Top
Best
New

Posted by bookofjoe 19 hours ago

Plug-In Solar Panels Starting to Sprout in U.S. Backyards(www.nytimes.com)
91 points | 87 comments
fooblaster 17 hours ago|
The thing we should be incentivizing people to use here are batteries, in the exact same configuration. We do not in many places, need more solar power generation, but we need devices that slurp down power at 2pm and dump it out in the three hours after sundown. Utilities should be paying anyone who dumps power to the grid at peak post-sundown demand hours, so that it is a no-brainer to install such a thing.
3eb7988a1663 16 hours ago||
A suggestion I liked was to time-shift water heaters as a thermal battery. Water heaters are a significant sink (~20%) of household energy. They are already installed and well insulated, you just want to over-heat them during cheap noon solar to off-set the heat losses over the day.
Steltek 46 minutes ago|||
This is basically how solar hot water heaters work today (I have one). They are superheated during the day (75C/170F) with a mixing valve to produce warm, but not scalding, water to the tap. The tanks are also oversized with a backup electric heater for the top half of the tank.

It works pretty well for my climate. I wonder how it compares to PV panels driving an electric heater though. Neither is going to work very well during the winter but the hydronic based system probably needs to get above some base level of solar input to meaningfully heat the water. Whereas PV will always produce some electricity in the winter which can always be converted to heat.

fooblaster 15 hours ago|||
this seems like it makes sense. how do you keep the dispensed water from being too hot? is there such a mechanism?
BostonEnginerd 15 hours ago|||
There are mixing valves which combine the too-hot water with cold tap water to produce hot water at a safe temperature.
kalleboo 10 hours ago||||
When we bought our house we had a heat pump water heater installed. The nominal tank water temperature is 80°C, and it mixes it to the desired temperature on output. It can also circulate water in a heat exchanger to keep your bath water from going luke-warm while you're in the bath.

We don't have solar but we do have a solar energy plan from our power company, so power during solar hours is charged at 0.5x rate in trade for the solar during the duck curve hours being 2x. So we have the hot water heater set to only heat during the solar hours and A/C set to shut off during duck curve hours.

This has resulted in our electricity costs for our house being lower than the combined electricity+gas costs for the apartment we lived in before (which was much smaller).

peokuk 15 hours ago||||
Mixing valve. Lets me use my water heater like it's 20 gallons larger than it actually is.
quickthrowman 14 hours ago|||
> It is increasingly common practice around the world to regulate the storage water temperature to above 60 °C (140 °F), and to circulate or distribute water at a temperature less than 50 °C (122 °F). Water above these temperatures can cause scald injuries. Many countries, states, or municipalities now require that the temperature of all bath water in newly built and extensively refurbished domestic properties be controlled to a maximum of 48 °C (118 °F). Installing thermostatic mixing valves can ensure that water is delivered at the required temperature, thereby reducing the risk of scalding accidents; it also reduces hot water consumption from a supply that is maintained at a higher temperature.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermostatic_mixing_valve

I see these a lot in commercial domestic hot water systems, a lot of them use steam or boiler loop water to heat the domestic hot water.

jonatron 17 hours ago|||
I'm getting a battery soon so I can get paid £1/kWh to dump power at specific times with axle energy https://vpp.axle.energy/landing
tialaramex 17 hours ago|||
Don't expect that to last. £1 per kWh = £1000 per MWh. Even when things went crazy as sanctions kicked in and Russia were attempting Blitzkrieg in Ukraine the wholesale prices never hit £1000 per MWh.

They say £1/kWh is a Beta price, that makes sense as a way to burn investor money to get people interested. Their real price is TBD. Would you take 25p per kWh with a £5 per month guarantee ? That could be at least in the ballpark of working.

jonatron 16 hours ago||
Well it's just a bonus on top, I'm not counting on it. Storing solar and backup is the primary reason for the battery. On June 24 at 19:00, agile octopus prices were about £0.85/kWh, there isn't a single simple price for electricity.
tialaramex 15 hours ago||
It's true that there isn't a "single simple price" but the only way you're getting more for your power than a wholesaler can sell it for is that they're paying far more than it's worth. Stability services aren't free, but we're not talking about a 10% premium here, closer to 10x
barbacoa 17 hours ago|||
Be careful with these kind of long term sell back agreements.

In the USA lots of early adopters of solar did so under net metering agreements where excess electricity is sold back at full price. After a number of years it was costing the utility companies too much money. So they updated the terms such that residents with solar buy electricity at retail prices (~$0.25) but sell it back at wholesale (~$0.04).

fooblaster 15 hours ago||
Yes, I think the key thing here to to not guarantee that pricing like they did in California over decades. Yes, the benefit will eventually be reduced. But that is considered success is it not?
barbacoa 15 hours ago||
>But that is considered success is it not?

Not if you took out a $50k loan for an early gen solar system and it now only saves $30 a month.

fooblaster 10 hours ago||
well, California currently is guaranteeing that benefit to nem 1 people for twenty years. I would much rather penalize those people than make everyone else pay a subsidy to them, as we are currently doing. They should bare the risk of their investment and get paid market rate.

My issue today is .. I cannot be paid market rate for giving back to the grid, even in hours when California needs the power.

r3trohack3r 17 hours ago|||
> batteries

Not exclusively. A few power companies (like SRP) innovated here with TOU plans that have variable costs throughout the day. You can save huge amounts of monthly spend by moving energy intensive work to off-peak hours and by “priming” things ahead of peak hours, like over-cooling your house ahead of the peak window.

The most costly part of an infrastructure build out is supporting peak-of-peak - that capacity exists year round to service the demand generated by peak mid-day usage during a heatwave in July.

If you can “lop off” that peak - it dramatically reduces the infra build out cost.

Peak-of-peak tends to correspond with sunny days: mid-day in summer. I could see battery-less solar being a useful tool there.

fooblaster 15 hours ago|||
related tangent: install costs of batteries and solar in California are insane. I recently had battery and solar installed, and labor and permitting were 60% the cost of the system. Systems without either of those markedly bring down the cost.
KennyBlanken 17 hours ago||
At least in the US, no, for one simple reason: grids in the US rarely to never have an excess amount of renewable generation capacity.

In my area natural gas is a consistent 40-60% of generated power, with solar rarely reaching more than about 30-35% at high noon in the summer.

Right now (as in at this very minute, high noon) in CA ~70% of the power being generated is renewable. That's 30% that could be solar, and isn't.

When there's excess renewable generation capacity (or about to be), sure, let's talk about installations for storing it.

In the meantime utilities are deploying battery systems for virtual grid inertia, to avoid having to use "peaker" plants, reliability when transmission lines go down, and for transmission line maintenance.

3eb7988a1663 16 hours ago|||
That might have to do with existing deal structures to maintain a non-renewable base load. Something like, if cloud cover/wind suddenly changes, we want to ensure there is already X% of natural gas running so there is a less sudden surge. There is a lot behind the scenes planning to try and ensure grid robustness.

California is certainly curtailing a lot of energy. EIA report[0] said 3.4 TWh in 2024, which was a 29% increase over 2023. If I am reading this[1] chart correctly, the 2024 California demand was ~275TWh.

CASIO also has pages dedicated to curtailment with much of the data available[2].

[0] https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=65364

[1] PDF https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024-11/2024_C...

[2] https://www.caiso.com/about/our-business/managing-the-evolvi...

coryrc 16 hours ago||
Standby generation -- "spinning reserve" -- doesn't count as generated energy, because it's not. Until you're at that point you still can reduce natural gas consumption with more renewable.
while_true_ 15 hours ago||||
California has huge amounts of excess renewable generation nearly every day, especially in spring and fall. Last April the grid operator curtailed 1.47 million MW/hrs of renewables, or about 2 GW per day. That's excess power the grid did not accept due to no demand. (source: https://www.caiso.com/documents/key-statistics-jul-2026.pdf)

In my mind the ideal solution is in addition to daily BESS time-shifting is seasonal time-shifting: long term storage of April excess for use in July.

rsynnott 1 hour ago|||
Is this curtailment due to overproduction, curtailment due to inadequate _grid_ capacity, or some mixture? In Ireland there's now a _lot_ of curtailment, but it's mostly driven by inadequate grid capacity (wind power in particular expanded quicker than the grid could).
fooblaster 15 hours ago|||
I think you had me until you mentioned long term storage. How do you store significant amounts of energy across seasons? I'm just not aware of anything other than pumped hydro power that has anywhere near the cap as capacity to do such a thing.
hdgvhicv 15 hours ago||
Green hydrogen. Generate hydrogen from water during excess times and convert back later on.
fooblaster 10 hours ago||
Is is actively done at scale? I suspect not given the amounts of batteries being installed.
hdgvhicv 3 hours ago||
No because there’s lower hanging fruit. We’re still burning dinosaurs on windy days and in summer, seasonal storage is a long way down the list.
ThatPlayer 16 hours ago|||
Generators don't ramp up/down immediately. Especially when peak power usage is 4-5pm, people getting off work, but also closer to sunset. That's a lot of power that needs to be generated immediately for stability.

More solar (without batteries) makes that worse.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_curve

bookofjoe 19 hours ago||
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/31/business/energy-environme...
domh 17 hours ago||
This is going to be made legal in the UK on the 27th August. Max 800w inspired by Germany. I'll definitely get some panels and see how they go.
micw 16 hours ago||
To be precise (Germany): 800W inverter, 2kWp solar panels (maximum 4 panels). This allows you to get the 800W during long periods of daylight (e.g. east/west configuration). You only need to add the installation to a public database and plug in the inverter. Before it was more complex (special plug needed, only 600W, need allowance from grid operator) and still we have ~1.5 GW installed plug-in solar plants. It's almost always a no-brainer, RoI is typically 3-4 years while the lifespan is 20 years.

Edit: My state had a subsidy of 300€ when I bought mine, so the RoI was instant ;-)

Lio 17 hours ago||
They're a no brainer especially if Lidl can nock them out for around £200 in the centre aisle.

Unfortunately for me my back garden has too much shade for panels and I don't think I could get away with them in the front.

So that leaves a roof top install and I think once you have scaffold that you might as well have a traditional install.

domh 17 hours ago||
Yeah I'm going to wait for lidl to do them, that's the plan anyway. Anything you can buy now is ~£600 (ecoflow is the brand I've seen). Hoping some others take the plunge first to provide some guidance.

Wish plugin batteries were part of it.

Lio 16 hours ago||
I think plugin batteries are coming too.

Right now (well 27th August) you can plug your inverter into a battery but you can't connect the battery to a ring main you have to connect devices directly to it.

That is under assessment though so there's a good chance they could copy the way Germany does it, just like they're doing with the panels.

mannyv 13 hours ago||
I have a two panel system, and the panels are about 430 watts each. Given the current ToD rates for electric, it will take years to pay back.

Microinverter: 400 Panels (used): 250 for both Cables: 50

I also picked up two LiFePo4 batteries and two Kasa smart plugs and time shifted my computing infrastructure's electricity usage. That made much more of a difference in my bill, since a few hundred watts moved to .09/kwh. If the bms was smarter i could charge the batteries with solar, but alas i can't cap the recharge current.

neves 17 hours ago||
Which are the high quality chinese brands of plug-in panels?
Lio 17 hours ago|
I've seen Ecoflow mentioned on YouTube but I don't know how reliable that is.
AuthAuth 16 hours ago||
This is in my opinion a bad solution to the problem of expensive energy or renewable transition. Having individuals start managing their power via plugin solar and plugin batteries creates a gap between the people who can afford it and those who cant. The people who cant afford it end up paying more for electricity.

A better solution is to do this on a local or federal government level and build the required amount of power.

triceratops 16 hours ago||
Energy is expensive due because demand exceeds supply. Individuals generating their own energy are increasing supply.

This is different from net metering at retail rates, which arguably does move costs from richer ratepayers to poorer ones.

AuthAuth 9 hours ago|||
The grid is made up of many different energy generating parts. Some are cheap to gen energy like solar others are expensive but consistent like gas. Utiliy companies sell the power to cover the costs of maintaining all these core parts of the grid. Personal solar decreases revenue because you have people generating energy and either using it or selling it back to the grid this is money that is taken away from grid maintenance. But when there is a low amount of solar they will all want to draw from the grid.

This puts extra burden on government/poor electricity buyers who cant afford solar to now cover the cost of the grid.

shostack 12 hours ago|||
Except California where it is expensive due to pg&e and corruption.
missedthecue 16 hours ago|||
I dont understand it. If most grid capacity is already installed, the people who don't build their own little island with solar and batteries end up being shrinking demand against a pool of fixed supply. Meaning their bills probably decrease.

There is the hiccup of universal distribution which needs regular maintenance, and is separate from electrical supply. But if this is remediated by charging solar owners base fees/connection fees, or if grid maintenance is only minority portion of electric utility bills (in the US it's about 40% with electricity production being 60%), the direction should still be poorer people proportionally benefitting.

AuthAuth 9 hours ago||
The power capacity is already built out. They shrink the demand(and revenue) of that built out capacity. But then when renewable power is bad they pop back onto the grid to spike demand.

The get to enjoy the best of all worlds free energy when its good and the safety of the grid while the grid gets the worst of all worlds a non paying household that will spike demand at the worst time.

grebc 16 hours ago|||
You basically kill any momentum of that happening in any reasonable timeframe the minute you said government.

In Australia there’s a ridiculous amount of household solar & now battery being installed. Despite all the attempts by companies/governments to do something, they just keep getting in the way of themselves.

I’m glad the option exists for people to go their own, that of course puts the bar at the individuals finances.

Lio 16 hours ago|||
Plugin solar is really cheap though. It's possible the price of an 800W kit drops to $200. That's really not a lot for something that could pay for itself in a year and keep saving you money for years to come.

Then there's the prospect of the price dropping even lower in the next few years. Imagine 800w kits for $100. How can you ignore something like that?

argentinian 16 hours ago|||
If demand decreases then that can cause energy to become cheaper.
AuthAuth 9 hours ago||
if demand drops to 0 you still need to pay money to run a power grid and the energy gen capacity.
AndrewDucker 15 hours ago||
How would this make it more expensive for people who can't?
syntaxing 13 hours ago|||
Because distribution prices are spread throughout the users. This is the case for policies that allow the rich to be completely off grid which is not the case here in the US (most cap off around 1500W).
AndrewDucker 7 hours ago||
Aah. Certainly over here in UK and Europe most people are using solar to reduce their usage of the grid but they're nowhere near going self-reliant, so they're still using the grid (and paying towards it).
AndrewDucker 7 hours ago|||
Aah.

Certainly over here in UK and Europe most people are using solar to reduce their usage of the grid but they're nowhere near going self-reliant, so they're still using the grid (and paying towards it).

KennyBlanken 17 hours ago||
The biggest obstacle to solar in the US: utility companies.

Ask anyone who has had a system installed. Your system can be totally compliant with national and state electrical code, installed by a competent installer using staff who are licensed electricians, get a stamp of approval from your own's inspectors - and the utility will refuse to connect it and insist you meet an additional set of their own conditions.

And there's nothing you can do about it. No appeals, no review process, nothing.

It's not even consistent, with utilities seeming to just obstruct for the sake of obstructing. Over and over I've of systems going in, the utility comes out (eventually) to inspect, refuses to connect. They're called back out, nothing has changed, and the system gets approved.

This is legislatures getting tired of all that power company bullshit, and bypassing them. As balcony solar rules hit state legislatures, expect some really absurd scare campaigns by power companies, and lots of lobbying.

Power companies see every solar panel they don't own as a threat to the profits they make on their fossil fuel power plants.

cortesoft 16 hours ago||
> Ask anyone who has had a system installed. Your system can be totally compliant with national and state electrical code, installed by a competent installer using staff who are licensed electricians, get a stamp of approval from your own's inspectors - and the utility will refuse to connect it and insist you meet an additional set of their own conditions.

Well, I am someone who had a system installed… I have a 14000 KwH per year system, and two 13 KwH batteries. It did take a while to get it inspected, which was annoying, although I was able to use it while I waited (I just couldn’t sent power to the power company until after), but they approved it the first time without any additional requirements.

What makes you so sure everyone has the experience you are talking about?

rcdemski 12 hours ago||
Same. I self-installed a 5.5kw solar system, fully permitted, in the Denver metro. The utility company (Xcel) had an easy online portal for submitting plans, a quick back and forth on system labeling - they wanted placards instead of stickers.

That took all of two weeks. To get their permission to operate, including having the city inspect my work and send the all clear to them.

jdyer9 9 hours ago||
Did you work with a company for plans and permitting? Been thinking about doing this and I'm also in CO
tzs 8 hours ago|||
It should be noted that if you are willing to forego selling excess solar power back to the grid you can bypass the need for inspection or approval from your utility.

Put some (or all) of your circuits on a transfer switch or generator interlock and connect your solar system to that.

Then legally your system is the same as a backup generator install. It should have permitting and inspection requirements similar to those of adding a circuit. That will just a city permit and a city inspection.

ademup 16 hours ago|||
A single counter example: In East Bay CA. I designed and built my 9kw solar roof installation myself. No electricians at all. The process was very easy and working with my city and power company was simple, with no blockers at all. 4 years running. On a yearly basis, we make over double what we use. It boggles my mind how solar isn't on every house in the country.
Panino 17 hours ago|||
> Ask anyone who has had a system installed.

This didn't happen to me or anyone else I know with rooftop solar in multiple states, and I've never heard of it. What citations do you have?

sfblah 16 hours ago||
You could do what I did and set up a zero net export system and just not tell the utility.
sixothree 17 hours ago||
Anyone have good suggestions for stands for 2-4 panels?
Lio 17 hours ago|
One thing I've read is that if you can dual sided panels mounted on a frame over white gravel and really boost secondary feed as much as 20 to 30%.

If they're mounted on a roof then obviously you can't benefit from that so it would be cheaper to go with single sided panels.

downrightmike 18 hours ago|
Let's just point out that it isn't about the line workers, it is about raising prices on consumers.

They'll replace the line worker at the drop of a hat, and fight tooth and nail to grow profits, that's just how corporations work.

More comments...