Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower

SunWize Builds 26-kW Residential Thin-film System in California

February 23, 2009 | 7 Comments

Do you like this news?

Bookmark

Feed

California, United States [RenewableEnergyWorld.com] SunWize Systems has completed a 24.6-kilowatt (kW) ground-mounted photovoltaic system at the David Page residence in Sky Valley, California. The system utilizes 410 Kaneka G-SA060 amorphous silicon modules, making it one of the largest installation of its kind in California.

"The David Page installation is a showcase for successfully applying thin-film to a residential application."

-- David Kaltsas, Executive VP, SunWize

The array size for the desert home in the Coachella Valley of Southern California is designed to provide 100% of the Page family’s requirement for electricity. The system could generate 50,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity annually.

"We are excited to be at the forefront of installing innovative thin-film module solutions,” said David Kaltsas, executive vice president of SunWize. “The David Page installation is a showcase for successfully applying thin-film to a residential application. It also exemplifies SunWize’s commitment to provide the customer with the best available solar electric solution by drawing from various resources across our entire organization.”

Solar Energy

7 Reader Comments

Comment
1 of 7

r-t-55471

February 23, 2009

I'm guessing the installation cost about $2M (round numbers, before getting other people to pay for it). How close am I?

Depending on how much the family uses and the deal with the electric company this could make money. Otherwise that's a REALLY big house :)

Comment
2 of 7

norcal-solar-pro-155549

February 23, 2009

R t:

A $2 million estimate is pretty high. That comes to $80/W and REW.com just posted a story on avg prices, with CA being around $8/W (see link below).

A better guess is $250,000 if it's ground mount, less if it's roof mount.

Note: the CA rebate is indeed financed by all rate payers (aka "other people") but only covers around 20-25% of the total cost, so this system was predominantly paid for with their own private money.

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2009/02/report-shows-significant-historical-reductions-in-solar-pv-costs

Comment
3 of 7

r-t-55471

February 24, 2009

I understand there are three types of rebates: federal, state, and local. Not everyone can get all of them, and other people certainly don't pay all of the cost, but it is our form of socialism - take from many and give to few.

Now that you make me look at my math again I am off by a decimal place. I was using $8M per Mw then decided 25K was a quarter of a meg. DOH! I don't know why I keep thinking I can do this stuff in my head.

Comment
4 of 7

peter-denholm-171603

February 25, 2009

I have read the country that is installing solar energy systems at a great pace is Germany. Sometimes the German engineers know what they are doing.

I read they also ofter big tax incentives to property owners who install home solar energy systems.

We have to reduce the demand on the power grid which is at a max, and reduce imports of oil. Solar and wind projects certainly will help.

I think the only way we will see an improved power grid and increased electrical generation in this country, is if the tax payers pay as usual.

Comment
5 of 7

john-harlan-81273

February 25, 2009

Judging from the 4KW the USFS installed at the Ti Bar Fire Station (component cost alone=$40K) year before last, one could make a wild guess that component costs alone could be in the range of $200K+.

Comment
6 of 7

r-t-55471

February 25, 2009

Ok, with a cost estimate of $210, 000 (only for the purpose of making the math easier), the estimate "The system could generate 50,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity annually.", and the use of 14 cents per KwHr I can do more math (obviously not my strong suit).

The 50K of KwHrs at 14 cents comes to $7K. Divide that into the $210K and you get a 30 year payback.

My math has a flaw or the justification for solar PV does.

Comment
7 of 7

ray-boggs-1416

February 27, 2009

With prices for high end, name brand high efficiency mono and polycrystalline complete solar systems well below $6.00 a watt installed for this size system Why in the world would anyone choose low efficiency thin film for a residential installation. And why 410 modules with all those interconnections when only it only would have taken (91) 270 watt polysilicon module for increased interconnection reliability ?? The Page family must have received a great deal to have chosen thin film over crystalline.

Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!