Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

What Solar Power Needs Now

By Daniel M. Kammen, University of California, Berkeley
August 13, 2007   |   23 Comments

Do you like this opinion & commentary?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
A tremendously compelling case, and one often cited by less often studied, however, is that of the Sunshine solar energy program in Japan. Over the course of almost two decades, starting in the late 1980s, Japan developed and then implemented a remarkably coordinated, well-designed solar development and dissemination effort.

The information and views expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyWorld.com or the companies that advertise on its Web site and other publications.

23 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 23
August 13, 2007
<p>With such conclusive evidence of the benefits of coordinated R&amp;D and commercialization, it is a shame that these advances cannot be implemented now within the U.S.&nbsp; What are we waiting for - another world war brought on by manipulation of the oil market?&nbsp; Oh wait, that's already in the beginning stages now isnt it?</p><p>&nbsp;Thanks for the article.</p>
Comment
2 of 23
August 15, 2007
As a 65 year old observer of and worker[electrician] in the energy industry, MHO is that comments2 and 11 are closest to the truth. No matter what solar panels for a roof cost, it has to be less then a coal fired power plant with&nbsp; all tne needed scrubbers and transmission lines.&nbsp; Take away the subsidys given to these and other carbon based industrys in the last century and where would they be? Whatever it costs, the idea of ordinary people with free basic energy on their roof, terrifies the&nbsp; money class. This is and has been class warfare, we work, they collect. I have no problem with capitalism, however this world is now &quot;rich&quot; enough to provide basic living standards for all. Even in the poorest of countrys people deserve more. only when we realize that all human energy and intelect is valuable and should be saved will we have the will to build . There is enough work to be done to employ millions in the country that takes the lead in doing the building. sadly it doesn't appear to be the USA.
Comment
3 of 23
August 15, 2007
What we need more than anything are the proper financial/investment incentives for everyone involved.&nbsp; We need&nbsp;local, state, federal, and international&nbsp;government policies that remove taxes from production (both labor and capital) and&nbsp;replace these revenues by charging user fees on the extraction, pollution and monopolization of our Earth's natural resources.&nbsp; In simple terms we need to tax waste, not work.&nbsp;
Comment
4 of 23
August 15, 2007
Regarding costs, I just don't get &quot;...with installed, unsubsidized costs, now coming close to 20 cents/kWh in the best applications.&quot;&nbsp; Having a time-dependent cost basis (per kWh, as author states) for a solar installation is confusing;&nbsp; it seems to me the cost should just be per kW.&nbsp; How can PV systems be compared based on cost/kWh usage,&nbsp; assuming the installation is paid for up-front (or even financed) by the owner?&nbsp; Perhaps this figure takes into account financing costs, but if so, then the only way I can makes sense of the per-kWh figure is if we are talking about an assumed fixed-lifespan installation.&nbsp; At that, $0.20/kWh would <em>never </em>succeed without subsidy, even here in&nbsp; most-expensive-electricity-in-the-nation Hawaii, and that's saying something, considering our (exorbitant) electric-power rates being below 20 cents/kWh on any island.
Comment
5 of 23
August 15, 2007
<div id="body"><p>Dreaming and fantasizing are the first step towards innovation. People all over the world and especially in America are dreaming of a green world where there will be only solar power energizing the needs of the entire country.</p><p>Experts feel that in five years, solar power will be cheap enough to compete with conventional electricity, even in UK, Africa, Australia and India. If that is the case more and more people will use solar energy in their homes. In a decade, the cost may have fallen so dramatically that solar cells could undercut oil, gas and coal. Technology is leaping ahead towards eco friendly, pollution free and a green future with the advent of solar energy homes.</p><p>Companies producing solar products feel that the day is not so far off when all the cities in America and Europe generate their heating, lighting and air-conditioning needs from solar energy for their homes and on buildings with enough left over to feed a surplus back into the grid.</p><p>A piece of dark polymer foil, as thin a sheet of paper can cause this wonder. It is 200 times lighter than the normal glass-based solar materials, which require expensive substrates and roof support. Indeed, it is so light it can be stuck to the sides of buildings.</p><p>This can be mass-produced in cheap rolls like packaging and can be in any color to go with the structure and design of the solar energy home. It will be the icing on the cake when the capital cost of solar power falls below the rate of oil or gas. That will be the day when every individual would wish to switch to solar energy for their home use.</p><p>Scientists all over the world say that the future lies with solar energy. Using solar energy for home use like heating, cooking, driving car and for all other uses like charging your mobile phone, street lights and heating the swimming pool and powering your computer will become a way of life. Just as the saying goes that sun never stops shining in California, a solar energy home will never lack the power required to run the house.</p><p>China is another country which is fast using this solar technology for its future growth. Japan already is moving in the direction of saving its excess power and the government there is helping device methods to save money on fuel. The future of solar energy homes is spreading rapidly in the east. The Ministry of Non-Conventional Energy is formulating a program to introduce solar energy to more than a million homes in the next few years.</p><p>India has long days and plenty of sunshine, especially in the Thar Desert region of Rajastan. With abundant solar energy available, this zone is attracting attention from the Indian government for its research purposes. Solar energy is being used in India for heating water for both industrial and domestic purposes.</p><p>Human beings may not be trustworthy but the sun is always kind and generous to mankind in general. Let&rsquo;s hope the future of solar energy homes all over the world is not very far away.</p></div><div><table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"><tbody><tr><td valign="top"><div id="sig" class="sig"><p>Chad Hartman is a <a href="http://go-solar.org/" target="_blank">solar power</a> supporter and a staff writer for Go-Solar.org. To learn more about solar energy and how you can benefit from it, please visit our site at: <a href="http://go-solar.org/" target="_blank">http://Go-Solar.org</a></p><div><p>Article Source: <a href="http://ezinearticles.com/?expert=Chad_Hartman" target="_blank">http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Chad_Hartman</a></p></div></div></td></tr></tbody></table></div>
Comment
6 of 23
August 15, 2007
<p>Concentrating solar power is the other big solar technology - and much cheaper than PV.<br /> </p><p>&nbsp;Further information about concentrating solar power (CSP) and highly-efficient HVDC <br />transmission of electricity may be found at:<br /><br />http://www.trec-uk.org.uk/index.htm<br /><br />and<br /><br />http://www.trecers.net/index.html<br /><br />and<br /><br />http://www.trec.net.au/<br /></p>
Comment
7 of 23
August 15, 2007
<p>They Renewable Energy people have done a poor job of defining the size of&nbsp;the need &amp; how to compete with the cost of GRID Power.&nbsp; They have encouraged the government to imply that it can directly compete with the source of energy that created it.&nbsp; </p><p>It is time for the Renewable Energy people to 1st define the size of the need 2nd acknowledge the requirements of distributing and storing&nbsp;energy.&nbsp; From the Big picture design to create sellable spinoff benefits that people have shown they are willing to pay a premium for.&nbsp; This premium will be required to subsidize the cost of the infrastructure.</p>
Comment
8 of 23
August 15, 2007
It should be noted that the peak electricity load in California on a hot summer day is 50,000 megawatts, so a really big, coordinated, plan is required - that's not what's happening. I believe that the figure of 50 cents per installed watt for either wind or solar is unrealistic.&nbsp; The goal has always been $1/watt, which nobody is close to in production.&nbsp; And when $1/watt is achieved (if it is achieved) there's not enough material or manufacturing capacity to handle the needs.&nbsp; The &quot;1 million solar rooftops&quot; would only be the tip of the iceberg. If anyone understands the immensity of the job, they're hiding the fact very well.&nbsp; We need a declaration of war on energy - renewable and non-renewable - to make sure there's energy around for our grandchildren.
Comment
9 of 23
August 15, 2007
<span><font color="#1f509c">Suresh Mirchandani Is definetively way of with the assumption that solar will catch up with wind. Wind is a fast moving target already by far the cheapest energy source if the competition was free and based on calculated external cost. Within the projected lifetime of a modern fossil or nuclear plant the projected pay back is impossible if wind energy keep up the pace with 5% cost reduction every year. The most likely scenario is that wind will accelerate cost reduction due to better technology and globalisation of production + the advent of stronger Chinese and Indian competitors to the original Danish producers. Wind energy should really pick up pace big time to become competitive and still it will be unlikely as wind at the going rate of improvement 30 years from today is heading towards 0,5 cents per KWH. I do not see how solar energy can go this low. The article does not put a perspective on the competitive advantages of solar energy going forward. In my view we should emphazize the strong points of solar energy which are the availability of power production in remote areas and mobile applications + for playthings and leisure objects such as sailing boats, tents, clothing etc. We are not heading for a solar future. What best exemplifies it is contained in the article where the Japanese program is heralded for achieving 10% cost reduction whereas the display industry for many years have been able to cut cost by whopping 30% A flat panel display contains everything a pv module contains and more. It is really strange solar panels do not drop at the same rate given the fact that outdated&nbsp;FPd production sites are ideally suited for PV panel production. The players in the solar field are clearly not committed enough to drop prices to painfull levels to assert their point of being willing and able to compete with wind.</font></span>
Comment
10 of 23
August 15, 2007
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%" height="100%" id="HB_Mail_Container"><tbody><tr width="100%" height="100%"><td id="HB_Focus_Element" width="100%" height="250" valign="top">Solar PV is now ready for Utility Scale Introduction with over 2GW planned from Thin Film plants, some of this is already rolling out as of to-day. With promised costs of under US$0.5/watt at large Gw volumes we are bound to see more Mw sized Solar Palnts feeding Utilities with their mandated green power. Within 5 years Solar PV will surely compete neck to neck with wind</td></tr><tr><td height="1" style="font-size: 1pt"></td></tr></tbody></table>
Comment
11 of 23
August 15, 2007
<p>Fellow Berkeley alum here.&nbsp;</p><p>We manufacture our&nbsp; solar LED lighting solutions in Japan and the technology currently available is&nbsp; amazing. However, we just need to better educate the American public and push community leaders to invest in the future.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Great Article&nbsp;</p>
Comment
12 of 23
August 15, 2007
What we are waiting for is national leadership on this issue (Democrat in the White House)
Comment
13 of 23
August 16, 2007
<p>Looks like tax breaks are greatly improving for non business solar.</p><p><a href="http://www.seia.org/solarnews.php?id=144" target="_blank">http://www.seia.org/solarnews.php?id=144</a></p><p>&quot;Provides no extension of the existing 30 percent Investment Tax Credit for homeowners under Section 25 of the tax code, but eliminates the existing $2,000 maximum dollar limitation&quot;</p><p>A great estimator is at <a href="http://www.findsolar.com/index.php?page=rightforme" target="_blank">http://www.findsolar.com/index.php?page=rightforme</a>&nbsp;, chose Type of Building as : Business - it gives you better options to enter your info; electric rate, installed cost/watt.</p><p>I did my own spreadsheet ( confirming Phi).&nbsp;For Florida with the federal tax credit I am starting to look at large systems. 8.6 kW PV, dual inverters, ignoring installation, $5500. :)&nbsp; 2 year payback !</p><p>But will need a second mortgage to afford initial cost :(</p>
Comment
14 of 23
August 16, 2007
Mr Tran: That 2190 you mentioned is very optomistic, as New York is more like 1480. However Germany is less then that and they are making it work. Here on Long Island, with the electric rate standing at 20.5 cents a kwh and subsidys and tax incentives between 50 and 60%, the payback works out to be 5 to 7 years. This doesn't take into account rate increases in the future.Most south facing roofs haveplenty of room for 5 to 10 kw of panels with excess room for a couple thermal panels. What this industry needs is leadership and a sense that if we do nothing our grandchildren will have it much worse. It is foolish to burn coal or oil when their value is much higher if we can figure out how to extract the chemicals without destroying the inviroment. Oh wait we did that in 1975 in Pgh. Pa with a coal to gas conversion plant that made methane and 100 other useful chemicals includeing anhydrous ammonia[fertilizer]. That still leaves the problem of mining the stuff, but it can all be done. I go back to my original premise, we are foolish if we think that the oil industry owners and others will give their cash cow easily. We need hely and can only get it by electing visionary leaders. It's called investing in the furure.
Comment
15 of 23
August 16, 2007
<p>Sorting out the confusion.</p><p>There are information tha's not in the article then I have to assume they are: productively operational hours/day and the life span. </p><p>If AA as the ourput of that PV and that one has 6 hrs of g....o...o...d sunlight per day (???)&nbsp; then 1 year its runs 365 *6 = 2190 hours.</p><p>Then&nbsp; AA * 2190 = total wh/year or&nbsp; AA * 2.190kwh/year.</p><p>I should reasonaley assume its life span is 30 years ? ? ?</p><p>Therefore the total of power it generates is AA * 2.19 * 30 (kwh)= 65.7*AA (kwh).</p><p>Then Cost/(65.7*AA)=$0.20</p><p>To calculate cost per watt one Then<br /> </p><p>If AA+1&nbsp; then the cost per watt is 65.7 * 0.2= 13.14</p><p>- I do not know the life span of the mentioned PV you can plug in other number (30) if you know it.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Now we do other calution with assuming that the upo front cost is&nbsp; 13.14 per watt.&nbsp; (remember each Watt output will produce 2.19kwh/year above) and and in my case my electricity cost $0.12/kwh. then I will save me the yearly amount of 0.12 * 2.19 =$0.2628 for each $13.14 I invest. </p><p>Or </p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Each dollar of investment I will save 0.2628/13.14 = $0.02 /year </p><p>Or </p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 50 years to recover my initial investment.</p><p>Hope this helps</p><p>Phi (Neo-aerodynamic.com)</p>
Comment
16 of 23
August 16, 2007
Chris makes an interesting point, but when that sales pitch is made, the customer will ask how much a PV system going to cost. Upon hearing the answer, a long silence ensues (the sound of incredulity) together with the realization of the sheer number of panels needed to make a dent in the energy needs of a home or business.

PV technology is important to a sustainable energy future but not the panacea touted in this article.
Comment
17 of 23
August 16, 2007
Solar needs sales people! The industry is full of people with no sales or marketing skills what so ever. When was the last time you saw or heard a commercial about solar products. Where's the solar coupons in the paper. News reports and word of mouth is how solar is selling right now. Where's the vacuum or used car salesman at to ram this beautiful, renewable energy down our gullets. The energy is cheap enough all that's needed is sellers!
Comment
18 of 23
August 16, 2007
Just imagine if instead of spending those mega billions of dollars in Iraq, America had bought the latest and best technology and build a mega solar cell manufacturing centre.&nbsp; By now or very soon America could dispense with middle eastern oil.&nbsp;
Comment
19 of 23
August 17, 2007
<p>LOOK,...........Do we actually have a choice.&nbsp; It's coming down to wind, solar and geothermal.&nbsp; I don't want to see more people dying because of energy problems in this country.&nbsp; We need our corn,.....to eat not produce more CO2.&nbsp; </p><p>Half of our energy is gone, half is left.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;We need petroleum for every single thing in society; forget about cars and transportation.&nbsp; Lets get the PHEV's coming from Ford and Chevy and create a nice museum for the muscle cars that are technologically obsolete anyway and start to say &quot;AAHHHHH&quot; with the Tesla and innovations in battery density for our autos.&nbsp; </p><p>And please, &quot;go get me a Chevrolet,...&quot; Yaah when you can produce a PHEV that gets 50+ miles per gallon like our counterparts, I'll be glad to buy Amercan.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>
Comment
20 of 23
August 18, 2007
<p>I have put togeter a short cut that you calculate renewable investment return as percentage and pay-back&nbsp; base on cost/output number of operational hours. It aslo help you to calulate your daily saving. (the web page has two calculation schemes please scroll down to the second one).</p><p>It's not 100% accurate because the manufacture's Output does not represent the real number at your particular situation on its entire operational period. - </p><p>it is:&nbsp; http://neo-aerodynamic.com/Calculator.html</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Hope it helps.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Phi (neo-aerodynamic.com)&nbsp;</p>
Comment
21 of 23
September 11, 2007
<p>www.mdgazette.com/vault/cgi-bin/gazette/view/2007G/09/08-21.HTM</p>
Comment
22 of 23
September 13, 2007
<p>A little perspective.</p><p>The solar PV industry would need a capacity of 83TW/yr to replace 50% of the 14 Quad/yr&nbsp;U.S. electrical demand in 25 years.&nbsp; Worldwide PV installed capacity is about 8 GW. The solar manufacturing industry is at least&nbsp;10,000 times too small just for the U.S. market.&nbsp; When experts talk about bringing the price down through manufacturing economies of scale, they are being politely correct.&nbsp; We need to match our vision with the task.&nbsp; There's been a call for government assistance.&nbsp; It's needed.&nbsp; Not to subsidize products, but to bring the producers to the scale required to meet the future demand.</p><p>Nay sayers point to the cheap price of coal and it's ample capacity to provide power to the U.S..&nbsp; What they are missing is coal liquids will be needed to replace petroleum while we transition to renewables in the transportation sector.&nbsp; The demand will drive up prices, potentially quadrupling the rate of coal production.&nbsp; Current coal reserves at the current rate provide a 100 yr safety net for power production.&nbsp; If coal replaces imports for the transportation sector it's viability is reduced to around 25 to 30 years. Coal is not a long term option.&nbsp; What about the Alberta tar sands?&nbsp; Don't listen to John Stossel.&nbsp; Go to Alberta.&nbsp; Get the facts.&nbsp; Go see what they're doing to Alberta, then decide.</p><p>Renewable energy is not an option, it is an imperative.&nbsp;The PV industry must scale-up soon.&nbsp; It may not be able to do so without assistance in financing production equipment and facilities.&nbsp; Also it needs people, and more support in education, research, and development.&nbsp; </p><p>Most of all, all of us need to think and act much, much bigger.</p>
Comment
23 of 23
October 11, 2007
We are saddened that our legislators accept fortunes in campaign contributions from the oil companies. and their lobbiests. The recent oil prices and their concomitant billions of dollars of quarterly profits posted by the oil companies continue to guarantee our legislator's silence when it comes to the citizens to get incentives for any other power technology. Shame on all of us for allowing this to continue!

WE MUST GROUP TOGETHER AND PULL THEIR HEADS OUT OF THE FEEDING POT WE SUPPLY FUNDS FOR AND DEMAND THEY WORK FOR US... NOT THE UNDER THE TABLE PAYOFF PEOPLE.
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Advertise With Us

POWER-GEN Africa SMA America, LLC American Solar Energy Society Southwest Windpower Apricus, Inc. National Solar Trainers Standard Solar Inc.
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine North America Renewable Energy World Magazine 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 India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Photovoltaics World Magazine Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters