Micha&Dany
2011-11-27 07:09:05
- #1
Hello Perlenmann,
Yes, I am pro photovoltaics because I am really convinced of it :)
But again: I know that with every system you have to calculate exactly whether the financial side really works.
The system availability says nothing about the yield, but about the downtime of the system. For example, if the inverter is defective or there is a power outage, then you cannot feed in anything. And at 97%, that means your system is off for a maximum of 11 days a year.
The orientation, and thus also the yield, are included in the 850 kWh / kWp*a (Ruhr area) I assumed. With poorer orientation, the value decreases - which of course changes the calculation and ultimately the return.
If you now have, for example, a strongly west-facing system and only reach (for example!) 700 kWh/kWp*a, then the system will not be worthwhile! (Then I wouldn’t build one either!)
And regarding the loan: I am not quite up to date anymore. I don’t know how banks handle it nowadays, but up to 2 years ago the banks accepted the system itself as collateral. And the loan could be serviced solely from the feed-in tariff. That means the system had no impact on your account in the first 12-14 years. What you earned from the system, you could pass 1:1 to the bank. Nothing more. So it financed itself.
But it may be that this has changed since then...
Best regards
Micha :cool:
Yes, I am pro photovoltaics because I am really convinced of it :)
But again: I know that with every system you have to calculate exactly whether the financial side really works.
The system availability says nothing about the yield, but about the downtime of the system. For example, if the inverter is defective or there is a power outage, then you cannot feed in anything. And at 97%, that means your system is off for a maximum of 11 days a year.
The orientation, and thus also the yield, are included in the 850 kWh / kWp*a (Ruhr area) I assumed. With poorer orientation, the value decreases - which of course changes the calculation and ultimately the return.
If you now have, for example, a strongly west-facing system and only reach (for example!) 700 kWh/kWp*a, then the system will not be worthwhile! (Then I wouldn’t build one either!)
And regarding the loan: I am not quite up to date anymore. I don’t know how banks handle it nowadays, but up to 2 years ago the banks accepted the system itself as collateral. And the loan could be serviced solely from the feed-in tariff. That means the system had no impact on your account in the first 12-14 years. What you earned from the system, you could pass 1:1 to the bank. Nothing more. So it financed itself.
But it may be that this has changed since then...
Best regards
Micha :cool: