Quote from: MeltManBob on May 10, 2013, 12:07:01 AM

....omitted for brevity

The red tape is annoying, but I can see the purpose of a lot of it. The idea is to get people to do low cost/no cost upgrades to their home--like getting a programmable thermostat or being more aware of "vampire" loads (flat panel TVs, Blu-Rays, coffee makers, microwaves--basically anything with a clock on it unnecessarily). I also read something about how Germany cut out a lot of their red tape to allow more people got solar installed on their house. This is one instance of the US federal gov't having less red tape than some of the individual state governments.

Quote from: firefop on May 10, 2013, 02:26:22 AM

....omitted for brevity

I love these ideas, thank you very much. If I had to size either an off-grid or a hybrid system for someone, the size of the inverter necessary to power their loads would dictate the number of panels and batteries needed for their system.

In very general terms, here's how it would work for a hybrid system where I live (in the eastern US): I decide which of the outlets in my house I want to serve using my solar panels and batteries. Ideally I determine a "comfort room," something with a few lights, maybe the plugs with tv/cable modem or dsl (comfort and communications). The big questions is: do I need a window air conditioning unit? Once I decide, I get an electrician to wire a sub-panel next to my main service panel. This sub-panel is hooked to an inverter/charger unit. This unit charges my battery bank in one of two ways: (a) the batteries are charged from the solar panels when possible (aka the sun is shining), or (b) the inverter/charger unit will charge the batteries from the grid if solar power is unavailable and the batteries get too low.

This way I save on electricity bills each month by powering some/most of my house with the electricity stored in the batteries generated from solar panels, while at the same time providing backup power to my household during times of grid outages. It's a very popular package (and much less expensive).

Each household has its own questions but if it's me:
1500 sq ft row house, front faces south
Back room is fully insulated on a slab of concrete with only east and north facing windows
Cable modem and wifi located in adjacent closet, refrigerator very close in next room...

This back room is the easiest room to cool in the summer, so it would be a no-brainer to hook up the sub-panel to the outlets here.
Six batteries would be overkill for my needs--I could probably get away with 2. Knowing that, I would likely go with 3 or 4 just to be safe. Ideally I want to have 3 or more days of electricity in case there is no grid power. Solar panels will help replenish what's in the batteries, but for every kwh discharged, I need to put back between 1.1 and 1.35 kwh (in other words, 110% to 135% of what was expended, depending on the battery).

I would need to do a projected usage for each appliance, but if I had a window A/C unit running, my system wouldn't last very long. To be perfectly honest, when the grid goes down, it's all about conservation and making sure I don't let my batteries get too depleted--otherwise they won't come back. My refrigerator is my primary concern, but having a tv/radio in an extended emergency situation can make all the difference.

tl;dr Hybrid solar/battery systems are better and cheaper, but require more planning. Designate a comfort room for when the power goes out.

Cochese

Posts

Merits