If buying land would you say south facing is essential for solar and/or are there other decent power options besides solar?

[Bop]

Those antarctic arrays look like they get direct sun. In the summer.

And the results speak for themselves- a 60% reduction in diesel consumption over the course of a year is a massive reduction in both fuel and transport costs... (diesel is over $2 a litre here atm where I live, and shipping it to Antarctica is both expensive and subject to risk (fuel spillage in the antarctic is severely frowned up) and many stations are adding wind generators to add extra boost during winter when solar is minimal....

 

[hwy17]

And the results speak for themselves- a 60% reduction in diesel consumption over the course of a year is a massive reduction in both fuel and transport costs... (diesel is over $2 a litre here atm where I live, and shipping it to Antarctica is both expensive and subject to risk (fuel spillage in the antarctic is severely frowned up) and many stations are adding wind generators to add extra boost during winter when solar is minimal....
View attachment 195508

Right, because they do get direct sun. A property that does not get direct sun will get much worse solar performance than them.

 

[Bop]

When those arrays were first installed, yes they did have issues- mostly in that they were performing so much better than expected (PV panels work better the colder they get despite many of the general public believing otherwise) that their controllers were simply overwhelmed by it and damaged...

Modern high voltage arrays can work well in almost any conditions- if you live in a place where such conditions are frequent- then over panel to compensate... they are cheap enough...

(I have put this up before- but this is my array at the old campsite- I usually get about 40A into the battery bank in the 'best conditions' but even at 8AM, with the sun still down behind the treetops, with 100% 'grey' cloud cover and showers all day, at that time it was up already over 4.4A into the bank... (10% of their full output)

You can see the suns disc (the bright spot), down in the treetops just to the left of the tree by itself of the right- there's an arrow pointing at it...
Unless you live literally in a cleft barely wider than your house and so deep it only gets a few minutes of sunlight a day- solar can still work- you might have to compensate by having a slightly bigger array than someone who doesn't have such restrictions, but solar is cheap (nothing like what my first array cost me- 1kw (10 100W panels) cost over $10000Au at the time (1980's) and filled the entire roof of the house- now my current panels (2nd hand ex gridties) that same 1kw would only cost me $100 and fit on the roof of the Hilux... (even new they would cost only a few hundred dollars)

 

[Skypower]

One thing that you can do when considering a plot of land is to use the”SunOnTrack” app on your phone. You can stand anywhere and know exactly what the sun’s path across the sky for winter and summer. You will know if or where the obstructions are and figure out if that location is viable for solar.

 

[DIYrich]

I think you are getting confused- you don't NEED twice the number of panels...

I didn't say he needed 2x panels. I was just using the number as an example. Could be 5x or 1.1x. Just showing it is a $ issue, and not a deal killer.

 

[Gueyog8a7]

What is latitude friend? It means the part of the world or the specific latitude of the piece of land. I could not say the latter since I haven't bought any yet. If the former, I am in the UK, looking at wales specifically.

You do not need a south facing land. You just shouldn’t angle your panels north. Test it out on pvwatts, you will find that putting panels flat or slightly tilted only results in a 10-15% loss in production. If we had your latitude it would be easy to do. And unless you are only mounting in a single row, you can install more panels in the same area thereby increasing total production (bc no inter row spaces). If you have land, ground mount at optimum angle (your latitude) toward south, even if you’re in a north facing hill.

 

[Bop]

I didn't say he needed 2x panels. I was just using the number as an example. Could be 5x or 1.1x. Just showing it is a $ issue, and not a deal killer.

Still missing the point...

You pick the number of panels required for the job...
It doesn't matter if you face them all south, or half SE and half SW
It doesn't matter if you face them half facing east and half facing west...
You STILL get the same total daily generated power ie kwh per day...
(you get a lower midday peak, but a longer generating day, making up for that lower peak)

So total number of $ spent is exactly the same- not 5 times more, not 1.1 times more... 1x...
'Hmmm I have to spend $1 for this one, or $1 for this one- which one should I buy- which is cheaper?'- said noone ever...

 

[Gueyog8a7]

if it is only property barring a mountain range blocking you it matters not as you can build your solar panel field in any direction.

It isn't as simple as that though is it if you are on land which is a steep slope, which the majority of plots available are which I have seen? Even though you can angle how you want it still won't get much if any direct sunlight. They are usually north or east or west facing slopes also with lots of trees.

It isn't as simple as just cutting all trees down either. There are rules here about what you can do with what type of land. I want to buy woodland because you are allowed to build more stuff without planning permission than you are with agricultural.

However I could see being able to make an ample clearing for enough panels to serve one person but I imagine there would still be many hours of the day in partial shade where the trees block it. I don't want to cut all the trees just for solar.

 

[Gueyog8a7]

Panels are now so cheap the direction is less important than the room to mount, a few extra panels will offset a less than ideal orientation so the more room the better.

Is that true though even if you are on a slope which is not facing the sun? Most of these are pretty steep facing either north west or east or a mix in between. So you might be only half way up a steep hill facing the wrong way.

 

[Gueyog8a7]

I own a 32 acre site that faces north and east, and it has great solar - just uphill! The trick is to find land that isn't too steeply sloped, so that the land itself doesn't become an obstacle. I'd suggest downloading the Sunseeker app for your phone, and using that to evaluate a site. Maybe $10 - $20 as I recall.

Yes, as I have just noted in a couple of my previous replies I just posted, the steepness is often a factor in these available plots.

 

[Bop]

North is better IMO. Where the sun is

Don't laugh- I have been doing solar offgrid installs since the 1980's, and this one made my jaw drop...
A guy had been doing research on the net, and actually had a quite good quality install, covering all the 'good things'- angle was right for the latitude, good quality equipment with fusesor MCB's where they were needed, nice and tidy wiring etc- all in all, it would put many so called 'professional' installers to shame...
But his performance was woeful...

The website (complete with instructional videos, photos etc) was based in the northern hemisphere- and he had literally done everything that they said to...
Including facing the panels south...

In NSW...



To be honest, he literally had no idea exactly what he was doing- it was all 'magic' to him, but he had actually done a very good job of following the (very good apart from that one point) instructions...
Literally 'monkey see, monkey do'

It was a relatively easy fix- the frames were well constructed, welded steel and concreted into place- so we simply cut all the legs off, he got some mates round, picked up the entire rack and spun it 180 degrees and put it back down and rewelded the legs back together and redid the wiring...
Cost him a couple of cases of beer and a BBQ for them all, but hey- I even got a free feed out of it (I really didn't have the heart to charge him anything, but he paid me to do a full 'once over' the entire system to make sure he hadn't missed anything else, and I got a free feed out of it to boot)

 

[Gueyog8a7]

Due south facing is not important, but sun exposure is. You need mid day sun like 11am-3pm and if the property doesn't get that due to trees or mountain shading that's a huge problem for off grid power.

And if you have 11am-3pm direct sun exposure, then it's probably possible to get a ground mount array facing south.

Most of what I have seen look very similar to your profile pic. Big trees, on fairly steep slopes.

I saw a really nice one for solar when I went to look at a different one the other day. The one I went to see was north east facing, and I was there around 1-2 and I think it was just about going over the hill so maybe an hour or two of peak sun? This other one is right on the crest of the same hill, with almost no trees, so panoramic exposure. Unfortunately it is 20 grand more; 50 vs 70.

Having said all this though, if only wanting for my meager solar requirements I could get away with imperfect orientation as someone else has mentioned, couldn't I, by overpanelling in the same vein as is done in winter.

It is a good point to bear in mind though to visit the places around the time slot you mention, which I have pretty much done naturally anyway so far.

 

[Gueyog8a7]

Oh by the way! I think to start I would mostly be dependent on my van's solar and ideally would keep it all on there so I would not have to install any to cover my daily uses. As such would be less flexible with mounting and positioning. I do not fancy moving it around every day either to chase the sun rays.

As I said I have gotten a lot more than I anticipated even in the shade behind my mum's house so far, just with the 200w I have already.

Certainly something to think of for mounting on the ground but again I am not sure what I am allowed and so it would be better to keep everything on the van in case there were any issues rather than investing lots of money on ground installs that I may get told to take down.

I am thinking keep things self contained on the van and just build low impact structures from the natural materials from the wood for things like storage/small shelter and what not.

I might be able to add stationary ones later but I don't know the rules yet so don't want to rely on that for now. Current plan is to have everything already in the van to be self contained and just cart it to wherever I buy the land.

 

[Bop]

Yup- even in indirect sun- using the right gear (high voltage MPPT charge controllers and overpaneling (in wattage, but NOT in voltage!!) you can still get respectable performance for minimal extra cost) with a setup like that, you will still get more than adequate performance even if you don't get direct sunlight all day...

 

[Gueyog8a7]

Depends- an east west array like my previous house had (shown above), the midday peak really isn't a 'thing'- indeed the eastern panels peaked about 10pm, and the western array about 2pm- both were well off their peak by midday- but combined still had a respectable total (about the same as either at its peak alone) and as they started literally at sunrise (the neighbours didn't start producing until a couple of hours later)- literally with only half the suns disc showing, the eastern array was already over 100W in the morning, over a kilowatt by an hour later...

My western array (shown above also) on my 'temporary' offgrid arrays also does the same- by about 3pm the northern array is well down from its midday peak, but the western array has just come into its one- and continues putting almost full output power into the battery bank right until sunset (the northern array by this time is practically zero- only making about 10-15% of its peak value)- this means I start the night with the battery bank fully charged, rather than things like the AC starting to suck power out by 3pm because the north array is no longer keeping up, the west array is only just hitting its peak output...

Which is why the final install on the house itself will be 6kw east, 6kw north and 6kw west- to maximise both early morning and late afternoon production (and give better 'poor weather' conditions output...)

Ok so from what you are saying here the north east one sounds like it could do fine? It is on a fairly steep slope facing NE so would catch the rays from sun up to around 1pm. Also from what I remember there is already a clearing facing out into the valley below so would be clear from trees for most of that time.

 

[Gueyog8a7]

Yes, but are you talking about E/W arrays that are still sun exposed from 10am-4pm? Those production hours are still important, even if they are not peak. If you had like an actual mountain blocking the sun during 10am-4pm that is going to be devastating for overall production no matter your orientation or peak.

OP says "almost if not 0 direct sun for north and only a few hours for e/w" for some of these properties. We should not use E/W arrays with all day exposure to give false hope. 0 direct sun or only a few hours direct sun is a huge unsolvable problem.

Actually my van behind my mum's house where it is currently already has had 0 direct and only just starting to get an hour or so's direct now it is starting to creep higher in the sky and the generation has not been too bad at all. I installed the electric right at the peak/slump of the winter light. It surely wasn't enough for when I was also using heater with 200w however the other day I read something in the range of 60w at the peak of the day and that was not even in direct. It was a cloudy day but light cloud, which I have noted seems to provide even better than clear days when in shade.

I am guessing that same kind of scenario could be transposed to a woodland in shade most of the day. But I certainly would not want to bank (literally) on that, buying the land, only to find out it would not generate enough .

 

[hwy17]

Actually my van behind my mum's house where it is currently already has had 0 direct and only just starting to get an hour or so's direct now it is starting to creep higher in the sky and the generation has not been too bad at all. I installed the electric right at the peak/slump of the winter light. It surely wasn't enough for when I was also using heater with 200w however the other day I read something in the range of 60w at the peak of the day and that was not even in direct. It was a cloudy day but light cloud, which I have noted seems to provide even better than clear days when in shade.

I am guessing that same kind of scenario could be transposed to a woodland in shade most of the day. But I certainly would not want to bank (literally) on that, buying the land, only to find out it would not generate enough .

Yeah it depends on your goals. If you are ok staying on propane and firewood for heat and don't need A/C, then it's possible to get by on a lot less electricity.

 

[Gueyog8a7]

All else being equal, if you need X number of panels with a south facing property, and 2x panels with an east or west facing property, then factor that into the price you are willing to pay. If X number of panels cost $10,000, then your break-even is $A for the south facing property, and $A-$10,000 for the E-W facing property. There might be other reasons for one being worth more than the other (water, view, access, etc), but you can quantify the value of south vs e-w facing.

Yea I was just thinking that enough panels to cover me would run only a few hundred more. I do also want to plant food crops though so south facing is also a big benefit for that.

It is just case by case. I saw a south facing one the other day. Fantastic plot, which is mainly just a field however it had other things that made it undesirable such as being very close to other people and also a busy main road and an access track for other plots running through it.

So I suppose the gist of the post is gathering just how important the angle is for the solar factor so it can be weighed against other +/-s. The north-east one was generally a lot of good stuff otherwise so I am wondering if others might tick most of my boxes then the solar issue could easily be overcome in most cases.

 

[Gueyog8a7]

Don't laugh- I have been doing solar offgrid installs since the 1980's, and this one made my jaw drop...
A guy had been doing research on the net, and actually had a quite good quality install, covering all the 'good things'- angle was right for the latitude, good quality equipment with fusesor MCB's where they were needed, nice and tidy wiring etc- all in all, it would put many so called 'professional' installers to shame...
But his performance was woeful...

The website (complete with instructional videos, photos etc) was based in the northern hemisphere- and he had literally done everything that they said to...
Including facing the panels south...

In NSW...



To be honest, he literally had no idea exactly what he was doing- it was all 'magic' to him, but he had actually done a very good job of following the (very good apart from that one point) instructions...
Literally 'monkey see, monkey do'

It was a relatively easy fix- the frames were well constructed, welded steel and concreted into place- so we simply cut all the legs off, he got some mates round, picked up the entire rack and spun it 180 degrees and put it back down and rewelded the legs back together and redid the wiring...
Cost him a couple of cases of beer and a BBQ for them all, but hey- I even got a free feed out of it (I really didn't have the heart to charge him anything, but he paid me to do a full 'once over' the entire system to make sure he hadn't missed anything else, and I got a free feed out of it to boot)

Reminds me of when I went on a walk and got lost and got mixed up which direction the sun should be facing to orient myself. After about 4 hours walking and not seeing any of the landmarks I expected to see it then dawned on me I had been walking in the wrong direction and would have to walk double the way back to get back to the train station. I was thinking for hours wtf haven't I seen the train line yet?

 

[Westcliffe01]

Have you lived on a north facing lot for a year yet ? When I lived in Germany for 3 years, the house that I rented sight unseen was on a north facing slope. The 140 stairs to the house from the street were icy for months at a time and I slipped and fell on the stairs on several occasions. The winter was effectively 2 months longer on the north side of the valley. Every afternoon in fall as the south side of the valley was heated by the sun it caused a downdraft on the north slope and since that slope was in full shade it was a decidedly cool breeze. Regardless of what you did your site would be sun shaded for many more hours a day than it would be on a south facing slope. So the productivity of your solar system would be much lower than on a south slope. Thus you would need a much larger install to make it, more expensive.

Often north facing lots are all that is left after the market has been picked over. The best south facing lost sell for considerably more because it makes a much nicer place to live, especially considering your psychological condition after being out of the sun for months at a time in winter when the sun angle is low.