May have to deal with paid permits depending on where you are

Watched Fisherman's Life on YT (in California) recently build out some panels had to pay for inspection granted different design than a fence

I’m finishing up a DIY ground install and just the conductor from the array to the service panel cost the same as about 3 panels. It’s about a 150 meter run.

Some very rough numbers from memory:

- 20 panel + 10 microinverter bundle: $5600

- cost to ship the bundle: $700

- conductor: $450

- steel/pvc conduit for conductor sheath: $350

- strut for racking: $500

- 3” steel conduit for ground mount: $5000

- concrete and tube forms for vertical post footers: $400

- augur/trencher rental: $500

- brackets/fasteners: $600

- tools: $500

- electrician work to upgrade service panel: $2500

- electrician work for hookup and disconnect install: still TBD but I’m guessing more thousands

- time spent x my current hourly salary as a programmer: I don’t want to think about it haha

Probably a bunch of stupid little stuff I’m forgetting. Just gas to go on supply runs is probably over $100, although I always tried to batch runs with other normal errands.

The most expensive parts of projects can be surprising, at least to me. I also recently invested in my own fuel transfer pump to transport home heating fuel instead of paying for delivery. 55 gallon drums: $20 each. Pump: $200. But the most expensive part was actually the 15 meters of arctic grade fuel hose at over $400.

Markup on the mounting systems, installers not willing to take the liability of installing expensive and heavy panels with random garbage hardware that is piercing a roof, roof work being pretty miserable and harder and more dangerous than 99% of jobs, and you are dealing with electrical systems and competing within the licensed electrician labor market.

A lot of construction work in general is priced around labor being atleast 50% of the total cost.

> What goes into a mount that makes it so expensive?

Ground mounts are far more expensive, not only because of how strong they need to be to support the panels under strong winds and snow without deflection, but the anchoring can be complicated depending on the site.

Some people can just hammer spikes into the ground, fill with epoxy, and their array is anchored. For my yard, I have to dig 4-feet down below frost line, through incredibly rocky clay soil, and bury (and concrete) 4x4 posts. On top of those posts goes the (expensive) metal rails to mount the panels. For just 10 solar panels it's gonna cost me ~$1000 in materials and many hours of digging.

The metal U-channel rails I'm looking at using will cost around $40/pp (10-ft), and I need at least 10 of them. In theory a cheaper option could be wooden boards like 2x8/2x10, but they're significantly heavier, bulkier, and would still be difficult to mount to.

This construction lets me build the array however I want, including adjusting angle (I'll have 4 pre-set angles for each season). This design is still cheaper than the cheapest pre-fab ground mounts, which are metal legs which go for ~$110/pp. You need ~2 legs per panel, though in some cases you can share one leg for two panels. For 10 panels you still need at least 11 legs, so at least $1100, before cost to anchor them. And that's a fixed angle. The adjustable angle ones are more like $185/pp.

Mounting as a verb, not a noun.

It is the cost of scaffolding to get up to the roof, labour to install the panels, electrical certification, etc.

The cost of barista preparing a coffee is often higher than the cost of beans and milk.

And so on :)

> What goes into a mount that makes it so expensive? Its essentially just a piece of metal, right?

I think this graph sheds some light on your question:

https://www.nrel.gov/solar/market-research-analysis/solar-in...

What happened in the last decade was that solar panels ("Module" in this graph) got very very cheap. They used to cost $3 per watt in 2010, but now only cost $0.3 per watt.

This extreme price drop happened thanks to technical innovations (such as commoditization of PERC cells), and the large-scale production in PRC.

Metal components ("Hardware - BOS" in this graph) did get cheaper in the same time frame ($0.6 per watt to $0.5 per watt), but their cost cannot be reduced as much exactly because they are just a piece of metal i.e. there is no low-hanging fruit in Metallurgy.

> This fact always surprises me. What goes into a mount that makes it so expensive? It’s essentially just a piece of metal, right?

The labor alone to mount the PV panel costs more than the PV panel. A union electrician costs a contractor $100/hr in a medium sized metro area with fringes and wages.

The mount and installing the mount cost more than the PV panel as well.

I’m unsure why everyone is posting about rooftop solar and rooftop mounts, the vast majority of PV panels are installed in solar fields, not on roofs.

I actually run and sell commercial electrical work, for what it’s worth.

I wonder if you couldn't do something incredibly simple like get some pressure treated 4x4 posts and use a router to make shallow slots for the panels to sit in. Plant them the right width and run a 2x4 along the bottom to let the panel rest on it.

What is it about solar panels that makes everyone want to use these really expensive mounting solutions? Is it just because they're trying to engineer a full 30 year lifespan right from the start?

You will still need the conduit for the wire of course, at least up to the inverter. That will add up pretty quickly if your mounts are spread out.

It's not the mount, it's the labour. People are expensive!

> What goes into a mount that makes it so expensive?

Human Labor, the most neglected factor when discussing rising infrastructure costs.

Because of the variety of roof designs and associated mounting systems, it is generally known how to mount the panels you are paying for. Installing panels on a high-pitched roof is also not an easy feat.

For ground mounting, site preparation is required. Probably one wouldn't want to see their panel system get some slope year after year.

I laid a set of panels on my low slope shed roof and just never secured them. They’re offset about 1/2” which enough that water flows under them and off the shed.

I’m in a very windy location but they are heavy enough to not budge.

Work

You can buy cheap mounting equipment on AliExpress. But then you must convince your local building department that your panels won't land on your neighbors in the next storm. That conversation is easier when you're using familiar name-brand mounting equipment that has published and proven all its specs.

Similarly, if you want to do a permitted installation, you generally need to use UL-certified inverters and batteries -- fewer shocks and fires. That's a different pricing tier from the "trust me bro" equipment you can find online.

Meanwhile, a panel's main failure mode is not producing enough power. They're relatively easy to replace when they fail to do that. Price incentives are better aligned for that system component.

i saw a post some where that they are just laying panels on the ground in africa bc of this problem

[dead]

Make sure to clearly read your jurisdiction’s setback requirements. Mine does not comprehend solar on a fence, it only clearly defines rules for privacy fences, solar on existing permitted structures, and dedicated ground mount solar installations. Solar on a fence isn’t a configuration it considers so I expect if I would apply for a permit to build a solar fence that I would have to convince my AHJ that it’s a privacy fence in order to use fence setback allowances, which would be tricky and likely not be a quick process.

Talk to your AHJ before spending any money.

> the liability of a roof install with leaks and servicing

Also expect a dove colony to enjoy the new comfort. All your neighbors will thank you for their homes turning into guano rocks, a sight once reserved to adventurous travelers.

Their nests, which will quickly accumulate under your roof's panels, offer not one but two existential threats for your home: They can catch fire when too dry, but also act as a water barrier, pushing the water into your roof.

I found this: https://joeyh.name/blog/pics/solar_fence_with_powerracks.jpg

> Is there any reason they should be vertical instead of facing the sun?

Takes up a smaller footprint of land, and PV panels themselves are now so cheap and last so long that it borderline makes sense as a fencing material even if you don't connect them to an inverter and power and anything with them.

Snow doesn’t accumulate on vertical panels. If it snows where you live this can make a big difference in winter performance and/or winter maintenance of clearing snow.

You get a different generation curve (more energy in mornings and evenings) with vertical bi-facial panels. Though this person is in a woody area which might not see that benefit.

For (3) you should get bifacials with the A side facing south if your fence is N/S, if E/W the recommendation is to alternate 50/50.

I'd say this is why they have the treated posts resting on gravel with concrete filling the remainder. This would stop water pooling, and if the concrete was mounded a little bit, keep more water away from the posts.

He says they're "treated", which I think means "impregnated with alkaline copper quaternary or similar poisons". So I think it might survive a good while even if it stays wet after it rains.

It is very complicated, but for the countries which are major producers, for most companies, it's between 64% and 430%. China (~85% of production) is 140%.

https://www.infolink-group.com/energy-article/solar-topic-it...

But even putting aside the tariffs, I'm in the same boat as you - residential/consumer solar in the US is a disaster - everything goes through shady installation companies, the labor and permitting costs are enormous, it's nearly impossible to buy panels yourself at the market rate.

I DIYd this with permits and interconnect in the SF Bay Area. I’ve had no power bill for years now, and I have two hot tubs.

Panels and enphase on Craigslist are so cheap you don’t have to worry about it. Max out what you’re allowed with your main electrical panel size and you’ll never regret it. Don’t even consider doing less than the maximum. You will never meet anybody who believes they added enough solar after a year of ownership

Use second-hand panels, hire a contractor to install them, and another contractor to then install and connect batteries and an inverter. Ignore the possibility to sell energy back to the grid, charge your batteries instead.

Now, you would have built not a cutting-edge system, but a relatively inexpensive one, with a minimum of red tape and financing shenanigans.

(Edited: typos.)

SignatureSolar has panels for $0.25/w. The tariffs are a nothing burger.

If you're paying someone else to do it, the panels will likely be <10% of the cost.

If you live at high latitude (Canada, N. Europe, etc), in the winter, the sun only gets 15-20 degrees above the horizon in the middle of the winter, and a vertical panel accumulates snow much less than even a mild slope.

Part of the issue is what you're optimizing for. If you have yearly net-metering, and you just want to max out the number of kWh you generate over the year, vertical probably isn't that great. If you are off-grid or are paid hourly based on power prices or some other scheme, you generally want to maximize your worst-case power production rather than maximize yearly production. Generally batteries are only sized for a few days worth of storage or so. You can't store power from the summer and use it in the winter. Vertical panels at high latitudes also produce more power earlier and later in the day when the sun is really low. Bifacial vertical panels also generally get more bifacial gain, especially on cloudy days.

It's really a question of maximizing worst-case performance vs. average-case performance.

Vertical panels have higher efficiency due to lower panel temperatures.

And usually you have enough power during midday but not in the mornings and evenings, where these would produce the most power, sort of flattening the power curve.

Also panels are really cheap, like 70€ per piece

> The whole point of mounting solar panels should be to maximize area that is facing the sun.

This is still conventional wisdom, yes. It assumes that you need to maximise utilisation of solar panels, and act as if they are rare and expensive. But they are now neither rare nor expensive any more.

Also, as the other comment pointed out, if you "maximize area that is facing the sun", you get most generation at mid-day. Adding in some generation that is most active in early and late day balances that out, as most power is used then.

And you can just throw more panels at the problem. It's not a constraint any more.

There are a few reasons as I understand it; aside from winter sun being a bonus, when the sun is low in the sky, as well as mornings,evenings, there's also the fact that solar panels are dirt cheap now and efficiency is getting higher.

OP has 370W bi-facial panels that cost $100, I recently had solar installed the in UK with 465W single-face panels which would have cost ~£100 each to buy in small quantities, my installer clearly paid less (and charged 3x).

It has also been my experience that a few degrees off with decent enough sun (and we don't get amazing sun here in the UK) makes practically no difference to the generation; my arrays are facing E-SE and S-SW and I can slightly exceed the rated specs in the peak of summer when the sun is mid-way between both arrays and not pointing "directly" at either.

> The whole point of mounting solar panels should be to maximize area that is facing the sun.

There are a lot more considerations to get into e.g. in areas with lots of snow verticals are significantly less affected and benefit more from reflection, in summer vertical E/W bifacials have a “double hump” which provides more generation in the morning and evening, verticals take less floor space so you might be able to get extra panels or get panels at all, N/S bifacials have better winter production unless your slanted panels are “detuned” from perfect summer angle (or even better have a tilt mount you can update every few months, but that is not cheap).

As other have said, panels are very cheap now (I think I some calculations that the panels can be cheaper than wooden boards for a more traditional fence), so the game is not mounting them optimally but instead just finding places to put them with minimum effort to increase the total area you have (that still get some light).

< Which again brings me to the question: why? Why would anybody do that?

Because why not have a fence that at least generates some power instead of a fence that does nothing! Costs are not that much more, 2k is easily spent on a bigger fence and this way, you don't have to get up and hustle, our fence does it for you!

Duck curve is the main reason, aside from "dual use utility as a literal fence" or "I ran out of space on my roof". Any solar you can collect at sunrise or sunset is more valuable.

Yes, there are good reasons for mounting panels vertically (other than just needing fence instead of a roof, obviously). A 5-minute session with a search engine or an LLM will explain those.

> but then you have freezing temperatures and snow covering the panels which makes them useless.

When vertical not much of an issue and the reflection from the snow appears to work well with bifacial.