Hacker News
points by linsomniac 2 days ago | 0 comments
Clarifying "Balcony Solar"

I'm seeing a lot of comments mis-representing "balcony solar". This is a phrase that specifically means "small-scale solar panels that directly feed the grid". It is NOT about solar cells feeding a "cooler sized battery+inverter".

This is what makes it so attractive; no battery is required. But this is also why it is waiting in the US on legislation (back-feeding the grid). Germany has already passed this legislation. In particular, the equipment needs to be UL3700 certified.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balcony_solar_power

[–] lwarfield 2 days ago
I've always seen Balcony Solar as a policy failure. It shows that the equivalent amount of grid scale solar is too hard/expensive to make due to permitting and regulation failures.

In an ideal world Balcony Solar shouldn't exist because grid power is cheap and plentiful.

[–] holgerschurig 2 days ago
Weird.

In an ideal world no one would bother where power comes from. From "the grid" or "from local". Why should "the grid" get some benefit? Over local production? IMHO such a thinking artificially limits competition.

What should still bother the law makers is the impact "grid power" vs. "local power". E.g. if AI computing centers build gas turbines for local power, but that creates noise and air pollution.

"Balcony solar"'s idea is to get solar into the hand of people without almost no extra cost. By design, you can plug it in into a normal socket. So you don't even need to call an electrician. No new power cable needs to be installed. And the basic idea of this ("make it so simple that even 85 year old Aunt Mary can do it") is IMHO worthwhile.

For a regular solar, you need to check if your roof can withstand the weight and wind forces. You need to install electric lines, circuit breakers etc etc. All of this costs several factors more than the pure voltaic panels.