Valley Furniture goes green

By Diane Saunders
Staff Writer
Published on Wednesday, December 31, 2008 1:13 PM MST

The long row of solar panels behind Valley Furniture are gray, but they are a sure sign that the furniture store is going green.

“I think it will do a good job,” Valley Furniture owner Steve Junion said of the solar energy system recently installed.

The system — believed to be first in Graham County installed at a furniture store — consists of 12 poles that support 12 solar modules each — for a total of 144. Each of the modules — also called panels — generates 175 watts of electricity, said J. T. Lines of Mega Watts Alternative Energy.

J.T. Lines, left, and Steve Junion, owner of Valley Furniture, stand in front of recently installed solar panels installed by Mega Watts Alternative Energy. A total of 144 panels are mounted on 12 poles in back of the store. Photo by Diane Saunders

Mega Watts designed the system with Sun Pumps, which also supplied the products and parts needed for the energy system.

“We use American-made panels,” Lines said, adding that the panels were made in Tennessee.

Lines said the system includes power inverters that recognize the electrical grid of the Graham County Electric Cooperative. The electricity produced by the Valley Furniture system is then synchronized with the GCEC grid.

This allows the solar energy system to pump electricity into the grid during the day — when the sun is shining — and use electricity from the system at night.

“It cuts down on peak-demand (costs),” Lines said.

In addition, homes and businesses that have a solar energy system are paid 4 cents per kilowatt hour when the systems overproduce electricity. This amount could go to 11 cents per kilowatt hour when “net metering” goes into effect, Lines said.

Net metering, when approved by the state, will require electric companies and cooperatives to pay owners of solar energy systems the same rate per kilowatt hour that the company charges customers.

Lines said the current fee structure will give solar power owners the return of their investment in three to four years. When net metering is approved, the return is expected to be reduced to two years.

The system Junion chose includes several features, including the following:

• It tracks and records how much electricity the system produces each day. The recorded production can be viewed online.

• It is maintenance free.

• When the power from the co-op’s electrical grid goes off, the solar energy system also shuts down. This is a safety feature that allows linemen to work on electric lines without fear of serious injuries.

Lines said the panels can be manually adjusted to different angles to receive optimum exposure to the sun. This is done seasonally to coincide with the position of the sun to the Earth. Because the sun shines in southeast Arizona about 330 days each year, system owners receive optimum benefits from solar energy.

Junion said he decided to buy the solar energy system because of tax credits offered by the state and federal government as incentives.

He also expects the system will “cancel out” the electric bill for the store. For more information call Lines at 965-6296, Jeremy Nash at 965-2928 or Sun Pumps at 348-9652.

Print this story Email this story Post A Comment

Comments

15 comment(s)

HEY wrote on Jan 7, 2009 9:47 PM:

" You can pay your bill on line or on the phone with GCEC. They have a 3rd party it will cost you around $3.99. Officialpayments.com OR go on your bank sight and do BILL PAY. OR you can get a form from them called SUREPAY and have it auto pay out of your checking account. Do your home work before you speak... "

Didnt know... wrote on Jan 6, 2009 12:33 PM:

" Are we in the dark ages? I went to search the $1.30 charge on the GCEC web site and ended up having to go SSVEC. Even Duncan has a web site. Why is GCEC so far behind other counties? You can't even pay your bill on line or over the phone. I VOTE for the $1.30 to update our systems instead of taking from one and giving to another. "

Didnt know... wrote on Jan 6, 2009 12:28 PM:

" Renewable Energy Tariffs

In order to fund the SunWatts Program, the ACC has approved the following monthly tariffs. These tariffs are levied per meter per month and appear on member's bills as the "ACC Environment Surcharge (REST)".

The surcharge rate is $0.005 per kWh per month with the following monthly maximums:

Residential $1.30 per meter per month
Commercial and Industrial $42.00 per meter per month
Industrial (over 3MW's) $150.00 per meter per month "

Thatcher Resident wrote on Jan 5, 2009 7:47 PM:

" Real Math is right on. My 1750 watt solar panel system cost about $14,000. After the $7,000 subsidy and tax credits, my net cost was around $5,000. The system produces at most 250 kilowatt hours per month, or 3,000 per year. At 11 cents each this is only $330 per year and much less until net metering goes into effect (which GCEC and others have delayed for almost 2 years). I'm glad I put in the system because it's the right thing to do, but it will pay for itself only if rates rise. "

Silly People wrote on Jan 5, 2009 6:46 PM:

" Didnt Max HIngton want to do this for county(go green)? And now we have what? NADA again w/herrington! "

Real Math wrote on Jan 5, 2009 1:06 PM:

" The 2,000 watt system (maximum for 50% re-imbursement on a home) will only produce $500 of electricity per year. This with the cost of money and tax credits makes the system just pay for itself when it is ready for replacement. Also, the money does NOT come from the Government, but from each person paying an electric bill in Arizona. Check it out; Your bill has $1.30 for renewable energy. This is taking money from little old ladies and giving it to rich people that can afford to go solar and take the tax credit. "

Real Math wrote on Jan 5, 2009 12:53 PM:

" I applaud anyone willing to do the right thing and put in green power, when they can afford it. But it is irresponsible to throw numbers out that are plain wrong. Do the real math. They put in 144 panels that produce 175 watts, times average solar generation day for Safford (6.3 hours due to environmental factors, which can be extended if the panels are continually adjusted), times 365, times .11, DIVIDED by 1,000 (kwh), nets $6,374.21 per year. Were they given the panels? If financed, add the cost of money. Nuclear and Coal "

To Solomon wrote on Jan 2, 2009 7:37 AM:

" You can also get for your $20,000 a rebate from Graham County Electric Co-op (REA) of approximately $10,000, paid by the Federal government, then a $2,000 to$3,000 federal tax rebate and $1,000 from the state. Ending up costing you around $7,000. If you make more electricity than you use then you will get a monthly check for the unused electricity. Biggest bargain around. Wish I had money enough to start a solar farm. Wish my local government would also get on the ball and not depend on mining to drag us down. "

SOLOMON wrote on Jan 1, 2009 8:13 PM:

" The initial outlay for solar is quite expensive. In the $20,000 range for home owner and the rebate from the feds and state will be about 3,000 in tax credits. But those of us in Solomon are doing our part . "

to Safford Citizen wrote on Jan 1, 2009 7:09 PM:

" The school district should be required to install solar panels in light of their current budget crisis. "

reptilist wrote on Jan 1, 2009 1:03 PM:

" Valley Furniture gets a hearty attaboy from me! "

to Safford Citizen wrote on Jan 1, 2009 12:14 PM:

" Good question, ask Jay Howe he is the high paid city utilities man. Of course he will not tell the city council the truth, just say he did something about the project, ei. the sewer line down Lone Star Road. This whole county from the schools, to the local jail should all be on solar power.
Relatives in Cochise county tell me the schools now have solar power there because Sulfur Springs Valley Co-op got on the ball and set them up. "

Missing the boat wrote on Jan 1, 2009 11:18 AM:

" Graham county , the chamber of Commerce and all the cities are really missing the boat by not applying for federal grant money and do like the city of Toledo, Ohio, did when they lost the auto industry. They are now making solar panels, something like six plants are working full time making these panels and selling them across the country. Why doesn't Graham county become the solar energy power source of if not the USA, at least Arizona. After all we are just letting sunlight go to waste. "

Safford Citizen wrote on Jan 1, 2009 8:59 AM:

" Why is it that Safford Municipal Utilities does not have a simular program, that would encourage users to put up panels and obtain both a rebate and be able to sell excess electricity back into the grid? "

Green wrote on Dec 31, 2008 3:37 PM:

" As we drove around this Christmas season we noticed several home owners in the Solomon area have solar panels in their yard. Bravo to them...BUT what gives with the new REA building down in Pima, a new building with a south facing roof and not one solar panel on it. You would think they would be using solar energy, esoecially with the governmnet rebate.
Why isn't the REA and our local governments using solar energy? Join the 21st century political leaders, this isn't Graham County set your clocks back 200 years. "

WRITE A COMMENT

READER COMMENTS
* Be respectful of others, the writer and the subjects in the story.

* Be relevant. Keep your comments pertinent to the story that is being discussed.

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All reader comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. The Eastern Arizona Courier is not liable for messages from third parties. IP addresses can be subpoenaed and your identity established by individuals who have been hurt by your comments.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity: You can be prosecuted for identity theft.
* Comments unrelated to the story.

Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in www.eacourier.com reader comments represent the individual's own views and not those of the Eastern Arizona Courier. The Courier does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than Eastern Arizona Courier spokespersons.

Thank you for your comments!