Colorado solar calculator
Estimate system size, panels, roof space, gross cost, savings, and payback using Colorado starter assumptions.
No email required
Enter monthly kWh or electric bill. The calculator uses state-level assumptions and shows the math behind the result.
Your estimate
Example resultEstimated system size: 8.1 kW. This is an estimate, not an installer quote.
Confidence
Medium
Planning estimate only — not an installer quote, engineering design, or tax advice.
Payback uses gross system cost before verified incentives, financing fees, batteries, and roof work.
Annual usage: 10,800 kWh
Annual production target: 10,800 kWh
State rate: 17.13 cents/kWh
Export assumption: Partial export credit
Direct solar use: 5,940 kWh
Modeled exports: 4,860 kWh
Panel count view
19-23 panels
Estimate shape
Privacy note: the printable report link stores estimate inputs in the URL, including ZIP and usage or bill values. Keep it private if those details are sensitive.
Local scenarios
Compare a few assumptions without creating an account.
Saved scenarios stay in this browser only and may include ZIP, bill, and usage inputs. SolarCalcNow does not sync them or send those values to analytics.
No saved scenarios yet.
Confidence drivers
Expected production: 10,800 kWh
System loss: 14%
Export value: Partial export credit
Direct solar use: 5,940 kWh
Modeled exports: 4,860 kWh
State production default: 1,550 kWh/kW/year
EIA Electric Power Monthly, Table 5.6.A — June 2026 - 2026-09-04
SolarCalcNow author-created production assumption - 2026-09-04
EnergySage marketplace + SolarCalcNow cost scenario - 2026-09-04
Production evidence: California has a saved full PVWatts response; eight states have successful API yields recorded to two decimals. Colorado, Illinois and Pennsylvania retain explicit author assumptions. The download distinguishes these evidence levels.
$0.1713/kWh
17.13 ¢/kWh
EIA Table 5.6.A, June 2026 residential column; published August 26, 2026. Divide the published cents/kWh by 100. This preliminary statewide average is a fallback, not your utility tariff. Use your bill's energy-only rate; fixed charges remain payable.
1,550.0 kWh/kW/year
kWh/kW/year
Author-created pre-loss planning input, not a retrieved PVWatts result or a measured state average. This state could not be verified within the provider quota. The model applies 14% system loss once. Verify production before using cost or payback.
$2.18–$3.28/W
$2.73/W × 0.8…1.2
EnergySage's state marketplace average, table updated August 28, 2026. We calculate an author-selected range of average × 0.8 to average × 1.2, rounded to cents/W. This ±20% scenario is not an observed price distribution or confidence interval. Cash solar only, before incentives; compare like-for-like local quotes.
SolarCalcNow provides planning estimates only. Results are not installer quotes, engineering designs, tax advice, financing recommendations, or utility interconnection approval.
Optional next step
Your estimate stays visible. This form is optional and uses explicit consent.
Installer quote matching is not active yet. You can still calculate, save, and print your estimate before contacting installers directly.
State-specific review
These planning notes interpret the same source-linked inputs used by the calculator. They do not add an incentive, utility tariff, or site-specific claim to the estimate.
A new Colorado estimate should begin with gross installed cost, because SolarCalcNow's reviewed federal record treats the homeowner Section 25D credit as unavailable for expenditures after December 31, 2025. That changes the comparison discipline for a 2026 purchase: an installer should not use older tax-credit language to turn a gross proposal into an assumed net price. Compare the written gross price with the state cost benchmark first, keep every rebate or tax claim on its own line, and ask for the current primary source and eligibility rule. The calculator leaves the federal amount at zero so its payback range does not depend on a tax outcome that has not been verified for the household.
Sources: IRS Section 25D update (reviewed 2026-09-04); EnergySage marketplace + SolarCalcNow cost scenario (reviewed 2026-09-04)
Colorado's state production assumption gives the sizing model a useful starting yield, but it is not a measurement of a particular roof. Snow retention, roof pitch, azimuth, shade, multiple roof planes, setbacks, and high-elevation weather can move a site model away from the statewide baseline. The correct review sequence is to keep annual kWh fixed, compare the calculator's state-level kW result with the installer's site model, and ask why the numbers differ. A smaller proposed system is not automatically more efficient, and a larger annual-production claim is not automatically better. Both should identify the roof plane, loss assumptions, inverter limits, and source used for the estimate.
Sources: SolarCalcNow author-created production assumption (reviewed 2026-09-04)
The residential rate shown on this page is a statewide EIA planning input. It values electricity used directly in the home, but it does not reproduce a Colorado utility bill, a municipal tariff, fixed charges, time-of-use periods, demand charges, or future escalation. Before accepting a savings forecast, compare the stated rate with twelve months of bills and identify the serving utility and plan. If an installer uses a higher rate, ask whether the difference comes from a current account record or from an assumed future increase. The calculator intentionally avoids automatic rate escalation, so a shorter proposal payback should disclose any inflation assumption rather than bury it inside the result.
Sources: EIA Electric Power Monthly, Table 5.6.A — June 2026 (reviewed 2026-09-04)
A Colorado system can produce the same annual kWh under several savings outcomes because electricity used immediately and electricity exported to the grid may not have the same value. SolarCalcNow therefore keeps export value editable and defaults to a partial-credit planning scenario instead of claiming one statewide compensation rule. Test retail, partial, and low export value without changing panel count; the spread shows how much payback depends on policy rather than physics. Then verify the current settlement terms for the actual account, including rollover, fixed charges, time periods, and any cap. A proposal that values every exported kWh at retail should cite the applicable tariff before that assumption enters a purchase decision.
Sources: EIA Electric Power Monthly, Table 5.6.A — June 2026 (reviewed 2026-09-04); SolarCalcNow author-created production assumption (reviewed 2026-09-04)
The state cost range is a starter benchmark, not an installer quote. Divide the proposal's solar-only gross price by DC system watts and compare like with like before evaluating a monthly payment. Roof work, batteries, service upgrades, trenching, financing charges, and optional monitoring should remain separate because they can make price per watt look artificially high or hide the actual solar equipment price. If a Colorado proposal sits outside the benchmark, that is a question prompt rather than proof that the quote is wrong. Ask for the equipment schedule, labor scope, exclusions, warranty responsibility, and any expected change order, then compare the same scope across bidders.
Sources: EnergySage marketplace + SolarCalcNow cost scenario (reviewed 2026-09-04)
A decision-ready comparison reconciles the household's bill history, SolarCalcNow's transparent state baseline, and the installer's property-specific model. The bill establishes annual demand; the calculator exposes rate, yield, losses, panel wattage, cost, and export assumptions; the installer should add roof measurements, electrical scope, interconnection details, and a written equipment package. Keep any unverified incentive outside the arithmetic until its current source and household eligibility are documented. When the three models disagree, change one assumption at a time. That process is more useful than choosing the proposal with the largest savings headline because it shows whether the difference comes from energy, production, price, or policy.
Sources: EIA Electric Power Monthly, Table 5.6.A — June 2026 (reviewed 2026-09-04); SolarCalcNow author-created production assumption (reviewed 2026-09-04); EnergySage marketplace + SolarCalcNow cost scenario (reviewed 2026-09-04)
Production evidence: California has a saved full PVWatts response; eight states have successful API yields recorded to two decimals. Colorado, Illinois and Pennsylvania retain explicit author assumptions. The download distinguishes these evidence levels.
$0.1713/kWh
17.13 ¢/kWh
EIA Table 5.6.A, June 2026 residential column; published August 26, 2026. Divide the published cents/kWh by 100. This preliminary statewide average is a fallback, not your utility tariff. Use your bill's energy-only rate; fixed charges remain payable.
1,550.0 kWh/kW/year
kWh/kW/year
Author-created pre-loss planning input, not a retrieved PVWatts result or a measured state average. This state could not be verified within the provider quota. The model applies 14% system loss once. Verify production before using cost or payback.
$2.18–$3.28/W
$2.73/W × 0.8…1.2
EnergySage's state marketplace average, table updated August 28, 2026. We calculate an author-selected range of average × 0.8 to average × 1.2, rounded to cents/W. This ±20% scenario is not an observed price distribution or confidence interval. Cash solar only, before incentives; compare like-for-like local quotes.
Source coverage: Xcel Energy Colorado
Xcel distinguishes continuous rollover from annual cash-out. Cash-out uses average hourly incremental energy cost, not retail. Obtain the current solar-bank election form; this example does not cover every Colorado provider.
Read the primary source — Xcel Energy Colorado solar bankSource checked: · Next review due: 2026-10-04
Source coverage: Colorado
The legislative reference identifies an exemption for qualifying residential renewable-energy property. Ask the county assessor about eligibility and assessment. This affects taxable property value, not an upfront cash grant.
Read the primary source — Colorado residential renewable-energy property tax exemptionSource checked: · Next review due: 2026-10-04
Program documented; eligibility required · Not subtracted from calculator cost
Planning example
This example uses the same calculator engine as the interactive form: 400W panels, low shade, 100% target offset, and no ZIP-level PVWatts override.
System size
8.1 kW
Panel range
19-23 panels
Roof area
507 sq ft
Gross cost
$17,662-$26,575
Annual savings
$1,309
Simple payback
13.5 years-20.3 years
For a home using 900 kWh per month in Colorado, the default planning estimate is a 8.1 kW system with 19-23 panels at 400 W each, producing about 10,800 kWh per year and needing roughly 507 sq ft of roof. Estimated gross cost is $17,662-$26,575 before incentives, with simple payback of 13.5 years-20.3 years. The estimate uses EIA Electric Power Monthly, Table 5.6.A — June 2026 (updated 2026-09-04) and SolarCalcNow author-created production assumption (updated 2026-09-04).
Usage sensitivity
These rows keep every input fixed except monthly usage. If your home is closer to 600 or 1,200 kWh/month, this gives a faster sanity check than reading one generic state paragraph.
| Usage | System | Panels | Gross cost | Payback |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 600 kWh/mo | 5.4 kW | 12-16 | $11,775-$17,716 | 13.5 years-20.3 years |
| 900 kWh/mo | 8.1 kW | 19-23 | $17,662-$26,575 | 13.5 years-20.3 years |
| 1,200 kWh/mo | 10.8 kW | 26-30 | $23,550-$35,433 | 13.5 years-20.3 years |
Local context
Good production and moderate rates; roof orientation and snow can affect results.
Before using this as a purchase decision, compare a no-battery and battery quote, verify your utility export rate, and check current incentives from state or utility sources.
For a home using 900 kWh per month, the Colorado starter model estimates about 8.1 kW, 19-23 panels, roughly 507 sq ft of roof area, and a gross installed-cost range of $17,662-$26,575. Simple payback is shown as 13.5 years-20.3 years before verified incentives, financing, batteries, roof work, or utility-specific export rules.
Colorado estimates use 17.13 cents/kWh as the residential rate assumption. Higher retail rates can improve the value of self-consumed solar, while lower rates usually make system size, export credit, and installed cost more important to the payback result.
Colorado export value and program details can vary by utility, so the calculator should be treated as a planning baseline. SolarCalcNow's default advanced setting models exported kWh below retail value until utility-specific rules are verified. This keeps the planning estimate conservative when a home exports more power than it uses immediately.
The current production assumption is 1,550 kWh per kW per year. This is a state-level starter value, not a roof-specific PVWatts result. Actual output can change with azimuth, tilt, shade, snow, weather, usable roof planes, setbacks, inverter choice, and module degradation.
The gross cost range uses a starter benchmark of $2.18-$3.28/W. SolarCalcNow does not subtract incentives from this estimate unless each incentive has an official or reviewable source, updated date, eligibility note, active status, and explicit permission to be included in net-cost math. Use the quote checker to compare installer price per watt against the same gross-cost baseline.
Data status
Electricity rate
EIA Electric Power Monthly, Table 5.6.A — June 2026
Updated 2026-09-04 - Confidence: official
Solar production
SolarCalcNow author-created production assumption
Updated 2026-09-04 - Confidence: starter-assumption
Installed cost
EnergySage marketplace + SolarCalcNow cost scenario
Updated 2026-09-04 - Confidence: market-benchmark
FAQ
Start with a full-year average of monthly electricity use, then choose how much of that use the system should offset. The Colorado calculator converts annual kWh into a system-size estimate using the visible state production assumption, shade setting, and system-loss factor. It then divides system watts by the selected panel wattage and shows a range rather than pretending the roof layout is known. Higher-wattage modules can reduce the count for the same system size, while setbacks, vents, separate roof planes, and shade can change the installable layout. Treat the result as a planning range and compare it with a site-specific design before signing a proposal.
The calculation uses 17.13 cents/kWh from EIA Electric Power Monthly, Table 5.6.A — June 2026, reviewed 2026-09-04. The figure is a statewide residential average, not a promise about a particular utility account. It helps value solar energy used directly in the home, while exported energy is valued separately under the selected export assumption. A real bill can include fixed charges, seasonal pricing, time-of-use periods, minimum bills, taxes, and other terms that the statewide rate does not reproduce. Use the source-linked average for early comparison, then verify the exact tariff and recent usage history on the account before treating savings or payback as project-specific.
No incentive is subtracted from the default gross-cost estimate. SolarCalcNow requires an official or otherwise reviewable source, a review date, active status, eligibility rules, ownership conditions, and an explicit inclusion decision before a program can enter net-cost math. This prevents an expired, conditional, or third-party-only benefit from making a planning result look cheaper than the written project price. Review the state incentive page and the primary program source separately, confirm personal eligibility with qualified professionals, and keep each claimed credit or rebate on its own line when comparing proposals. Gross price, financing charges, battery cost, roof work, and incentives should not be collapsed into one unexplained number.
Colorado export value and program details can vary by utility, so the calculator should be treated as a planning baseline. Solar used immediately in the home is valued at the residential rate assumption, while exported energy is valued under the selected export scenario. If the export credit is below retail, a system designed for full annual usage offset can save less than a simple one-for-one net-metering model suggests, especially when much of its production leaves the home. The calculator therefore separates direct solar use from export and keeps the assumption editable. Confirm the serving utility, tariff, settlement period, fixed charges, rollover rules, and time-of-use treatment before relying on the modeled annual savings or simple payback.
The model combines user inputs with Colorado statewide rate, production, and cost assumptions, but it cannot inspect the property. It does not measure roof orientation, tilt, shade patterns, structural condition, usable roof planes, setbacks, electrical-service capacity, or interconnection constraints. It also cannot know the final equipment package, installer scope, financing fees, insurance requirements, utility tariff, or verified incentive eligibility. Those details can change panel count, production, gross cost, and payback. Use the result to understand scale and compare assumptions, then ask installers to document their site survey, production model, equipment, exclusions, and written price so differences can be traced rather than accepted as unexplained precision.
The current calculator does not geocode ZIP codes. It uses an author-selected reference point in the selected state, including when the optional live PVWatts provider responds. Entering a ZIP does not establish property-level accuracy. The model does not know the exact roof plane, azimuth, tilt, shade, setbacks or module layout. Check which production basis appears in the result, then compare it with the installer model and the physical roof survey before relying on annual output.