The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Friday, May 24, 2013
  • Sections
    • Home
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Solar
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Wind
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Geothermal
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Bio
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Hydro
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Careers
    • Companies
      • Company Directory
      • Press Releases
      • Products
      • Events Calendar
      • White Papers
    • Webcasts
      • Upcoming Webcasts
      • Featured Webcasts
      • Archived Webcasts
      • Events Calendar
    • White Papers
    • Magazines
      • Renewable Energy World
      • Wind Technology
      • Large Scale Solar
      • Hydro Review
      • HRW - Hydro Review Worldwide
      • Renewable Energy World (North America Edition)
      • Photovoltaics World
    • Awards
  • Account
    • Sign In
    • Register
  • Search
Don't Miss The Great Solar Debate: Where Does the Global Solar Industry Stand? Click Here to Register! ×

Solar Grid Parity 101

John Farrell
January 12, 2012  |  44 Comments

img_2913.jpg

Solar grid parity is considered the tipping point for solar power, when installing solar power will cost less than buying electricity from the grid.  It’s also a tipping point in the electricity system, when millions of Americans can choose energy production and self-reliance over dependence on their electric utility.

But this simple concept conceals a great deal of complexity.  And given the stakes of solar grid parity, it’s worth exploring the details.

The Cost of Solar

For starters, what’s the right metric for the cost of solar?  The installed cost for residential solar ($6.40 in 2011), or commercial solar ($5.20) or utility-scale solar ($3.75)?  Even if we pick one of these, it’s difficult to compare apples to apples, because grid electricity is priced in dollars per kilowatt-hour of electricity, not dollars per Watt.

Enter “levelized cost,” or the cost of a solar PV array averaged over a number of years of production.  For example, a 1-kilowatt (kW) solar array installed in Minneapolis for $6.40 per Watt costs $6,400.  Over 25 years, we can expect that system to produce about 30,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh), so the “simple levelized cost” is $6,400 divided by 30,000, or about $0.21 per kWh.

But people usually borrow money, and pay interest, to install solar power.  And there are some maintenance costs over those 25 years.  And we also use a “discount rate” that puts heavier weight on dollars spent or earned today compared to those earned 20 years from now.  A 1-kW solar array that is 80% paid for by borrowing at 5% interest, with maintenance costs of about $65 per year, and discounted at 5% per year will have a levelized cost of around $0.37.

That means that “solar grid parity” for this 1-kW solar array happens if the grid electricity price is  $0.37 per kWh.  But this calculation is location specific.

In Los Angeles, that same 1-kW system produces 35,000 kWh over 25 years, lowering the levelized cost to $0.31.  The timeframe also matters.

If we only look back at the Minneapolis project with a levelized cost of $0.37, but instead look at the output over 20 years instead of 25 years, it increases the levelized cost to $0.43 because we have fewer kWh of electricity over which to divide our initial cost.

We choose 25 years because solar PV panels have a good chance of producing for that long.

We also use a lower installed cost that the U.S. average.  Residential solar projects may average $6.40 per Watt, but there are some good examples of aggregate purchase residential solar projects costing $4.40 per Watt.   The levelized cost of solar at $4.40 per Watt in Minneapolis is $0.25; in Los Angeles it is $0.21.

The following map shows the levelized cost of solar, by state, based on an installed cost of $4.40 per Watt, averaged over 25 years (click for a larger version).

This map shows half our grid parity equation, the cost of solar.  But what about the other half, the grid price?  It’s another complicated question.

The Grid Price

Utilities like to compare new electricity production to their existing fleet, which means comparing new solar power projects to long-ago-paid-off (amortized) coal and nuclear power plants that can produce electricity for 3-4 cents per kWh.  But this is apples to oranges, because utilities can’t get any new electricity for that price, from any source.

A more appropriate measure of the grid price is the marginal cost for a utility of getting wholesale power from a new power plant.  In California, this is called the “market price referent,” and it’s around 12 cents per kWh.  The figure varies from state to state.

But while the market price referent provides a reasonable comparison for the cost of utility-scale solar, it’s not the number that matters for solar installed on rooftops or near buildings.  In those cases, the power is used “behind the meter,” and depending on the type of state policy for net metering, the customer can essentially spin their electric meter backward when their solar panels produce electricity.  That means that solar power is really competing against the energy cost on a utility bill, known as the “retail price.”

The following map shows the average retail electricity price by state across the U.S.  It ranges from 8-10 cents in the interior to 15 cents per kWh and higher on the coasts (click for a larger version).

In general, the residential retail electricity price is the generally accepted grid parity price.  With this price and our previous map of the levelized cost of solar, we can assess the state of solar grid parity.  The following map shows the ratio of the levelized cost of solar to the grid parity price in each state.  Only Hawaii has reached solar grid parity without incentives.

As time rolls ahead, and grid prices rise while solar costs fall, the picture changes.  In five years (2016), three states representing 57 million Americans will be at solar grid parity: Hawaii, New York, and California.

There are other considerations in the grid parity calculation.

Time-of-Use Rates

Some utility customers pay “time-of-use” rates that charge more for electricity consumed during times of peak demand, such as when a hot sunny day has everyone using their air conditioners.  Under these rates, a solar project can be replacing electricity that costs upwards of $0.30 per kWh.  Over a year, time-of-use rates can (on average) boost the cost of electricity – at peak times, when solar panels produce a lot of power – by about 30 percent.  Assuming every state implemented time-of-use pricing (and that it was equivalent to a 30 percent increase in grid prices during peak times), solar grid parity would be a reality in 14 states in 2016, instead of just three.

Solar v. Grid Over Time

There’s one other calculation.  Let’s say that in 2011 solar still costs just a bit more than the grid electricity price, but that the grid price is rising at a modest rate each year.  In this case, solar may still be the right choice because the lifetime cost of solar (at a fixed price) will be less than the rising cost of grid electricity.  We can use an accounting tool called net present value to estimate the savings from solar compared to grid power over 25 years, and we find that for every percentage point annual increase in electricity prices, solar can be ~10% more expensive that grid power today and still be at “parity.”  We find that with electricity price inflation of 2% per year, solar grid parity shifts up two years using this method.

To further explain the concept of solar grid parity, I’ve also created this slideshow.  Click below to see it explained with a lot of graphical assistance.

Solar Grid Parity 101
View more presentations from John Farrell

Solar grid parity has enormous implications for the electricity system and the time is drawing very close for many Americans.  I hope this post (and slideshow) helps illustrate the complexity of the concept, and I’d appreciate your feedback via email (jfarrell@ilsr.org) or in the comments below.

This post originally appeared on Energy Self-Reliant States, a resource of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance's New Rules Project.

The information and views expressed in this blog post are solely those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyWorld.com or the companies that advertise on this Web site and other publications. This blog was posted directly by the author and was not reviewed for accuracy, spelling or grammar.

44 Comments

Register To Comment
ANONYMOUS
January 20, 2012
Here in NJ we have the SREC (Solar Renewable Energy Credit) program and it definitely fluctuates with the supply and demand of solar. But I was just reading an interesting take on this issue that suggests jobs may be part of the issue (http://www.geoscapesolar.com/blog/2011/11/21/nj-srec-prices/). More jobs would definitely increase the efficiency of service and give people easier access to installation, which would cut down on overall costs.
Sean Ong
Sean Ong
January 17, 2012
Here's a great (free) paper published by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory on residential grid parity by utility service territory in the United States. In this paper, grid parity is referred to as "break even price."

http://1.usa.gov/solarPV1
ANONYMOUS
January 17, 2012
The prices quoted in this article are not for stand-alone PV. Thus, a user requires a grid connection to provide continuity of service, the "energy bank" in which the PV owner can "deposit" overproduction and withdraw to compensate underproduction,and electrical system "stiffness" to allow the inverter to operate stably and to keep the voltage from crashing when the owner's central a/c compressor starts. Thus, the utility is providing a service, even if the owner is net energy neutral. Under net metering, the utility obtains no revenue, and in the present volumetric rate structure, the cost is shifted to other utility customers. This is not sustainable; utilities have a legal right to a return on their T&D investment, and regulators are obligated to allow rates to recover costs and provide ROI.
There are two basic componets of electricity cost: the energy cost, and the fixed costs of providing service. Presently, commercial customers typically have separate energy and demand charges. Traditionally, both cost components have been rolled into a single per-kW rate for residential customers becasue demand metering had been too expensive to install for small users. This has changed. Modern electronic residential meters can easily measure demand. If residential PV with net metering becomes large, utilities and regulators together will drive a shift to energy + demand tariffs for residential in order to avoid the poor, without PV, from subsidizing the affluent. Fixed costs are presently the basis for about 40-50% of typical residential rates. With demand metering shifting fixed costs out of the per kWH charges, kWh prices will decrease substantially, thus moving the "grid partic bar" lower for PV. Any discussion of PV grid parity needs to consider that the fixed costs of the grid remain (PV does not provide significant grid capacity avoidance), and present tariff structures are likely to shift.
Kurt Johnsen
Kurt Johnsen
January 16, 2012
To continue the previous, Are most folks competent to do wiring and make voltage drop calculations, etc? Also,I didn't mean to post as anonymous. Kurt Johnsen
ANONYMOUS
January 16, 2012
Does Geunther drive his solar panels to and from work?

Jim C., yeah, you can get everything including Chinese made modules from Lowes for around $4/ watt except for a few other things like a solar site survey, a building permit, an electrician, an AC disconnect, maybe a utility required renewable energy meter,roof flashing, transition box(s), breakers,wiring into the main panel or other, conduit and wire from roof to main panel,grounding wire, maybe ground rods, oh yeah and the physical installation on the roof. Do you think one can do this well or safely the first time around? Are most folks able to work on a roof? In an attic? The prospects for paying more and / or having very bad things happen is very high.
Jim Case
Jim Case
January 15, 2012
@Bob, you are truely an exception to the rule. Now you can go online to Lowes and get everything you need to install a system on your home "if you have a south facing roof line" I would have to see the house from satalite and a 2 year energy audit from your utility to make an evaluation as to what you may need as well as a visit to dsire.com to see what is availabe in your market area, rebates and such. There is a lot to this to make a determination.

Jim C. oltoby58@yahoo
Trevor Bond
Trevor Bond
January 15, 2012
I'll look into solar world thanks. Does anyone else agree that solar world is a good company to buy from?

@oltoby We have had an energy survey done and we have pretty efficient appliances and also a well insulated home, so unless we cant save too much more energy unless we got rid of energy HOGS like central a/c. Too bad the family wouldn't fly with that.
Jim Case
Jim Case
January 15, 2012
Grid parity is a non issue if you consider that most folks have antiquated and energy PIGS for appliances and HVAC. Kick the pig and get a energy management survey done before you spend twice as much on solar as you need to by making the house more efficient. TAME THE BEAST BEFORE YOU FEED IT!!
Jim Case
Jim Case
January 15, 2012
You can now buy Westinghouse panels with built in enphase inverters at lowes, Ha!

Jim C.
Authorized dealer for Westinhouse energy systems
House Springs Mo
John Christensen
John Christensen
January 15, 2012
I would recommend Solar World panels and enphase inverters for ease of installation, might have to hire a licenced electrician to get through the inspection process but that's it. Solar World has the most domestic experience and the best warrantee and they are very competitive through their dealers.
Trevor Bond
Trevor Bond
January 15, 2012
Thanks so much for all the help. And ya I had heard that the electrical work had to be done by certified people, but I was hoping I could do the labor of putting the panels up on the roof in an effort to save costs. But I guess I will have to ask. And I am hoping that the payback time for the hot water heater will drop because the hot tub would serve as the tank that we would have to buy instead.

Also, would anyone recommend a certain company to buy from? I am having trouble finding ratings. Is there a site that compares panels from many companies and has customer reviews? I would like to buy from a US company in an effort to help our the economy and our energy security.
William Fitch
William Fitch
January 15, 2012
Hi:

Expensive systems...
My tracking system at around 9.1 KW will at most run me 24K gross.
Will have it online by August this year...
I am only getting the 30% fed credit which would bring me down to
16.8K$. I pay about 10 cents a KWH now. I live in PA on PPL electric.
I calculated my LCOE for 25 years at only 7 or 8 cents even using the higher than expected 24K$ gross number, and I did not count any SREC's at all... I think of them as a desert since they are so tied to politics at the state level..
I am doing the system myself of course, but still most of your numbers seem very high for RIGHT NOW, considering you can get high quality mono for 1.15 per watt...

.....Bill
John Bronson
John Bronson
January 15, 2012
@Bob Clemintime

Installers are probably not going to let you do any of the work. Legally, you are supposed to have an electrical contractor's license, and they will probably have to get a permit.

The exception may be off-grid systems, if you keep it at 12V. E.g. solar powered attic fans, solar powered lights, etc. Also, you should consider combinations. E.g., you can have an off grid system and still be connected to the grid.
John Bronson
John Bronson
January 15, 2012
@Bob Clemintime

Here's some math for payback time. Let's say you have 1kW of PV installed for $4/watt = $4,000. NREL quotes 4.34 hours average sunlight in CT. 4.34 kWh/day @19 cents/kWh = 82 cents/day. $4,000 divided by 82 cents = 4,878 days or 13.3 years payback time. Of course that 19 cents/kWh grid price is likely to go higher with inflation, so your payback time would be less.

For solar hot water payback time, the industry quotes 6-8 years.

For property values, ask a realtor, or appraiser (the realtor's brother-in-law).
Trevor Bond
Trevor Bond
January 15, 2012
Alright so I am pretty new to all of this, and am hoping I can get some advice from some of the "veterans". I want solar panels put on the roof of my house in CT. I understand the environmental benefits which is a large part of my interest in energy source, but the person who pays the bills is simply interested in the economics. If we can get the panels without a loan, I determined the payback time should be about 15 years. Is this true? We pay about 19 cents per kwh now. We have little to no roof shading. There is a possibility of the house being sold 7 years from now. I read some articles that said in CA pv systems increase the value of the homes. How much of the purchase price would be recouped. Do people think the effect will be the same in the suburbs of CT?

We also have a hot tub and I think it would be a good idea to put up some solar thermal panels to help heat the tub. Does anyone know what the payback time for this might be?

Lastly, if both of these make economic sense for us to do, is there a better way to convince the purchaser that this is a good idea? Oh and I may be able to do some of the simple parts of the installation myself.

P.S On our bill there is a "delivery charge" which makes up a good portion of our monthly expenses. What does this mean as the electricity is delivered by wires?
Thomas M
Thomas M
January 15, 2012
Dick,you are right saying the cost depends on the level of dependability. Cost for small off grid systems for emergency power and everyday power can be minimal. These smaller systems provide peace of mind for those times when grid power is down and can provide everyday usage lowering electric bills. And as you mention, solar is not for everyone, especially those in areas that do not recieve good light. It should be considered as an auxilary system, unless of course you have the funds and available sunlight to become totally off grid.
Dick Maclay
Dick Maclay
January 14, 2012
The cost of being off grid depends on the level of dependability desired. Enough solar cells and batteries for 2 9s of reliability would be expensive in areas where clouds and storms are frequent and/or of significant duration. 5 9s of reliability, what the grid should begin to offer when it needs to do so to be competitive, would cost a whole lot more. The sort of reliability that most people expect from a utility will certainly cost more in almost all cases off-grid than on-grid. The synergy between utility loads and sunshine ensure that. If one gets psychic value from being off grid it may be worth while. Most of us are not there.
Thomas M
Thomas M
January 14, 2012
What about the cost of going off grid? This should be everyone's agenda. Becoming energy independent, lessening our dependence on the grid. Then all these foolish cost calculations wouldn't matter, nor would the ever changing policies regarding what the grid suppliers agenda really is intending. Time and money wasted on promises and energy politics and taxes would be better suited being invested in off grid systems that benefit the homeowner's utility bills and peace of mind not to mention the impact on the world's ecology.
Dick Maclay
Dick Maclay
January 13, 2012
The solar industry needs it own Steve Jobs. Roof top solar delivers the same electrons as central generation with a little rooftop ugliness thrown in. Unlike cars and even new kitchens, invisible electrons cannot be sold on sex appeal. But rooftop generation can function fine after hurricanes, earthquakes, bad drivers hitting power poles, and even snow storms with some effort. Jobs took an ordinary cell phone and added value. Someone needs to add islanding, power conditioning, and whatever to solar inverters. Many of us will pay more sooner when the inverters do more.

Utility cost of service analysis, like the analysis offered here, are fine as long as far as they go. But both neglect customer alternatives that include CHP, islanding solar, energy conditioning and management, and…. Google is known to be poking around this area. Don't be Kodaked by Google or others. By the way I would like to get my solar system with islanding before the Hayward fault lets go with the big one.
Dick Maclay
Dick Maclay
January 13, 2012
It is good to see an article with an honest appraisal of solar power. And the intelligent comments from industry participants is heartening too.

Utilities today are as visionary as Kodak. But what will they do when they recognize that solar is beginning to offer real competition? Politicians walked away from regulation when its high costs threatened the viability of railroads. Old line industries including railroads, airlines, banks, etc. reduced costs by 30% and more with deregulation. And they began selling what customs wanted. Don't be surprised to see genuine deregulation in the utility business when competition strikes. Having been involved with both railroad deregulation and California's effort to slap a deregulation bumper sticker on increased regulation, I assure you this industry has seen nothing like the real thing. The shocker here is that utilities are more regulated and less efficient than the other industries ever were. Utilities, as a result, have more costs they can cut given the necessity chance. Expect the utility arena to become more chaotic than the airlines have been. The question is when? Don't forget that deregulation usually comes after crazy new regulatory schemes have all failed. It is a last resort by politicians, so chaos will probably precede real deregulation. Grid parity will be slowed when utilities retaliate with new rates, new rate structures and cost reductions.
Bill Howley
Bill Howley
January 13, 2012
There is another consideration concerning retail grid rates. The publicized rates for a particular state are subject to a variety of extra charges that significantly change the per kwh charge. For instance, WV is listed on the map as having a rate of 8.8 cents per kwh. While that may be true in the abstract residential kwh on the rate schedule, every residential customer pays a flat $5 per month fee in addition to per kwh charges. This flat charge means that high users have lower kwh rates than low users who do not have the larger number of kwh over which to spread this $5 charge.

I use only about 250 kwh per month, so my actual per kwh charge, including the $5 base charge is actually around 11.5 cents per kwh. WV once had among the lowest rates in the US, but rates have risen more than 40% here since 2008.

I'm saying all of this to indicate that the details matter, and each family or business needs to take a close look at state and local installation costs and grid rates.
John Christensen
John Christensen
January 13, 2012
The numbers always matter but if one is off by a small fraction it doesn't really matter as everyone still make out in the long run with current trends going forward, solar is a good investment period. The whether its DIY or Leasing or eletric cars or commercial everybody wins! There are plenty of opportunities for DIY out there on the internet but if one hires a turn key business to perform the whole objective from start to finish that service is worth something and the guarantees justify the expense.
John Bronson
John Bronson
January 13, 2012
Dani_B wrote:

'@John-Bronson - You're calculations are also incorrect. The author clearly stated he was using Minneapolis for the example. In PA we get 4.5 peak hours. I can't imagine Minneapolis gets 6.'

'Our costs in PA are anywhere from .12 to .18/kwh, which makes it cost saving to those in the .18 territory, but not in the .12 but we still have people buying.'

@Dani_B

I wrote 'My understanding is that the sunniest areas (US southwest) will get 6 hrs average'. Perhaps you should brush up on your geography, and reading comprehension? Also, the author quotes 28.7 cents/kWh for PA, so even your calculations are much lower.
John Bronson
John Bronson
January 13, 2012
John Farrell wrote:

"I pretty much use NREL's PVWatts for estimating output. For Los Angeles, for example, that's about 1500 kWh AC for every DC kW of capacity. I also include panel degradation of 0.5% per year."

1500 kWh per day? Could you please be more specific, and transparent as to how you arrive at your numbers? When I visit the NREL site, it shows an interactive map that calculates 11.5 cents/ kWh for Los Angeles:

http://mapserve3.nrel.gov/PVWatts_Viewer/index.html

This is quite a bit less than the 23.3 cents/kWh you have on your map. I'm not trying to be a jerk here, but there is a big difference between what you are quoting, and what the industry is quoting.
Chas Marischen
Chas Marischen
January 13, 2012
Failure to count and or consider SELF installation changes the game.
That statement is based on doing it from "scratch". The Solar industry is also limiting ITSELF by not produceing a "black-box" system, and making it AVAILABLE to the DYI's at "most" building supply outlets.
Waiting for "parity" is like waiting for the price of diamonds to come down.
Finally; What is the value of electricity when you CAN'T get it from the "GRID"???
Gerry Wootton
Gerry Wootton
January 13, 2012
I don't live in California so I don't know what to make out of this PGE schedule. http://www.gosolarnow.com/pdf%20files/PGE%20E9%20Rate%20Schedule.pdf It appears that one has to seriously avoid demand charges and opt-out on Smart Meters to obtain the rates used for comparison.
Gerry Wootton
Gerry Wootton
January 13, 2012
Always a fun exercise. So many factors, so little math.
I find PVWatts gets you into a neighborhood, but just that and 10% could be significant. Important inputs are actual elevation, air polution, humidity, wind, cloudiness distribution, etc. most of which are quite location dependent. Many relevant inputs are inconsistently available by location and there is no common pool of consistently recorded meteorlogical data which makes it more difficult to get the best answer. PVWatts seems to not reflect seasonal cloud data very well. That's not overly important except that it does affect the optimum fixed mount or single axis tracker configuration. Also, one can assume a generic PV module or one can use a model of the optical and electrical properties of a specific module.
There's also the issue of when power is most needed including season of the year and time of day: in fixed and single axis installations, configuration can be optimzed to demand rather than best annual yield. Also, optimizing for annual yield generally requires a larger inverter than optimizing for least seasonal variation which plays into LCOE in interesting ways. In practice, the drop-out level of the inverter is also highly relevant to practical yield and the effectiveness of trackers.
In large practical arrays with trackers, one does not typically space out daisies so that shadowing can not occur,instead using retrograde motion to avoid shadowing: there is a tradeoff between area/land costs, run-length losses, etc. so the best LCOE is not obtained at the best possible yield.
And of course another very important factor is the frequency of window washing.
For the small scale operator, yet another concession: that 100 year old tree versus LCOE.
DoggyDog World
DoggyDog World
January 13, 2012
Excellent article which covers all the bases involved in grid parity calculation and gives some useful real-world examples. A terrific counter-balance to the misinformation spread by the likes of Gunther.

Two comments. Although 2%/yr is a good estimate of electricity price inflation there is a small chance it will be much higher as in the '70s and early '80s. The insurance a PV owner has against this risk has some value. It would cost real money for a non-PV owner to buy similar insurance (e.g. using natural gas options or similar). I wouldn't put this in the grid parity calculation, it's just an extra point to consider.

Second, retail electricity price is the correct number to use for a net-metered customer today. But as we reach grid parity and the installed base begins to mushroom, PV users will start paying for grid services. It's one thing for a small bunch of enthusiasts to free-ride off a large base of grid customers, quite another thing when "everyone" has PV. To take an extreme example, if 90% of the customers had enough PV to net-meter down to zero annual kWhs the remaining 10% would see their bills quadruple (or more) just so the utility could continue providing nighttime and cloudy-day backup for the PV'd majority.

Of course we probably won't hit 90% within the 25 year life of this grid parity calculation, so maybe we can just ignore this issue. But we'd probably see grid connection fees showing up around 25-30% penetration, which could happen before 2037 in favorable areas like US southwest. Paradoxically, the faster an area ramps PV the worse the 25 year economics are for anyone buying PV today. So be careful with your evangelism, early adopters!
John Christensen
John Christensen
January 13, 2012
This is a great report from a solar advocate that has the facts and figures to back it up, why would folks want to question someone who is always conservative and precise in his calculations. Please subscribe to John Farrell's blog and email updates, he is on Twitter too! This is a great discussion and I'm glad that all the commenters critiques were answered by the author. My advice to the lady who didn't want to install pv now is that every day you don't power locally with solar is a day you didn't produce clean, economic, and readily available power, that should be enough right there to make you go ahead and take the plunge.
ANONYMOUS
January 13, 2012
Joanna,

One major thing to consider is the tax credits and rebates in your area. These will all go away at some point as we get closer to "parity" This 40-60% subsidy to the system allows you to get into a system today at the lower prices from the future. This "parity" discussion means that the price is equal or better than utility electric without any incentives. If you include the incentives, the author's $0.37 based on $6.40/Watt would be closer to $0.22, and when you adjust for the fact that actual installed prices are now closer to $4/Watt, you are more like $0.14/kWh. With all incentives and credits used, current "net" cost of solar in Arizona is close to $2/Watt.

Also John, your calculations are assuming a full tracking system. If you go online to PV Watts you can calculate the expected kWh/kW installed based on your area. Most residential systems are fixed and thus the production has a curve throughout the day and doesn't have full production all day long. In Arizona, we are seeing around 1800-1900 kWh/kW for our systems using the Enphase micro-inverters, compared to traditional inverters that will see about 1600-1700 kWh/kW.
Joanna Gubman
Joanna Gubman
January 13, 2012
Hmm OK, I guess 3rd party options would make a difference.. Thanks!
John Farrell
John Farrell
January 13, 2012
If the prices seem high, that's because I intentionally left out incentives (i.e. no federal tax credit, depreciation, rebates, grants, or production incentives). Those who want to can add those in.

Secondly, I have received many comments that the prices are too high, but I'm basing the prices on known project costs and existing datasets. If you have a dataset for the U.S. suggesting that residential solar is being installed at an AVERAGE or MEDIAN price less than $4.40 per Watt, send it to jfarrell@ilsr.org. Thanks!

Sincerely,
-John
John Farrell
John Farrell
January 13, 2012
@jgubman

Two thoughts. First, with solar leasing and other 3rd party arrangements, solar can be more costly than grid power as long as the lease/PPA has an escalator that is forecast to be lower than grid power inflation.

And second, it's not always purely an economic decision. Or folks may be willing to expect longer than a 25-year project life...
John Farrell
John Farrell
January 13, 2012
@John-Bronson

I pretty much use NREL's PVWatts for estimating output. For Los Angeles, for example, that's about 1500 kWh AC for every DC kW of capacity. I also include panel degradation of 0.5% per year.
randy velker
randy velker
January 13, 2012
Thanks Dani for clearing up some of the basic misunderstandings that have come out of the article. Which, by the way, is an excellent primer on 'grid parity' and how to compare solar energy with utility energy.

Every paragraph in the article covers another key element that must be understood. Kudos on the article and the graphics! I will use it as a link on my website.

As far as waiting for grid parity before installing a PV system. If one waited their would be NO risk. The decision will make itself (assuming that there are financing mechanisms in place so that capital costs don't stop the process). If one installs PV now there is a risk they are taking. That risk is that utility rates remain LOW (or at the current levels) and their locked in price of electricity (for PV) never drops below the utility rates. They would then have paid premium money for 'green kwh's' while everyone else is getting electricity for less (over 25 years).

They also risk- getting scammed by their installer; an underperforming system, a damaged system... Not huge risks, but risks none the less.

They also have to be able to buy rather than rent their electricity production. It is the ownership vs. renting argument all over again. Ownership works for some, renting works for others- a cost benefit analysis in each individual case.


Randy
Tom Adams
Tom Adams
January 13, 2012
These calculations of grid parity cross-over all drive off the current structure of utility rates where many fixed costs (such as a large fraction of the transmission and distribution costs) are variablized into rates. Consumers with PV are going to need power at night (unless they fill their basements with lead and go off grid). The declining cost of solar is an acid test for the efficiency of utility rate structures. If we want to have financially viable utilities, we will have to pay their costs. A more cost-reflective rate structure would see consumers paying larger connection charges and lower variable charges. For solar to be truly competitive, not just competitive against an inefficient rate structure, solar costs have to drop to the point where the delivered cost of power meets the loss-adjusted cost of peaking power.
ANONYMOUS
January 13, 2012
To work your levelised cost you divide the cost of the installation by the average output x 25. So for my 50% subsidy system in the UK this works out 15.4p/unit. For my new FIT system we will see it depends how much it generates hopefully 26p/unit. Whilst I agree that systems last longer than year at least the modules do you have to choose a number and the length of the module guarantee period is as good as any. By the way my new system is small and so relatively expensive and cost me extra money due to the panic brought about by the change in fit rules. People I know have systems installed at a cost of 16p a watt and we have heard off and found adverts for 10p a watt. The fit is very successful at lowering prices.

On other thing to remember. The levelised cost is really comparing your import electricity cost. Its difficult not to send about 50% to the grid unless you get net metering then you need to nearly double this cost since export tariffs are usually much lower.
Danielle Barnes
Danielle Barnes
January 13, 2012
@gunther-beck-68945: Yes I agree that the article seems to suggest it's better to wait, but the article is called 'Solar Grid Parity 101." I think it's 75% accurate in math, but 100% accurate in that there's a lot to consider when evaluating solar. So many of my competitors tend to over simplify the issue when in fact there's a lot to take into account like maintenance and string inverter replacement costs. (The new Enphase model eliminates that cost where others don't.) That's where our business excels. We can do the math and guide a customer into what's best for them. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.

And I would argue that I would consider a kitchen remodel with the ROI. No, I wouldn't do the math even nearly to the degree we do for solar, but I wouldn't put $100,000 in a kitchen that will net me $40,000 on resale of the house, no matter how much I like it. If putting a $10,000 kitchen into the house nets an additional $15,000 in sale value, then I would feel that I did get some sort of return on my investment. (I was a kitchen business owner and designer, so that's where my experience is derived from, but it's been over a decade since I was active.)

I would totally agree that a car doesn't have a return on investment for a consumer. But for a business, equipment does and that's where solar and equipment are treated alike. They both have value as an asset, they both can be depreciated and they both can make the company money - one by adding to the sales line and one by reducing an expense line. For example, a crane truck may cost the business $50,000 but they can rent it out and net $25,000 in profit. Clearly a return on investment, would you agree?

As far as Joanna's comment, I think what she really needs to know are the variables first. Then she could determine if it makes sense for the homeowner to buy now or wait later. But only if you have ALL the correct variables and it will be different for everyone.
Gunther Beck
Gunther Beck
January 13, 2012
@Dani-B: your comments on doing a proper investment calculation are right, but the picture painted by this article for the broad public is simply wrong on all ends. Just look at the comment by Joanna above. Her deduction is that it is not a good idea. But this cannot be said without doing the maths, as you say correctly.
To me the article is not a training course on investment calculations but a heap of misinformation. If I was malevolent I would say it is a PR action by someone who wants to stop people considering PV for their homes.
But back to your argument: you are right that people need some input to decide if the want to buy a car, PV or refurbish the kitchen. But - honestly - have you ever seen an investment calculation done on a car or a kitchen ? And that's my main point: compare what it costs to what you get for it and then decide. You don't have an ROI on the next kitchen you buy, so why would you need one for another installation made in your house?
Danielle Barnes
Danielle Barnes
January 13, 2012
Since there's a character limit - here's my additional notes:

My PA calc was for one year. We usually use a factor of 1.2 x watts to determine the number of SRECS the system will generate in one year, but with Enphase, we get closer to 1.3. Also, there's degradation of the panels over 25 years, so that also needs to be factored in, which I'm not sure any of you are. I didn't do the math so I can't say.

Our costs in PA are anywhere from .12 to .18/kwh, which makes it cost saving to those in the .18 territory, but not in the .12 but we still have people buying. Many took advantage of the state rebate.

Oh, and none of you factored in the federal tax credit of 30% or did I miss that calculation?
Danielle Barnes
Danielle Barnes
January 13, 2012
@John-Bronson - You're calculations are also incorrect. The author clearly stated he was using Minneapolis for the example. In PA we get 4.5 peak hours. I can't imagine Minneapolis gets 6. Also, you're using peak hours to calculate the watt hours, but you're not taking into account the derate factor. In PA, by your method, we should get over 1600Wh. We are, in fact, looking great if we get 1300Wh on the AC side of a 1kw system.

@gunther-beck-68945 - You do have to calculate financing into the cost if they need it, but I don't think the author was suggesting that it's added to every project. He was merely referencing a potential cost to many US consumers. We compare it to an investment because those that HAVE the cash aren't sitting with it in a jar at home. They want to make an educated decision on what to do with that money. Especially businesses that need to know if a new $40,000 system will earn more than a $40,000 truck, for example. Or a homeowner that has $20,000 bonus for the year and wants to put it where it makes the most sense-in a bank account, a kitchen remodel, a solar system, or an investment account.

And while you all pointed out that he's wrong on his pricing, I don't think that's what a reader should take away from this and I don't think that was John's intention. I believe he meant to inform the reader on HOW to do the math. In PA and NJ, I'm looking at $3.50 or less for a small 10k RESIDENTIAL system. And that's only because my competition is at those numbers. Clearly a reader should use the equations, plug their numbers in where applicable, and see what their LCOE is.

@jgubman - I agree that it's unusual for someone to want to spend money when you think it will be cheaper down the road or closer to grid. Many of my customers appreciate just knowing their cost for electricity for the next 25 years. They know it's going up and they want to budget for retirement and also want to take advantage of the rebates and credits while available.
Joanna Gubman
Joanna Gubman
January 13, 2012
Hi John,

For "solar vs grid over time", can you explain what the homeowner's motivation would be for installing solar while it is still more expensive than grid power? Seems more economical to wait a few years until grid parity, and *then* buy the solar panels (excluding environmental motivations of course)..

-Joanna
Gunther Beck
Gunther Beck
January 13, 2012
I agree with John and I want to add that your calculation is simply wrong. First of all it is nonsense to calculate any interest for the financing into the cost of a product. This is wrong for those people who have the money themselves (they just miss 0.something in interest from the bank) and it is wrong for the people who have higher borrowing cost. It depends on the circumstances, but has nothingto do with the product. (does a car get more expensive if you buy it from credit card debt?)
Secondly you forget to factor in energy inflation. What will be the cost of electricity in 25 years? Even 40 cents will not look bad in the prices of 2025, I bet.
And then there is the lifetime of PV: 25 years is guaranteed by most of the producers and even the first generations of PV were dismantled a few years ago after 35 years of service (some german north sea island).
Apart from that your purchasing prices for PV are outdated. Currently a household size installation is well below 3,50 EUR/Wp here in Europe and at present exchange rate that comes to 4,49 USD/Wp.
And finally there is one point that is always overlooked: If you have 20.000 USD at hand and want to spend it, you can buy half a car or you can buy 4 kWp in solar that will deliver 50-100% of the amount of electricity that you will use for the next 25 + years.
There is no need for a sophisticated investment calculation for PV unless you also do it when you buy your next car. You have the money and spend it and you know what you get for it. Electric power is paid for the coming 25 years in advance and you know exactly today what it costs and that you have the money to pay for it right now. It cannot be compared to buying any corporate or public debt or shares that may or may not have any value in 25 years.
John Bronson
John Bronson
January 12, 2012
@John Farrell

What formula are you using for calculating solar power rates? My understanding is that the sunniest areas (US southwest) will get 6 hrs average x 365 days = 2,190 Wh x 25 years = 54.75 kWh. $4.4/watt / 54.75 kWh = 8 cents/kWh.

This is more inline with what is quoted in wiki:

"By late 2011, the fully loaded cost of solar PV was projected to likely fall below $0.15/kWh for most of the OECD and reach $0.10/kWh in sunnier regions like the southern United States or Spain.[7] This is below the retail rate for power in much of the OECD already."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grid_parity

Add Your Comments

To add your comments you must sign-in or create a free account.

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
John Farrell

John Farrell

John Farrell directs the Energy Self-Reliant States and Communities program at ILSR and he focuses on energy policy developments that best expand the benefits of local ownership and dispersed generation of renewable energy. His latest paper,...
  • About
  • Articles
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Create a free account and start adding your blogs.

Create an Account

Most Commented

  • 8
    San Antonio Solar Fans Delay Introduction of SunCredit Program
  • 6
    Renewable Energy Research Initiative Launched in UK
  • 3
    Texas Legislature Passes Commercial and Industrial PACE Bill
  • 3
    French and German Ministers Call for 2030 Renewable Energy Targets

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • SolarReviews
  • CivicSolar
  • Renewables Academy AG (RENAC)
  • Panasonic Eco Solutions North America
  • Enecsys
  • 3TIER
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America
  • SolarInsure, Inc.
News
  • Renewable Energy
  • Solar Energy
  • Wind Energy
  • Bioenergy
  • Geothermal Energy
  • Hyrdo Power
  • Blogs
  • Video
  • Finance
Resources
  • Companies
  • Products
  • Careers
  • Events
  • Webcasts
  • White Papers
  • Magazines
  • Press Releases
  • e-Newsletters
Company
  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising & Services
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Site Map
Network Partners - Magazines
  • Hydro Review Magazine
  • Hydro Review Worldwide Magazine
  • Renewable Energy World Magazine
Network Partners - Events
  • Power-Gen International
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India
  • HydroVision International
  • HydroVision Brazil
  • HydroVision India
  • HydroVision Russia
© Copyright 1999-2013 RenewableEnergyWorld.com - All rights reserved.
RenewableEnergyWorld.com - World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for news & Information