Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
CA renter
ParticipantTry 21st Century Insurance. I’ve been with them for decades, so not sure if that’s why we have such a good rate, but every other insurance company that I’ve called to compare rates has said that there was no way they could come anywhere near what we’re paying with 21st Century.
Participant[quote=AN]I’ve been enjoying my AC the last couple of days set at 72 degrees and loving it. AC + solar rocks. No longer have to worry about setting my AC at 72. I tried setting it at 78 for a short period today but was miserable, so I lowered it back to 72 shortly after.[/quote]
Amen to that! We keep our thermostat at 71; otherwise, it feels like we’re going to suffocate. As others have mentioned, A/C is necessary to dry things out as well as cool things down. Humidity is the worst, and it always feels humid around here.
We went for many years without A/C and used to drive all around the county on hot days just so we could be in the air conditioned car. This gave us lots of time to look at houses during the bubble. 🙂
Participant[quote=thebazman]I would be curious to know how many more investors, landlords, and vacation home / pied a terre` owners there are compared to the 50’s when homeowners primarily bought SFR’s for their families. I’m no economist or finance major but I’m sure this must have some effect on supply and demand for starter homes.
Who wouldn’t want to have their home make money for themselves during retirement or instead of 9-5 job?
FYI I had my chance to buy one in 2010. I’m sure there are many others who were too picky like myself and didn’t realize what a good opportunity that would be to combat rising rent prices in the future.[/quote]
We’ve been hearing about highly unusual numbers of “investors” in the RE market ever since the downturn began (technically, since the late 90s, which led to the beginning of the housing bubble). There are markets where the majority of sales are going to non-owner-occupiers.
This is not what housing should be used for, but it’s a manifestation of the highly manipulated credit and currency markets — which affect every other market.
But now that there is turmoil in currencies, commodities, and international bond and stock markets, we’ll get to see how leveraged some of these positions have been and how this might affect other types of markets around the world. It’s entirely possible that much of it is interconnected.
ParticipantA bit late to this thread, but having watched these cycles in LA, it was “different this time” back then, too.
In the 80s, we had the Japanese and the Iranians (TONS of money) pouring into the RE market. On the other side of BG’s interest rate issue were the creditors who were making 8-12% on their earnings, even in “safe” bonds and regular savings accounts! The stock market had started rising, and there was a general sense of panic as people were worried about inflation and being priced out of assets, so lots of people were heavily into buying real estate in those days, too.
Then, the market peaked in 1989/1990 (yes, it was a bubble), and prices fell anywhere from 30-50%, much like the crash in 2007-2009, even in some of the most desirable neighborhoods like Malibu and Beverly Hills.
There are a number of possible issues that could trigger another collapse. Our interest rates are near historical lows (meaning there is more room to the upside than downside), and national debt levels are so much higher now than they’ve been throughout most of our recent history…
https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/FDHBFRBN
https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GFDEGDQ188S
https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/TCMDO
With household debt being at rather low levels, interestingly enough…
Debt Service as a percentage of disposable personal income:
https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/TDSP
And HH debt to GDP:
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]I like Vermont and the philosophy there.
I heard that you are automatically opted out of junk mailing lists. It’s good that politicians are less beholden to business interests and care more about people.[/quote]
Agreed. And that is Bernie’s platform. I absolutely love the man.
Participant[quote=svelte]
Great catch, ocrenter. I suspect everyone was giving their size in DC – I know I was. the revised number for CAR is:
6.8 = 87.31 / 12.8
which brings it right in line with everyone else.
It does sound as if she has 40 panels if she has the 320w Kyoceras.
We have 40 panels also but use the 260w RECs. We’ve got room for 10+ more panels, but it is looking like that won’t be necessary. We’ve been pleased with our performance so far![/quote]
Those numbers make more sense, though it would have been nice to be #1! 😉 I’m still surprised that it’s in line with everyone else’s numbers because of our shade. Would have thought that would have cut our efficiency down by quite a bit, but the trees don’t shade it as much when the sun is at its northernost point. In a couple of months, the trees will probably bring our numbers down.
Yep, 40 panels, and room for more, but we shouldn’t need them, either.
Glad to hear they are working out so well for you, too, svelte.
Participant[quote=meadandale]They provide you both numbers, DC and AC-CEC.[/quote]
Yes, both numbers were in the contract details, which I had to break out in order to find the numbers, but the system was sold to us as an 11 kW solar system, and that’s what they have on the monitoring site, too — they don’t even mention the AC wattage on there. It’s strange that they would do this if the other companies are advertising in DC, but I do think that the AC numbers are better for the consumer since that’s what we use.
Participant[quote=ocrenter][quote=CA renter]
Good question! It’s 12,800 W DC, and 11,031 W AC. I used AC because when we were sold the system, it was sold as an 11 kW system. It’s also how it’s listed on Sullivan’s site. Would this explain the difference? Not sure how everyone else quoted theirs.
You’re probably right, OCR. If I calculate it based on the DC wattage, it’s more in line with everyone else’s numbers.
Sorry for the confusion, all.
Darn! I was hoping we’d be #1. :)[/quote]
Wow, that’s a huge system! 40 panels?! Did you cover your entire roof? 🙂
I’m surprised Sullivan would advertise and sell in AC, given the rest of the industry all sell in DC and therefore it would appear they would have a pricing disadvantage.[/quote]
Yes, it’s a huge system, but we have the dual pool pump issue — can’t fix that without tearing everything out of the concrete, according to what we were told. Before we moved into this house, we were working on it for a few months and the SDG&E bill on this house when it was empty was about the same as the one for our other house where we were living around the corner; the pool pumps seem to be the culprit, and we will be changing the main pump to a variable speed one when it gives up the ghost.
And after almost two decades of no A/C (we would drive around in our air conditioned car for hours on hot days, which gave us lots of time to look at real estate over those years), we finally got it when we bought this house and use it quite a bit…okay, we use it a lot. Our solar system was designed to cover ~100% of our usage.
Participant[quote=ocrenter][quote=CA renter]
I’m looking at the installer’s (Sullivan Solar Power) site. If there’s another way to find the info, please let me know because the numbers do indeed seem way too high (not that I’m complaining, if they’re right).
We have both west and south facing panels, with the majority facing west. And they do get shade at different times in the afternoon, and we do get some coastal fog since we’re about 6-7 miles from the coast (maybe a bit closer). They are Kyocera panels. We have string inverters — which I was lamenting until just reading this thread, if our numbers are correct.
For the record, 6/19/15 was our best production day so far.
These panels:
https://www.altestore.com/store/Solar-Panels/Kyocera-KD320GX-LFB-320W-27V-Solar-Panel/p10984/
I might call Sullivan on Monday to make sure these numbers are correct. Agree that this would be pretty strange. If they are right…WE’RE #1!!! :)[/quote]
CAR, did you quote your system size in AC or DC?[/quote]
Good question! It’s 12,800 W DC, and 11,031 W AC. I used AC because when we were sold the system, it was sold as an 11 kW system. It’s also how it’s listed on Sullivan’s site. Would this explain the difference? Not sure how everyone else quoted theirs.
You’re probably right, OCR. If I calculate it based on the DC wattage, it’s more in line with everyone else’s numbers.
Sorry for the confusion, all.
Darn! I was hoping we’d be #1. 🙂
Participant[quote=AN]Hmmm… we’re 5.6 miles from the coast. So our distance is about the same. I have a chimney that does shadow one of the panel part of the day. But I have micro-inverters, so it should be more efficient than string inverters.[/quote]
OCR might have figured out the reason for the discrepancy.
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]I would like Pope Francis to address the paradox of thrift.
CAr, if we all saved (consume less), we’d all be the poorer because the size of the economy would shrink at least 30%, as you put it.
I was having this conversation with a friend. He believes that if everyone worked harder and saved, we’ll be all the better. Not true, I pointed out. If everyone had perfectly good work ethics, we’d lose a lot jobs.
For example, around the house… If you cook your own food, cut your own hair, do you own repairs, clean your own house, etc… you can dispense of many services. That’s good for you, but bad for the economy.
Nobody wants to deal with it, but there’s a conflict between economic growth (human well-being as defined in economic terms) and conservation.
About granite countertops. These days, china produces so much of it that prices are the same as Formica now. The giant diamond saws can slice through granite rock like butter. Just think how granite countertop prices have dropped in the last couple decades, despite increasing demand. The material is taken for granted now.[/quote]
This is precisely why we have to look at alternative ways to manage our economy and our global resources. The way it’s going is not sustainable.
As for those granite countertops, it’s not the price that was/is the problem. The problem is that many Americans will throw away perfectly good cabinets and countertops just because their existing ones are “outdated” (lordy, how I hate that word). Do you think it’s ecologically sound to mine for granite and ship this heavy material overseas, or even around the country, when it’s completely unnecessary? Not to mention that waste that’s created when old stuff is torn out and discarded because it’s “old.”
Yes, labor specialization is more efficient and it adds to the GDP and tax base because we create transactions out of thin air. It’s like my arguments about “women’s work.” Why is childcare valuable when you’re doing it for someone else’s child, but not when you’re doing it for your own child? Why is fixing your car valuable when you’re doing it for someone else, but not when you’re doing it for yourself? It’s not that people are doing more work, it’s just that the work has been commoditized.
By forcing people to trade everything instead of doing things for themselves, we DO make things more efficient, but we lose the ability to do things for oneself (back in the day, people knew how to fix cars, build houses, make and fix basic machines, etc.) and taxes us for doing the same work as we were doing before, without being taxed. It enables a central power to control the economy and the labor force in ways that they never could if everyone worked independently and in a self-sustaining manner.
Not advocating a return to a craftsman/agrarian lifestyle, but just stating that much of the “growth” in our economy isn’t really growth, but the movement of labor from the individual to the corporate model.
ParticipantBumping this thread because he is now running for president and is drawing incredibly enthusiastic and large crowds at his events.
Read about his priorities on the right-hand side of his site. Discuss…
Participant[quote=svelte][quote=CA renter][quote=svelte]Got 71.1 kwh yesterday with 10.4 kw system.
Let’s see how they compare
6.83 = 71.1/10.4 – svelte
6.66 = 35/5.25 – ocrenter
7.01 = 31.54/4.5 – montana
6.5 = 24.7/3.8 – ANMontana, looks like you’ve done best so far!
Also interesting that our results are so close together…looks like one can expect between 6.5 and 7 hours of energy on the BEST day of the year…
That’s probably on a crystal clear long day with zero clouds. Worst day will be much harder to compare apples to apples, since clouds will vary over the different homes.[/quote]
On Friday, June 19th, we generated 87.31 kWh with an 11 kW system. On Saturday, June 20th, we generated 84.3 kWh. We’re about 6-7 miles from the coast and the panels are new (within the last year). I’m surprised our generation is so good because we have trees that shade the panels during part of the day, and we also get the coastal influence. Must be the orientation or the panel/inverter types(?).[/quote]
I just checked. I got 71.98 on Friday
6.92 = 71.9 / 10.4
7.93 = 87.31 / 11Yours is way higher than the numbers others have posted.
Not sure the reason…a few possibilities:
(a) do your panels point due south? Supposedly the best orientation
(b) I have noticed inconsistencies in the energy reported, on the order of 3 to 4 kwh per day. For example, checking two sites for my house on Friday:
– My installation company’s website (sunrun) reports I generated 69 kwh
– My equipment company’s website (solaredge) reports I generated 71.98That’s a difference of about 3 kwh.
How are you determining how much you generated?[/quote]
I’m looking at the installer’s (Sullivan Solar Power) site. If there’s another way to find the info, please let me know because the numbers do indeed seem way too high (not that I’m complaining, if they’re right).
We have both west and south facing panels, with the majority facing west. And they do get shade at different times in the afternoon, and we do get some coastal fog since we’re about 6-7 miles from the coast (maybe a bit closer). They are Kyocera panels. We have string inverters — which I was lamenting until just reading this thread, if our numbers are correct.
For the record, 6/19/15 was our best production day so far.
These panels:
https://www.altestore.com/store/Solar-Panels/Kyocera-KD320GX-LFB-320W-27V-Solar-Panel/p10984/
I might call Sullivan on Monday to make sure these numbers are correct. Agree that this would be pretty strange. If they are right…WE’RE #1!!! 🙂
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]I don’t think it’s planned obsolescence as much as technological advancement that comoditize things.
Take granite countertops. It used to be that only the richest could afford them. But now people don’t think twice about remodeling. You’ll probably remodel you house several times.
Plus there is culture that makes us desire new things.[/quote]
Yes, it’s planned obsolescence; those “advancements” you’re referring to are usually superficial tweaks to an already existing technology that are designed specifically to get the sheeple lined up to buy more, more, more. It is incredibly wasteful and polluting.
Why do you think that granite countertops are an improvement? Most of us lived with Formica or tile countertops for decades, and are none the worse for it.
This “culture” you speak of is manufactured, and it’s one of the biggest environmental problems in our society. Everything should be made to last as long as possible. If we did this, I’m willing to bet that we could cut our pollution going forward by at least 30%, and probably closer to 60%, IMHO.
-
AuthorPosts
