this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
613 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

60079 readers
3367 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

All the new houses around here with no solar would indicate that is not true. They're not even required to have a south facing roof.

[–] dan@upvote.au 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

At least here in California, having solar panels on a non south facing roof usually only reduces production by 10-20%, as long as it's not entirely north facing. Solar systems are often slightly undersized - it's more cost effective to size it so it handles average load rather than the summer peaks you only see for a few weeks per year - so the actual difference for a given system may be less.

With my system, I see the best output from south-east facing panels since they get the morning sun. West facing panels are also fairly popular here due to time-of-use electricity plans. Some electricity plans have peak pricing from 4 to 9 pm, so people want to try and collect as much sunlight as possible during that period before sunset.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

The UK is a lot further north, and it's probably not a massive loss.

It was enough to prevent me getting "free" solar panels (while that was a thing) though, so I'm still salty about that.