What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Killer Gift For A Movie Buff view!
bestbuy.com - Insignia Blu-ray player instantly streams Netflix movies right to your TV & comes with a free disc.
25 Comments
- Nacon, on 05/15/2009, -1/+7Hard to trust a company that doesn't even have a proper website.
Check the link in the article, its 1 page with their logo and a mail link. - fantasticjon, on 05/15/2009, -0/+5um. that is a horrible name for a solar panel company. That is a horrible name for any company.
I am going to start my own competing solar company.
Titanic solar
no. no. Hindenburg solar. - Robotron, on 05/15/2009, -0/+4Solar is still a very young and new industry. A business like this doesn't have a marketing budget--better to spend the money on manufacturing the panels than advertising. Let Ikea handle the advertising!
- embr, on 05/15/2009, -0/+4I prefer Apocalypse Solar myself...
- sdcarter, on 05/15/2009, -0/+4fta: Can IKEA-branded DIY panels be far behind?
Oh I can see the weird names now... - GooyBoy, on 05/15/2009, -0/+3OK, they eliminated the glass cover panel that most other panels have and replaced it with Teflon making it lighter.
I can't wait to see what these puppies look like after a hail storm................ - VitriolAndAngst, on 05/15/2009, -0/+3The price per watt is not the HUGE issue here. If this works as advertised -- then $2400 for 400 watts. At least you are getting the convenient, low-hanging fruit. You take a chunk out of electricity you will always be using during the day. If you aren't trying to replace ALL of the energy in your home, you are at least covering for an AC system or a computer + refrigerator.
The system is saving money on installation and all that equipment you need to buy to make solar panels integrate with home power (like an inverter).
Save the money and don't get the batteries. You can add power to the grid and get money back from the Power company in many states. But likely you won't be getting peak 400 watts and you are using most of the power just maintaining your house.
Spend $2,400 and offset a good portion of your footprint during the day? That's a lot smaller bite than the $20,000 systems to just START saving money. It's at least do-able for a lot more people at this price point. - Necoras, on 05/15/2009, -1/+4Um, either you didn't read the article, or you can't do math... It's $6 a watt at 400 watts from 3 panels = $800 per panel. Silicon is expensive. The costs here aren't labor, they're materials so building it in China won't make it any cheaper.
Also, this system is specifically designed not to need a battery system. It plugs into your wall and any excess energy is fed into the grid. Then, at night or when it's cloudy you pull from the grid. This reduces your over all grid usage. This type of system is designed to reduce your pull on the grid, not remove the necessity of it completely.
Do some research before you spout off about how worthless other people's hard work is. - Scottamus, on 05/15/2009, -0/+3Another awesome product that will be perpetually available a year from now, yay.
/s - Recoil, on 05/18/2009, -0/+2"Armageddon Energy"... pretty ironic name for a company that makes environment-friendly power solutions.
- inactive, on 05/15/2009, -2/+4$2400 per panel is ridiculous.
This is something the Chinese need to hurry up and rip off, so we can buy them in walmart for $200, then $150, then $50
besides im usually not home during the day and only use about 100 watts in my whole house while im out, so i would need some kind of battery system. that cant be cheap. - inactive, on 05/15/2009, -0/+2I think Armageddon is a pretty weird name already.
- govtdoesnotwork, on 05/15/2009, -2/+4I guess that's a good point. OTOH, there are plenty of these solar companies with VERY proper websites & no product to speak of, so maybe these folks have their priorities right. Now that they DO have a product, it's time to improve the site, of course, but I don't mind minimal for now.
- sodade, on 05/15/2009, -0/+2lrn2solar
- CarlT, on 07/26/2009, -0/+1I have been toying with the idea of getting some solar panels, this article has helped with my decision. Though who decided on their company name?!! When i initially saw the title i expected to see a hate article on scientists experimenting with dark matter or some other posibly more sinister energy source!
http://www.uwpays.com - theaceoffire, on 05/16/2009, -0/+1I think a sheet of plexiglass over all of them would cost next to nothing compared to adding glass to each one.
- catestarrr, on 05/15/2009, -0/+1Will be great on flat roofs! need a better price point though
- govtdoesnotwork, on 05/15/2009, -0/+1AC/fridge systems are generally too power intensive to do with DC electric solar at a reasonable cost. Other ways of cooling with solar exist which seem like a far better & easier idea.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=s ...
But I agree with the overall gist of your comment. Running less energy intensive stuff is certainly low hanging fruit at the moment. - kbergeth, on 07/09/2009, -0/+0Onsenguy is only partially right. Net metering is actually very widespread. What he didn't mention though is that utilities HAVE TO buy your energy back, the price they give you varies. Nice summary here:
http://www.awea.org/faq/netbdef.html
Also, the article writer need to mention the inverter, you can't just plug panels into your wall outlet without an inverter. See this explanation which is in laymen's terms: http://www.spheralsolar.com/howdoessolarpowerwork. ... - onsenguy, on 05/15/2009, -1/+1Nope, no, not possible, absolutely bull-farking-*****.
I just finished a contract with a solar panel manufacturer and got a really good insight into the solar energy market. There is no way you are going to be able to just plug this into your household electrical supply and have it used instead of the grid supply and have reverse flow going to the power company at a credit to you.
Net billing (having the power company buy excess from you) is only available in a few places where newer digital meters are in place. In addition, most electrical codes require these additional sources to be electrically isolated from the main supply. The same is true even for gas generators. In a lot of places this requires a second breaker panel for all the circuits that may be driven by the secondary source when the primary is not being used. Reality: It is very expensive to have solar as a secondary electrical supply. At this juncture it is better as a primary only with battery storage for minimal uses like off-grid cottages and storage/work sheds.
According to YouNoodle.com Armeggeddon energy is a two-person startup setup in January consisting of a Standford MBA and one technician. They have no product, no technical designs and no investor capital.
Take any of their announcements with a huge grain of salt. - inactive, on 05/15/2009, -2/+2I am glad i am getting silicone caulk for $2 a tube for my kitchen. silicone is cheap. processing it in to panels is expensive.
- Necoras, on 05/15/2009, -3/+2Don't leave them out during a hailstorm? They're supposed to be easily removed. Still, I wouldn't want to be out on my roof when an April thunderstorm is coming, so you do have a point. Maybe they can provide a protective cover that can be put on quickly.
- Hollowpoint, on 05/15/2009, -4/+1Shame they look like an array of kid's trampolines.
- WarriorBlake, on 05/15/2009, -5/+1Probably can't run on Vista thought...
- nextTopModel, on 05/15/2009, -7/+2
Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2004/feb/22/ ...
Die, Humans! Is Mother Nature Sick of Us?
http://www.livescience.com/environment/090507-eart ...
Exclusive: The methane time bomb
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-c ... and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clathrate_gun_effect
Put oil firm chiefs on trial, says leading climate change scientist
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jun/23/ ...
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is