The HTML title starts "The Landlord-Friendly...". It really depends on the landlord.
I like the idea of solar, and of backups, and of figuring out how to live comfortably in rentals, and of being mobile, but...
I'm pretty sure that my own real-life landlord would flip out, if he came to the door, and saw that charger box bolted to the wall, and the bare terminals of an Alibaba special "SCREMOWER" large lithium battery pack.
Before he even saw that cabling. Which I think (with those lengths, and tacked up like that) would be an electrical code violation here.
Would insurance even cover a fire?
Also, if there's later an expensive roof leak, there'd be questions about whether it had been caused by installation of the panels (even though no holes were drilled). And is there a liability risk if the panel gets blown off.
And would insurance cover any of that?
Were I in landlord's position myself, I'd have much of the same concerns.
As a landlord, I would not approve of this tomfoolery in any of my buildings.
Safety hazards I see include: Solar panels on the roof that aren’t bolted dow; I don’t care what wind speed they’re rated for. Wires running from them to the inside of the house not in conduit and not secured. A high energy battery pack not NRTL listed. Extension cords draped through the house permanently installed (within the expansive definition of permanently installed used by the NEC)
In addition running the wires in through a cracked window creates an unacceptable risk of water damage.
That said, it’s a cool project. Just do this in a barn you own not a house I own.
My question for you if you are a landlord at what price would a battery and solar system would make it profitable for you to install and then sell the electricity to the tenants. With the slowdown in ev cars as well as battery production increases as well as steep fall in solar wafer prices I think we are likely to see a big surge in home battery installations in the next 2-3 years.
The math really isn't that different from "should I install solar on my house". Although I live (and own rental properties) in an area with lots of sunshine, we also have relatively inexpensive electricity, about 15% cheaper than the US national average. Every time I look into solar, the answer is the same: it will take longer for it to pay off for me than the lifetime of the components. The only places around here where solar pays off is where the grid isn't already available, in which case the cost of solar installation often dwarfs the cost of extending the grid.
Even once solar makes sense for the house I live in, its a tougher sell in a rental: If I were to do install solar on a rental, there's the added complexity of "how do I charge the tenant for electricity?". I could not charge them, but have higher rent. But it takes a pretty sophisticated tenant to properly account for the value there, so that would make the units appear less price competitive than they actually are. I could install a meter and charge them the same way as a power company does. But does that make me a power company? Are there a bunch of new rules I would have to follow? What do I do if someone doesn't pay the bill? I'm sure I could figure it all out, but it makes the investment less attractive, which means the price of solar relative to buying from the grid has to be even better before I would go down that route.
This depends on the interest rate. Today there is a huge 30% federal tax credit that would take 1/3 off of any such installation. That said, the tax credit is still not enough to cover the price increases due to inflation and interest cost of financing a system. I spent a large amount of time trying to make this work this year, and it just feels foolish. You'd be buying really expensive energy just for the novelty of saying you have solar.
This. I had this grand plan to convert (almost) everything to electric and then install solar but it would take roughly 16 years to pay back the solar install based on our current electricity bill. Then I’ve tried to rationalize it based on added resale value, which, where we’re located, might command a small premium to the install price, but even that seems questionable and we don’t have any plan to move.
It seems like there are two justifications for solar if you’re on the grid. Either you want to do right by the environment (totally good, though very pricey, reason to do it!) or your electricity costs are very high. If there are others I’d love to understand them. Maybe if you’re a prepper (not making fun) then that’s another reason.
Someone on a forum I'm on has a solar setup because they have poor grid reliability. Solar + battery + transfer switch provides them with good availability.
It's way easier to capacity plan with a fuel based generator though. My 35kW generator can go at least several days on a 500 gal propane tank, regardless of weather. Potentially indefinitely if propane delivery is available, but I lose phone service when the power is out beyond 4 hours, so I'd have to venture out to get signal to call, and if power is out for more than a few days, the weather is probably pretty bad and delivery may not be available.
With a solar + battery system, handling potential multiday outages, I'd be concerned about my winter where there's less than 9 hours of daylight and it's often mostly overcast, and I'm running my heatpumps to warm the house. But if I have solar/battery capacity to make that work, I'm going to have way too much capacity for most of the year.
Solar + battery for grid backup makes more sense in places with shorter duration outages and were peak electricity use is in the summer rather than the winter.
Good point on grid reliability. It’s almost like our grid is too reliable because although we probably have an outage once or twice a year it’s so short duration that we don’t even lose perishables in the fridge or freezer <knocks on wood>. But certainly a great reason to do it if you’re blacked out for days multiple times per year.
With the way prices are dropping for solar and batteries I would recommend doing the calculation again 3-5 years from now as with the current cost trajectory specially if it is just 20-30% more expensive. I think even prices for electric appliances will drop as more people start to use electric appliances like heat pumps etc as they will also enjoy economies of scale and labour cost drop as more installers get used to working with them.
It’s a good call. One thing I struggle with, especially given recent times, is that the trades seem like they’ll only be getting more expensive so even though the material costs may drop the tradespeople will eat up that savings. It’s great for those professionals, of course, but as of late you would’ve been better off doing any project “yesterday” that requires a tradesperson rather than waiting until “tomorrow” (perhaps with the exception of when lumber prices were insane a couple of years back).
> If there are others I’d love to understand them.
In the past year or two we’ve had an eight day power outage, five day power outage, multiple 1-2 day power outages, and who knows how many hour-ish interruptions and gasoline or propane for the generator get expensive and inconvenient running it for long periods of time.
Our main limit to how long we can comfortably survive without power is that we’re on well and septic. Without power the pumps for both aren’t running so we have no running water and no sewer. We have bottled water on hand to at least cover drinking, but if we were to just shit in a hole outside we would basically just be dumping raw sewage into our water.
Local power generation and storage is very interesting to me.
Your comment nicely demonstrates the pitfalls of looking at everything through a financial lens. The point of backup power isn't as a financial investment, but rather providing your personal convenience/comfort/protection. So yes, buying a generator is spending money.
Financially, most likely he could have an even higher "ROI" with a much smaller solar battery (sized for the daily use of time shifting), plus a generator for long term outages. Unless your grid rates are such that you can buy electricity off peak, charge the battery, and then profitably sell it back to the grid (effectively operating your own small time distributed grid storage), sizing a battery to provide for multiple day outages is cost prohibitive.
The point of adding solar is you don't need a battery sized for multiple day outages, just enough to get you through the night. And instead of a generator which you need to spend money to maintain every year and otherwise just depreciates, you get solar panels which make you money every day.
If you have net metering, then buying a sizeable battery bank is in the same category as buying a generator - a depreciating asset mostly going unused.
If you don't have net metering, then you get bitten by needing to massively oversize your solar array to still fill the batteries on the worst case dim winter days, so that you can make it through the next night (likely powering necessary heating loads). That overproduction is then wasted on peak days unless you can find something clever to do with the excess electricity.
I'm sure there are other scenarios with time-varying electricity rates, but I'd think that calculation would be much closer to general time shifting with the backup power as an added benefit, rather than revolving around the backup power.
I think it would be interesting to consider partial or hybrid solutions, which may vary by climate zone. I.e. a solar battery setup that can cover typical day/night cycles with a tuned amount of excess, with some "survival" mode where you conserve battery charge for longer outages.
You'd need some pre-planning to segregate different circuits to do partial transfers and/or some smart appliances which can operate in reduced power modes. In the survival mode, maintain a critical baseload of lighting and food storage, perhaps even with some freeze-proofing heating mode that does not hit regular comfort targets. Use high-load equipment only when there is excess solar input beyond what is needed for battery maintenance etc.
You could also provide the right kind of exterior input to allow a portable generator to be added to the system in an emergency situation. This could support higher peak loads or recharge batteries when solar input is insufficient.
No heating loads, it's a natural gas furnace. Loads are just lights, furnace blower, and other ancillary loads.
It's not exactly the same as just adding battery backup, because the marginal cost of adding battery backup to a solar inverter is far lower than getting an inverter for just backup purposes, and solar allows a smaller battery.
While the article probably doesn’t use UL listed equipment, I’ve found that equipment exists that does such as eg4. They run 48v which makes it legal in addition to being Ul listed. It’s typically the installation between solar panels and power inverter/converter that needs to be up to code.
I can't even stop my family that lives with me from overloading crappy extension cords; most people, including my tenants, don't know enough to avoid overloading extension cords. Frankly, all extension cords with a NEMA 5-15 or 1-15 plug should be required to either be rated for 20A, or include over-current protection; and the fuses should be shaped to prevent you from putting an over-current fuse in the fuse holder. But alas it doesn't work that way in the US. (It does in some countries).
That said, I drive by all my properties periodically, and my property manager does annual walk through; large battery banks, excessive extension cords tacked to the walls, and solar panels sitting on the roof with wires run through a window would all get flagged in such a walkthrough, any my rental agreements allow me to require the tenant to correct unsafe conditions, which all of those are.
And I do have good insurance. There's a pervasive believe on HN that you can't get insurance that covers variations of not-to-code, not-properly-permitted, and/or not-done-by-licensed-electrician electrical installations. There very may well be insurance that excludes these things, but its easy to get insurance that covers those things, and mine does. If my tenants do dumb-ass stuff that burns the building down, I'm covered, even if that dumb-ass stuff involves electricity.
> Rent-seeking is the act of growing one's existing wealth by manipulating the social or political environment without creating new wealth. Rent-seeking activities have negative effects on the rest of society.
If you stop being a parasite perhaps one could afford a barn.
Despite the seeming equality, renting your property and “rent-seeking” are actually not the same thing. Housing requires maintenance, cleaning, repairs, and plenty other upkeep. The value of renting your property is not a result of manipulation of the social or political environment. Your angst is misplaced, though I feel for you. If there’s anything I can do to help let me know
"Just do this in a barn you own not a house I own."
Someday we'll wonder why we thought it was a good idea to make the need for shelter into an investment vehicle. Until then, I hope people use your properties as they see fit.
There are a lot of people that can afford to rent a house, but would not qualify for a mortgage to buy a house. If houses were not available to rent, there would be plenty of people unable to live in a house.
I'm in a fortunate situation where my landlord is not a slumlord. When things need looking into, it gets taken care of in a timely manner. I do not have any issue with someone choosing to have this as a business.
The GP's statement doesn't at all suggest that they're looking at this property as an investment vehicle; The house could be ROI-neutral and its owner would still not like to see it burn down from uninspected, unsafe electrical work.
That fact alone doesn't make it into an investment vehicle.
There's a set of circumstances that make it so. Low interest rates, being able to use leverage (borrow money, buy a house then rent it out), and higher-than-inflation price increase of houses.
Your rather carefully worked comment is being downvoted already. I agree with you, but I think that here, plenty of people have the dream of early retirement.
Don't get me wrong, I like that dream too. I just have my thoughts about the current housing market, which to me has aspects of an investment market.
there's nothing wrong with paying someone else to maintain your dwelling and dealing with capital costs. people don't have a problem with the market solutions to the basic right to food, for the most part.
The main problem comes with the unearned profit that comes from owning land that benefits from improvements made by others.
tldr: land value tax and less restrictive zoning yesterday
The extension cord "alternate electricity system" as they call it seems particularly harrowing. You had better make sure that you know what the load rating is on each of those cords and what they are going to be supplying (or better yet, just don't do this). Unlike household wiring, there will be no breakers.
The "load rating" on the cords exceeds the total power delivery capability of the system. It has its own circuit breakers.
The manufacturers are well aware of risks, for liability reasons if nothing else, and have contained them in the uniform-electrical-code mandated manner. The system is no more risky than any other plugged-in appliance. We don't need to invent problems. Extension cords are just extension cords.
no they're not. Not when you're dealing with potentially large loads. an extension cord rated for 13 amps with 16 gauge wiring, with a 110v dryer running on it, will cause a fire, sooner or later. A proper 10-gauge, 20 amp-rated extension cord will not.
that this system won't exceed ratings is a fair point, but extension cords are not just extension cords.
Obviously the extension cord you use needs to be rated for the power it carries. Anyone buying extension cords can see there are different sizes. They are well-labeled, and it is easy to look up the gauge needed for its length and what is to be plugged into it. A correctly-rated extension cord is no more hazardous than the same-rated Romex, and often cheaper.
All the appliances mentioned are rated to be used with appropriate extension cords, and cords are sold at retail for such use.
"obviously" is doing a lot of work there. What's obvious to you isn't obvious to the next guy, who's just going to look for the cheapest cord there is.
They're not well marked at Home Depot, you have to bother to look for the right gauge, the cables aren't even necessarily in the right place, and if you don't know jack about being an electrician, it's easy to buy a cheap 2-prong 18-gauge indoor-rated cable for use outside in a wildly inappropriate fashion. No one at Home Depot is going to stop you and ask what you're about to do with the cable.
yes, For people with half of a clue, it's possible to buy the right cable and be safe, but we have to plan for the lowest common denominator, and tell people that extension cords are just extension cords when they come in all sorts of flavors, some of which are happy to burn your house down, is irresponsible.
The store brand, which is general most prominent, gauge is color coded: 6AWG - Gray / 12AWG - Yellow / 14AWG - Pink / 16AWG - Orange. There's one exception to this where 14 AWG cable is using orange labeling normally used on 16AWG wire but that's the opposite of a safety issue.
And they have generally have the rated amperage for the length of the cable.
This all falls under "it is possible to kill yourself by stupidity", with nothing specific to powering appliances from a battery/inverter. People who take the initiative to set up such a system self-select for attention to detail. It is a lot easier to use the wrong cord with no battery system than with.
The extension cords mentioned are all interior-to-interior. There is no magickal difference between an extension-cord wire and a like-gauge Romex wire. The former bends easier.
I've run my share of long extension cords and chained power strips, running every which way, in both rentals and owned dwellings, powering space heaters and everything else. One thing you really need to watch out for is the connections - even a good tight plug+receptacle has higher resistances (electrical+thermal) than the cable itself or a hardwired terminal screw clamp. An older looser-fitting receptacle can make poor contact with higher resistance and even arcing, making a lot of heat. And also the risk of physical damage to the cable of an extension cord is generally higher. So do what you will, but make sure you're inspecting such runs often, especially for excessive temperature rise at the ends.
I always thought any concentration of power represents an opportunity for things to go off the rails; do you happen to have a citation for "not a fire hazard" that I could read up on?
That's actually one of my bigger concerns with these solar into battery stunts is where to place such a massive array of batteries such that if something caught fire it wouldn't take out my roof or other flamable stuff
Watch for RedFlow batteries, they are made of bromine liquid tracks which is a fire retardant. They’re big, not as cheap as Lithium batteries but can be charged and drained 100% repeatedly without damage. I’m hoping they can scale up manufacturing and lower pricing with time because it seems an option with plenty of desirable strengths in this kind of scenario.
Thanks for bringing those to my attention, that does sound like something that interests me. The "where can I buy" was notably absent from their website, but some further searching found a comment of someone who did find prices <https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2022/10/06/residential-flow-batt...> but it wasn't especially the price that made me pause as much as the assertion that the batteries have fluid pumps that must be kept running
Since I apparently couldn't buy one then it doesn't matter but I would need to further understand what happens <s>if</s>when those pumps fail
They have a YouTube channel with some case studies and discussions[1] the channel intro shows high level what the battery chemistry and mechanism is - pumping electrolyte past a membrane and either dissolving or precipitating Zinc + Bromine to charge/discharge. They seem to be making a 10kWh cell which they can stack into a shipping container sized larger cell, and then deploy those to make grid-scale storage, rather than home use. Presumably they have an answer for if all the pumps in all those containers need regular maintenance, but I haven't thought about that until now.
('liquid tracks' should have been 'liquid tanks' in my earlier comment).
LiFePo4[1] is not 100% safe but it's a much safer chemistry compared to the other common alternatives. This is because LiFePo4 chemistry isn't prone to thermal runaway.
Thermal runaway is really bad. Typical lithium rechargeable batteries can't handle overheating without starting a chain reaction: an uncontrollable thermal runaway followed by a literally inextinguishable inferno.
If you short circuit the LiFePo battery it still is going to turn into a welder. It can still start a fire. If you don't short circuit it, under normal conditions it shouldn't spontaneously combust.
1. Note: Confusingly LiFePo4 (Lithium Iron Phosphate) looks a lot like LiPo (Lithium Polymer), however, LiPo batteries are some of the most prone to fire while LiFe batteries are the least prone to fire.
> Rule 64-918 (1) further prohibits ESSs with storage capacity greater than 1 kWh or utilizing lithium-ion batteries from being installed in dwelling units.
The reasoning for that rule is "fire hazard". There is zero exceptions.
The 2024 edition has 2x 20kWh allowance in a 1h fire proof room spaced 1m apart. And you need a series of fire prevention tools like an extinguisher and such. But that is not yet implemented.
Yeah, I spent the money on good quality 12/3 extension cords that can safely pull more power than the circuit will deliver and have been quite happy with them. Being able to run a space heater off them is really nice in the winter.
Looking at the video, his apartments wiring probably dates to the 50’s or so. Which would be the norm here. Hard to do worse.
Most landlords here are pretty low maintenance (both ways) as long as you pay on time and willing to bend. Did not blink an eye when I asked to go roof WISP and drilled my own hole next to the cable line. No roof penetration so they didn’t care.
I’m thinking of asking about a weighted panel to cover the 4-9pm PG&E quadruple pricing via a LFP bank.
> Would insurance even cover a fire? ... And would insurance cover any of that? (leaks, etc.)
Yes. Insurance is a contract, and the standard insurance contracts used by nearly all insurers do not contain exclusions for permits, code violations, or things like this. They would absolutely not renew you after a loss caused by something like this, and would probably report the loss to the industry databases. Insurance companies will often try to impose liability on other parties when losses happen, but they don't sue their own customer, as the whole point of an insurance contract is that they are assuming liability for loss in exchange for your premium. (If you believe this to be otherwise, try to find a recorded instance of an insurer denying coverage for code violations or un-permitted work. I've never been able to do so, and would be very interested in reading the case study.)
If you want to be sure, just ask your insurer for a copy of your contact, and read it. They aren't that complex.
The haphazard cabling and use of potentially subpar cables to deliver power is a fire waiting to happen.
I wouldn’t condone this or any variation thereof that violates the NEC, a lot of liability is being assumed by doing this.
I realize not everyone can afford a new home but with the proper knowledge and tools you can make electrical changes to achieve your goals that can be reversed on move out.
I might have previously done things against my landlords wishes but it was done - and removed - professionally. The other option is to talk to your landlord and do it right, making it permanent upon your separation from the property.
Years ago I fantasized about making a transformer designed to pass through a window. One coil on the outside, one on the inside. Unfortunately I don’t think you can split the core of a transformer and still get anywhere near the efficiency
Also more recently I learned that these things can vibrate. Which would not be good for a window.
You’d be better off passing a wire ribbon around the sash.
Split transformers for power transmission exist, but are rare. Here's a 3 KW system used for non-contact charging of electric forklifts, industrial mobile robots, and such.[1] 93% efficiency claimed. Probably not worth the trouble just to get power through a window.
Yeah at certain points I thought they were trolling.
But still inspired me to perhaps to something like this that bypasses the meter and the city grid, but just a little more limited in scope than running duplicate wiring everywhere.
Wow... This should be added to the FAQ's under "Whats the catch?": At least a dozen code violations that risks burning down your/your landlord's property, serious injury or worse - loss of life - and opens yourself to VERY large liabilities.
A more proper way to do this would be to have one self contained outdoor box rated to contain high energy batteries, have your inverter and PDU as part of that package and then plug your the panels to that. When you have a power outage go out and grab your backup battery box. This eliminates the bulk of the issues.
Although, that raises the obvious solution that you could just spend a bit more money and get one of those self contained "battery generators", which have been properly engineered and designed, and are also pretty portable.
Another thing I would add is adding some sandbags to the solar panels so that they don't fly off the roof in a high wind scenario. Theres a reason why when doing a rooftop installation code will specify this if not being directly bolted. (Technically a structural engineer will need to do a load calculation, but for this size of install the risks are minimal compared to the risks inherent in the rest of the system)
All of the code/safety/landlord issues notwithstanding, the price is pretty incredible. If I plug my address into the PVWatts calculator, given the insane price increases from PG&E over the past few years, the payback period is one year. Beyond the fantastic economics, you're getting a decent emergency backup system that should cover at least your fridge, lights, and various electronics.
Tangent: can anybody recommend a hybrid invertor that can prioritize solar over grid _without also_ prioritizing battery over grid when solar isn't available?
Context: I have a solar + battery system for backup power purposes. We have long enough grid outages every so often that make it worthwhile, and I need to keep the batteries charged in preparation for those outages. However, 98% of the time the batteries are charged and the solar power is just being wasted (there is no grid tie back here); I'd like to actually use it. The invertor (which is cheap chinese) can prioritize "renewable over grid" and thus use the solar during the day, but in this mode it then uses the batteries at night, and recharges them from grid when it runs them down; this means lots of battery cycles and also potential for backup to be foiled if the grid goes down at the wrong time.
I have a similar Growatt from siganture solar. I'm pretty sure they're made by the same manufacturer as EG4. The cheaper one can do it, in a solar > utility > battery priority mode.
But depending on your solar panel and consistent power draw, I'd maybe use the solar > battery > utility mode. It'll let you set a point to switch from battery to utility, the highest at 95%. That way when your usage is below your solar generation, you can still use the solar to charge the battery.
A bit more wear and tear on the battery, but even less solar wasted. Assuming you can handle the batteries only being at 95% if you have an outage. If your usage is less than your solar generation, could even set it lower.
I've been looking at something similar but different. My grid is fine, but I want to be able to use the batteries based on my time-of-use plan prices. I have less solar panels, but would want to charge my battery using grid power when prices are lower.
Seconded. The thing I’m using here is basically an EG4 knock off and I copied the wiring from the Will Prowse EG4 3000W mobile solar power guide (linked under how to) - which makes me think it’s the same board inside.
Sunsynk will give you what you want. You can define a minimum battery level, after which it'll switch to grid if there is not enough solar to supply the load. If there is no grid then It'll continue to use battery until a final emergency cut-off that shuts the whole system down.
The battery setting can be configured on a timer, so you can have different cut-offs for dulifferent times of the day.
Can't second this enough. I have a Sunsynk inverter here in South Africa where we deal with multiple-daily grid outages. So the priority is always set (based on time of day) to keep the batteries charged "just in case". If Solar can't provide enough juice, it sucks from the grid.
The whole thing is actually quite elegant. It turns "electricity" into this fungible thing like it was supposed to be in the first place. More pro points, you can plug in an electric-start generator and configure it to start automatically as needed in order to supplement the solar. Going further still, you can plug in a wind-turbine and have it blend it into this whole system.
Makes me wish I could install a wind turbine on my roof. A fair bit of solar, coupled with a little bit of wind suddenly makes your batteries go a really long way towards being fully off-grid capable.
I have 1.2kW of used Sunpower panels I bought for $70/pop about 3 years ago. Buying decommissioned commercial install panels is insanely cost effective. It's crazy how cheap they go.
Yeah! The Sunpower T5s mentioned above are still performing at near-max performance as far as I can tell. Things like shading or dust will influence modern panels way more than their age at this point IMO. Past 20 years I don't know - but for the next 10 years, it's seems to be a pretty good hack :)
I suppose the same reason companies get rid of perfectly serviceable laptops and servers: depreciation and chasing after fractionally larger efficiencies.
Ya re-upping gov/state incentives is the theory I’ve heard in a few places. See e-bikes/EVs/general combustion leases where the same happens. Luckily, same as housing and transportation it dumps a bunch of lightly used but performant gear into the market for people like me.
My understanding is commercial installs are more sensitive to efficiency than consumers. I believe it's far more economical for them to squeeze everything they can out of an acreage than it is to simply build new. Between panels losing efficiency and newer, more efficient panels coming on the market, commercial installs tend to cycle out panels well before the end of their life.
This leaves a second-hand market with some pretty crazy discounts.
I’m surprised the landlord is ok with this. I understand the panels might be rated to withstand some amount of wind, but there’s a huge liability if this project lead to injury.
A good job was done considering the load on the indoor wiring, but the exposed wires on the outside of a building concern me. Typically wires have some level of insulation and/or conduit that reduces and contains the spread of fire. If wind did move the panels around, those wires could pull loose and start a fire.
SF does not perform frequent building inspection, but if an inspector saw this they would almost certainly cite that this violates building code. In the event of injury, insurance might not pay out given how this is setup.
Around the 2 minute mark in the video you can see he's ratchet strapped the panels together, and in turn that strap is attached to the roof (looks to be looped around a pipe?).
So he's not just relying on the wind rating of the panels.
A better and perhaps code compliant way to do this (this is sometimes done this way here in NL, no idea about the US) is to bolt the panels to e.g. an aluminum frame, which you'd then hold to the roof with ballast, e.g. cinder blocks or heavy yard tiles.
Depending on the panel area, frame and amount of ballast you can easily prove that there's no way the result would move due to weather, unless you were experiencing such apocalyptic winds that the house itself would be destroyed anyway.
My power is resold by the city so they don’t break it out, but a nearby county is 4.55c per kWh distribution charge and 5.96c per kWh generation charge.
> If you use very little on the residential schedule I think it can drop pretty low, probably around $0.15/kWh.
The lowest price on the PG&E tiered rate plan E1 (implied by the words "If you use very little ...") is $0.42/kWh. Even the most variable rate EV2A plan has an off-peak price of $0.35/kWh. I don't see any way to get a price of $0.15 kWh.
I can't work it out exactly without doing more research than is worth. As I said, the schedules are complex, maybe someone more versed in this can chime in.
Hopefully SF will finally manage to force PG&E to sell it the city's grid. I doubt it will lead to rates as low as Santa Clara's, though.
> I can't work it out exactly without doing more research than is worth. As I said, the schedules are complex, maybe someone more versed in this can chime in.
The $0.26/kWh is for the CARE program, which heavily discounts energy (30-35%) for low income people and families. It's not a rate available to most people.
Whereas the rates paid by those who have a municipally-owned utility (MOU) in CA (i.e. LADWP, SMUD, SVP) are actually 60% lower than those paid to investor-owned utilities (IOU) [1].
The municipal utility rates are lower because:
a) being owned by their municipalities, their primary incentive structure is to lower costs of reliable electricity for ratepayers, not to return a profit to shareholders.
b) IOUs generate profits for shareholders, and this profit is only generated - per regulation - as a percentage of capital expenditures.
c) PG&E and other IOUs must reduce the wildfire risk of their huge transmission and distribution networks, which operate in much more wildfire-prone parts of California than the municipal utilities (which are mostly urban). To achieve this, they tend to choose very expensive solutions (i.e. under-grounding transmission lines) since (b).
This results in all ratepayers in IOU territories paying much higher electricity rates, regardless of whether they are in a high fire-risk zone. If electricity rates were set based on highly localized wildfire risk, the rates would be even more divergent, sometimes in areas just a few miles apart (due to California's micro-climates). There would probably be tremendous outcry and anger, as nobody wants to pay for the risks associated with where they have chosen (or can afford to) live.
I agree with everything you posted. In SF's case, the city is hoping to turn CPSF into a full MOU.
For the time being, the lowest per-kWh rate in SF is based upon the CPSF discount, time-of-usage discount, below-baseline discount, winter discount, income discount, EV adjustment, and exact schedule chosen, plus the overhead effect of fixed fees and minus the special twice-yearly climate credits. Did I miss anything? :)
I have no idea what it is, but it's somewhere between my initial figure ($0.15) and yours ($0.35.)
I did a similar project in 2003, but obviously the technology has improved a lot since then. I've previously posted some details here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36000824
The thing that stood out to me about this project was the lack of any hardware to secure the panels to the roof, which is absolutely necessary to prevent wind damage.
I do not want to fight with the utility or the insurance for such work, but this made me think: Can I set up something (I have a house) in my backyard + frontyard to just charge my EV? Catch the sun when it can, and then charge the car when connected. My PG&E bill says 56% of my usage is from midnight to 6 AM which is just EV + fridge. Although I pay a low rate on that, but imagine dropping half of your usage.
I specifically pick out the EV as an example because by definition my system would never need to connect to the house or the grid, so I guess all I have is a disconnected battery (powerwall) to insure.
You _can_ do it, but EV charging is a big load for a few hours. That's not really what solar is good at. Solar likes smaller loads spread throughout the day.
If you go super cheap (the "$1000" system in the article), you'll be able to put a couple miles into the car in the afternoon on "level 1" charging. It's not nothing but it's not really practical for a car (but probably fine for an electric bike/moped). Also, most of the available power is unused since the battery is so small.
So you get a battery big enough to hold everything your panels can generate. You get a more powerful 240V inverter, a nice 8-10 kWh battery, and move to Southern California. With the best possible circumstances in July, you can fill up that battery every day, and add 19 miles to your car overnight.
Now you're at $10,000 for about 6,500 miles per year.
If the battery lasts 8 years (LFP can do 3000 cycles, 1 cycle per day = 8.2 years), you're paying 19¢/mile (and only if you use all of the power you generate).
Compare that to just plugging into the wall, which is 3-6¢/mile.
I would argue those prices a bit. A pair of 5kWh rackmount LFP batteries is only about $3,000. Assuming you're charging overnight, you can definitely get by with a 120V inverter like OP. Get a charger that does NEMA 5-20 for 16A and it'll transfer 10 kWh in 5 hours overnight fine.
I agree with your conclusion that wall is better though.
You might consider something on the opposite end of the spectrum, specifically net metering. If your grid connection is reliable, it's even more economical to get a solar system without batteries that feeds the grid. Where I'm located people pay the difference between the two without regard for when the power was generated or consumed. It also means your system is more efficient because there are no battery losses.
All the information I can find indicates that it remains available for new hookups. Of course, since April 2023, new hookups are under NEM 3.0, which is significantly less beneficial to the generator than earlier NEM programs.
I’ve been considering this for my home. I have solar already but with an EV my usage exceeds my generation. Second hand panels like this ones in this article are cheap. I could get a set of those and sting them into an EcoFlow Ultra which has the solar inverter and ~5kWh battery. Then plug an EVSE directly into the 240v plug on the eco flow. Eco flow also has an API so I could get fancy with the software and change what gets charged based on the car or battery charge levels.
It would cost ~$6K. I estimate I’d save about $1500/yr from my electric bill. ROI isn’t great but most home projects have an even worse ROI so I still might do it just for kicks. Would also be nice to have a big Eco Flow battery I could use for other stuff.
Yes very easy with a ground mount with 4 panels, a battery and inverter.
I should write an article about it because I had planned to build something myself and keep all equipment outside and build a small wooden enclosure away from the house for it.
My EV lives outside & right beneath the only safely accessible part of my roof to put solar on... so an explanation would be grand! My only issue is that I need solar->battery->car, as the car is at work 3/7 days...
I love this. I have been waiting for some sort of off grid solar kit that I can install "Ikea" install, i.e. with almost no idea about the matter take the instructions, plug and play.
For more money and less effort you can purchase a "solar generator". It's a funny name for something that's basically a battery + inverter + mppt, but "solar generator" is the best thing to punch into Google.
I love how clear and to the point this page/guide is. Beautifully summarizes the downsides as well as the upsides.
The system is even tempting to me as a homeowner not renter, but a similarly simple system that doesn't require running wires through the house might work better.
My question is if in a house a person plugs in a under rated extension cord into a normal powerpoint and connects equipment to the other end, such that the current exceeds the extension cords current rating , and a FIRE results, would the insurance company pay??? ( ie this is in a house without any of the this DIY solar. cables or battery etc) . would be interesting question.
No idea of the specifics. But a good heuristic to go off of is to assume that no they won't pay out if they can find anything that is remotely plausible to have been the cause or contributing factor.
I've lost 2 freezers worth of food in the last 25 years due to power outages. I have since purchased a battery that can run a freezer in summer for a few hours or a furnace fan in winter for several days for the next outage. Adding a solar panel so I can use that battery continuously wouldn't pay for the battery, but it'd sure offset it considerably.
You can do that so long as nobody else in the area affected by the outage had the same idea and got there before you.
The last major outage (due to an ice event), I hit the stores within the first hour of the outage and they were already cleaned out of water, propane, ice, and getting rapidly cleaned out of other supplies.
I really don't want to be rude here, but I live in a place where we constantly throw the frozen stuff outside into the snow when the power goes out, so I'm genuinely confused.
If it was an ice event, why would you have to travel to get ice?
I've lived in places where the "ice event" that caused the power to go out was freezing rain. That kind of ice can make trees heavy enough to lose limbs into power lines and makes roads slick enough for vehicles to crash into transformers and power poles (hence the power outages), without outdoor temperatures necessarily being cold enough to preserve frozen goods and without there being enough easily available ice outside (e.g. ~.5cm covering on all surfaces) to bring inside for stuffing the freezer.
That is almost exactly what happened here. We basically had sleet for about a full day, it was relentless. In an area that never snows and rarely freezes, a neighbor went actually ice skating down the street. I still have microspikes from my previous life in the mountains, and was one of few people who could get around confidently -- and even then, it was a bit sketchy here and there.
I've never seen anything like it. Individual blades of grass were embedded in solid capsules of ice. I regret not taking the time to get the camera out and do a bunch of photography, but I had my hands full the entire time.
A few nights later, the ice had barely begun to thaw, and then it refroze and then started snowing. I stood outside my home for a bit in the darkness, and listened to the sounds of tree limbs cracking, breaking, snapping, and crashing, like a steady rhythm, for a while. Just, "boom, crash. ... boom, crash. ... boom, crash. ..."
We're getting side-tracked a bit here. In this case: it happened in an area where most folks are accustomed to mild weather year-round and I don't recall seeing even a single box of food kept outside; I was out for propane, and only noted a few other things that got hard to find much more quickly than expected; the power outage itself lasted until long after the freezing conditions did, because the outage was caused by massive tree destruction that took out power infrastructure over a large area. This happened back in January and there are still cleanups happening here and there from it.
The bell curve for outages seemed to be a few days at the least, to about 5 to 10 days for most, to about three weeks for some in outlying areas. You can find some reasonable articles by searching for "2024 oregon ice storm".
In any case, point was, whatever supplies you think you'll need for an extended power outage are likely to become scarce really quickly.
The difference is the battery can engage automatically. Do you want to monitor for the rare, yet anticipatable event?
A self-critique: power outage isn't going to occur without notifying the person, except for maybe being out of town. That said, one less problem to solve in response to rare, anticipatable event.
Get a 12V power inverter and power it off and idling car, or even better an EV. The max draw for most fridges/freezers isn't very high actually, and the average load is very low.
Naw, fill it up with salty water bottles. Drive the phase change to happen well below 0 centigrade. 23% saltwater will help hold your freezer at -21C (which is probably too salty to freeze in most freezers, but you get the point).
When I last had a multi-day outage, we hooked our generator up to our freezer. We would run for one hour, then off for 3-4 hours. Also good schedule for making more coffee, charging phones, etc.
The bigger factor is that he's renting, and therefore whether the jurisdiction has net metering or not doesn't matter.
But he's in San Francisco and California does not have net metering. I've been considering doing something like this as any grid-tied system is about $3/W for power, plus $500/kWh for storage. But an off-grid system done on your own is about $0.60/W plus $200/kWh for storage.
It’s also a major pain in the ass in places where the grid isn’t exactly prepared for that. My parents are allowed to sell power from their EV installation. Their neighbor, who built a much smaller one a few months later, got denied.
You can buy 256Wh battery banks for around $150 now. You can pair them with a timer for charging/topping off at night when electricity is cheap. They even accept solar input.
Throw one in every room and between appliances like the fridge or oven. Now you have a UPS for your whole house and the cheapest energy rates throughout the day.
Do those have an inverter built in? If not, at $600/kWh very pricy compared to what this guy used at $190/kWh for batteries, or $360/kWh including the inverter:
If is he talking power bank, then big ones, usually called power stations, have inverters. But they can’t be used as UPS since they cut power when switching sources.
The all-in-one 3kW inverter/controller that he uses is for 110V AC output (using the 48V battery). In the article he linked to, the system uses an EG4 3000EHV-48 that also outputs 110V AC.
Are there equivalent all-in-ones that would provide 230/240V AC for use in Australia/New Zealand?
This is dangerous and illegal everywhere in the United States. DO NOT DO THIS!
All 50 states have adopted NFPA 70, the National Electric Code, and the linked article shows a bunch of things that absolutely DO require a permit and would absolutely FAIL to be approved:
First and foremost, running bare high voltage DC wires through an open window is in violation of a pile of building codes and very dangerous. The linked solar panels have an open circuit voltage of 64.8V, so with four of them in parallel there can be 260V of direct current. This can and will kill you, especially if you touch it in such a way where muscular tetanus prevents you from releasing the cable.
Electrical extension cords are intended to be temporary, and the article's use of them violates a bunch of codes. Here are some of the relevant ones:
400.10 Uses Permitted
(A) Uses
Flexible cords and flexible cables shall be used only for the following:
(1) Pendants.
(2) Wiring of luminaires.
(3) Connection of portable luminaires, portable and mobile signs, or appliances.
(4) Elevator cables.
(5) Wiring of cranes and hoists.
(6) Connection of utilization equipment to facilitate frequent interchange.
(7) Prevention of the transmission of noise or vibration.
(8) Appliances where the fastening means and mechanical connections are specifically designed to permit ready removal for maintenance and repair, and the appliance is intended or identified for flexible cord connection.
(9) Connection of moving parts.
(10) Where specifically permitted elsewhere in this Code.
(11) Between an existing receptacle outlet and an inlet, where the inlet provides power to an additional single receptacle outlet. The wiring interconnecting the inlet to the single receptacle outlet shall be a Chapter 3 wiring method. The inlet, receptacle outlet, and Chapter 3 wiring method, including the flexible cord and fittings, shall be a listed assembly specific for this application.
400.12 Uses Not Permitted
Unless specifically permitted in 400.10, flexible cables, flexible cord sets, and power supply cords shall not be used for the following:
(1) As a substitute for the fixed wiring of a structure
(2) Where run through holes in walls, structural ceilings, suspended ceilings, dropped ceilings, or floors
(3) Where run through doorways, windows, or similar openings
(4) Where attached to building surfaces
Exception to (4): Flexible cord and flexible cable shall be permitted to be attached to building surfaces in accordance with 368.56(B).
(5) Where concealed by walls, floors, or ceilings or located above suspended or dropped ceilings
Exception to (5): Flexible cord and flexible cable shall be permitted if contained within an enclosure for use in Other Spaces Used for Environmental Air as permitted by 300.22(C)(3).
(7) Where subject to physical damage
400.17 Protection From Damage
Flexible cords and flexible cables shall be protected by bushings or fittings where passing through holes in covers, outlet boxes, or similar enclosures.
You absolutely cannot and should not run bare wires through a window. This manages to violate basically all of Chapter 3 of the NEC:
300.3 Conductors
(A) Single Conductors
Single conductors specified in Table 310.104(A) shall only be installed where part of a recognized wiring method of Chapter 3.
300.4 Protection Against Physical Damage
Where subject to physical damage, conductors, raceways, and cables shall be protected.
300.6 Protection Against Corrosion and Deterioration
Raceways, cable trays, cablebus, auxiliary gutters, cable armor, boxes, cable sheathing, cabinets, elbows, couplings, fittings, supports, and support hardware shall be of materials suitable for the environment in which they are to be installed.
300.11 Securing and Supporting
(A) Secured in Place
Raceways, cable assemblies, boxes, cabinets, and fittings shall be securely fastened in place.
300.12 Mechanical Continuity — Raceways and Cables
Raceways, cable armors, and cable sheaths shall be continuous between cabinets, boxes, fittings, or other enclosures or outlets.
310.10 Uses Permitted
(C) Wet Locations
Insulated conductors and cables used in wet locations shall comply with one of the following:
Be moisture-impervious metal-sheathed
Be types MTW, RHW, RHW-2, TW, THW, THW-2, THHW, THWN, THWN-2, XHHW, XHHW-2, or ZW
Be of a type listed for use in wet locations
(D) Locations Exposed to Direct Sunlight
Insulated conductors or cables used where exposed to direct rays of the sun shall comply with (D)(1) or (D)(2):
Conductors and cables shall be listed, or listed and marked, as being sunlight resistant
Conductors and cables shall be covered with insulating material, such as tape or sleeving, that is listed, or listed and marked, as being sunlight resistant
Both the solar panels and the inverter are listed products and are required to be installed in accordance with their listings. In particular, this means they must be permanently fastened to the structure in the manner of the manufacturer's instructions.
110.3 Examination, Identification, Installation, Use, and Listing (Product Certification) of Equipment
(B) Installation and Use
Listed or labeled equipment shall be installed and used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing or labeling.
The solar panels must be fastened to the structure in a way that resists wind and weather loads. There are entire sections of the NEC and various IBC codes devoted to this.
Other various code sections that this would fail:
110.8 Wiring Methods
Only wiring methods recognized as suitable are included in this Code. The recognized methods of wiring shall be permitted to be installed in any type of building or occupancy, except as otherwise provided in this Code.
110.12 Mechanical Execution of Work
Electrical equipment shall be installed in a neat and workmanlike manner.
110.13 Mounting and Cooling of Equipment
(A) Mounting
Electrical equipment shall be firmly secured to the surface on which it is mounted. Wooden plugs driven into holes in masonry, concrete, plaster, or similar materials shall not be used.
110.26 Spaces About Electrical Equipment
Access and working space shall be provided and maintained about all electrical equipment to permit ready and safe operation and maintenance of such equipment.
(A) Working Space
Working space for equipment operating at 1000 volts, nominal, or less to ground and likely to require examination, adjustment, servicing, or maintenance while energized shall comply with the dimensions of 110.26(A)(1), (A)(2), (A)(3), and (A)(4) or as required or permitted elsewhere in this Code.
(B) Clear Spaces
Working space required by this section shall not be used for storage. When normally enclosed live parts are exposed for inspection or servicing, the working space, if in a passageway or general open space, shall be suitably guarded.
(E) Dedicated Equipment Space
All switchboards, switchgear, panelboards, and motor control centers shall be located in dedicated spaces and protected from damage.
(1) Indoor
Indoor installations shall comply with 110.26(E)(1)(a) through (E)(1)(d).
(a) Dedicated Electrical Space. The space equal to the width and depth of the equipment and extending from the floor to a height of 1.8 m (6 ft) above the equipment or to the structural ceiling, whichever is lower, shall be dedicated to the electrical installation. No piping, ducts, leak protection apparatus, or other equipment foreign to the electrical installation shall be located in this zone.
(2) Outdoor
Outdoor installations shall comply with 110.26(E)(2)(a) through (c).
(a) Installation Requirements. Outdoor electrical equipment shall be the following:
(1) Installed in identified enclosures
110.27 Guarding of Live Parts
(A) Live Parts Guarded Against Accidental Contact
Except as elsewhere required or permitted by this Code, live parts of electrical equipment operating at 50 to 1000 volts, nominal shall be guarded against accidental contact by approved enclosures or by any of the following means:
(1) By location in a room, vault, or similar enclosure that is accessible only to qualified persons.
(3) By location on a balcony, gallery, or platform elevated and arranged so as to exclude unqualified persons.
(4) By elevation above the floor or other working surface as follows:
A minimum of 2.5 m (8 ft) for 50 volts to 300 volts between ungrounded conductors
(B) Prevent Physical Damage
In locations where electrical equipment is likely to be exposed to physical damage, enclosures or guards shall be so arranged and of such strength as to prevent such damage.
Wires from panels in parallel will all be at, typically, 48VDC. Voltages add only when you wire in series. No "live parts" are exposed in modern systems.
The quoted regulations govern construction. Residents have much greater latitude. All the appliances mentioned are approved for use with rated extension cords.
Notably, even in construction/industrial settings, there are typically broad exemptions for 'low voltage' wiring[0], typically defined as < 50V or < 48V, justified because there is no/little 'hazard' associated with voltage that low. To wit you can, for instance, just duct tape/zip tie some flexible wire/cabling to the wall if it is only carrying e.g. a 5V power to a sensor, some LEDs, or other equipment. Which I have done and passed fire marshal inspection on multiple occasions in multiple jurisdictions[1].
The regs (and by extension a fire marshal) would probably be unhappy about the extension cord, but a. 'everyone does it'[2], b. 'surge protecting' cords are generally exempt (at least in my jurisdictions), and c. trivially rectified by hard wiring one or both ends of the extension cord to hard wire or create a 'wire + receptacle'.
[0]Current limitations, watt-hr limitations, etc. may apply in this case.
[1]Obligatory disclaimer: not advice, follow your local regulations, etc.
[2]The response would be a 'please fix this' and not fines or worse.
NEC chapter 7, article 720 covers wiring of less than 50V. It's important to note that elsewhere in the NEC and other codes, "low voltage" is defined as <600V, <1000V, or <2000V, depending on the code and code cycle.
Your fire marshal might have passed 5V cabling duct taped to a wall, but it would be in violation of 720.11:
720.11 Mechanical Execution of Work
Circuits operating at less than 50 volts shall be installed in a neat and workmanlike manner. Cables shall be supported by the building structure in such a manner that the cable will not be damaged by normal building use.
Good point about 'low voltage' -- which does not mean the same thing in all contexts.
>Circuits operating at less than 50 volts shall be installed in a neat and workmanlike manner. Cables shall be supported by the building structure in such a manner that the cable will not be damaged by normal building use.
The only possible violation of 720.11 for duct taping <50V cables to walls I can see is 'neat and workmanlike' which is vague at best; there is nothing intrinsically 'un-neat' about an attachment method unless maybe using like literal chewing gum or something else absurd or just categorically unfit for purpose. I'm hardly going to call it best practice, but duct taping a (small to modest-sized) zip-tied bundle of low voltage cables to say route it up and around a door is perfectly cromulent in my experience.
Likewise I'd feel perfectly comfortable (from both a safety and code/inspection perspective) supergluing cables to dry wall (on the more absurd end), or p clamp'ing w/ drywall screws, or using adhesive zip tie mounts, etc.
You're probably right, but just to rules lawyer this a bit for fun:
Flexible cords and flexible
cables shall be used only for
the following: [...] (9)
Connection of moving parts.
He could mount his panels on plywood on caster wheels, and then prevent excess moment by tying those "moving parts" by chain to cinder blocks.
The rules don't specify that you must have a reason that isn't dumb to make those parts move.
The "400.12 Uses Not Permitted" section gives the list in "400.10" a blanket exemption ("unless specifically permitted in 400.10"), and that's the section that would forbid running the wires through a window.
The rules specify equipment must be installed in a manner per its listing, and there are at least four nationwide codes that cover the attachment of solar panels. In California I would guess there are more, stricter codes (e.g. seismic).
Even if you managed to make the panels movable, this would fail 690 of the NEC:
690.31 Wiring Methods
(A) Wiring Systems
All raceway and cable wiring methods included in this Code, other wiring systems and fittings specifically listed for use in PV arrays, and wiring as part of a listed system shall be permitted. Where wiring devices with integral enclosures are used, sufficient length of cable shall be provided to facilitate replacement.
Where PV source and output circuits operating at voltages greater than 30 volts are installed in readily accessible locations, circuit conductors shall be guarded or installed in Type MC cable or in raceway. The ampacity of 105°C (221°F) and 125°C (257°F) conductors shall be permitted to be determined by Table 690.31(A)(b). For ambient temperatures greater than 30°C (86°F), the ampacities of these conductors shall be corrected in accordance with Table 690.31(A)(a).0
That entire section seems to hinge on a few conditions you might get out of. E.g. here the videos seems to show the maintenance access to a roof, is that a "readily accessible location"?
Even if that's the case it seems you could circumvent the rest by using lower voltage coming from the panels into the house.
- Install this equipment in a permanent manner consistent with its listings and all applicable codes. "Off-grid" does not mean "do whatever you want", it means you aren't connected to a fixed grid.
- Buy equipment that is designed (and listed) for portable PV storage. This would most commonly be used for RVs and the like, and would look more like a generator than a house panel. You still don't get to drape extension cords all over your home in lieu of permanent wiring if you do this.
- Start a company, design a product that can allow temporary whole-circuit backups without transfer switches and all the usual stuff, and somehow convince a NRTL to list it. Good luck.
If this is legal, it is excellent. When I remodelled our home some years ago, I had to rewire everything, including putting ethernet cables everywhere. It is not such a big deal if you are in the middle of it.
This reminds me of the time when I built a battery stereo power amplifier and then only used it a few times because I didn’t want to risk burning the apartment complex down. It was fun building it though.
Forget the landlord (who is already unlikely to give roof access, let alone run electrical wires outside), this immediately fails the WAF (wife acceptance factor) due to the hideous cable install.
Solar panels can sit in the sun without producing any power at all just fine. The sun will cause a voltage to develop on the solar panels output terminals, but if that voltage is not enough to cause current to flow, for example, because of battery charge controller is not drawing current, or because they’re not connected to anything, nothing bad happens.
I don't know if OP's inverter supports it (looking at the manual real quick shows that it should), but the one I have will let you set any loads to use the battery when it's fully charged. Then set a point when it'll switch off battery, say 90%, and use the excess solar (after loads) to charge the battery again. So keeping the battery between 90%-100%, while still using most of the solar.
I don't have any loads setup on mine because I don't want to run cables everywhere like that, so my battery just sits fully charged until I need it.
You should absolutely NEVER place solar panels directly upon a roof as many of the linked website photographs demonstrate.
Solar cells need ventilation on their undersides, and without it will rapidly be damaged (i.e. become more inefficient). Long-term, water trapped underneath may encourage shinglerot.
Hmm.. I wouldn't trust that "2,500W power distribution strip", or the extension cord itself, to actually be safe when you have a fridge, living room appliances and the induction cooktop pulling 1.2KW all at once. Fire waiting to happen.
Guess you're from the UK? I think it's one of the only places in the world that does that.
No, usually not, though better power strips will have one. But you don't need to go over the specified amps to cause a fire, there are multiple places that could overheat - extension cable, connections, solder points - while still being under the fuse rating if this thing is running at max power for a long time. The main job of a fuse is to protect against power surges / short circuits.
"We don't even notice power outages or public safety shut-offs anymore"
I don't notice these where I live, because they literally never happen. Are there really places in the first world in 2024 where blackouts still happen frequently?
"Frequently" is a bit subjective. This is one of those things where it might only happen in a specific area once every couple of years (for more than a few minutes or hours), but when it happens, it sticks around in people's memory -- usually because losing power is a great way to suddenly get a good look behind the facade of modern living.
Even people living in parts of California suffering under the reign of PG&E and their "power safety" shutoffs during potential fire events don't really experience prolonged, frequent outages, but they are a memorable nuisance (speaking as someone who lived in one of those areas).
That said, if you haven't experienced this yet, that's great, but it's likely that you will in the not-too-distant future. Power infrastructure almost everywhere is getting a bit wobbly for a couple of reasons: much of it is well beyond its originally designed lifetime, much of it hasn't been maintained as well as it should have been, and we are currently living through the disruptive effects of an increasingly unstable climate that have been predicted for decades. If your power comes from hydro, then freshwater ecosystems are experiencing deeper and longer drought cycles and the dam that provides that power is probably getting a bit old. If you live in a hurricane area, you're eventually going to get hit by a really bad one. If you live in an area that gets cold, you'll eventually get hit by a severe ice storm. If you live near a wooded area, it's going to burn. If you live deep in an urban setting and your power comes from a nuclear plant and everything has been well enough funded end-to-end to keep it in good working order, then congratulations, you probably won't experience any of these events directly.
But a lot of other people are, regardless of who they or their neighbors vote for.
I live in Boulder, Colorado. We had the Marshall Fire[1] a couple years ago, which burned down 1084 structures on a day with high winds. These winds are pretty normal around here on occasion, at least multiple times each year.
What's not normal is that last week, our utility (Xcel Energy) decided to preemptively shut off power to 55,000 customers to reduce risk before a forecasted wind event with high fire-risk[2]. They had intended to restore power the next day, but some went without power for a couple days.
The communication and execution of the shutdown seemed poor, and the infrastructure problems that led to the shutdown are still here. The impression I have from comments in local groups is that they are trying to avoid liability and have not adequately invested in fixing shoddy infrastructure that is going to be safe here. People are expecting regular shutoffs to become the new normal. Wind storms aren't going away, fixing the infrastructure would take a long time, and people don't think Xcel is interested in spending the money, even though they can likely afford to.
This has definitely left me thinking about a DIY battery+solar solution to keep my heating system running, as well as fridge/freezers.
I’m curious as to what the reasons for such regular shutoffs are. I’m now 24 years old and I cannot recall ever experiencing a power outage, ever. So either I’m extraordinarily lucky or they aren’t as common here
I live in rural CO, and we get them pretty regularly. Extreme weather is pretty common out here, and the infrastructure isn’t as redundant for the mountain communities (I assume due to the cost/benefit ratio of building new lines).
It’s not just power - we had a forest fire one year that burned a microwave tower & killed our cell phones _and_ internet for a week. The local businesses struggled for a day or two, because no one really carries cash anymore.
I should add that kind of like the OP, I added an enphase LiFePO4 house battery and panels. They’ll keep critical loads running basically indefinitely, which has been a welcome change. We have gas heat, but I used to get nervous in the winter when the power went out (our boiler requires electricity to run).
I live outside Seattle. We frequently get outages because trees fall on the lines. As most of where I live is glacier carved terrain, the soil conditions are very difficult for both undergrounding cables and for tree root establishment. When there is sustained heavy rains, the ground saturates, and if there are high winds afterwards, trees fall over.
I'm worse off than many, because I live on an island, and my electric service comes in across the water from a penisula. There's an awful lot of non-redundant paths through the penisula. On the island, there is no redundancy either, but there is a plan to create a ring between the three substations, which should help.
Most of my outages are only a few seconds. At the substation, they have reclosers [1], circuit breakers that will open when shorts or abnormal currents are detected, and then quickly reclose (thus the name) as many shorts are transient.
But when a tree falls on the line, that needs a truck rolled out to investigate, and often another one or two to repair. And conditions are similar across the area, so if one tree is on a line, there will be many. My local infrastructure is low priority because it serves few customers.
Ice storms are pretty nasty too, because then you've got potentially a lot more trees falling, and also hazardous road conditions that prevent or slow repair work.
When I lived in other places, power outages were much more rare. I would have never considered a whole house generator in those places, but I have one here and most of the houses I looked at had them. I would certainly install one if there wasn't one already.
I live in NJ in the US. The Emerald Ash Borer has decimated ash tree populations here, leaving millions of dead ash trees, many next to power lines. Electric companies are overwhelmed and slow to chop dead ones down.
Add in global warming bringing excessive intense rain storms to soften up the ground, and wind storms happening several times a year, and the result is we lose power at least once or twice a year. Some neighbors in very heavily wooded roads lose power 5+ times a year.
Not sure Spain can be considered a first world country but we small (5-10min) intermittent power outages in my neighborhood whenever there is sustained large amount of rain.
Funny enough, it seems to put the nearest cell phone antenas down as well as I can't even rely on tethering my mobile phone connection to work from home.
The private for-profit “utility” in California, PG&E, is extremely corrupt but voters can’t do anything about it because it’s a one-party state which means the only people that run for the opposition party are completely looney. Look up the history of the Paradise fire and “public safety power shutoffs”.
One party has nothing to do with itx it's more just standard PUC malfeasance and corruption which is endemic across the country. Ohio, for example, is anything but a one party state yet has legislators going to prison for being bribed by utilities to pass outrageous legislation.
Yes, much of the rural us east coast experiences a few a month. So many trees mean that even with continuous maintenance, odds are good that a storm or two a month will have an impact to at least some parts of any given service area.
Welcome to California, where the infrastructure is creaking and falling apart, power is unbelievably expensive, the housing is decrepit and eye-blistering expensive, and people just refuse to improve the system because they don't want more people to move here.
I had two 3 minute+ power drops yesterday. The local university lost power for 10+ hours, and scientists -80C freezers had to be emergency evacuated to other locations.
Calling California a “failed state” over this seems absurd when the most extreme example in recent history is the Texas freeze power outage in 2021 which left 4.5 million homes without power for several days during winter storms. Somewhere between 250-700 people died because of it.
It’s not the reason I call it a failed state but it does occur with more frequency than other states. It’s a matter of something that happens in an emergency vs ongoing issues.
Texas has the most number of outages in the last 20 years of all states, where an outage is defined by the DOE has a power failure affecting 50,000 people or more.
What is the reason, then, that California cannot be considered a first world state, and instead a failed state? And are there other states that used to have this designation, but have lost it in your view? Just curious.
Exploding deficits, tent cities, shit covered sidewalks, blackouts, palpable corruption, to name a few. No, I don’t think it’s limited to California, that state just kind of serves as a time machine for the rest of the country.
I like the idea of solar, and of backups, and of figuring out how to live comfortably in rentals, and of being mobile, but...
I'm pretty sure that my own real-life landlord would flip out, if he came to the door, and saw that charger box bolted to the wall, and the bare terminals of an Alibaba special "SCREMOWER" large lithium battery pack.
Before he even saw that cabling. Which I think (with those lengths, and tacked up like that) would be an electrical code violation here.
Would insurance even cover a fire?
Also, if there's later an expensive roof leak, there'd be questions about whether it had been caused by installation of the panels (even though no holes were drilled). And is there a liability risk if the panel gets blown off.
And would insurance cover any of that?
Were I in landlord's position myself, I'd have much of the same concerns.