Scotty Attacks MKBHD For No Reason – Here’s the Truth

using a partner right at the start introduces bias… I am not saying scooty killme is credible but neither are you!

You talk about data, and yet you forgot to mention the price of the tesla powerwall? So if you were going to buy the powerwall 3 direct from tesla, it would cost $9000, which does not include the cost to get it installed. So if we looked at the panels themselves and they last 20 years with no issues what so ever (very unlikely), you're still paying a minimum of $18000 for 2 powerwalls over the 20 years. Plus $20,000 for the panels. Not even including maintenance,how much sunny, winter time, dull days, rainy days, power being used to power being saved in the battery, etc. There isn't any incentive or justifying the costs. Now, if the batteries were a lot cheaper and could hold a lot more energy and the panel produced a lot more power than yeah. But from what I believe, it's scientifically impossible to do that, due to their size. Bigger, the better.

I hate the word average!! So misleading, example. 99 people earn £10,000 a year, the boss man earns £1,000,000 = 100 people in total. What's the average salary?????? Guess what? Those 99 people are going to say where there £9,000 is.

But all this assumes you can have that money up front

One of the things to note – Some Solar groups have a bad rep due to how they do installations. One group tends to subcontract installers, and sometimes they don't do it necessarily correctly. There have been horror stories in my area about the company due to poor installation.

With that said, it is always good to 'shop around' with your installers, particularly ones who have their actual installers.

One of the other push points a few years ago was how some areas are doing 'Net Metering'. Like California, NEM 2.0 for people who installed prior to April of 2023, where power from solar being fed back to the grid would be almost 1 to 1 cost wise (IE: You get credit for the kW you feed into the system about the same as when you take it). However, California is now adopting NEM 3.0 where the excess power you are not using and feeding back to the grid is going to be significantly LESS than what you will pay when you ask for power.

This now leans to or encouraging people to go Solar + Battery. The battery system is the additional cost that tends to make people 'think twice' because it is a significant boost in price. However, there are benefits to having this paradigm other than 'power backup' as well.

Most solar installers who will do the solar + battery system, will give you a system that should power your house at night with the power that you DON'T use from solar. Solar would charge the battery back up, allowing you to use that stored power to mitigate the 'peak hour' usage (Which tends to be 1.8 to 2x what you pay for off-peak). And yes, it will also power the house when the power goes out.

As a person who went to Solar after NEM 3.0 for California was pushed, thus making me fall under the new compensation method versus being in the NEM 2.0 compensation (Which those people are locked in for a period of time) the cost of solar is reasonably noticeable when not forced under certain situations.

I will say, yes, foggy/overcast days, I am not getting as much power solar wise, but then again, I am also still 'grid tied'. I am not 'off the grid'. But looking at the power bill, solar reduced the bill by over half and that is with the fact that the solar + battery system we have does NOT move over everything.

The pre-lim Solar + Battery system focuses on 'critical loads'. Most critical loads for the house will be the 'basic electricity'. The standard outlets and lights in the house.

The things NOT usually put over are the double breaker or 40 amp loads. This being like Electric Clothing Dryers, Electric Ovens, HVAC, Electric Dishwashers, Electric Stoves and the like. The basic reason for this is they will pull a lot from the battery. As a note, most battery systems will put about 10-13 kW on the cheap end. You can put more, but the installers often size just enough to get you by for the next day.

The stuff that is NOT on the critical load side of things will still be tied to the Grid, so it isn't like you can't use those things, it means you don't necessarily eliminate your electric bill going solar.

But it does mean, your peak hour usage can be sized down for things running in the house that is under the critical load part.

Most of the good solar installer groups will size your system based on your 'needs', just keep in mind the definition of 'critical load' will not include the high load electrical appliances unless you ask them to add more battery capacity to allow for it if you are going to a Solar + Battery system.

do the factory warranties apply if you install them yourself? tesla had roof fires on some commercial installations at walmart. if your house system catches fire and burns your house down does the solar company pay that ?

Oddly a rare case where Australia can 1-up the US and say "30% of Australian houses have installed solar" +plus, "Installation costs at least HALF of what it does in the US"
I've had 6.6KW of LG panels installed for 10 years … its awesome and theres no maintenance.
Our local power authorities are less "restrictive" in exporting to the Grid (than US it seems), but they don't pay you much. Best savings are from using the solar yourself during the day. i.e. bigger loads like Cooling or Heating via Heat Pumps, also very common in Australia

I like his videos but he will male some very questionable claims at times. Im looking to go solar. But only if i can get batteries as well. My only hold up is if i can find a plan that will offset my elec bill fpr close to what the monthly would be for the install.

In Australia, you can get a 10 kw system for 7 thousand AUD.

You can double the installation fee right off the bat since you'll need to remove/install it with a new roof at least once. You'll also have to raise your home owners coverage to account for the added coverage for the solar panels.

So, lets' do the math: $21k initial setup (with tax breaks) + $15k for second installation after a new roof = $36K investment over the lifetime of your 10k system.

Best case scenario, you produce 17.7k Kw/Year @ the average US energy price of 16 cents per Kilowatt, that's $2,888/Year of Energy.

That's a 12.5 year ROI, best case scenario. The worst case scenario is it takes you 25 years for ROI, 10.9K/Year Kw @ 13 cents per kilowatt hour.

It's not exactly clear cut, and without tax incentives, the value goes right out the window. If you're a do it yourselfer with a ground based system and net metering, it is probably a no brainer.

Scotty is pretty much right. I have them with reputable company and installer and have issues . Hurricane debbie loosened panels. If bird poops on panel or just needs a good cleaning your up in roof a few times a year . One small cloud will drop almost 30pct in watts. Maybe a smaller investment in solar panels and is good for a supplement but the payback isn’t there yet

Scotty…TOYOTA's cause pollution but you rather they keep producing the fossil powered engines…contradicting much? 🤔

I used to watch scotty when he talked about cars. Now he has run out of relevant topics so he discusses things he has no clue about. And of course if it is alternative anything he is against it.

In houston putting holes in roof and putting panels to fight hurricane winds to gain maybe $20k is Dumb option. Assuming $3000 power bill becomes $1000, x 20 years It just is. Anyone i sell to wont want hassle of panels…. I guess there are dumber things but holes in my $500,000 house to gain $20000 is unwise math…. Hurricanes hate solar panels. Typhoons hit California… Most solar installers wont exist in 20 years or their lawyer will laugh at whover owns house in 20 years … $20k is not enough for risk and hassle, vs $500,000 house…… Walmart decideed this, after roof fires from the wiring, tthey had experts who said its not worth the risk….

My solar cost me more a month than I was paying, plus I dont qualify
for the rebate . So, I am taking a loss on solar .

Only disagree about the cost of roof being part of credit. Get audited, you have problems.

I know a number of people who feel they got taken to the cleaners by solar installers. The story for all of them is Very Similar. They usually start out having trouble with their gas heating system or air con. They call someone who declares the problem either unfixable, too costly, or not worth fixing. They get talked into a Heat Pump system (which they are told will be 3x more efficient), and spend about $8-10,000 for the installation. They soon find out that the new system monthly cost is actually 3x More, because it's Electric. They totally flip out over their electric bills, and call the installer. The installer then comes out and talks them into a Roof-Top Solar system with Battery Backup. Cost (with incentives and rebates), about $35,000. In the process of trying to decide, they are told that any electricity their new system generates that isn't used will go on the grid and they'll be paid 20 cents per kilowatt hour for it. They jump at this, only to find out later that the real payback is 2 cents per kilowatt hour (which is virtually nothing). One of my friends got so mad he now turns on the Central Heat or Air, opens all the windows, and burns up the electricity that way, because he refuses to sell it to the State for 2 cents. Meanwhile, they all end up paying for new Heat Pumps and Solar with Batt Backup at a final total cost of about $40,000, when they could have just fixed their old gas heater for under $500.

06:00 The manufacturers guarantee that after 25 years the solar panels will still be generating a minimum percentage usually 80-90 percent or more.