[RE-wrenches] FW: Panel Fire

David Brearley david.brearley at solarprofessional.com
Wed Feb 11 22:57:00 PST 2009


Allan, there are 4 modules pictured in the ³before² photo, not 8. The after
photo show the ³good² modules, the ones that did not burn. This suggests
there are 4 module each on two separate roof faces. Please have another look
at the before picture and count the frames. In the before picture each 250 W
mystery module is supported at 4 corners only. They are some sort of large
format modules. Nothing I can find online matches these characteristics,
especially the superstrate material.

Please re-read the homeowner¹s account in these various postings as well.
Sundiego indicates that the module superstrate is not glass, but some other
material. Apparently it is a material that melts when exposed to flame. It
sure isn¹t glass, that¹s pretty clear by the photos and the written account.

This does not look like an elaborate hoax to me. It does look, as BB points
out, like a potential crime scene, a fraud at the very least. Something was
misrepresented to this customer. It¹s pretty apparent that these modules are
not listed and identified for the application. The installation isn¹t
vaguely appropriate. It¹s just dumb luck‹literally‹that the house didn¹t
burn down.

Clearly the narrator is unreliable, but I don¹t think it is malicious, just
ignorance. The dude¹s a ³solar newbie² and his house caught on fire. That¹s
what it looks like to me.

David


On 2/11/09 6:57 PM, "Allan Sindelar" <allan at positiveenergysolar.com> wrote:

> I guess I'm not the only one who's suspicious of this whole story. This came
> to me off list. Some of the post here doesn't jive - it's pretty clear there's
> no glass, and the blurry corner doesn't look it to me.
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
>   
>   I  may be very wrong here and I don¹t mean to impugn anyone¹s integrity but
> don¹t forget that in this era of digital animation movies you can¹t always
> believe what you see in photo either. (I'm sure no one here has ever
> Photoshopped a photo to make it more presentable  looking.)  I couldn't help
> but notice that the bottom right corner of  the photo was surprisingly blurry
> and indistinct.  It is  difficult to distinguish one thing from the next, when
> just a few feet  away but out of the range of detail in the photo, things
> seemed to be  much clearer.  I¹ve never seen a photo look like that  in
> reality.  It¹s as if the roof and array have  mysteriously melted together.
> Also, I have never seen tempered glass  melt in a low temperature fire.   If
> it were a high temperature fire the roof would not have  survived.  I think
> that a great deal of caution is warranted  especially considering the lack of
> detail that the poster is giving about  the panels, location,
> installer/supplier, existence of another array  etc.
> --- On Wed, 2/11/09, Allan  Sindelar <allan at positiveenergysolar.com> wrote:
> One detail I haven't heard mentioned yet and am  curious about - the photo of
> the fire damage appears to show the corner of  another west(?)-facing array. I
> find it curious that the system owner  described a 2 kW system made up of
> eight 250W(!) modules, which are  clearly visible in the topmost system photo.
> There's just a whole lot that doesn't jive in  this whole story. Scary to me .
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> List sponsored by Home Power magazine
> 
> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
> 
> Options & settings:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> 
> List-Archive: 
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> 
> List rules & etiquette:
> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
> 
> Check out participant bios:
> www.members.re-wrenches.org
> 
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20090212/a11d0d1c/attachment-0003.html>


More information about the RE-wrenches mailing list