs are just regulatory/permitting in disguise. An expedited approval regime with standards such that, permits-wise, installing solar panels was as easy as installing an EV charger would save a ton of money.
Matt Ferrell just did a video on this recently https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3eEzdpi12I
Perhaps also useful would be plug in batteries, especially if one has variable rates. Charge when cheap, discharge when expensive.
One constraint on these I've read is that if you have sources and sinks on the same circuit, you might overload the line without tripping the breaker at the box. If I'm understanding this correctly this has caused them to limit the power of plug-in solar to a fraction of what a single circuit could potentially carry.
This may be a stupid question, but I've always heard to never plug a generator into an outlet - what makes these safe enough that you can?
The biggest problem with plugging a generator into an outlet is you need a double ended cord. If you use everything correctly they work fine, but there are too many ways things can go wrong. The most obvious one is you plug everything in, start the generator, and the trip over the cord on you way back inside, thus sending the live male end flying toward you. Once in a while a kid will see these dual male plugs and plug them in - lots of ways things can go wrong here.
There is also the problem of backfeeding, but this is more theoretical - even if you know to limit your power use, your neighbors won't and so your generator will trip its own breaker. Linemen are taught to either treat power lines like they are live, or to short them to ground - it can happen they don't do this and you kill a linemen, but still not as big a worry as it is made out.
They make generator "inlets" that sidestep all these problems when used correctly. Most common I've seen is a block so you can't have the inlet and the main breaker both on at once.
The inverter box contains circuitry that cuts power output within some specified number of milliseconds if unplugged rendering the prongs "cold".
It's not so much being unplugged as it is sensing whether the mains power is down. If it is, they stop backfeeding immediately, just like hardwired solar inverters do.
If this weren't done, there would be risk of electricution to anyone working on wiring in the house or on the utility distribution network.
They have to sync up and feed power in phase with the grid when its up as well, in the case of net metering setups.
It's also important for the male plug prongs to not be live when unplugged.
I commented a little too quickly and left the nuance out. Your answer is much better!
Thanks. I would have asked Claude or something but I know so little about this topic that I wouldn't have been skeptical enough of its answer.
Fancy power electronics in them that make sure they only send power to the outlet while the grid is energizing it too.
These sync with the grid and also have safety mechanisms to avoid backfeeding if the grid is down (or it's unplugged).
In addition to the electronics that others mentioned, they also have limited amperage. That way even if you are pulling from your mains power and the solar at the same time, your circuit hardware shouldn't melt or catch fire.
https://archive.today/NEPz3
I hope the next step for this is plug-in battery storage. All the on-grid battery hybrid inverters I can find in the USA are either single leg 120V or 12kW for $5k. I just want like 3kW dual-leg with support for a dozen kWh of batteries
The Bluetti Apex 300 is an expandable 2.7kWh 3.8kW dual-leg inverter for ~$1000 (on sale).
The EG4 12kPV does 8kw split phase output and is $3k, but haven't seen anything smaller than that yet.
How do these work when plugged in to only one of the split phases on a US-style 120 system? Because I'm a nerd, I know which legs of the phase go to which outlet in my house, but I don't expect everyone to pay attention to that. I assume something has to take that into account somewhere.
There is no problem and so nothing needs to account for it. A split phase is just a transformer with the windings, and one is connected to the other. We call one side (high voltage) the primary, and the other two secondary, but the transformer doesn't care at all, it can send power either way (there are limits but we are well under the maximum rating of the transformer so we can ignore them). If you only draw 240 volts then the two connected windings act as a single secondary, if you only draw 120 then one of the two secondaries provides power. Any other combination - the transformer doesn't care.
It backfeeds onto the grid and becomes the utility companies problem to deal with. This is similar to them dealing with a house that is an unbalanced consumer between the legs.
To my understanding, it is basically a non-issue at residential voltages. To be a problem it would require all the houses on a transformer (there are typically just a few for each transformer) to be unbalanced significantly in the same direction. That would be the end of it, too, because the 240V split only happens at the transformer.
If lightning strikes does the risk of fire increase with solar ac ?
https://wallhop.io/https://www.nationalgeographic.com/enviro...
This is fun, but utility-scale solar is far cheaper.
It doesn't have to be cheaper than utility-scale. It only has to be cheaper than retail electricity.
In other words, it can be useful even if it's not the most efficient way to do it. It only has to be more efficient than the status quo.
I don't have thd capital to build utility-scale solar. I do have the capital to install residential solar. My electricity is now cheaper.
There are advantages to distributed infrastructure as well! You mentioned one of the biggest disadvantages.
I am thinking along the line of:
Utility-scale solar might be cheaper but doesn't make my house resilient to grid failures. It also only benefits me when the grid is upgraded enough that ... well, it benefits me.
Plug in solar doesn't make your house resilient to grid failures either. You would need an inverter that can generate an AC output without having an existing one to follow; a disconnect to isolate you from the grid during an outage, batteries to smooth the output, an electrician to install it, and an inspection to certify that it was all done correctly.
If you are going through all of that, there is not much benefit to plug-in solar instead of traditional.
Most of the balcony solar packages already include what you need. They include a battery and on that battery is a receptacle that will supply power if there is no mains. The dogtail that you insert into your house outlet only supplies power if there is mains, but the receptacle on the battery supplies power regardless.
So when the power goes out you unplug your fridge from the wall and plug it into the battery. In essence it operates like the standard camping battery/"solar generator", a la Jackery et al.
To gp’s point, if you’re going through it all just implement it at your panel/subpanel. Mine does auto switch over to power the entire panel and I only know about it from an app notification. Then I can decide if and where I want to power down usage in the house to conserve battery.
Having to plug in individual appliances seems to defeat the entire purpose. What happens if you’re away on holiday? Come home to a fridge full of trash? If power is back, do you even know how long the outage lasted? What about other devices that generally should have nonstop power or are typically hardwired? Sump pumps, HVAC equipment, water heaters, etc.
These panels do not work without the grid.
(And this is intentional to avoid electrocuting line workers who are working to fix the grid when it breaks)
Line workers ground everything before they touch any conductors, except in some cases where they intentionally work "live."
This is the truth. Aside from solar there are plenty of folks with backup generators that automatically come on whenever grid power fails. When maintenance crews came through my neighborhood to upgrade the old pole fixtures, they grounded out each block to keep any backfeed off what they were working on.
No, it's more than that, it's not just a safety feature that you could disable: the plug-in panels need an existing waveform to synchronize to, if the grid is dead they can't produce an AC voltage signal on their own.
We know how to make inverters that can produce an AC voltage on their own. It is not particularly difficult or expensive. The reason why we do not put those inverters in plug-in solar units is entirely because we don't want them to have that ability.
Nobody claimed we didn't know how. You're misunderstanding the point of these panels.
Problem is for most of USA utility scale = utility profit for share holders.
For example Duke is for profit here in Florida, and charges about 25% more per KWH than OUC that is a public utility.
This leads to pricing where on one street your power bill is $250, but one street over its $200, often coming from the exact same power plant.
It is easier to find a million people with a few hundred euros and a sunny balcony than finding one dude with a few hundred million euros and land on which building a solar farm is permitted.
I'm sure it's cheaper to somebody. But with home solar, I can actually cut my power bill by a noticeable fraction.
It's not and it will NEVER be.
Utility companies are not incentivized to lower prices because it means less money for them. Do you remember when power companies told people to conserve power and then people successfully did this? And then they raised rates because they weren't making enough money? This happens in California ALL THE TIME. I've lived here 30 years in Silicon Valley and it's the biggest scam that no one talks about. It happens with electricity and water. With water its even more egregious because they told us to conserve water because of the "drought" but once the drought was over, they raised rates because people weren't using enough water. My connection fee to water is over $100/month without spending a drop of water. That's why I stopped conserving water and water my lawn every single day because it turns out that my water costs are only about 1/3 of the actual water bill costs so fuck it!
It's the same playbook over and over again, there's no incentive to lower rates at all because it's an easy way to make money over an entire population of tens of millions of people.
Now PG&E is fighting to charge solar panel owners $100+/month just for the privilege of being connected to the grid. That would make having solar panels even more expensive than not having solar panels which is utter hypocrisy but no one seems to care or point this out. It's a complete and utter scam.
EDIT: I forgot to mention last year the rates were $0.37-0.45 per kWh, until this year when they implemented a base fee of $25/month, so they lowered it to $0.33-0.45/kWh. Rates in Nevada are 1/4 of that.
2015: $0.17-0.33 per kWh
2020: $0.24-0.38 per kWh
so prices have more than doubled in 10 years. Fucking criminals.
I live in Florida, and I'm building a water battery, so I can freeze it at night when electricity rates are cheap, and use it to cool the house during the day.
The day after the system goes live, they'll probably announce flat rates for any time of day, just to f' with me. :(
Where I live we have Time of Day electricity pricing where the prices jump 2-3x during high demand. Panels conveniently produce the most power around this time, so this can save people money.
We should build now in anticipation of drone warfare. Utility-scale solar is easier to take out. Same as natural disasters.
The more stable you think the future will be, the more you want to capture the efficiency of central power.
By that logic literally everything should be distributed. That's going to be a big undertaking to re-architect our entire civilian infrastructure against that.
I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, I just don't see society taking that measure until it's either 1) cheaper, or 2) the threat moves from being just a threat to reality.
> 2) the threat moves from being just a threat to reality.
Completely agree. But I'm already there. Large scale economic disruption has just started. For that to remain peaceful over the next few decades would be a miracle. So we should plan for disruption, for which energy decentralization is a keystone, and the technology to make it practical is here.
California has a 600 MW Virtual Power Plant composed of Tesla Powerwall batteries in 85k homes. Central control of distributed generation removes a lot of inefficiencies. Household excess is available to the whole system.
Has no one been paying attention to how Ukraine/Russia and now Iran has been targeting civilian infrastructure? All of Spain's electricity was down last year from a cyberattack. This is completely a new line of threat that we need to address.