@@Mark1Mach2 long term investment. How many years does it take to pay for a full house system? 20yrs? 30yrs? And yes it should make your house have a better resale value but a ton of people don't buy a house a 20yrs old and stay there 30yrs which means most can't afford the upfront cost hoping they will be there in 20-30yrs to pay if off and start to save on electric bills. I live in a 1700 total, 480 square foot living house. I am the perfect candidate for solar because I have over 3 times the roof of my living area as non living, (porch, carport, patio) which means I could put all the solar on the roofs not directly over my living but the added up front cost, 20yr investment recoup time, the added home owners insurance, as they are covering more "house", more worries about leaking roofs, damaged solar, inverters, batteries if I want power in a hurricane when the power company is out for a week or 2 here in south Louisiana, to worries about a hurricane tearing them off, cleaning, maintenance, and after 20yrs after I pay them off, now they don't work as good so I need more panels, or they need repairs. So for me it just not there yet but i would LOVE if every roof/property had solar, clean, renewable, free solar, its just not right for me.
@@markbedard1886 "look better" ... I don't understand your comment. Aesthetically, solar doesn't look good vs a plain roof shingle, regardless of traditional vs. shingled solar. Regarding effectiveness, as I recall from watching the video 3 months ago, the shingle option produces less power than traditional solar but because you can deploy it over a greater portion of your roof, there is a chance it can balance out or exceed traditional solar.
@4:35 They cut off the conversation about the Central micro inverter. There is a reason why! Be warned with only a single micro inverter for the whole roof it will only take 10% of shade on ANY individual Solar Shingle to shut down every solar shingle because they are wired in series like Christmas tree lights. That means trees, cloud cover another house...all you need is 10% of your roof shaded to get ZERO power
Not really because of "bypass diodes". All solar panels nowadays have a simple 600V "bypass diode" in their terminal box. It is soldered across the panel's terminals in reverse-bias to the current flow. The diode provides a lower impedance alternative pathway for the electric current of the other non-shaded panels to "by pass" the shaded panel(s) whose impedance has increased greatly due to shading. At worse, a partially shaded panel will take out just the panel itself and not the entire string. These diodes cost pennies at volume and could even be installed onto very old panels for the same effect. Some larger solar panels have bypass diodes installed across the rows or cells within the panel itself during its manufacture. This provides bypassing of a panel's internal rows or cells allowing the panel itself to continue providing some power in partial shading conditions.
Not necessarily, there are these thing called power optimizers that addresses some of those issues. And in some cases that’s not much of an issue. It really depends in a case by case basis and what the owner is willing to spend based on having the right information. Saying that a string inverter setup is straight up inferior is something that some salesperson would say to upsell you to a $28K system instead of a $18K system. Every setup has it’s plus and minus and related costs. I’m sure over time they’ll provide more choices and not to forget 3rd party add-ons that may address some of those issues.
This person is wrong. If you shade one panel of a string on a central inverter it averages in a ZERO out of how mnay panels are in the string and bring them all down, but NOT to zero. Micro inverters go on EACH panel. A central or string inverter wires in series. Microinverters are made for shaded situations and dont have a single point of failure like central inverters.
@@SunnySTX These are wired in series. They don’t have inbuilt micro inverters on every tile - that would be cost prohibitive and a maintenance nightmare.. There may be a microinverter in the fiberglass box at the end of each column but I think they are designed to go back to a normal string inverter as there are no microinverters that I know of that could take the wattage (45W per tile x say 20 = 900W) and potentially you could have as many as 30 in a column. Also the installation they show on their website has only one fiberglass box on the central column which means it’s more of a junction box designed to combine the strings. I’d assume this system would need bypass diodes on every panel and blocking diodes at the end of each string.
@@mondotv4216 they're 14 watts per shingle. String inverters run at 600V per string on residential so you could have ~28-32 in series based on climate thermal coefficient rating for location for MPPT operation.
@@priestesslucy There is no ventilation under these, unlike a rack mounted solar panel. A roof can become extremely hot. This is my biggest concern and I'd like to see independent real-world results... besides that concern, this looks like a compelling roofing product.
Cooling adds complications and potentially new failure modes. You will make up the difference in loss due to thermal coefficient on sizing. More solar shingles.
@@gipnor All Solar PV generation gets hot. That is why the best production months occur when it is cool and sunny. Here in Ontario, that is March and April. Then, in the summer months, we get sun earlier in the day but by solar noon, all our systems start to lose energy production because the modules get hot.
Water leakage isn’t an issue with today’s racking systems and flash feet. I noticed the .55 degradation after 25 years that’s not even in the ballpark. String Inverter technology …not class leading. No. Dollar/watt breakdowns every video I see on this is vague with no numbers. I guarantee solar sales aren’t made without a real world breakdown of how much watts of production are being produced for the cost. This could be a solid product for a niche clientele. There was also no mentioned of cell efficiency. We’re about 2 years from the release of tandem PV technology which will drive panel efficiency to the upper 20s. More efficiency equals choice of more power gen or less panels.
Dollar/watt breakdowns are a must in the solar industry. I do not trust solar companies for install because they overcharge on the equipment and recommendations. On top of that most don't even generate the power based off the quote.
Good luck when the insurance company forces you to get a new roof. Definitely not cost effective. You are right about the string inverter. Thats a big downside of these shingle panels. A single point of failure is not cool. And no shade mitigation is a deal breaker. Correct about todays attachments and flashings. Ever try to get a shingle manufacturer to honor their warranty? Have fun.
@@shroud1390 Funny you should say that. As I type this my roof is being replaced after recent series of Tornado and hail damage. I'm becoming more interested in these new rackless mounting options. I'm not gonna get solar for another 2 couple of years so i'm going to keep my options open. I love the fancy metal roofs where you don't even have to penetrate but damn they are expensive and i'm not in my "until I die" home yet.
@@boblatkey7160 like I said it depends on the cost. At this point there is no public information on their costs. So we don't know what it is. My point was they would have to undercut the total cost significantly to be viable.
For me now I don't care about design, colour and all those specs.... price is the most important thing. A company able to provide low cost solar panels will easily make a killing worldwide.
The thing is, it’s not just the price of the panels. You can even buy these in Ikea these days. It’s other things, like the convertor which needs replacing every 10-15 years, that makes solar too expensive still.
If you choose a white roof shingle to have a 50 degree cooler surface temperature over darker colored shingles, this will be a oven for the attic. I'd like to see what in attic heat blocker they come up with.
There is another advantage that they don't talk about. I ordered solar panels for my roof. They add weight to the roof and therefore that requires an engineering review and requires that your city or county needs to sign off on it. From a structural engineering point of view there is no additional load vs. shingles and should not require extra structural engineering scrutiny. My project has been delayed by my city for a long time due to the City engineer's questions and requirements.
I like the idea of being able to nailgun the panels to the side of our camper because of how lightweight the panels are... We've only got so much room on the roof.
Don't put holes in a camper. Just don't. For a camper you glue the flex panels to the roof or you have a rack that takes existing bolt holes, replace with longer screws (maybe the same screws) and reseal with the RV sealant. You CAN NOT EVER seal up the penetrations as well as they did at the RV factory. (and they have issues sealing them up) Better off with a rack system that slides into one of the storage areas accessed from outside, set it up and clamp it to the bumper. For just the 12V systems of the RV, you can do fine using a Harbor Freight 100 watt system. (plan to need to attach it to PVC to join the 4 panels and then weight it vs wind.) The Harbor Freight set is what I use now, screwed to a pallet,with the spring bar hitch system laid on it for weight so the wind doesn't blow it over. This has held up to 60 mph wind gusts. 28 ft bumper pull that will sit in one place most of the time. I have a utility trainer with 2 of the old 45 watt Harbor Freight panel sets mounted. Appx 11 years and still works fine. (pretty good results from that experiment but i wouldn't mount them to the trailer if doing it again. Separate and able to be angled wins) Flex panels glued to a CLEAN RV roof do fine. Not as efficient as panels you can angle to the best collection angle. Just putting them to 30 deg pitch pointed due S is an improvement for most of USA. (compared to flat on an RV roof)
As a solar business, since 1977, the most practical placement of solar panels is building a covered carport. It’s easier to service and the entire structure qualifies for tax credits.
Big problem with these is they are plastic panels and the sun deteriorates all of these plastic panels within 3 years and will only get 50% output. At 6:00 minutes in this video they deceive you by showing a output decline of 2-25 years of 55%. I guarantee that 55% will be at the two-year mark. Anyone in solar that is honest will advice you to get glass panels.
It's going to be a lot harder to keep these panels cleared of snow than raised panels. Also, the slope of roofs are not always optimal depending on latitude and time of year. Raised pannels can change this angle for greater efficiency.
I'm not quite if it's snowing, solar panels would be that effective at all tbh. I think this is more meant for dryer climates like California, Arizona, Florida, Texas and the lots.
@@ehombane But 25 years is typical for that style of shingle roof? Solar always uses 25 years and with efficiency gains, putting a new solar roof on in 25 years will provide much more energy or the homeowner will still have working solar and only do what is necessary for making the roof new. My roof is 20 years old in Phoenix and I am pulling the shingles soon for new felt which is normal. My so,ar adds to the cost of the job (about 20%) but I will only have my solar at the end and not brand new solar with the benefit of years of efficiency improvements. ~I hope this new product succeeds. It plus storage will be great for homeowners.
Why not glue the panels on to a rubber canvas like pondliner, u can cut that to size for any roof. And that lasts same 30 years. Can be underwater (like 2inch or so for better cooling. )
How do the home insurers feel about this? Will they pay to replace these after storm damage or just pay the value of an equivalent standard shingle roof? Are premiums inflated to adjust for that?
Imagine if every home in the sunny states of the West (California, Arizona, Nevada, etc) had roofs that were generating solar electricity. Game changer right there, never mind about the rest of the country.
More over, all those homes could generate more electricity than Hoover Dam, meaning we remove the dam and return the Colorodo River back to its original condition.
The video talks about the loss of .035% coefficient starting at 77 F, and increasing as the temperature increases. What is the loss at 90 degrees+ that I get here is south Florida? How much does that affect the production of power?
Its .35 not .035 huge difference. It will lost about 6 to 13 percent at peak heat ( .6 to 1.3 kw in a 10k system) my concern here in florida is the wind resistance and insurance premiums.
The only advantage that rack mounted panels have is this: they can be installed on roofs that don't face the ideal angle/direction. Although less attractive, the panels can be tilted to maximize output. Since my roof faces due south, *I WANT these shingles* !
Eh, not quite. A west facing roof can't put south facing panels even on the best of rack mounted systems, and the vast majority are still going to be angled the same as the roof. Now in flat roofs then sure you can rotate and tilt as much as you want. The biggest benefit of rack mounted panels is the use of micro inverters in case you have cobble together panels with different angles on them. If you have a south facing roof then these panels are a good choice, not cheap mind you, but if you were going to pay to have your roof replaced AND you were going to pay for solar then this definitely is a good solution.
@@Mike__B I guess you missed my point slightly. Not all homes are built on a 'grid system' where streets run north/ south and east/west. In a lot of meandering suburbs, plenty of homes face slightly less than ideal direction (eg: SSW) and the panels are tilted on the racks to make up the difference. Although this looks less attractive, some people would rather have better performance from their panels over how it looks. That said, I agree with the other points you made.
@@marceld6061 No I understood your point, I'm just saying rack mounted systems typically are not going to orient themselves in a different direction to maximize sunlight exposure, much like these shingles they almost always will be facing the same direction as the roof does.
@@Mike__B Where I live (west coast) and where I have travelled (Hawai'i) I have seen more than "a few" that have the panels adjusted to point in a more ideal direction when the house doesn't face due south. The panels are not on a flat plane. They are all tilted. Majority are parallel to the roof. That can be because the roof faces the ideal direction or it can be that the homeowner wanted a uniform look or it could be that the estimate for the installation was too high with having each panel tilted. I have had homeowners can make "less than ideal" decisions based on budgetary constraints during my many years as a contractor. The additional cost of orienting the panels during installation would probably pay for itself in energy return. But that extra few hundred bucks up front can sway decisions.
My biggest question isn't if it's "weather/wet" proof... How about how good is it in frozen rain, 20 degrees below zero, and heavy snow? That's where I can help make a decision with Midwest use
It's a solid state high density silicone design, aka, itll hold up better than shingles due to being more resistant to thermal expansion. Also since it's not rack mounted, load stress along the mounting points is non-existent as the weight is equally distributed across the entire roofing surface rather than a few clamps. Aka, these are almost better in every capacity from a structural standpoint. Although I doubt they'll be anywhere near as efficient. Thoigh I would argue that having smaller, panel a which require less resources to make that are more widely adopted, is more important than squeezing out every last drop of efficiency. Also because their directly on top of the roof, I wonder if the thermal mass of your roof can actually provide some cooling effect considering homes are air conditioned. It would be amazing if that actually lead to greater thermal performance over rack mounted panels.
That’s a good question I’m going to venture a guess they definitely tested in different temperatures and weather conditions I’m sure there’s probably a good amount of loss of efficiency with it how much is obviously something you would probably have to contact them about but I would venture a guess that you could use this on like the East Coast for example if it does work with all those things mentioned I must admit I would definitely be most impressed with this as far as solar power goes definitely the best all-around I’ve ever seen I think out of all the different companies and adverts including Tesla
@@glamdring0007 Even on the East Coast in the areas of like Buffalo in Syracuse to get some of the highest numbers of snowfall the roofs are buried under snow continuously few days at most
@Zolar Czakl That’s what I thought I was like when they actually do okay during the winter because they’re not losing energy from being overly hot it would actually help them run better kind of like computers when I keep them in over refrigerated room for servers they run better being colder than if they were at room temperature. Just like a lot of people ask what about if you live in someplace like Seattle or Boston where it rains all the time it is cloudy it’s like yeah you wouldn’t get as much energy produced but you would still get energy you don’t need it to be shining son like Florida or Arizona or something it just wouldn’t be quite as effective but it would still work and people still have them in those areas in the technology will only get better and better every year
In my region, *the fire department will not fight fires of rooftop PV installations* simply because of the risks for the firefighters. No "excuses" needed - just rational thinking applied.
Hi FD, Miles from the video. This product passed an electrical hazard check with zero hazard. That was a panel that we electrified, broke, and tossed into a tub of water. The fire departments said we were the first to pass with zero hazard.
@@milesproctor7392 Maybe READ my comment first before freaking out...? You are miles away from what I am talking about. Here is a little story for you: a friend of mine gets to test drive cars for top car maker in the EU where he works in development. Their combustion models now have "emissions" that are CLEANER than the air that goes INTO the system. He is still fined for "pollution" when he drives to a business meeting in Antwerp - simply because the administration of Green Technophobes can't wrap their head around the facts of chemistry and physics and are putting his hi-tech vehicle in the same category as a diesel lorry from the 1950s based on outdated criteria. *And that's precisely what I am saying: Firefighters and all other bureaucracy are thinking in categories = simplistic patterns, not actual facts.* - and my comment is highlighting a problem with just that: categories. ... as for excuses: in my area, we also get taxed on the electricity we make, even if we don't feed it into the grid! Again, no excused needed - just basic maths applied.
I was recently informed by a GAF solar shingle installer that I must have my entire roof shingled when this product is used or else GAF could not offer a warranty. This was a problem for me because only 6 months ago I had one side of my house re-roofed (Owens-Corning) due to leaks, but now that I am ready for solar I would be required to re-roof that side again - only this time with GAF - before I could get a warranty with the GAF solar shingles. It's all-or-nothing with GAF.
Wouldn't it be best to keep an air gap for heat issues in the attic? If someone choose white shingles to benefit from the 50 degree cooler roof surface temperature 🌡️, this product is an oven.
The "Vacant Walking Areas" he mentions at 5:45 is actually a Fire Code requirement to allow Firefighters access. Haven't seen anything to indicate that Timberline is exempt from these requirements.
That code is too ensure that firefighters can access as much of the roof that they need. Rack-mount solar panels are brittle and because there's no support under the glass, they will break if walked on, but these are unbreakable, so because a firefighter could walk ON these, rather than having to go around, these would be way better from a firefighting point of view.
That is mental that such a low percentage of roofs get solar. We re-roofed in Northern England 2 years ago and got black in line (where the panel is the primary waterproof layer and the roof membrane the secondary) panels fitted into the roof. It cost around US $10,000 for a 7kw system and it saved about $5000 in slate cost, as less slates were needed. We don't even get much sun in Northern England, I have no idea why so few people would consider solar. This system looks good.
Metal roofs can use bracket systems that don’t go through the roof thus avoiding holes. The brackets tighten down on the metal ridges and connect to rooftop solar panels. Best option in my opinion.
Great concept - very practical - I see more room for improvement in eliminating the majority of rooftop cables , connectors, and connector housings with flat interlocking buss bars or similar locking tabs.
Im not an expert but I think you can apply for some or of government assistance or premium loan if you decide to get those even now. It depends where you live and the local laws ofc, so take my comment with a bucket of salt but it worth to check if there are some programs or bank premiums in your area.
Why in the world would they ever get it equal to a standard roof?! It’s a solar panel not a hunk of tar pressed together. As soon as Ferrari comes out with a car that costs no more than a Corolla I’m gonna buy one.
Excellent review, but I don't think it improves the look over traditional panels all that much, but certainly better than the older silver anodized as seen at 7:21. GAF really needs to make fake panels that match the solar ones and do the whole roof in one style instead of this weird mismatch of smooth panels with what looks like raised seams and architectural style shingles 5:45. Obviously the efficiency isn't as good at 14.5W/ft² vs 21W/ft² for panels and that's fine if you have enough space, but I really wonder how well they handle typical issues like shading, etc. They don't appear to have any type of optimizers built in to each panel and they admit, it's a traditional string inverter that relies on every panel producing the same to get output. Typical issues we have in the NE is snow that builds up on the bottom edge of the roof. It seems like you'd get no output if just the bottom row was covered since all the cells are in series sideways. I'm sure they will continue to make improvements. Another thing that would be nice is to make a ridge vent with an integrated junction box and run the wiring caps all the way up, so they look like they are part of the roof style instead of a cover that tries to hide the wiring. I like that critters can't get under them, that's a bonus.
While the "shading issue" does apply, so many houses have been built over the past three decades with zero shade, that the issue does not apply too many consumers. Of course, the real question is cost and longevity.
@@valkyriefrost5301 What does apply to a lot of customers, at least in the north of the US, is snow. For example, yesterday it dropped about 2" and by noon, the snow slid down and stopped at the asphalt shingles and covered the bottom set of panels of my house. It's still there and the rest of the panels are producing electricity just fine. Also while I recognize many areas are different regarding shading and trees, by me, it's required to have at least 2 trees in the front in any new development. And while those 2 trees were shorter when I installed solar, they now shade the bottom row at times which makes no meaningful difference to my annual output since only 2 panels of 36 get shaded.
@@scottkolaya2110 - I was not saying that this solution would apply to every home across the US. Only that many homes are built is treeless communities, especially in the South and Southwest parts of the country. Other situations, like yours, will require more a thought out solution to be viable.
@@scottkolaya2110 The reason while your not covered panels are still producing it that micro-inverters are used. GAFs string inverter, by contrast, would mean the inverter shuts off when not enough panels are producing.
I like that Brian corrects the solar guy for his incorrect use of inverter terms. Central inverters aren't used in residential settings, string inverters are.
The downside is the lack of ventilation behind the cells, which will decrease efficiency on hot days and because it's flexible, the durability might be an issue too. I will go for cheap regular panels even if it is a bit more effort to mount them on the roof... It's crazy how much power you can get out off your roof nowadays...
"Ugly" - yeah that's my biggest gripe with solar panels. Whenever I fly over the buildings where I live, it's just nasty... (To anyone who thinks I own a small plane and am serious: I don't and I'm not.)
You didn’t even talk about the pigeons that nest under rack mounted solar panels. I know because I had to deal with it. I had to call the company I leased the system from and they had me pay $500 to come out and remove the pigeons that had nested and add a barrier around the system keep pigeons out.
That's done by producing and manufacturing with the eccomies of scale. Mass production reduces cost tremendously that's why the assembly line made car ownership possible
@@dannydaw59 he said that is equal to roofing and an similar sized solar array. The only difference is that you can walk on it and is not risk of damaging the roofing with the bolts.
This is the part that almost makes me conspiratorial, because all the ads about 'gamechangers' (I see three of them) just makes me 'want to wait a little more'. However, I had always heard the roof is the least efficient and you should have tracked panels that move with the sun. But they almost NEVER actually talk to a person that has them, that shows the bills showing how much it has saved. I almost think its fossil fuel companies doing ti to make people wait just a little longer.....which is usually til gas prices go down.
@@mikearchibald744 a janitor at my store got some for his house over a year ago. Just solar, no batteries. He said it has replaced his electricity costs so far. He doesn't pay for electricity anymore. Only the monthly payment for the panels.
@@trinsit Well, yeah, the question is how many panels and how FOR the panels instead of electricity. If your payments for the solar are the same as electricity, you are no further ahead And if there are NO batteries, then what happens on cloudy days?
@@mikearchibald744 you do come out ahead because now there is a point at which the bill stops when you pay the system off. Also, their house is still wired into the city electric grid and power is continuous. It's just that while the solar panels produce electricity, the meter moves backwards.
@@trinsit I see, so he does net metering and supplies enough to the grid to offset any payments. They have that system here too, thats my main complaint because IF the utility would actually PAY for the power then tons of people would invest in creating power. BUt all they do in most places I've checked is balance the credits at the end of the year and you may owe them, but they never pay you, so essentially they are STEALING power from you.
I definitely agree with this. I wonder if there is enough solar panels to cover all new constructions? On top of that, the infrastructure required to manufacture all those solar panels.
A small amount of solar is mandated in new construction in some places like California. And that means the wiring for the inverters, panels, and interconnection to the grid are already in the home, and customer can expand the amount of solar as their budget or need expands.
Mandates don’t seem to be the way to go in this case. In some places the payback is long and the cost is high or roofs are under tree cover most of the time. Make emissions appropriately costly and companies/people will make the decision on their own.
Seriously look into it. Start with the alternator magnet version of self running generators. Then combine that with the power wall. It will put out clean energy 24/7. Especially in energy effecient homes
Great idea for a product that should only improve. I do wonder about the cost but solar is always a major investment. I have no doubt they can eventually achieve cost parity with normal panels. I think the others will be copying them because if these last they're the obvious choice
So what they fail to tell you is that it can’t bet used all the way to the edge of the roof, nor can they go around any cutouts. Because of that I went with a rack system. Difference in power creation was ~50% difference.
5:47 Seems the GAF solar roof looses MORE at -0.35% than the Panasonic rack mounted roof, possible because of air gap beneath the rack mounted system. Bet temperature degradation will be greater if the roof attic is "spray-foam" insulated and "encapsulated," because this leads to a hotter roof face temperature.
Why is the industry so obsessed with putting these over rooftops? If they did it as a pergola, gazebo, or carport, they could just mass manufacture it as a kit for cheap installation and avoid the structural risks. It would work for most people. More than the fraction of people who happen to need a new roof this year.
I am really impressed with this! Making solar an easier thing to interact and integrate into existing roofing businesses is always a good thing. My only concern is durablity to hail. You are doing great, does your company have a social media presence?
The question with hail is, how big, how dense. Most GAF products and 30 yr laminates in general do great to 1” hail, however we start getting to 2” and above, it’s likely damaged. We get to 4” and bigger, not much out there for roofing that isn’t going to have some sort of damage.
8:35 sorry the Bernoulli principle means the panel will tend to stick close to the roof with wind. There will be less pressure between the roof and panel.
The Bernoulli principle says that fast moving air has lower pressure than slow moving air. The discussion in the video was correct. Slow moving air next to the roof (high pressure) will tend to lift the panels, relative to the fast moving air above them (low pressure).
okay so now that this idea exists, can we then put a perfermated pipe at the top of the roof to trickles cold water down to coll them. then collecting it in a tank and pumping it back up. this can clean and cool them and maybe offer some warmish water for the house. And if any embers falls on the roof during fire season then it will take care of that too.
@@fatboy19831 didn't seem so, the water pump would be small and the roof area very large. Plus the efficiency boost. Also water is very good at absorbing heat and is able to bend light into he panels from non direct light should that be relevant considering it would a thin film. Your tank then would then also be able to collect rain, which means less demand for central water too and be covered to stop evaporation. So I do t really see a problem. Or a complexity issue...what complexity?, especially with things you can get at home depot easy.
@@fatboy19831 if they provide the shingles and install them then I can build the rest in under a day. Whats to difficult toassproduc3 about this? Are people dim?
How do these meet the NEC 2017/2020 panel level shutdown requirements? I'd imagine having to purchase a per-shingle tigo (or similar) optimizer / shutdown would be even more prohibitively expensive and break the aesthetic benefit. What are the per-panel wattage output and @ what voltage? How is grounding handled for all of these shingle sized panels?
I was also looking for the answer to this question. Maybe they are loopholing it, and calling the whole array one module with a single rapid shutdown immediately under the roof surface.
Problem i find is that what if one goes bad? You can’t just yank it off since its nailed. Yeah a roofer can come and do it, but you are removing a shingle and then creating more holes to re-nail it. On a wrack you just screw it off and your good to go.
So at 14w per foot on an average size home your looking at a product that will produce 1/3 of a homes power needs. It would take 30 years to break even and your probably having to replace after 24 years...
Not a useful application, roof space on an RV is very limited, you want the higher power per square foot of the fixed panels. Though a flexible solar panel that can be rolled up would be a game changer as an awning upgrade.
@D R This isn't a typical solar panel. Traditional solar is made with more components, much of which could be recycled. This uses less material, but is it more or less recyclable? The more panels that are out there, higher the prices and/or incentives can make recycling viable, generally speaking.
Regular shingles are installed offset so the overlap seam is covered by a solid span. Because of the wiring lining up there is no overlap so the seams are all lined up. That can't be great.
The thin-film is immune to cracking unlike regular crystalline silicon cells used in conventional solar. Thin-film solar also can be rolled up and wrapped around structures.
@@edwardlouie These bickering Louie brothers are both wrong/right to some extent. It depends on materials (I suppose ETFE, moncrystalline silicon, aluminum bus-bar). Also, material thickness and additives, supporting structure, panel arrangement, electrical configuration, roofer behaviour and much more.
Without micro-inverters doesn't the whole installation suffer if one of the panels gets shaded or go bad in some way? Other than that it looks neat. Need to redo the roof anyway and solar would be nice.
Love microinverters, have Enphase myself, but string inverters are fine with shade these days. (Though optimizers would be helpful.) Maybe if voltages work out, you can series a few of these into microinverters or optimizers in combiner boxes.
0:14 That vertical white tube brakes down the whole string. If you got shadow on one cell of the whole panel string, this is the weakest point in your chain and limits the maximum current. Series connection. 🤷🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
I used to sell solar, and would have to say to clients " you could almost eliminate your$87.00 a month average bill if you purchase this $24,000.00 system, if it lasts 20 years".
How do you repair or replace a panel /microinverter when it goes out? If one of the micro inverters goes out will the system continue to function since it's based on a string inverter?
The only problem with GAF is that they won't talk to potential installers, or resellers. I don't know if they are operating out of some sort of archaic dealer network or what, but i've repeatedly tried to reach out to them for more information.
I am a custom home builder, I would for sure offer this to my clients. How much is it? How does it stand up to Hail? Here in North Texas we have one that requires roof replacements every ten years or so.
One inverter vs. a separate micro-inverter for each panel means the whole system is compromised to the lowest power output panel on the whole roof. Ie. if one panel sit in the shade, it's output is much less than the rest of the roof but because of how inverters work, this means that is only takes the lesser amount of voltage from ALL the panels. This is a MAJOR drawback!!!
Great product, very easy to install and looks great on the roof. I also think they have less chance of blowing off in a storm because the wind can not grab under it like a traditional solarpanel.
@@brianguirola4219 yep. We had all our installs survive a cat 5 and panels only got trashed from trees. Not the wind. All this stuff is engineered and will def meet any windload codes
The marketing of this product focuses on the low aspect ratio and the ease of application via standard roofing techniques. In California, the light roof load compared to conventional high weight load solar makes it desirable in an earthquake prone state. However, I would be interested to see the electrical connection methodology from solar cell-to-solar cell; series connection? What is the failure mechanism of a line of elements and the panel as an entity? There was some limited discussion of the external circuit connection mechanics and the external electronics but needs more discussion. Interconnection of panel to main line was shown to be a relatively simple process but where are the converters located, what are converter efficiency? What are the resistive losses to get to the converters and the measured voltage drops? How difficult is the process to trouble shoot and isolate a failing panel? How many solar cell lines must fault before the panel becomes ineffective? A video with a bit more electrical information is merited. Finally, after watching all the failures of solar companies and fraudulent claims on UA-cam, much more detail is necessary. Solar companies exposed by News organizations across the country for fraudulent claims, and taking advantage of people with incredible costs with zero power generation and “special contract clauses”, well just be careful. I hope Solar eventually becomes standard but it may be some time. Fingers crossed.
Wait do you mean the solar roof tiles on the fake houses, on the fake street, on the movie set at Universal Studios (Desperate Housewives)? hahahahaha!
I like this system but think the rack system that allows airflow under the panels help keep the building and the panels cooler. The panels provide a shade for the roof and will decrease the inside temperature. Same affect as setting under a shade in the direct sunlight.
If they can make it were we don't have to re do the whole roof and just install the solar roofing part at a reasonable price. I think the retrofit would be a massive win!
It looks like you install it alongside traditional tiles anyways, so it could be possible! Of course it probably won't match as closely as Tesla's tiles, but probably it's way lower cost, and of course conventional solar panels don't match at all.
love the concept, but it seems like regular solar panels are better in pretty much every way except they are a bit less good looking. hope they improve the output and longevity, which would make this more appealing. also, would love to know how difficult or easy it is for these to be recycled.
I will say that this could save a lot on construction costs since traditional panels require more expertise to install and there's a shortage of such installers. so it could mean less expensive and having it completed months earlier.
So still expensive( cost of new roof, standard solar panels) when it should be lower cost right from the start because your cutting labor. But no, companies charging as much as possible.
I see the neighbors panels are facing another direction, assuming south. That makes me wonder how efficient this roof is. I'd love to see a generation comparison to the neighbors. If it's anywhere near their results that would be very good.
I remember being so young and loved watching CNET specially when brian does the report. So refreshing watching something that has nothing to do with politics or negativity. @cnet y'all are the original G. 😎
The biggest thing holding solar back is people thinking that they should get paid the same for juice they are putting back into the grid as they are for getting it out. The power companies are definitely not paying retail prices for the power they get from coal, so why should they pay that for solar from homeowners? They are the ones who have to maintain the grid and manage all of the new sources to try and maintain smooth reliable power to everyone else, and that ain't cheap.
That is sounds great. I am in the Solar industry as a service technician always consider after installation servicing and Remediation. If the vast majority of the industry is not in line with this scope of work you will be stuck with a niche product that no one will like to repair and service if needed.
@6:00 out put decline would suggest these have half the lifespan of traditional. Would be interested to see a full cost breakdown. Installation and all. Is it about the same cost after figuring in replacement cost? What kind of manufacturing reaources do these require vs traditional?
One more thing for the roofer to screw up. Will they install your solar panels like they install insulation? Home owner - "Hey can you guys put some insulation in my roof while you have the decking off?" Roofing contractor - "Sure, no problem." Opens up roof, throws in a bundled bale of insulation, and closes the roof without ever "installing" the insulation. Neighbors - "Hey, nice solar roof, have you noticed any difference in your electric bill?" Home owner - "No, not at all, and my heating and cooling bills are still high!"
I wonder if they could just delete the underlaying asphalt shingle and wood sheet. Make these the roof on an open frame attic for maximum thermal air transfer
@@rubidot they said 2-25 years because they know that all these style panels deteriorate quickly after 2. If you place these on the north side of your house where it gets no sun then you can hope for 25 years lol
If this went on a new house with a storage battery and a connection for an EV the added cost may be offset by the electricity produced. Plus likely the price of electricity will increase every year. A new house could be designed so the roof size, shape, angle ect. provide the most benefit.
While my solar is bigger it is also surviving monsoons here in the SW when neighbors are losing shingles. If this is a cheaper alternative and cost effective to replace then it's headed int he right direction. If it has similar potential for shingle loss in high wind storms but similar expense to "Ugly" solar then this accomplishes nothing for me
wow this would ease all the concerns I currently have with solar. I didn't know exactly how regular solar could affect the roof but I knew it had to have a big effect on the life of it. Well, now I know you can cause leaks or crack the rafters. Hope the cost comes down on these guys
The roofer they interviewed was painting a really negative picture of using lag bolts for no reason. First of all, lag bolts aren't the only way to secure racking to your roof. Second, unlike what he said, most rafters a 2x6 not 2x4. A lag bolt is not going to damage the integrity of a roof or rafter. Plus, it is EASY to know if you missed a rafter. The feel of driving a lag into thin air versus hitting the rafter is completely different. They were trying to sell these things big time. They look cool but definitely a lot of propaganda.
Can't believe they didn't show a finished roof with this product. If the roof is filled with things like at 7:45 then it could be really ugly and a lot of the argument for this approach seemed to be that it's just like regular roofing. We really don't know that without seeing the finished product though.
I wish they would have shown the home after the contractor had completed the job. Also would have been beneficial to see how they cut that product in certain locations. Very promising product
Looks great, hope it takes off! One way or another when I eventually have to redo my roof I'm definitely going in on this or similar, despite what will likely be modest energy gains living in the PNW.
Solar panels need airflow to keep them cool the hotter that they get the less electricity they make , this is a good idea that will not work as good as the old ways of doing this , solar is just a grift like all renewable energy
I haven't read all the comments, so I don't know if anyone has brought up the question of which nd. What would happen when a hurricane comes through with 100+ mph winds? I've seen asphalt, slate, and clay shingles tipped up and blown/broken off in such conditions. I didn't see any kind of fastening on the downhill side of these panels; how susceptible are they to this effect?
Well done GAF. Even if I don't buy this product whenever I get solar, I love this innovation and am cheering it on.
Agreed. Competition is healthy for everyone.
Yeah. Why hasn't solar taken off in all these years is beyond me.
@@Mark1Mach2 long term investment. How many years does it take to pay for a full house system? 20yrs? 30yrs? And yes it should make your house have a better resale value but a ton of people don't buy a house a 20yrs old and stay there 30yrs which means most can't afford the upfront cost hoping they will be there in 20-30yrs to pay if off and start to save on electric bills. I live in a 1700 total, 480 square foot living house. I am the perfect candidate for solar because I have over 3 times the roof of my living area as non living, (porch, carport, patio) which means I could put all the solar on the roofs not directly over my living but the added up front cost, 20yr investment recoup time, the added home owners insurance, as they are covering more "house", more worries about leaking roofs, damaged solar, inverters, batteries if I want power in a hurricane when the power company is out for a week or 2 here in south Louisiana, to worries about a hurricane tearing them off, cleaning, maintenance, and after 20yrs after I pay them off, now they don't work as good so I need more panels, or they need repairs. So for me it just not there yet but i would LOVE if every roof/property had solar, clean, renewable, free solar, its just not right for me.
Does that really look better?? I think not.
@@markbedard1886 "look better" ... I don't understand your comment. Aesthetically, solar doesn't look good vs a plain roof shingle, regardless of traditional vs. shingled solar. Regarding effectiveness, as I recall from watching the video 3 months ago, the shingle option produces less power than traditional solar but because you can deploy it over a greater portion of your roof, there is a chance it can balance out or exceed traditional solar.
@4:35 They cut off the conversation about the Central micro inverter. There is a reason why!
Be warned with only a single micro inverter for the whole roof it will only take 10% of shade on ANY individual Solar Shingle to shut down every solar shingle because they are wired in series like Christmas tree lights.
That means trees, cloud cover another house...all you need is 10% of your roof shaded to get ZERO power
Not really because of "bypass diodes".
All solar panels nowadays have a simple 600V "bypass diode" in their terminal box. It is soldered across the panel's terminals in reverse-bias to the current flow. The diode provides a lower impedance alternative pathway for the electric current of the other non-shaded panels to "by pass" the shaded panel(s) whose impedance has increased greatly due to shading.
At worse, a partially shaded panel will take out just the panel itself and not the entire string. These diodes cost pennies at volume and could even be installed onto very old panels for the same effect.
Some larger solar panels have bypass diodes installed across the rows or cells within the panel itself during its manufacture. This provides bypassing of a panel's internal rows or cells allowing the panel itself to continue providing some power in partial shading conditions.
Not necessarily, there are these thing called power optimizers that addresses some of those issues. And in some cases that’s not much of an issue. It really depends in a case by case basis and what the owner is willing to spend based on having the right information. Saying that a string inverter setup is straight up inferior is something that some salesperson would say to upsell you to a $28K system instead of a $18K system. Every setup has it’s plus and minus and related costs. I’m sure over time they’ll provide more choices and not to forget 3rd party add-ons that may address some of those issues.
This person is wrong. If you shade one panel of a string on a central inverter it averages in a ZERO out of how mnay panels are in the string and bring them all down, but NOT to zero. Micro inverters go on EACH panel. A central or string inverter wires in series. Microinverters are made for shaded situations and dont have a single point of failure like central inverters.
@@SunnySTX These are wired in series. They don’t have inbuilt micro inverters on every tile - that would be cost prohibitive and a maintenance nightmare.. There may be a microinverter in the fiberglass box at the end of each column but I think they are designed to go back to a normal string inverter as there are no microinverters that I know of that could take the wattage (45W per tile x say 20 = 900W) and potentially you could have as many as 30 in a column. Also the installation they show on their website has only one fiberglass box on the central column which means it’s more of a junction box designed to combine the strings. I’d assume this system would need bypass diodes on every panel and blocking diodes at the end of each string.
@@mondotv4216 they're 14 watts per shingle. String inverters run at 600V per string on residential so you could have ~28-32 in series based on climate thermal coefficient rating for location for MPPT operation.
5:40 I'd like to hear more about that -0.35% temperature coefficient. Cooling the underside with ventilation had always been so crucial.
Isn't that worse than the figure listed for the ordinary panels?
@@priestesslucy There is no ventilation under these, unlike a rack mounted solar panel. A roof can become extremely hot. This is my biggest concern and I'd like to see independent real-world results... besides that concern, this looks like a compelling roofing product.
Cooling adds complications and potentially new failure modes. You will make up the difference in loss due to thermal coefficient on sizing. More solar shingles.
@@gipnor All Solar PV generation gets hot. That is why the best production months occur when it is cool and sunny. Here in Ontario, that is March and April. Then, in the summer months, we get sun earlier in the day but by solar noon, all our systems start to lose energy production because the modules get hot.
thats why this was not worth making a video for this, wasted my time watching any of it.
Water leakage isn’t an issue with today’s racking systems and flash feet. I noticed the .55 degradation after 25 years that’s not even in the ballpark. String Inverter technology …not class leading. No. Dollar/watt breakdowns every video I see on this is vague with no numbers. I guarantee solar sales aren’t made without a real world breakdown of how much watts of production are being produced for the cost. This could be a solid product for a niche clientele. There was also no mentioned of cell efficiency. We’re about 2 years from the release of tandem PV technology which will drive panel efficiency to the upper 20s. More efficiency equals choice of more power gen or less panels.
I like this comment. Pretty good points made that we need to be aware of.
Dollar/watt breakdowns are a must in the solar industry. I do not trust solar companies for install because they overcharge on the equipment and recommendations. On top of that most don't even generate the power based off the quote.
Good luck when the insurance company forces you to get a new roof. Definitely not cost effective. You are right about the string inverter. Thats a big downside of these shingle panels. A single point of failure is not cool. And no shade mitigation is a deal breaker. Correct about todays attachments and flashings. Ever try to get a shingle manufacturer to honor their warranty? Have fun.
@@shroud1390 Funny you should say that. As I type this my roof is being replaced after recent series of Tornado and hail damage. I'm becoming more interested in these new rackless mounting options. I'm not gonna get solar for another 2 couple of years so i'm going to keep my options open. I love the fancy metal roofs where you don't even have to penetrate but damn they are expensive and i'm not in my "until I die" home yet.
@@hmurchison8123 standing seam metal roof is the way to go!
I'd still want rack-mounted panels. 1. Have microinverters, 2. Potentially run cooler which reduces efficiency loss on hot days.
I think it comes down to cost ultimately if it's half the price 60% the efficiency would be acceptable
@@boblatkey7160 like I said it depends on the cost. At this point there is no public information on their costs. So we don't know what it is. My point was they would have to undercut the total cost significantly to be viable.
For me now I don't care about design, colour and all those specs.... price is the most important thing. A company able to provide low cost solar panels will easily make a killing worldwide.
The thing is, it’s not just the price of the panels. You can even buy these in Ikea these days.
It’s other things, like the convertor which needs replacing every 10-15 years, that makes solar too expensive still.
Efficiency, longevity and durability is important too
Most important how much it cost and what is the output W/m2
Ok checked the website and no public info about price or output...
If you choose a white roof shingle to have a 50 degree cooler surface temperature over darker colored shingles, this will be a oven for the attic. I'd like to see what in attic heat blocker they come up with.
There is another advantage that they don't talk about.
I ordered solar panels for my roof. They add weight to the roof and therefore that requires an engineering review and requires that your city or county needs to sign off on it.
From a structural engineering point of view there is no additional load vs. shingles and should not require extra structural engineering scrutiny.
My project has been delayed by my city for a long time due to the City engineer's questions and requirements.
Your city sounds quite inconvenient I have just ordered panels and I’m going through none of this.
Hahah do you have to ask for permission to flush too?
I like the idea of being able to nailgun the panels to the side of our camper because of how lightweight the panels are... We've only got so much room on the roof.
Don't put holes in a camper.
Just don't.
For a camper you glue the flex panels to the roof or you have a rack that takes existing bolt holes, replace with longer screws (maybe the same screws) and reseal with the RV sealant.
You CAN NOT EVER seal up the penetrations as well as they did at the RV factory. (and they have issues sealing them up)
Better off with a rack system that slides into one of the storage areas accessed from outside, set it up and clamp it to the bumper.
For just the 12V systems of the RV, you can do fine using a Harbor Freight 100 watt system.
(plan to need to attach it to PVC to join the 4 panels and then weight it vs wind.)
The Harbor Freight set is what I use now, screwed to a pallet,with the spring bar hitch system laid on it for weight so the wind doesn't blow it over. This has held up to 60 mph wind gusts. 28 ft bumper pull that will sit in one place most of the time.
I have a utility trainer with 2 of the old 45 watt Harbor Freight panel sets mounted. Appx 11 years and still works fine. (pretty good results from that experiment but i wouldn't mount them to the trailer if doing it again. Separate and able to be angled wins)
Flex panels glued to a CLEAN RV roof do fine. Not as efficient as panels you can angle to the best collection angle.
Just putting them to 30 deg pitch pointed due S is an improvement for most of USA. (compared to flat on an RV roof)
@@fhuber7507 you're right. Actually I used a caulking gun for the cheap panels we have on the front. We don't own a nailgun, only a caulking gun
@@fhuber7507 either way, it would be impossible to caulk the cheap ones we have now to the wall. The lightweight panels would be way easier
If it has an awning perhaps it could be used there.
Optionally add heat pipes on the backs of these to: 1. cool the PV cells, 2. provide heating and/or hot water
There are panels that do just that, look at Linus Tech Tips video. (For the panels/entertainment, not as much for solar.)
Cost
@@user-dr2pg8fk2i Thermal inefficiencies will cost you more. Heat pipes will keep the cost above standard panels.
@@dundeemt multiple companies have looked at cooling modules. None of them have done it. What have you figured out that they haven't?
Version 1.0. Concept is great. Give this company couple of years and they might do product updates in 2.0 to bring costs down and efficiency up.
Yup, plus other shingle companies releasing competing products. Pushes quality up and cost down as they compete for our business
As a solar business, since 1977, the most practical placement of solar panels is building a covered carport.
It’s easier to service and the entire structure qualifies for tax credits.
The yard is a good place too
Can’t seem to find any that would look good in my driveway.
but wont the shade of the solar panels on a house help cool the house down in summer?
@@steviegbcool
Not very much.
I am sure the tax credit angle is a great sales pitch but hope your clients dont get audited.
They could easily incorporate these into building codes. Require every new home built to have enough solar to power the house plus 40%
Brilliant product. Needs to be globally launched.
Big problem with these is they are plastic panels and the sun deteriorates all of these plastic panels within 3 years and will only get 50% output. At 6:00 minutes in this video they deceive you by showing a output decline of 2-25 years of 55%. I guarantee that 55% will be at the two-year mark. Anyone in solar that is honest will advice you to get glass panels.
It's going to be a lot harder to keep these panels cleared of snow than raised panels. Also, the slope of roofs are not always optimal depending on latitude and time of year. Raised pannels can change this angle for greater efficiency.
I'm not quite if it's snowing, solar panels would be that effective at all tbh. I think this is more meant for dryer climates like California, Arizona, Florida, Texas and the lots.
@@tonyli2918 In dryer sunnier climates people ran out of 'excuses' LONG ago.
@@tonyli2918 I'm watching this video from the south of France and je suis interested by this new technologie !
I'd worry about heat and longevity compared to regular Solar panels.
they casually threw the concept of 25 years.
@@ehombane But 25 years is typical for that style of shingle roof? Solar always uses 25 years and with efficiency gains, putting a new solar roof on in 25 years will provide much more energy or the homeowner will still have working solar and only do what is necessary for making the roof new. My roof is 20 years old in Phoenix and I am pulling the shingles soon for new felt which is normal. My so,ar adds to the cost of the job (about 20%) but I will only have my solar at the end and not brand new solar with the benefit of years of efficiency improvements. ~I hope this new product succeeds. It plus storage will be great for homeowners.
Why not glue the panels on to a rubber canvas like pondliner, u can cut that to size for any roof. And that lasts same 30 years. Can be underwater (like 2inch or so for better cooling. )
Got to give it to this seller. He got it all right: articulation, expertise, language, all the checkboxes. The product seems great.
How do the home insurers feel about this? Will they pay to replace these after storm damage or just pay the value of an equivalent standard shingle roof? Are premiums inflated to adjust for that?
Ask insurance company!
Imagine if every home in the sunny states of the West (California, Arizona, Nevada, etc) had roofs that were generating solar electricity. Game changer right there, never mind about the rest of the country.
More over, all those homes could generate more electricity than Hoover Dam, meaning we remove the dam and return the Colorodo River back to its original condition.
Yet the power companies (AZ) fight us at every step and destroy nearly every incentive to go solar.
All shingled roofs all over NA. not just the sunny states. This would be the ultimate in DG.
@New Moon The price will have to come down a fait bit before It becomes a good investment where I live, It can't come soon enough though.
@@valkyriefrost5301 Wait what about the water supply
The video talks about the loss of .035% coefficient starting at 77 F, and increasing as the temperature increases. What is the loss at 90 degrees+ that I get here is south Florida? How much does that affect the production of power?
Its .35 not .035 huge difference. It will lost about 6 to 13 percent at peak heat ( .6 to 1.3 kw in a 10k system) my concern here in florida is the wind resistance and insurance premiums.
The only advantage that rack mounted panels have is this: they can be installed on roofs that don't face the ideal angle/direction. Although less attractive, the panels can be tilted to maximize output. Since my roof faces due south, *I WANT these shingles* !
Eh, not quite. A west facing roof can't put south facing panels even on the best of rack mounted systems, and the vast majority are still going to be angled the same as the roof. Now in flat roofs then sure you can rotate and tilt as much as you want. The biggest benefit of rack mounted panels is the use of micro inverters in case you have cobble together panels with different angles on them. If you have a south facing roof then these panels are a good choice, not cheap mind you, but if you were going to pay to have your roof replaced AND you were going to pay for solar then this definitely is a good solution.
@@Mike__B I guess you missed my point slightly. Not all homes are built on a 'grid system' where streets run north/ south and east/west. In a lot of meandering suburbs, plenty of homes face slightly less than ideal direction (eg: SSW) and the panels are tilted on the racks to make up the difference. Although this looks less attractive, some people would rather have better performance from their panels over how it looks.
That said, I agree with the other points you made.
@@marceld6061 No I understood your point, I'm just saying rack mounted systems typically are not going to orient themselves in a different direction to maximize sunlight exposure, much like these shingles they almost always will be facing the same direction as the roof does.
@@Mike__B Where I live (west coast) and where I have travelled (Hawai'i) I have seen more than "a few" that have the panels adjusted to point in a more ideal direction when the house doesn't face due south. The panels are not on a flat plane. They are all tilted. Majority are parallel to the roof. That can be because the roof faces the ideal direction or it can be that the homeowner wanted a uniform look or it could be that the estimate for the installation was too high with having each panel tilted. I have had homeowners can make "less than ideal" decisions based on budgetary constraints during my many years as a contractor. The additional cost of orienting the panels during installation would probably pay for itself in energy return. But that extra few hundred bucks up front can sway decisions.
My biggest question isn't if it's "weather/wet" proof... How about how good is it in frozen rain, 20 degrees below zero, and heavy snow? That's where I can help make a decision with Midwest use
It's a solid state high density silicone design, aka, itll hold up better than shingles due to being more resistant to thermal expansion.
Also since it's not rack mounted, load stress along the mounting points is non-existent as the weight is equally distributed across the entire roofing surface rather than a few clamps.
Aka, these are almost better in every capacity from a structural standpoint. Although I doubt they'll be anywhere near as efficient. Thoigh I would argue that having smaller, panel a which require less resources to make that are more widely adopted, is more important than squeezing out every last drop of efficiency.
Also because their directly on top of the roof, I wonder if the thermal mass of your roof can actually provide some cooling effect considering homes are air conditioned. It would be amazing if that actually lead to greater thermal performance over rack mounted panels.
That’s a good question I’m going to venture a guess they definitely tested in different temperatures and weather conditions I’m sure there’s probably a good amount of loss of efficiency with it how much is obviously something you would probably have to contact them about but I would venture a guess that you could use this on like the East Coast for example if it does work with all those things mentioned I must admit I would definitely be most impressed with this as far as solar power goes definitely the best all-around I’ve ever seen I think out of all the different companies and adverts including Tesla
I'm going to guess this product is not meant for the top half of the US...having panels buried under snow for half the year is pointless.
@@glamdring0007 Even on the East Coast in the areas of like Buffalo in Syracuse to get some of the highest numbers of snowfall the roofs are buried under snow continuously few days at most
@Zolar Czakl That’s what I thought I was like when they actually do okay during the winter because they’re not losing energy from being overly hot it would actually help them run better kind of like computers when I keep them in over refrigerated room for servers they run better being colder than if they were at room temperature. Just like a lot of people ask what about if you live in someplace like Seattle or Boston where it rains all the time it is cloudy it’s like yeah you wouldn’t get as much energy produced but you would still get energy you don’t need it to be shining son like Florida or Arizona or something it just wouldn’t be quite as effective but it would still work and people still have them in those areas in the technology will only get better and better every year
In my region, *the fire department will not fight fires of rooftop PV installations* simply because of the risks for the firefighters. No "excuses" needed - just rational thinking applied.
Hi FD,
Miles from the video. This product passed an electrical hazard check with zero hazard. That was a panel that we electrified, broke, and tossed into a tub of water. The fire departments said we were the first to pass with zero hazard.
@@milesproctor7392 Maybe READ my comment first before freaking out...? You are miles away from what I am talking about. Here is a little story for you: a friend of mine gets to test drive cars for top car maker in the EU where he works in development. Their combustion models now have "emissions" that are CLEANER than the air that goes INTO the system. He is still fined for "pollution" when he drives to a business meeting in Antwerp - simply because the administration of Green Technophobes can't wrap their head around the facts of chemistry and physics and are putting his hi-tech vehicle in the same category as a diesel lorry from the 1950s based on outdated criteria. *And that's precisely what I am saying: Firefighters and all other bureaucracy are thinking in categories = simplistic patterns, not actual facts.* - and my comment is highlighting a problem with just that: categories. ... as for excuses: in my area, we also get taxed on the electricity we make, even if we don't feed it into the grid! Again, no excused needed - just basic maths applied.
I was recently informed by a GAF solar shingle installer that I must have my entire roof shingled when this product is used or else GAF could not offer a warranty.
This was a problem for me because only 6 months ago I had one side of my house re-roofed (Owens-Corning) due to leaks, but now that I am ready for solar I would be required to re-roof that side again - only this time with GAF - before I could get a warranty with the GAF solar shingles. It's all-or-nothing with GAF.
Wouldn't it be best to keep an air gap for heat issues in the attic? If someone choose white shingles to benefit from the 50 degree cooler roof surface temperature 🌡️, this product is an oven.
The "Vacant Walking Areas" he mentions at 5:45 is actually a Fire Code requirement to allow Firefighters access.
Haven't seen anything to indicate that Timberline is exempt from these requirements.
That code is too ensure that firefighters can access as much of the roof that they need. Rack-mount solar panels are brittle and because there's no support under the glass, they will break if walked on, but these are unbreakable, so because a firefighter could walk ON these, rather than having to go around, these would be way better from a firefighting point of view.
That is mental that such a low percentage of roofs get solar. We re-roofed in Northern England 2 years ago and got black in line (where the panel is the primary waterproof layer and the roof membrane the secondary) panels fitted into the roof. It cost around US $10,000 for a 7kw system and it saved about $5000 in slate cost, as less slates were needed. We don't even get much sun in Northern England, I have no idea why so few people would consider solar. This system looks good.
$10,000 is alot and the ROI isn't that good.
I played 1450$ for 8 530w half cut solar panels exactly a year ago
Metal roofs can use bracket systems that don’t go through the roof thus avoiding holes. The brackets tighten down on the metal ridges and connect to rooftop solar panels. Best option in my opinion.
Standing seam metal roofs are the best.
Great concept - very practical - I see more room for improvement in eliminating the majority of rooftop cables , connectors, and connector housings with flat interlocking buss bars or similar locking tabs.
what I was thinking.
heck just a heavy guage solid copper wire that snaps in a track on each one would eliminate the clips
Need to improve efficiency and temp coefficient greatly to be viable
@@chefgav1 nah, as long as cost is low. There is room for poor efficiency if it's affordably baked into the roofing product
@@ctgottapee But the guy at GAF didn't say it was less expensive than rack-mounted panels. Same cost, less efficiency, hard "No" from me.
Once they get the cost equal to a standard roof install, I'm going to order the system. Heating is always another huge factor.
Im not an expert but I think you can apply for some or of government assistance or premium loan if you decide to get those even now. It depends where you live and the local laws ofc, so take my comment with a bucket of salt but it worth to check if there are some programs or bank premiums in your area.
Why in the world would they ever get it equal to a standard roof?! It’s a solar panel not a hunk of tar pressed together. As soon as Ferrari comes out with a car that costs no more than a Corolla I’m gonna buy one.
Excellent review, but I don't think it improves the look over traditional panels all that much, but certainly better than the older silver anodized as seen at 7:21. GAF really needs to make fake panels that match the solar ones and do the whole roof in one style instead of this weird mismatch of smooth panels with what looks like raised seams and architectural style shingles 5:45. Obviously the efficiency isn't as good at 14.5W/ft² vs 21W/ft² for panels and that's fine if you have enough space, but I really wonder how well they handle typical issues like shading, etc. They don't appear to have any type of optimizers built in to each panel and they admit, it's a traditional string inverter that relies on every panel producing the same to get output. Typical issues we have in the NE is snow that builds up on the bottom edge of the roof. It seems like you'd get no output if just the bottom row was covered since all the cells are in series sideways. I'm sure they will continue to make improvements. Another thing that would be nice is to make a ridge vent with an integrated junction box and run the wiring caps all the way up, so they look like they are part of the roof style instead of a cover that tries to hide the wiring. I like that critters can't get under them, that's a bonus.
Exactly, they conveniently gloss over a lot of the issues. This is more like a add for GAF then anything else.
While the "shading issue" does apply, so many houses have been built over the past three decades with zero shade, that the issue does not apply too many consumers. Of course, the real question is cost and longevity.
@@valkyriefrost5301 What does apply to a lot of customers, at least in the north of the US, is snow. For example, yesterday it dropped about 2" and by noon, the snow slid down and stopped at the asphalt shingles and covered the bottom set of panels of my house. It's still there and the rest of the panels are producing electricity just fine. Also while I recognize many areas are different regarding shading and trees, by me, it's required to have at least 2 trees in the front in any new development. And while those 2 trees were shorter when I installed solar, they now shade the bottom row at times which makes no meaningful difference to my annual output since only 2 panels of 36 get shaded.
@@scottkolaya2110 - I was not saying that this solution would apply to every home across the US. Only that many homes are built is treeless communities, especially in the South and Southwest parts of the country. Other situations, like yours, will require more a thought out solution to be viable.
@@scottkolaya2110 The reason while your not covered panels are still producing it that micro-inverters are used. GAFs string inverter, by contrast, would mean the inverter shuts off when not enough panels are producing.
I like that Brian corrects the solar guy for his incorrect use of inverter terms. Central inverters aren't used in residential settings, string inverters are.
I think he was clarifying more than correcting, but yeah it’s impressive Brian knows all this stuff too.
The downside is the lack of ventilation behind the cells, which will decrease efficiency on hot days and because it's flexible, the durability might be an issue too. I will go for cheap regular panels even if it is a bit more effort to mount them on the roof... It's crazy how much power you can get out off your roof nowadays...
This is absolutely bloody brilliant, extremely well engineered. THIS is American manufacturing ingenuity, this earned a like and subscribe!
"Ugly" - yeah that's my biggest gripe with solar panels. Whenever I fly over the buildings where I live, it's just nasty...
(To anyone who thinks I own a small plane and am serious: I don't and I'm not.)
You didn’t even talk about the pigeons that nest under rack mounted solar panels. I know because I had to deal with it. I had to call the company I leased the system from and they had me pay $500 to come out and remove the pigeons that had nested and add a barrier around the system keep pigeons out.
This is a great product. Now, you need to get the price down to a reasonable amount.
That's done by producing and manufacturing with the eccomies of scale. Mass production reduces cost tremendously that's why the assembly line made car ownership possible
Where did you see the price? Someone mentioned about no price on the website.
@@dannydaw59 he said that is equal to roofing and an similar sized solar array. The only difference is that you can walk on it and is not risk of damaging the roofing with the bolts.
@@ehombane The efficiency?
I love this idea. I still want to see test results from homeowners.
This is the part that almost makes me conspiratorial, because all the ads about 'gamechangers' (I see three of them) just makes me 'want to wait a little more'. However, I had always heard the roof is the least efficient and you should have tracked panels that move with the sun. But they almost NEVER actually talk to a person that has them, that shows the bills showing how much it has saved. I almost think its fossil fuel companies doing ti to make people wait just a little longer.....which is usually til gas prices go down.
@@mikearchibald744 a janitor at my store got some for his house over a year ago. Just solar, no batteries. He said it has replaced his electricity costs so far. He doesn't pay for electricity anymore. Only the monthly payment for the panels.
@@trinsit Well, yeah, the question is how many panels and how FOR the panels instead of electricity. If your payments for the solar are the same as electricity, you are no further ahead And if there are NO batteries, then what happens on cloudy days?
@@mikearchibald744 you do come out ahead because now there is a point at which the bill stops when you pay the system off. Also, their house is still wired into the city electric grid and power is continuous. It's just that while the solar panels produce electricity, the meter moves backwards.
@@trinsit I see, so he does net metering and supplies enough to the grid to offset any payments. They have that system here too, thats my main complaint because IF the utility would actually PAY for the power then tons of people would invest in creating power. BUt all they do in most places I've checked is balance the credits at the end of the year and you may owe them, but they never pay you, so essentially they are STEALING power from you.
Solar should be incorporated into all newly built homes throughout the US. It should be mandated.
I definitely agree with this. I wonder if there is enough solar panels to cover all new constructions? On top of that, the infrastructure required to manufacture all those solar panels.
A small amount of solar is mandated in new construction in some places like California. And that means the wiring for the inverters, panels, and interconnection to the grid are already in the home, and customer can expand the amount of solar as their budget or need expands.
I don’t like mandates, or fascists.
Mandates don’t seem to be the way to go in this case. In some places the payback is long and the cost is high or roofs are under tree cover most of the time. Make emissions appropriately costly and companies/people will make the decision on their own.
@@copisetic1104 So you don't like the constitution?
Seriously look into it. Start with the alternator magnet version of self running generators. Then combine that with the power wall. It will put out clean energy 24/7. Especially in energy effecient homes
Great idea for a product that should only improve. I do wonder about the cost but solar is always a major investment. I have no doubt they can eventually achieve cost parity with normal panels. I think the others will be copying them because if these last they're the obvious choice
So what they fail to tell you is that it can’t bet used all the way to the edge of the roof, nor can they go around any cutouts. Because of that I went with a rack system. Difference in power creation was ~50% difference.
5:47 Seems the GAF solar roof looses MORE at -0.35% than the Panasonic rack mounted roof, possible because of air gap beneath the rack mounted system. Bet temperature degradation will be greater if the roof attic is "spray-foam" insulated and "encapsulated," because this leads to a hotter roof face temperature.
Sorry, you lost credibility at "looses".
@@tim3172 Hope you feal an inch tawler beecaws ewe arrrh a gooder speeler dan me. Also, "may the fleas of one thousand camels infest your armpits."
Why is the industry so obsessed with putting these over rooftops? If they did it as a pergola, gazebo, or carport, they could just mass manufacture it as a kit for cheap installation and avoid the structural risks.
It would work for most people. More than the fraction of people who happen to need a new roof this year.
I am really impressed with this! Making solar an easier thing to interact and integrate into existing roofing businesses is always a good thing. My only concern is durablity to hail. You are doing great, does your company have a social media presence?
The parent company GAF is a pretty big company. Not a startup.
its walkable, so im guessing it should stand up to hail.
The question with hail is, how big, how dense. Most GAF products and 30 yr laminates in general do great to 1” hail, however we start getting to 2” and above, it’s likely damaged. We get to 4” and bigger, not much out there for roofing that isn’t going to have some sort of damage.
8:35 sorry the Bernoulli principle means the panel will tend to stick close to the roof with wind. There will be less pressure between the roof and panel.
The Bernoulli principle says that fast moving air has lower pressure than slow moving air.
The discussion in the video was correct. Slow moving air next to the roof (high pressure) will tend to lift the panels, relative to the fast moving air above them (low pressure).
CNET, Please bring back Car Tech, that was the best car review video on UA-cam
okay so now that this idea exists, can we then put a perfermated pipe at the top of the roof to trickles cold water down to coll them. then collecting it in a tank and pumping it back up. this can clean and cool them and maybe offer some warmish water for the house. And if any embers falls on the roof during fire season then it will take care of that too.
Way to Complex for the mass market. As an option it might work. It makes it more difficult to get to the break even point.
@@fatboy19831 didn't seem so, the water pump would be small and the roof area very large. Plus the efficiency boost. Also water is very good at absorbing heat and is able to bend light into he panels from non direct light should that be relevant considering it would a thin film. Your tank then would then also be able to collect rain, which means less demand for central water too and be covered to stop evaporation. So I do t really see a problem. Or a complexity issue...what complexity?, especially with things you can get at home depot easy.
@@fatboy19831 if they provide the shingles and install them then I can build the rest in under a day. Whats to difficult toassproduc3 about this? Are people dim?
Very interested to learn how this system will hold up to hail.
In the UK the use of coolant in the solution means no one will service it or any part of the heating system (looking at you British Gas).
How do these meet the NEC 2017/2020 panel level shutdown requirements? I'd imagine having to purchase a per-shingle tigo (or similar) optimizer / shutdown would be even more prohibitively expensive and break the aesthetic benefit. What are the per-panel wattage output and @ what voltage? How is grounding handled for all of these shingle sized panels?
I was also looking for the answer to this question. Maybe they are loopholing it, and calling the whole array one module with a single rapid shutdown immediately under the roof surface.
Problem i find is that what if one goes bad? You can’t just yank it off since its nailed. Yeah a roofer can come and do it, but you are removing a shingle and then creating more holes to re-nail it. On a wrack you just screw it off and your good to go.
So at 14w per foot on an average size home your looking at a product that will produce 1/3 of a homes power needs. It would take 30 years to break even and your probably having to replace after 24 years...
A version of this for RV's would be great.
Not a useful application, roof space on an RV is very limited, you want the higher power per square foot of the fixed panels.
Though a flexible solar panel that can be rolled up would be a game changer as an awning upgrade.
I wish they had showed the finished product of that guys roof
This is great. Thanks! But it would be more comprehensive if it covered recycling as well.
@D R This isn't a typical solar panel. Traditional solar is made with more components, much of which could be recycled. This uses less material, but is it more or less recyclable? The more panels that are out there, higher the prices and/or incentives can make recycling viable, generally speaking.
Regular shingles are installed offset so the overlap seam is covered by a solid span. Because of the wiring lining up there is no overlap so the seams are all lined up. That can't be great.
Stepping on the panels doesn't seem like a good idea, that commonly causes micro crack damage to the PV.
The thin-film is immune to cracking unlike regular crystalline silicon cells used in conventional solar. Thin-film solar also can be rolled up and wrapped around structures.
@@Obscurai can you reference a research paper that found stepping on thin film panels doesn't cause microfractures?
@@edwardlouie These bickering Louie brothers are both wrong/right to some extent. It depends on materials (I suppose ETFE, moncrystalline silicon, aluminum bus-bar). Also, material thickness and additives, supporting structure, panel arrangement, electrical configuration, roofer behaviour and much more.
Without micro-inverters doesn't the whole installation suffer if one of the panels gets shaded or go bad in some way?
Other than that it looks neat. Need to redo the roof anyway and solar would be nice.
Love microinverters, have Enphase myself, but string inverters are fine with shade these days. (Though optimizers would be helpful.) Maybe if voltages work out, you can series a few of these into microinverters or optimizers in combiner boxes.
The string would suffer. But there are multiple strings
0:14 That vertical white tube brakes down the whole string. If you got shadow on one cell of the whole panel string, this is the weakest point in your chain and limits the maximum current. Series connection. 🤷🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
"what's the cost?" guy proceeds to not say the cost of each unit lol
I used to sell solar, and would have to say to clients " you could almost eliminate your$87.00 a month average bill if you purchase this $24,000.00 system, if it lasts 20 years".
So it pays for itself in... 276 months (23 years) and lasts 20 years?
What. A. Bargain.
How do you repair or replace a panel /microinverter when it goes out? If one of the micro inverters goes out will the system continue to function since it's based on a string inverter?
somehow i dont think thst the homeowner paid full price for the solar panel and install
Why?
The issue here in FL is you need a new roof every 10 years. Insurance will cut you off when roof is over 10 years
The only problem with GAF is that they won't talk to potential installers, or resellers. I don't know if they are operating out of some sort of archaic dealer network or what, but i've repeatedly tried to reach out to them for more information.
I am a custom home builder, I would for sure offer this to my clients. How much is it? How does it stand up to Hail? Here in North Texas we have one that requires roof replacements every ten years or so.
One inverter vs. a separate micro-inverter for each panel means the whole system is compromised to the lowest power output panel on the whole roof. Ie. if one panel sit in the shade, it's output is much less than the rest of the roof but because of how inverters work, this means that is only takes the lesser amount of voltage from ALL the panels. This is a MAJOR drawback!!!
Great product, very easy to install and looks great on the roof. I also think they have less chance of blowing off in a storm because the wind can not grab under it like a traditional solarpanel.
If they blow off thats a really bad day your whole roof would fly off..there rated at 150 mph of wind
@@brianguirola4219 yep. We had all our installs survive a cat 5 and panels only got trashed from trees. Not the wind. All this stuff is engineered and will def meet any windload codes
The marketing of this product focuses on the low aspect ratio and the ease of application via standard roofing techniques. In California, the light roof load compared to conventional high weight load solar makes it desirable in an earthquake prone state. However, I would be interested to see the electrical connection methodology from solar cell-to-solar cell; series connection? What is the failure mechanism of a line of elements and the panel as an entity? There was some limited discussion of the external circuit connection mechanics and the external electronics but needs more discussion. Interconnection of panel to main line was shown to be a relatively simple process but where are the converters located, what are converter efficiency? What are the resistive losses to get to the converters and the measured voltage drops? How difficult is the process to trouble shoot and isolate a failing panel? How many solar cell lines must fault before the panel becomes ineffective? A video with a bit more electrical information is merited. Finally, after watching all the failures of solar companies and fraudulent claims on UA-cam, much more detail is necessary. Solar companies exposed by News organizations across the country for fraudulent claims, and taking advantage of people with incredible costs with zero power generation and “special contract clauses”, well just be careful. I hope Solar eventually becomes standard but it may be some time. Fingers crossed.
I still like the idea of the Tesla solar tiles best since I always loved the look of Italian terracotta roofing
Wait do you mean the solar roof tiles on the fake houses, on the fake street, on the movie set at Universal Studios (Desperate Housewives)? hahahahaha!
I like this system but think the rack system that allows airflow under the panels help keep the building and the panels cooler. The panels provide a shade for the roof and will decrease the inside temperature. Same affect as setting under a shade in the direct sunlight.
If they can make it were we don't have to re do the whole roof and just install the solar roofing part at a reasonable price. I think the retrofit would be a massive win!
It looks like you install it alongside traditional tiles anyways, so it could be possible! Of course it probably won't match as closely as Tesla's tiles, but probably it's way lower cost, and of course conventional solar panels don't match at all.
love the concept, but it seems like regular solar panels are better in pretty much every way except they are a bit less good looking. hope they improve the output and longevity, which would make this more appealing. also, would love to know how difficult or easy it is for these to be recycled.
I will say that this could save a lot on construction costs since traditional panels require more expertise to install and there's a shortage of such installers. so it could mean less expensive and having it completed months earlier.
LOL - recycled... nope, these will go straight to the land fill with the rest of the old roof.
So still expensive( cost of new roof, standard solar panels) when it should be lower cost right from the start because your cutting labor. But no, companies charging as much as possible.
I see the neighbors panels are facing another direction, assuming south. That makes me wonder how efficient this roof is. I'd love to see a generation comparison to the neighbors. If it's anywhere near their results that would be very good.
In North America facing the panels to the south gets them the most sun. This is due to the way Earth is tilted on its axis.
I remember being so young and loved watching CNET specially when brian does the report.
So refreshing watching something that has nothing to do with politics or negativity.
@cnet y'all are the original G. 😎
Absolutely brilliant! Great idea. I would buy it in a heartbeat if they were available where I live.
The biggest thing holding solar back is people thinking that they should get paid the same for juice they are putting back into the grid as they are for getting it out. The power companies are definitely not paying retail prices for the power they get from coal, so why should they pay that for solar from homeowners? They are the ones who have to maintain the grid and manage all of the new sources to try and maintain smooth reliable power to everyone else, and that ain't cheap.
I'm worried about the durability of the overall unit and fire protection/flammability of the product.
That is sounds great. I am in the Solar industry as a service technician always consider after installation servicing and Remediation.
If the vast majority of the industry is not in line with this scope of work you will be stuck with a niche product that no one will like to repair and service if needed.
@6:00 out put decline would suggest these have half the lifespan of traditional. Would be interested to see a full cost breakdown. Installation and all. Is it about the same cost after figuring in replacement cost? What kind of manufacturing reaources do these require vs traditional?
Will insurance pay for the roofing share of the cost if you are replacing a roof due to tree damage?
Why would you not insure the roof as it is.
I like where they're going with this technology. Looking forward to future designs with integrated seamless connectors.
Brain got a great demeanour which shakes things up nicely for audience to enjoy even for ordinary stuff.
One more thing for the roofer to screw up.
Will they install your solar panels like they install insulation?
Home owner - "Hey can you guys put some insulation in my roof while you have the decking off?"
Roofing contractor - "Sure, no problem." Opens up roof, throws in a bundled bale of insulation, and closes the roof without ever "installing" the insulation.
Neighbors - "Hey, nice solar roof, have you noticed any difference in your electric bill?"
Home owner - "No, not at all, and my heating and cooling bills are still high!"
I wonder if they could just delete the underlaying asphalt shingle and wood sheet. Make these the roof on an open frame attic for maximum thermal air transfer
Hoping this will be available nationwide soon, as I haven’t been able to find a company that offers this yet in NH....
How long would it last with regards to UV exposure?
They mentioned 25 years
3 years in Arizona sun and they will be crap panels. Stick with glass .
@@rubidot they said 2-25 years because they know that all these style panels deteriorate quickly after 2. If you place these on the north side of your house where it gets no sun then you can hope for 25 years lol
Not appropriate for heavy snow areas unless the pitch of the roof is sufficiently steep.
If this went on a new house with a storage battery and a connection for an EV the added cost may be offset by the electricity produced. Plus likely the price of electricity will increase every year. A new house could be designed so the roof size, shape, angle ect. provide the most benefit.
I need to ask my roofer what he knows about Bernoulli.
As far as future solar, this has to be the answer!
While my solar is bigger it is also surviving monsoons here in the SW when neighbors are losing shingles. If this is a cheaper alternative and cost effective to replace then it's headed int he right direction. If it has similar potential for shingle loss in high wind storms but similar expense to "Ugly" solar then this accomplishes nothing for me
wow this would ease all the concerns I currently have with solar. I didn't know exactly how regular solar could affect the roof but I knew it had to have a big effect on the life of it. Well, now I know you can cause leaks or crack the rafters. Hope the cost comes down on these guys
The roofer they interviewed was painting a really negative picture of using lag bolts for no reason. First of all, lag bolts aren't the only way to secure racking to your roof. Second, unlike what he said, most rafters a 2x6 not 2x4. A lag bolt is not going to damage the integrity of a roof or rafter. Plus, it is EASY to know if you missed a rafter. The feel of driving a lag into thin air versus hitting the rafter is completely different.
They were trying to sell these things big time. They look cool but definitely a lot of propaganda.
How well do Timberline panels hold up to large hail stones? What about strong winds? In Oklahoma we can have both big hail stone and tornados.
Can't believe they didn't show a finished roof with this product. If the roof is filled with things like at 7:45 then it could be really ugly and a lot of the argument for this approach seemed to be that it's just like regular roofing. We really don't know that without seeing the finished product though.
I wish they would have shown the home after the contractor had completed the job. Also would have been beneficial to see how they cut that product in certain locations.
Very promising product
Looks great, hope it takes off! One way or another when I eventually have to redo my roof I'm definitely going in on this or similar, despite what will likely be modest energy gains living in the PNW.
I think I read somewhere that in climates like in PNW even with total cloud cover, just the daylight will produce power though much reduced
I sell solar full time in Oregon and Washington the pnw is VERY solar capable
Solar panels need airflow to keep them cool the hotter that they get the less electricity they make , this is a good idea that will not work as good as the old ways of doing this , solar is just a grift like all renewable energy
I haven't read all the comments, so I don't know if anyone has brought up the question of which nd. What would happen when a hurricane comes through with 100+ mph winds? I've seen asphalt, slate, and clay shingles tipped up and blown/broken off in such conditions. I didn't see any kind of fastening on the downhill side of these panels; how susceptible are they to this effect?