I’m curious what the cumulative operating cost / financial repayment plan is relative to the capital installation cost. Funny enough if it is advantageous to you vs solar city that is one more argument in favor of them running a poor business model.
The general model has some intrinsic advantages. If you want to build out solar generation you normally have to buy land (expensive), but this way the customer is giving you space on their roof "for free". Then the price per kWh the customer pays to the power company includes a transmission cost, but the power is being consumed on site so you don't have to pay that.
The result is that solar generally has a generation cost of ~$0.04/kWh (which includes the cost of the land) but meanwhile you have customers happy to be paying $0.11/kWh. The trade off is the one-time cost of installing it on individual roofs is more labor intensive than doing a large-scale installation in a field somewhere, but that just means it's competitive rather than having a massive advantage.
