Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Tracy Sanders's avatar

I'm an engineer and have done my own engineering plans with economic impact assessment for different options in the same specific location. The project first started with the concept of having automatic failover power generation. It moved from natural gas to diesel because the utility companies cannot always keep nat gas flowing, especially in extended freezing weather. Just for some very rough numbers, the diesel generator project was $50,000. Solarization was around $120,000. Both options assumed I did 100% of the labor including concrete, trenching, electrical. What is interesting in the figures is that the diesel generator is not in lieu of utility power, so it's never going to generate ROI. It's only pure risk mitigation. Solar would be in lieu of utility power. I would never sell back power to the grid because of the evil agreements you must sign for that. I would rather invest in more batteries and retain my own power generation for later use than think I'm getting some value from selling it back to an untrustworthy counterparty.

I agree with you about localization on power. I prefer the route of hyper localization. Hyper localization meaning that sure you can source components from the U.S., but operations and service must be hyper local. A few years ago, I looked into a battery inverter solar system and there was only one that did not require a cloud controller connection.

All Generac generators require cloud controller and eliminate local MQTT control capability. Cummins on the other hand does allow for the interface to a no-cloud, no remote interference, no subscription fee piece of hardware. That hardware can be run in a hardened network configuration and is an owned device. No subscription. No cloud controller.

I have not done my project yet considering I have a ton of other things going on. Looking at the full project and time horizon based on constraints, the $2500 automatic failover natural gas generator looks like a good option.

So far I have some buildings running fully independent except in the winter when power consumption for heaters exceeds what the solar can provide. That is the kind of hyper local I'm talking about. I think that property owners need to look hard at localizing one building at a time. If they start small and grow, it becomes completely attainable.

One of my plans included a 40 ft shipping container and a utility building. Strictly using south-facing panels and surfaces, between the utility building and the shipping container, that provided enough roof surface to handle 22kw. True output becomes around 18 kW. The shipping container can be insulated well on the inside and be the hardened container for the battery units and power control/management equipment. There are always logistical challenges associated with running large enough wires back from the battery bank to replace the grid input.

Zoning has absolutely not caught up and I don't see it changing in our lifetime. It would require an allowance to have a property that had no electric utility hookup. As it is now, if you drop that, you can forget your occupancy permit. They will condemn your property and get the sheriff to throw you out of your own property. The interim period will likely require a full panel interrupt redirect like an ATS does. That way the property can claim that it still has utility power and you pay the $30/mo fee to simply have the glory of the spy meter there. But otherwise you are not consuming power from the grid.

No posts

Ready for more?