Current estimates suggest that solar might be as cheap as coal by the end of the decade, and half the cost of coal by the end of the next decade:
If the trend continues for another 8-10 years, which seems increasingly likely, solar will be as cheap as coal with the added benefit of zero carbon emissions. If the cost continues to fall over the next 20 years, solar costs will be half that of coal. These predictions may in fact be too conservative given that First Solar have reported internal production costs of 75 cents (46 pence) per watt with an expectation of 50 cents (31 pence) per watt by 2016.
When applied to electricity prices this predicts that solar generated electricity in the US will descend to a level of 12 cents (7 pence) per kilowatt hour by 2020, possibly even 2015 for the sunniest parts of America.
What does that mean? Cheap, decentralised, plentiful, sustainable energy production. This would be a massive relief to global markets that have been squeezed in recent years by the rising cost of oil extraction, which has been passed onto consumers. Falling energy prices — all else being equal — mean more disposable income to save and invest, or to spend.
9 comments:
On all residential roofs, not on "solar farms". Let us sell back to the utility. Shade on our roofs! this will abate the day surge for the oil and coal fired power plants and allow them to run at at a lower rate, more steady rate as usage is up at daylight, and down at sunset. Wind is approximately the same, except in Illinois, where there is none!
If it "gets cheaper", why can't it survive without gov't $$$?
This is bunk!
Falling energy prices.Thats is funny.
This article is patently false. The authors overestimate the power generated, overestimate the lifespan of the panels and underestimate the cost, and forget about the huge subsidies to help support solar.
If you want to generate enough electricity to cover just the increase in electic use in this country over the past 10 years, you would need enough solar panels to cover the entire U.S.
I will install solar when it makes sense to do so. Right now my solar installation would be subsidized by all the taxpayers, causing them to suffer.
Tepee's are the way to go green!
7:22 Working with engineers who oversee solar installion projects, I tend to agree with you to a point. The payback time for savings versus investimate has been shrinking somewhat as technology improves. Without substantial government taxpayer subsidies it would'nt make any sense at all right now with the current capabilites and cost of convential systems. The hope is technology will improve to make it most cost effective. That is an unknown at this point. For example the industry has been trying to come up with a better DC battery. Lithium Ion batteries were the latest and greatest. Been hearing about any battery fires lately? (Boeing 787s, Chevy Volt cars, various PCs, etc.)
Looks like the market will take care of everything if we let it do so. We just have to get better at this stuff and that takes time.
Using subsidies and over-regulating coal power plants tries to impose economic sense when it doesn't exist yet. I have no doubt that there will come a time when it makes more sense to cover your roof in solar and install a small windmill in your yard, diversifying your sources in a cost effective mannor.
It's near impossible to be "self sufficient." You would have to massively overbuild to meet your max needs and end up with a lot of unused capacity. At least in Maryland, I understand that you won't make any money from the utility beyond what they can charge you for their electricity in a month (ie, no refund checks). But if we can all take some load off the grid and cost effectively eliminate a decent chunk of our needs it will have a huge impact on economy.
Post a Comment