[RE-wrenches] Maxing out the roof

[Tump]

How about using modules w/ a higher power density? I always try to keep
modules from the edge, but .....

-----Original Message-----
From: re-wrenches-bounces at lists.re-wrenches.org
[mailto:re-wrenches-bounces at lists.re-wrenches.org] On Behalf Of Andrew
Truitt
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 1:04 PM
To: RE-wrenches
Subject: [RE-wrenches] Maxing out the roof



Greetings!  First off, thanks to Allan, Brian and Peter for your input on
the external disconnect signage - I won!  We're having a UV rated plastic
sign made right now.


I'm interested in hearing what company's policies are regarding filling a
roof with solar.  I have always advocated for a 2-3' perimeter around the
array to a) facilitate ease of installation, b) prevent excessive wind
loading at the roof edge, c) allow access for firefighters and d) I
personally think it looks better.  However, I've been getting a little
pressure from the higher-ups to let the designers place modules right up to
the edge of the roof to increase system size.  Their responses to my
arguments are a) take all the necessary precautions to keep the installers
safe while installing at the roof edge, b) install more attachments near the
roof edge to strengthen the rack structure, c) there is no requirement in
our area for firefighter access and there will always be access on the
north-facing roof anyway and d) a roof full of PV looks like a pile of
money.


What is your policy on array size and why?



Andrew Truitt
Standard Solar



-- 
"Don't get me wrong: I love nuclear energy! It's just that I prefer fusion
to fission. And it just so happens that there's an enormous fusion reactor
safely banked a few million miles from us. It delivers more than we could
ever use in just about 8 minutes. And it's wireless!"

~William McDonough



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20090203/779fb005/attachment-0003.html>