Within the last year a fairly large (~100-130kW?) system was installed on a 4-sided building in Alberta that had PV installed on all four vertical walls. Each side's PV system operating independently, of course. We were not involved in this project and i'm not totally up to speed on the why's, how's and expected productions and so on... but i know the designer and i'm pretty sure he already has a good idea what range the production output of each different facing wall will fall in.
I can inquire if he has any articles or insight he would be willing to share with this group. *Benn Kilburn * CSA Certified Solar Photovoltaic Systems Electrician, SkyFire Energy Inc 6706 – 82 Ave NW | Edmonton, AB | T6B 0E7 P: 780-474-8992 | F: 888-405-5843 | www.skyfireenergy.com [image: email] <b...@skyfireenergy.com> [image: facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/SkyFireEnergy> [image: twitter] <https://twitter.com/SkyFireEnergy> [image: linkedin] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/283735?trk=tyah&trkInfo=tarId%3A1408655033432%2Ctas%3Askyfire%2Cidx%3A2-2-5> [image: google] <https://plus.google.com/+SkyFireEnergy/> [image: SkyFire Energy Logo_horizontal] On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 11:21 PM, Peter Parrish < peter.parr...@calsolareng.com> wrote: > 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, SolarGnosis > > 1107 Fair Oaks Ave., Suite 351 > > South Pasadena, CA 91030 > > (323) 839-6108 > > peter...@pobox.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > List sponsored by Redwood Alliance > > List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org > > Change listserver email address & settings: > http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org > > List-Archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/maillist.html > > List rules & etiquette: > www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm > > Check out or update participant bios: > www.members.re-wrenches.org > > >
_______________________________________________ List sponsored by Redwood Alliance List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Change listserver email address & settings: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List-Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/maillist.html List rules & etiquette: www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm Check out or update participant bios: www.members.re-wrenches.org
