Survey: Would You Go Solar If You Could Do It No Money Down?
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto 
on 08.19.08
In Connecticut, "low and moderate income" ($ 121,650 is moderate? Wow.) wage earners can get subsidies so that they can install complete solar photovoltaic systems with no money down. You still have to make payments on the system, but then again you are getting your electricity for free and may be even selling some back to the utility. The down payment is traditionally the barrier to most people- would you go for this if you could get it where you live?
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
no. I would get water heating panels which are twice as efficient, and I would (will) build them myself.
I want to say yes, but it would depend on a couple of factors.
What is the interest rate?
How long will I stay in the house? If I might be moving soon, is there a way to transfer the loan to the new owner, as there is with the deal California is adopting?
No, what would be interesting would be standardized solar equipment so a person could buy the basic inverter and two panels and then add a new panel every 3 months. Standardized quipment like everything else - circuit breakers, wall plugs, and switches. They are all the same - why not the solar panels too?
I have no desire to add that much debt to my bottom line.
We DO need to require solar in this country on all new construction. We DO need to offer gov't assistance programs so that everybody else with existing buildings can add it at affordable rates.
Would be MUCH cheaper than the money spent in Iraq on creating a stable regional "foothold" to protect and expand American interests (read install a gov't that will reliably sell us oil at reasonable prices).
Not until my electric co-op has a net metering agreement.
I would be more interested in alternative conservation systems instead of something geared specifically for solar. There are so many different solar energy systems and what might be optimal for semi-desert areas would not be the best choice for rain belt areas. Everyone seems to think that you have to purchase a pre-built system. There are ways of building and installing systems for your particular area that are easy to build yourself and inexpensive. There should also be property tax breaks for owners that install systems.
I would be more interested in alternative conservation systems instead of something geared specifically for solar. There are so many different solar energy systems and what might be optimal for semi-desert areas would not be the best choice for rain belt areas. Everyone seems to think that you have to purchase a pre-built system. There are ways of building and installing systems for your particular area that are easy to build yourself and inexpensive. There should also be property tax breaks for owners that install systems.
I would love to take advantage of an offer like this, but I dont believe we get enough sun in Seattle to make it worth while.
Given the low amounts of sunshine we get here, I would imagine the pay back period would be ridiculous.
Same problem with wind, there isnt enough wind to justify wind turbines either :(
The only resource we have an abundance of is rain :(
I can imagine over the life of the 15 year loan that PV cell efficiencies are going to increase dramatically, leaving the owner with an outdated system rather quickly well before it's paid off.