WrenchesI see this working south of the tropic of cancer but at 1000 watts per
meter squared tilted north might work for a month a year but I don't think the
tax credits were proposed for poor performance module installations. I see
enphase annual readings prove the point. Jerry
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Peter Parrish <[email protected]>
Date: 07/27/2015 7:21 PM (GMT-10:00)
To: 'RE-wrenches' <[email protected]>
Subject: [RE-wrenches] Using the North Facing Roof
I recently read a short piece that caught me up short, and I quote:
“The fast dropping cost of solar, while a huge boon to the adoption of solar
PV, has counter-intuitively altered design parameters. No longer is the
north-facing roof considered unusable because limited application in less-than
optimal orientations can still show a positive net benefit. Arrays are thus
designed now with elements or sub-arrays in these locations, increasing overall
kW installation while reducing the energy production per capacity installed.
This might have been anticipated based on sheer economic analysis from a users
perspective, but so long has solar been expensive that these less optimal
orientations were never seriously considered.” I doubt that the individual who
wrote this piece came to these conclusions him/herself. Does anyone know of a
recent article that argued this perspective? Is this an emerging design
practice? If so, I’d like to know more about it. - Peter Peter T.
Parrish, Ph.D.President, SolarGnosis1107 Fair Oaks Ave., Suite 351South
Pasadena, CA 91030(323) [email protected]
_______________________________________________
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
List Address: [email protected]
Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
List-Archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/maillist.html
List rules & etiquette:
www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
Check out or update participant bios:
www.members.re-wrenches.org
