Hybrid Car – More Fun with Less Gas

Figuring Output from a Given Surface Area - Page 4

register ::  Login Password  :: Lost Password?
Posted by Ron Rosenfeld on August 13, 2009, 10:20 am
 
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 23:31:46 +0100, Eeyore


I used the OP's figures for insolation.  It should have been obvious that I
have no way of checking his DATA.  And he asked to have his calculations
checked.


Again, I used the OP's figures.  If his data is incorrect ...  GIGO
--ron

Posted by stevey on August 16, 2009, 7:38 am
 
Cost per watt is a good metric for analyzing return on investment.
However, module cost only account for nominally 50% of system cost.
I could not locate a data-sheet at NanoSolar's website.  What is the
9.5% efficiency value?  Is it for DC or AC?   Your spreadsheet is
hard to read on my screen --column alignment is off.  Would you post
the analysis in .XLS or .CSV format?




    $

 572,520

 681,193

 727,578

 767,336

,332

 337,946

 217,346

 177,587

          5,631,108 $13,148.35   /y=
r



Posted by Eeyore on August 18, 2009, 3:19 am
 

stevey wrote:


There is no such thing as 'cost per watt' since the sun shines differently all
over the planet.

Learn some science.

Graham


--
due to the hugely increased level of spam please make the obvious adjustment to
my email address



Posted by stevey on August 18, 2009, 4:41 pm
 Hi Tom,

I took another look at your original message and can offer these
feedbacks:
  1.  Adjusting for temperature effect, the production values may be
~8% more.
  2.  Adjusting for AC efficiency, assuming all system degradations
result in 20% loss,
       The final yearly payback could be roughly 14% less than your
number, say $80K..
Your eventual payback period is probably 45+ years, much due to your
low kWh rates
and that you'll pay a professional contractor to design and construct
this 46500 m2
array site, at a cost of about $/W, not considering taxes,
incentives, maintenances.

Good Luck.
Steve   -aka solarMD  PVSleuth



Posted by Eeyore on August 19, 2009, 12:31 am
 

stevey wrote:


< snip >


That sounds quite likely. PV solar isn't pennies from heaven.

Graham

--
due to the hugely increased level of spam please make the obvious
adjustment to my email address



This Thread
Bookmark this thread:
 
 
 
 
 
 
  •  
  • Subject
  • Author
  • Date
please rate this thread