The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
  • Sections
    • Home
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Solar
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Wind
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Geothermal
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Bio
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Hydro
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Careers
    • Companies
      • Company Directory
      • Press Releases
      • Products
      • Events Calendar
      • White Papers
    • Webcasts
      • Upcoming Webcasts
      • Featured Webcasts
      • Archived Webcasts
      • Events Calendar
    • White Papers
    • Magazines
      • Renewable Energy World
      • Wind Technology
      • Large Scale Solar
      • Hydro Review
      • HRW - Hydro Review Worldwide
      • Renewable Energy World (North America Edition)
      • Photovoltaics World
    • Awards
  • Account
    • Sign In
    • Register
  • Search
Don't Miss The Great Solar Debate: Where Does the Global Solar Industry Stand? ×

Comparing Residential Solar Ownership to a Solar Lease

John Farrell
October 22, 2012  |  18 Comments

If you're in one of the larger solar markets in the country (California, New Jersey, etc) then "going solar" doesn't mean going it alone.  You can likely get a "zero money down" lease or some similar financing tool to reduce the upfront cost.  But is it worthwhile?  The following analysis, done for a friend in Ithaca, NY, provides some context.

Solar Economics in Ithaca, NY

Comparing solar ownership to a solar lease can be tricky.  The following analysis examines the value of owning a 5 kW solar PV system which can be used for comparison to a quote from a solar leasing company.  Overall, long-term solar ownership can be very profitable.

The comparison can be done in two ways. The first examines the cash flow of two options for paying for your own solar array: with all cash upfront or with a bank loan at 5% interest.  If you pay cash, you’ll be making money from day one, including all forecast maintenance costs.  If paying off debt, it will cost extra until the loan can be paid off in approximately 5 years.

We’re not taking into account what are called the “opportunity costs” of the investment, that is, the return it could earn if put into other types of investments.  Consumers rarely do this type of analysis, although businesses often do.  We are also not including any tax deduction for the interest paid if the solar array were financed with a home equity loan.

The second common way to evaluate an investment is to examine its return.  This can be used to compare it to other investments, like treasury securities, mutual funds, or stocks.   As we can see, the cash investment has a good return over 15 years, and both solar financing options provide a good return over 25 years.

Financial Measures of Project Value

Finance Type Years to Payback 15-year ROI 25-year ROI Profit/Loss at 15 years Profit/Loss at 25 years
Cash 10 9% 12.50% $5,000 $16,050
Debt (80% of total cost) 18 n/a 7.50% ($2,400) $8,650

Neither of these analyses take into account the increased appreciation of the home because of having a solar array.  A number of studies indicate that when selling the home one would get back a significant percentage of the installation value.

Comparison to Solar Leasing

Solar leasing offers several benefits over ownership, but also some potential liabilities.  Benefits include no maintenance (yearly cleaning, potential inverter replacement, etc) and little to no upfront investment.  But a solar lease should be examined closely and its assumptions compared to those in this analysis:

  • Projected Savings: How do projected savings compare to ownership?
  • Inflation Assumptions: A lease typically has two inflation rates, one for the lease payment (fixed) and one for the grid electricity price (a guess).  If the latter ends up being lower than forecast (I’ve seen them as high as 5%!), it can significantly reduce projected savings.
  • Lease End: What happens when the lease expires?  Can the system be purchased?  How does the purchase price compare to the projected savings to that point?  This is very important because of the potential value of the solar array to the resale price of the home.  Also one can inquire whether an inverter replacement already been done when the system is available for purchase.
  • Company History: Will the company be around in 10-15 years to fulfill their lease requirements?

In summary, comparing ownership to leasing isn’t easy, but this guide can help by comparing the economics and challenging the assumptions of the lease agreement. 

Assumptions for the Economics of Solar Ownership

Upfront Costs

Installed cost: $25,000
Combined incentives: $20,000
Total cost: $5,000

Ongoing Balance Sheet

Maintenance: $250 per year (including inverter replacement every 10-15 years)
Electricity savings: $838 in first year
Finance costs (if applicable): $2,600 per year for 10 years

Inflation, Financing, and Incentives

Estimated solar output: 5,776 kilowatt-hour per year for a 5 kW (DC) system
Estimated installed cost: $25,000 ($5 per Watt)
Federal incentive: 30% tax credit ($7,500)
State incentives: 25% tax credit on installed cost, up to $5,000; NYSERDA rebate of $1.50 per Watt ($7,500)
Electricity price inflation: 3% per year, starting at 14.5¢ per kilowatt-hour
Panel output decrease: 0.5% per year
Borrowing costs: 5% interest on 10-year, $20,000 loan.  Largely paid back in year 2 with incentives.

Sensitivity Analysis

What happens if our assumptions are wrong?  The following table compares the 15-year profitability of a PV system paid for with cash under different scenarios.

 

This post originally appeared on ILSR’s Energy Self-Reliant States blog.

Lead image: Solar panels on roof via Shutterstock

The information and views expressed in this blog post are solely those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyWorld.com or the companies that advertise on this Web site and other publications. This blog was posted directly by the author and was not reviewed for accuracy, spelling or grammar.

18 Comments

Register To Comment
Ray Boggs
Ray Boggs
November 1, 2012
Hi Donald, the customer's that I've talked to have told me that they were quoted rates in the 5% to 6% range and since it's an FHA product there are no points or junk fees. There is a limit on the amount of fees than can be collected. I'll call Admirals tomorrow and will confirm their rates. I do know that they offer a 1 year same as cash deal as well as a one time re-amortization where you can come back and apply your 30% tax credit and any other financial incentives to your loan balance and have your payment reduced based on the new loan amount. Also you only need a 650 credit score versus 700 for most leases. Yes, it is a second mortgage but you don't need any equity in your home and there's no appraisal necessary and the interest is probably tax deductable. In any event when you consider that most if not all of the leasing companies are inflating their system prices so that their investors get a higher tax credit, purchasing and owning a system at $3.65 installed before incentives would be a much better way to go. We received a request for a quote a couple of days ago from a customer that was a actually considering a 25 year leas at $141.00 per month on a 3.84kW system. $141.00 for 25 years came to $42,300.00 or $11.01 a watt and he won't even own it. Absolutely ridiculous!
Donald Kinda
Donald Kinda
November 1, 2012
To ray-boggs- Thanks for the quick response. I've already checked out Admirals, but with all their fees and high interest rates (9%),plus they put a 2nd on your home, they were way too expensive.
Donald Kinda
Donald Kinda
November 1, 2012
Many good comments here! To ray-boggs: Could you please provide information to the 0 down loans you mention? I'd love to look into one here in California!
ANONYMOUS
October 24, 2012
Leasing is NOT a great way for Americans to go solar. Now that low interest $0 down solar loans are available, leasing a solar system is one of the absolute worst ways to go solar. The leasing company will take your 30% federal tax credit and any other financial incentives. They will typically charge the consumer almost triple what you could have bought the system for. They will have the benefit of using your roof so that they can connect their solar system to your electric meter for the next 20 years while not even compensating you for it. And good luck ever selling your home. Nobody will want to buy your home and take over your remaining lease payments when they can buy a different home without a leased solar system and buy a brand new solar system and have it installed for so much less. And after paying 20 years worth of lease payments that will increase every year for 20 years because of the built in annual payment escalator clause you won't even own the system. It will still belong to the leasing company. And if you believe the leasing company's propaganda (myth) about all the maintenance that your system will need, I've got a bridge that I'd like to sell you. Remember, you'll be paying up to triple the cost for a leased system so you're actually paying for that maintenance and plus thousands of dollars more. The only people who believe that a solar lease is a great deal are the leasing company sales people and the unfortunate consumers who have been brainwashed by them. A $0 down solar LOAN that allows you to own the system at a much lower price and keep all of your incentives, now that genius. A solar lease is nothing but pure ignorance of the other much better financing options that are currently available.
Forrest Jones
Forrest Jones
October 24, 2012
The real question with solar leasing, is not whether the initial cost is less expensive, but rather "is the transaction legal and ethical." I consider it to be grossly unethical to: not give the customer a fair value for their electricity, telling the Govt that the installation cost more than it actually did (to get more of the 30% Tax Incentives), and to undercut the "Competitively Bid" Contractors by selling the lease/project to the Owner for $0.00 down. There is not a competitive bid with a lease, the competition is being undercut and Solar Leasing companies are falsifying the costs to the government. In reality, all of us tax payers are paying money into the pockets of the SolarCity and other Lease entities. It will ruin any competitive bidding in those areas, and all the other contractors will have to cheat also, to stay in business. The end result will be that the Govt may even take away the 30% Tax credit completely. I support the government on this one. Solar Leases are completely different than leasing equipment, an office or a car. The benefit (loop hole) that is being capitalized on, with the Solar Lease, is the 30% Tax Credit. And even then, it is not the government that is being fleeced, but rather all of the Tax Payers. The author did a great job of comparing the fixed variables in the article above. There are many variables in guessing what rates will be in 20 years, maintenance, weather, etc. They cannot all be covered in a brief article. His numbers are good enough to show the comparison with an "Honest" Lease. The problem though is that the Solar Lease companies can't help but fleece the government.
Calvin Verdun
Calvin Verdun
October 24, 2012
Leasing is a great way for Americans to go solar no upfront cost and still receive the benefit of yearly savings, electric companies tier 3,4 and 5 are increasing not decreasing so locking in a low rate for the next 20 years is genius.
Ray Boggs
Ray Boggs
October 24, 2012
Solar maintenance is nothing but a myth that was created by the leasing companies to convince the public to sign their expensive lease contracts. With a $0 down solar lease for example, add up your lease payments and you'll typically find that you'll be paying triple the cost for a system when compared to buying. Even paying cash for a system from many leasing companies will typically cost you double. That's why several leasing companies are currently being investigated by the treasury department. If you're paying more that $3.65 per watt before incentives, for a name brand high performance solar system then you're probably paying too much. At that price you could easily pay for a maintenance agreement and own the system while pocketing thousands, even tens of thousands of dollars when compared to leasing. And don't forget about the new $0 down solar loans that are now available that allow you to keep the 30% federal tax credit and other financial incentives while owning your solar system.
ANONYMOUS
October 23, 2012
Leased solar is better than no solar, but compared to owning it is a ripoff... And I sell both.
Leasing gives tax breaks meant for homeowners to big corporations. It skims off homeowner value and also gives it to bankers. Not to mention extra inflated sales price to the installer. The monthly savings to the homeowner is typically $10 or $20. The supposed financial benefit is no, or little increase in monthly costs. But that part is all calculated from guesstimates that may, or may not pan out. At the end of the 20-year crap shoot you own nothing.Hopefully leasing will be gone soon and financing to own will really get competitive, cheaper and take off.
ANONYMOUS
October 23, 2012
Mr Farrell is clearly against solar leasing. This is apparent in his last article posted on this website calling out specifically SolarCity. The leasing is working and the higher costs compared to a purchase price includes overhead of skilled employees and maintenance over 20 years. Most people do not have 25000 or (5000 after rebates, that are going away by the way). So what's this guys real motivation behind these biased and slanted articles? That is what I think we should be asking.
V. Bruce Stenswick
V. Bruce Stenswick
October 23, 2012
Of course no one mentions climate change. We need enough solar to shut down all of our peaking power plants by 2040. I would like to say no matter what the cost, but with all the work being done on different aspects of energy, it may turn out some day that energy storage and a non-carbon generating capacity will be a better option.
ANONYMOUS
October 23, 2012
I have bee designing and selling solar systems for over 8 years now. We invest a lot of thought and spreadsheets into solar financial calculations and comparisons. Mr. Timmons, please purchase a new calculator or learn to use the one you have. Mr. Fortuna, you have the right idea. Mr. Berwind is correct that solar leasing is about change a lot. Many of us in solar have surmised for quite a while that SolarCity has been playing hard and fast with accounting and IRS rules. I hope the Feds straighten them out so everyone's tax dollars are no longer misappropriated and our solar sales playing field is leveled.
PHIL KLEVORICK
PHIL KLEVORICK
October 23, 2012
and here I actually thought this article was comparing lease vs ownership of residential solar. I feel like I was just spammed! Who does qaulity control here Mr/Mrs Editor? NOTHING in this article remotely resembled the title. too bad.
ANONYMOUS
October 23, 2012
I agree that this article does not deliver....
Steve Fortuna
Steve Fortuna
October 23, 2012
Mr. Timmons,

In the Ithaca example, the purchase numbers and incentives are spot on, but the article tends to ignore the inflation variable on avoided electricity costs by comparing ALL production to TODAY's CURRENT ELECTRICITY VALUE. This is short sighted. Most utilities have experienced a 5% annual inflation rate over the past decade - some more. Even if inflation were calculated at a HISTORICALLY LOW 3%, today's 14.5 cent avoided utility kWH will be 40.7 cents in 25 years. 2012's $838 annual savings becomes $1,807 in 2037, and total saving over 25 years would be $34,114. If you bought a 25 year, $25,000 CD at your bank today, how much would you get in return, how much would it improve the resale value of your home, and how much would it improve the carbon footprint of your neighborhood? If someone offered you the option of pre-paying in 2012 dollars for all the food your family would eat in the next 25 years, would you consider it? I'm constantly amazed how seldom people value inflation (or currency devaluation) in their financial decisions. Solar has a long lifespan and should be evaluated with the same long-term criteria as other investments, including Net Present Value and Time Value of Money. What do you think the prices of coal, oil and natural gas will be in 25 years? Do you think Exxon shareholders aren't dreaming of $1,000 barrel oil prices?

I reject the claim that giving middle class homeowners a 30% ITC for investing in American Products and American installation is going to effect our deficit or tax burden. That 30% credit on direct investment feeds the economy in the exchange of goods, services and jobs FAR MORE than the 15% capital gains tax rate does on overseas investments. There is no mandate for financial institutions to plow profits back into the US economy, or to loan it to businesses. Banks are sitting on record cash, so invest in the middle class and let them get a break for products that create US jobs.
Joseph Berwind
Joseph Berwind
October 23, 2012
As many know, Solarcity Corp's IPO is perhaps the single most important event for solar in the USA, at least from a 'positive prospective' that is. The company's success or failure to raise money may be the ultimate arbiter of this author's post. First, SolarCity Inc. and other leasing companies have been issued with subpoenas by the US Department of Treasury. The Department of Treasury is investigating the companies' participation in the Section 1603 grant program. The report noted that if irregularities are found, the companies could be liable to pay damages. SolarCity, in its S-1 SEC filing, revealed that it had been subpoenaed in Jul 2012 – along with a significant number of other participants in the rooftop solar energy installation industry – to deliver documents to the Department of Treasury, which is investigating the companies' participation in the Section 1603 grant program. (PV Magazine, 12 Oct 2012). Second, Operating leases may be out year after next. The Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") and the International Accounting Standards Board ("IASB") are proposing dramatic changes to lease accounting rules that would virtually eliminate operating lease accounting treatment. The changes would affect all companies that lease real estate, and their company balance sheets, as a result of how leases would be classified under the proposed new rules as a capital lease transaction. A recent survey, conducted by accounting firm Grant Thornton of 2,800 businesses across the globe, found that 54% of businesses "are not aware of, and are therefore unprepared for, one of the most significant global accounting changes in the past decade: the virtual elimination of off-balance sheet leases." The Securities and Exchange Commission estimates that the accounting changes would lead public companies to put $1.3 trillion in leases on their balance sheets. The author seems to have skipped this "issue" which in and of itself would sink the solar leasing model.
Stepan Tatulian
Stepan Tatulian
October 23, 2012
The final part of this article, where the comparison and conclusions should be found, is missing, this is really a disappointing article.
Thomas Timmons
Thomas Timmons
October 22, 2012
The author is completely correct that solar economics is a tricky business. Living in Arizona, I have long been interested in solar energy, but after a long data analysis process, the best way I could wrap my head around the difficulty of determining the economics of residental solar (opportunity costs, inflation, projected energy prices, repairs, panel losses, lattitude) was to ignore the panels, and think of what you're really buying -- electricity. In this case, study, this owner is buying approzimately 144 megawatt hours worth of worth of electricity over the 25-year lifespan of the panels. The current retail price of this energy in Ithica is $20,160. Paying $25,000 out of pocket to buy that much energy is a pretty bad idea. Why would anyone do that? Well, having third parties pay for 80% of the cost of the installation will definitely helps. At $5,000 out of pocket, the deal is now pretty sweet. But just because I don't pay for the $20,000, doesn't mean it shouldn't be counted. Thats money the federal government, the state/local government and the local utilities could be spending on other priorities. The real question is: are the societal benefits of buying 5.76 megawatts of solar energy each year over the next 25 years really worth $25,000 today? Perhaps, but since society at large is paying the vast majority of these costs, any calculation needs to take in a lot more variables than just whether it makes sense to a homeowner who is only on the hook for 20% of the total. Don't get me wrong, I like residential solar, but until it costs less to build, install and maintain a solar power system than the cumulative value of the electricity it will generate, solar energy will not be a commercially viable industry. In this case, that should be between $2,500 and $3,000/Kw installed. We still have a little ways to go.
ANONYMOUS
October 22, 2012
This article did nothing to compare the actual costs of leasing vs. purchasing a residential solar system. It gave good information on costs of purchasing a solar system, but never even gave an example of a cost for leasing, instead it listed things to think about if considering leasing. A misleading title and a disappointing article.

Add Your Comments

To add your comments you must sign-in or create a free account.

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
John Farrell

John Farrell

John Farrell directs the Energy Self-Reliant States and Communities program at ILSR and he focuses on energy policy developments that best expand the benefits of local ownership and dispersed generation of renewable energy. His latest paper,...
  • About
  • Articles
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Create a free account and start adding your blogs.

Create an Account

Most Commented

  • 17
    The Economic Case for Divesting from Fossil Fuels
  • 12
    Breakdown: Penetration of Renewable Energy in Selected Markets
  • 11
    Fracking and Solar: Friends, Foes or the Bridge to Clean Energy Adoption?
  • 4
    China Solar Update: Trina Improves, Suntech Scores Extension, Beijing Awaits EU Tariff Decision

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • PLANSEE SE
  • Solectria Renewables LLC
  • EU PVSEC (European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition)
  • KACO new energy, Inc.
  • SolarEdge Technologies
  • Array Technologies
  • RBI Solar Inc.
  • Mersen (formerly Ferraz Shawmut)
News
  • Renewable Energy
  • Solar Energy
  • Wind Energy
  • Bioenergy
  • Geothermal Energy
  • Hyrdo Power
  • Blogs
  • Video
  • Finance
Resources
  • Companies
  • Products
  • Careers
  • Events
  • Webcasts
  • White Papers
  • Magazines
  • Press Releases
  • e-Newsletters
Company
  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising & Services
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Site Map
Network Partners - Magazines
  • Hydro Review Magazine
  • Hydro Review Worldwide Magazine
  • Renewable Energy World Magazine
Network Partners - Events
  • Power-Gen International
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India
  • HydroVision International
  • HydroVision Brazil
  • HydroVision India
  • HydroVision Russia
© Copyright 1999-2013 RenewableEnergyWorld.com - All rights reserved.
RenewableEnergyWorld.com - World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for news & Information