So I did a bit of research last night and here are just some notes and analysis below. Yes, I am a huge freaking geek since I sickly like this kind of stuff and surprisingly I got to a different conclusion than I initially had:
Notes:
•On the buy page if you look at the financing options with TD, there is no link
•The news page is full of dead links, related articles, but very few mention the company at all by name.
•Company is not listed on google with respect to their actual address. The building exists, and they are likely in it, but it is odd.
•There is a separate meter, but in general power from the roof is fed directly into your house as solar power. Any excess is pushed out and sold on the grid. This may be important later.
•For reroofing you are required to use one of their contractors
•FAQ page uses what appears to be the flash file from the inverter and equipment company
Analysis:
This company is a middleman reseller. Given its lack of presence and size I suspect it does not have the pockets deep enough to fund the initial investment in the panels. This is likely being pushed by the panel creators or more likely the equipment company that makes the equipment between the panels and the grid (my cousin is in this area, apparently it is doing fairly well). I strongly suspect that the main backer is SMA, who seems to be one of the giants still around in the industry
http://www.sma-america.com/en_US.html). High level research shows the 50MW of solar power with a fat KWh rate is distributed by geographic area. I suspect that the assumption is that they don't want to end up with too heavy a concentration of solar power in only one area. This would explain the glut of solar in the rural areas near Ottawa, and why some of they may not have been hooked up yet, so your area may work.
So does the financial math work? Probably (this is finance stuff so I always will play conservatively here)
From wiki the average amount of power a panel generates is 175 W/m². Next looking a roof I am making a rough guess would be 2 panels across and let's say 4 deep on your roof (thinking of 1mx1m panels), which gives at peak generation of 1.4KW/h, or on a sunny day 7KWh (assuming the equivalent of 5 hours of intense sunlight). Playing it safe let's say the rate the government pays is $0.60/KWh and that the panels generate the same amount of power throughout the year (hence the 5 hours assumption). 7 x 0.60 x 365 gives $1533 a year in income. So with the payment to you, depreciation, etc. it is likely that this is a good business deal for the company in question. Assuming their interest rates don't spike too much and that the government sticks to its word on prices*. So at least rest assured it isn't likely a scam or something that will blow up in a weird way*.
Considerations:
-Trees in the area may need to be trimmed or removed. The other half is who is responsible for keeping trees from shading the panels.
-If you share a roof with your neighbor, you may require their approval to install the panels. It also may increase your risk with respect to the next few points.
-Conditions of the install is that if you need your roof replaced (any idea how many years are left on the current roof?), you need to use one of their approved roof installers. Note the company is Toronto based and if you live outside of TO, you may not be able to find one of these roofers (or not for as good a price as you may find elsewhere).
-Panels on the roof will likely change drainage patterns. This can have some nasty implications, especially if it pushes more water onto your neighbour's property and it is damaged.
-How are these panels insured and does installing them require you to take out additional insurance on the house?
-In whose name would this be in (e.g yours, your spouse's, both)? It has some interesting tax and program repercussions (e.g. EI claims and income)
-I do not believe the price paid by the government is indexed to inflation. So assuming a 2% rate of inflation (this is the historic one to typically use), and based on the rule of 72 by the time the 20th year rolls around you are going to be earning about half as much as you initially did (assuming no reduction in electricity conversion with the cells as well).
-Resale! The 15% increase in price on a home is typically quoted if you own the panels and they are tied to your internal power network first. This is another contract that people have to agree to if they buy the home, so it will reduce the number of prospective buyers. If you have no intention on moving in the next 20 years, this is moot.
Risks:
*if company that owns the contract goes belly up the contract will likely be bundled up and sold as an asset, as well as the equipment. These could even be sold separately, which gets very messy. Given your level on the totem pole of debt repayments the likely case is that your contract would be made null and void and the equipment removed from your roof. So I suspect the worst case is that you end up with some weird marks and likely cosmetic and superficial damage to your roof.
*I have a natural tendency not to trust the government to deliver on a long-term promise - especially if it is costing money and is unpopular with the taxpayers. That $0.80 or $0.60/KWh rate is in place and may stay for the next 20 years. It may also disappear, and I do say that with a lot of seriousness. What the government of Ontario is currently doing is technically illegal. The rate guarantee has some neat asterisks in how it was set up and granted. The condition is that most of the 'green tech' needs to come from Ontario to qualify. Now this isn't a problem for this install, I am sure it will meet the criteria. The problem is the result of an international ruling and complaint (search for "Ontario solar international dispute" in your favorite search engine). Germany, China, and several other countries were claiming Ontario was breaking international law by effectively making a perverted form of tariff against foreign green technology. This is where it gets murky since international law is subjectively applied, but in short what the government set up is being challenged and it is not improbable that they will have to back peddle on the current guarantee. The take home from this * is make sure you cover the exit clauses in the contract in-case of an eventuality of the premium being clawed back.
Conclusion:
I'd likely say go for it with the company, but make sure the exit clauses are iron clad for you to be as protected as you can. It isn't going to be a ton of money, but assuming they handle all maintenance, it is very little work for a little bit of passive income.
