12-29-2013, 09:08 AM
quote:
Originally posted by kalakoa
quote:
I spent $1800 to triple my admittedly puny original 720 watt array to 2160 watts.
At $1/W, more solar panels would be cheaper, without the need to maintain complicated mechanical tracking hardware.
Okay, I'm not getting pissy here, I'm just going to lay it out regarding what's best and what's not best.
Bottom line; It's all subjective to the situation and there are many potential variables regarding the matter, thus there is no "golden fact" applicable to every situation and the price of panels is only one aspect of the several possible aspects regarding the matter. If all solar panels fell to one cent a watt tomorrow, there will still be situations where having more than X array area is neither possible, desired or necessary and tracking is the best option. Giving up land for two very large arrays is not always practical to some nor is the expense and hassle in altering the layout of a current infrastructure to accommodate another monster array to gain the appropriate solar line of sight. Thus the expense be it the money in diverting a driveway, cutting down desired trees or what have you may still exceed the cost of a solar tracker even if the panels were free. Other considerations are light reflection from fixed panels that in some cases can damage nearby food crops etc. Solar trackers reflect light back at the sun and not someone's crops, car, house, etc. There's also the expense of an additional charge controller if necessary and its installation if not a DIY. There's far more to the matter than dollars. What works for one person may not work for another person.
So with that in mind... the best option will always be determined by individual need.
- Armed citizens provide security of a free State.