This fact always surprises me. What goes into a mount that makes it so expensive? Its essentially just a piece of metal, right?
The article goes into the parts for their custom fence project, but for the more typical case, why can't the metal mounts just be mass produced cheaply?
Some very rough numbers from memory:
- 20 panel + 10 microinverter bundle: $5600
- cost to ship the bundle: $700
- conductor: $450
- steel/pvc conduit for conductor sheath: $350
- strut for racking: $500
- 3” steel conduit for ground mount: $5000
- concrete and tube forms for vertical post footers: $400
- augur/trencher rental: $500
- brackets/fasteners: $600
- tools: $500
- electrician work to upgrade service panel: $2500
- electrician work for hookup and disconnect install: still TBD but I’m guessing more thousands
- time spent x my current hourly salary as a programmer: I don’t want to think about it haha
Probably a bunch of stupid little stuff I’m forgetting. Just gas to go on supply runs is probably over $100, although I always tried to batch runs with other normal errands.
The most expensive parts of projects can be surprising, at least to me. I also recently invested in my own fuel transfer pump to transport home heating fuel instead of paying for delivery. 55 gallon drums: $20 each. Pump: $200. But the most expensive part was actually the 15 meters of arctic grade fuel hose at over $400.
300V 6/3 SO cord is about 6 bucks a foot, that adds up quick! Just be glad you didn’t have to buy any pin and sleeve connectors ;)
You can use wood, but then you have buy good amount of treated lumber and put it together. Galvanized steel also lasts longer than wood.
My impression is that galvanized steel fences are cheaper than wood ones. Even using steel posts and wood panels. People make wooden fences cause prefer the look.
Depending on your local area, if you're the homeowner, you can often do most of the electrical yourself (pull permits if needed). Use ChatGPT to look up code requirements and instructions, then look up YouTube videos where professionals show you how to do it all. I think it's much less complicated than figuring out all the solar-specific stuff (tilt angles, voltages, wiring, disconnects, etc).
A lot of construction work in general is priced around labor being atleast 50% of the total cost.
I've seen OSHA violations of such severity, of such imminent danger, you couldn't get a tailor pin up my sphincter with a jackhammer.
They exist for a reason, and you're going to have to do your project on the cheap by yourself, sorry.
The other engineer and I just looked at each other and quietly minded our own business :-)
The safety rules do make things much safer but also noticeably increase cost. It’s a tradeoff we as a society have decided is worth it. Maybe at some point we will change that decision and then costs will quickly come down, capitalism is very good at meeting the minimum requirements in order to make sales.
Or is more likely a general antipathy to solving beaurocratic problems if it will endanger fossil fuel profits?
Subtly different safety rules by region (or any other type of rule variation) is just a symptom of the latter issue.
Typical roof mounted installs in the USA are in the $3-4/Watt range, inclusive of parts, labor, and permitting for professional installation. Tax credits and other incentives can reduce this.
Code compliant ground mount installs via DIY are in the $2.75-$4/Watt range, inclusive of all parts and permitting and assuming labor is free but that a licensed electrician is needed for final grid tie. Tax incentives can reduce this. Not needing permits or a licensed electrician also can reduce it. Alternatives such as using wood racking instead of metal is also cheaper but this may violate electric code.
>As of March 2025, the cost of residential solar energy in Australia averaged just AUD $0.90 (USD $0.59) per watt—less than a quarter of the U.S. average.
It's generally attributed to consistent sensible regulation which has created a competitive market and reduced any time wasting paperwork.
Case in point: https://i.tribune.com.pk/media/images/Grenfell-tower17254759...
This was literal "bonfire of the regulations": https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/this-is-the-bonfire-o...
Regulations and codes are written in blood and corpses. Don't be so quick to discount them.
I'm not in favor of throwing away all regulations and all licensing, mind you. But some pragmatic rebalancing needs to happen. If I go to India I do not automatically die inside a house with a $9500 solar installation. That'd be much more likely to happen on an American road with its 40000/yr fatalities that everyone casually accepts as a pragmatic trade-off worth having ;)
In parts they do, but that doesn't mean that licensing doesn't have a point. They should not be able to limit the licenses but testing and training should absolutely happen. Especially for critical things like electricity.
> If I go to India I do not automatically die inside a house with a $9500 solar installation.
You don't but your chances are higher than a country with enforced minimum standards.
https://www.newslaundry.com/2023/08/01/electrocution-kills-1...
India’s traffic fatality rate is 12.6 per 100k, which is about the same as the US’ at 14.2. India has a very low car ownership rate, and US a very high one, so I dunno that I’d be so quick to judge in your shoes.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r...
Perhaps if India was more like the USA, safe road travel would improve - and consequently - their 172k traffic fatalities would fall to a more acceptable level (by the way there are doubts this figure is correct - people speculate it's much higher)?
And before you complain about the population difference, I checked the per capita rates of traffic fatalities. India outpaces the USA by quite a bit.
By the way, this is all an apples and oranges comparison. Building standards has nothing to do with road fatalities.
[1] https://www.coloradohistoricnewspapers.org/?a=d&d=CRN1913010...
OK, so in your scenario, who will take the risk?
There is a very significant risk of one or more workers falling off the roof and getting killed or injured so badly they can never work again. Do you plan to take that risk and if it happens pay death benefits to the fallen worker's family or cover the medical and disability expenses? Or, to you expect to just say "tough luck" to the worker? Or, will you pay an insurer to cover it?
There is a very significant risk the roof will pierced in a way that it no longer works to exclude water, magnified by using materials & tools not up to standards. Will you take on the risk when the roof fails and leaks, and remove the installation, repair the roof, they re-do the installation? Do you expect the overseas contractors to come back and fix it (and how will you enforce that)? Or, will you require them to follow some established standard to reduce the risk, and/or try to get insurance/warranty to cover the risk?
It is easy and trivial to complain about "excess" regulations, ignoring the fact that many of them were bought with blood and funerals. And yes, some are a pain in the arse, and seem unnecessary for your particular situation. But unless you have actually considered the WHOLE problem, and can post a better solution, it just comes of as immature whinging. So, how do you expect to handle the risks?
I talked to a local engineer for drafting plans. I didn’t know what I was doing so had to go through 4-5 revisions, which the engineer got frustrated by I think.
US doesn't need immigrants. There is a lot cheaper labor available[1], $7.23 to $14.45 per month. Many companies use this nearly free labor infrastructure[2]. There is no reason solar installers can't train and use them.
[1]https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2017/04/10/wages/
[2]https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/usa-more...
Ground mounts are far more expensive, not only because of how strong they need to be to support the panels under strong winds and snow without deflection, but the anchoring can be complicated depending on the site.
Some people can just hammer spikes into the ground, fill with epoxy, and their array is anchored. For my yard, I have to dig 4-feet down below frost line, through incredibly rocky clay soil, and bury (and concrete) 4x4 posts. On top of those posts goes the (expensive) metal rails to mount the panels. For just 10 solar panels it's gonna cost me ~$1000 in materials and many hours of digging.
The metal U-channel rails I'm looking at using will cost around $40/pp (10-ft), and I need at least 10 of them. In theory a cheaper option could be wooden boards like 2x8/2x10, but they're significantly heavier, bulkier, and would still be difficult to mount to.
This construction lets me build the array however I want, including adjusting angle (I'll have 4 pre-set angles for each season). This design is still cheaper than the cheapest pre-fab ground mounts, which are metal legs which go for ~$110/pp. You need ~2 legs per panel, though in some cases you can share one leg for two panels. For 10 panels you still need at least 11 legs, so at least $1100, before cost to anchor them. And that's a fixed angle. The adjustable angle ones are more like $185/pp.
Saved a whole lot of backbreaking digging, do recommend.
It is the cost of scaffolding to get up to the roof, labour to install the panels, electrical certification, etc.
I have several solar arrays at home - roof mounted, ground mounted.
The first array I ended up shelling out something like €2k for a mounting kit for a dozen panels.
The second array I went to a local builders merchant and bought a pile of aluminium profiles, and got a sack of cheap panel mounting bolts and clamps from China. 30 panels, about €200 in mounting hardware, and I went for the absolute bare minimum truss that would support them and be rigid through extreme weather. Commercially, it was looking like €3,500 just for the ground mounting kit. My labour cost was my sorry ass hauling gear up a cliff like a pack-goat and drilling bedrock to anchor them. Actually, the rock anchors were one of the expensive parts of that array - I think next time I’m just doing deeper holes, threaded bar and grout.
So yeah. The noun is bloody expensive, never mind the verb.
And so on :)
I think this graph sheds some light on your question:
https://www.nrel.gov/solar/market-research-analysis/solar-in...
What happened in the last decade was that solar panels ("Module" in this graph) got very very cheap. They used to cost $3 per watt in 2010, but now only cost $0.3 per watt.
This extreme price drop happened thanks to technical innovations (such as commoditization of PERC cells), and the large-scale production in PRC.
Metal components ("Hardware - BOS" in this graph) did get cheaper in the same time frame ($0.6 per watt to $0.5 per watt), but their cost cannot be reduced as much exactly because they are just a piece of metal i.e. there is no low-hanging fruit in Metallurgy.
The labor alone to mount the PV panel costs more than the PV panel. A union electrician costs a contractor $100/hr in a medium sized metro area with fringes and wages.
The mount and installing the mount cost more than the PV panel as well.
I’m unsure why everyone is posting about rooftop solar and rooftop mounts, the vast majority of PV panels are installed in solar fields, not on roofs.
I actually run and sell commercial electrical work, for what it’s worth.
What is it about solar panels that makes everyone want to use these really expensive mounting solutions? Is it just because they're trying to engineer a full 30 year lifespan right from the start?
You will still need the conduit for the wire of course, at least up to the inverter. That will add up pretty quickly if your mounts are spread out.
Of course it's possible to make it work, but if you need a concrete foundation in the ground to keep the posts immobile you're destroying the economics of it.
Then again, why don't those 'really expensive mounting solutions' suffer from the same issue?
Human Labor, the most neglected factor when discussing rising infrastructure costs.
For ground mounting, site preparation is required. Probably one wouldn't want to see their panel system get some slope year after year.
I’m in a very windy location but they are heavy enough to not budge.
It’s obviously not appropriate for all cases. But the original article, the guy could have gotten by with some zip ties. I’m of opinion that a lot of mounting is over engineered.
Similarly, if you want to do a permitted installation, you generally need to use UL-certified inverters and batteries -- fewer shocks and fires. That's a different pricing tier from the "trust me bro" equipment you can find online.
Meanwhile, a panel's main failure mode is not producing enough power. They're relatively easy to replace when they fail to do that. Price incentives are better aligned for that system component.