Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

PV Costs Set to Plunge for 2009/10

December 23, 2008   |   17 Comments

Do you like this news?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
"We are about to see the convergence of two powerful forces in solar photovoltaics: the price premium accruing to silicon refining is about to unwind, at the same time as thin-film manufacturing is really starting to get to scale."

-- Michael Liebreich, Chairman and CEO, New Energy Finance
17 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 17
December 24, 2008
This can't happen soon enough! Hopefully it the spiraling economic disaster isn't what is driving this and it will continue once a recovery has begun.
Comment
2 of 17
December 24, 2008
There is no future for green energy sources as long as the market price for liquid fossil fuel is allowed to fluctuate as wildly as it has recently. As an investor in "green", I can tell you that investors want more stability than that.

We should change today's federal flat tax on gasoline to a tax that rises when market price falls and falls when market price rises. Call it a "floating tax", "reversing tax", or something like that. Design it to hold the total price at the pump in the range of $3-$4 per gallon. Most important, do it for crude oil so after-tax price stays at $75-100 per barrel.
Comment
3 of 17
December 24, 2008
Although prices are set to fall, let's not forget about supply vs. demand. If I remember correctly most suppliers had already utilized all panel allocations prior to the 4th quarter of 2008.

As long as demand exceeds supply, costs will continue to climb, regardless of the cost of silicone. Also it would have been nice to see how the market price of metal (precious and non) affects the price – it could almost be a wash, or be a cause for a price increase.

Cheers….
Comment
4 of 17
December 24, 2008
Lower PV costs are great news and are an essential ingredient in expanding the solar electric market. In our current economic situation a more supportive federal policy will also be needed. Many tax investors in solar are withdrawing or reducing their activity in funding solar projects because they have less need for tax credits. In order to spur the market solar tax credits should be made refundable and/or tradable. Current IRS restrictions on ownership to take full advantage of solar tax benefits limits the market for monetizing the tax benefits. If solar tax credits were able to be traded and were refundable a market that included a much wider group of participants would be created and would support rapid growth in the industry. A federal mandate for Feed In Tariffs (FITs) for a significant part of the market to achieve an aggressive national RPS will hopefully be a component of the new administration's renewable energy policy. Here in New Jersey we experienced a major slowdown in the commercial solar industry during 2008 because the buyers of Solar Renewable Energy Certificates have been unwilling to enter into long term purchase agreements for SRECs at prices that support project financing. A FIT approach would have worked much better.
Comment
5 of 17
December 24, 2008
The market will take care of these things without heavy handed action by the government. Now that the combination of technological advances and intense competition is causing a free fall in the costs of PV, and even the most closed minded environmentalists have realized they were hanging onto a myth (the myth of peak oil). The market for energy will begin a fairly rapid shift away from a petroleum based economy. Tthough petroleum will be important for the forseeable future, energy production will begin to decentralize, with PV economically available to all. This opens the door for EVs recharged by the panels on your roof, and energy being stored in capacitors as well as improved batteries, and permanently taking the punch out of petroleum demand. There will now always be enough oil to satisfy demand.
Comment
6 of 17
December 24, 2008
If the global economic slowdown forces Germany, Spain, and the US to shutter PV subsidies, we might see significant additional decreases in module prices, beyond what is contemplated in this article.
Comment
7 of 17
December 24, 2008
Hi all very interesting input you all have to give.Recently,as a planet loving South African,I have decided to aggressively tackle Global Warming,which as we know is affecting us globally yet we ponder on petroleum prices,yes we will get people that are not concerned about economic factors or global warming but it is imperative that we as Green Commandos instill in peoples minds the affects of Global warming s DESTRUCTION could any day end mankind and this is my sales pitch once we are up and running...Blessed Christmas to all
Comment
8 of 17
December 24, 2008
P.S.South Africa will be entering the market.soon....very soon


Cheers
Comment
9 of 17
December 25, 2008
It would be a great moment next yr as we expect fall in c-si module prices. This would have a rolling effect on increase in demands and industrial / employment growth further globally.
Comment
10 of 17
December 26, 2008
We've seen similar hype continually from Renewable Energy World. The PV industry experts say the silicon contributes 13%, not 38%, to the cost of polysilicon PV. Several thin-film PV manufacturers have been saying they'd be selling PV for under $1/W within a year for the past 4 years. The latest big PV plant (Waldpolenz Park, Germany) to go up using the cheapest thin-film PV available will need to sell its power at $350/MWhr to cover interest and operating costs. That's three times the current mean residential rate in the US. VC capital continues to flow into PV companies in an effort to keep them alive. I expect that will soon come to a halt, as reality begins to sink in. More sound info can be found here http://dotyenergy.com/Markets/PV_Solar.htm .
Comment
11 of 17
December 27, 2008
PV technology is going to replicate computer chip development. In other words it's only going to take a few years for newer PV systems to radically outperform those on the market now. This means its intelligent to wait a few years before making investments in permanent infrastructure installations. From a consumer standpoint this puts the brakes on the decision making process. The 30% tax credit will be available for another seven years. This is bad for the small local contracting group. How can we in good faith tell homeowners now is the time when in a few years what we have sold them will be seen as inefficient next to what will be available then?

Is it ethical to sell PV systems that we know will soon be obsolete?
Comment
12 of 17
December 28, 2008
It seems that there is more than one way to descibe efficiency. If you mean the ratio of the value of the kilowatt/hours produced to the total cost of production, then solar PV is a poor option. If you mean the kilowatt/hours produced compared to the kilowatt/hours used to manufacture, transport, install, operate and maintain a system, then solar PV is the best choice.

High efficiencies in experimental PV devices using multi-junction, wide spectrum technologies show > 40% conversion efficiency but pose significant manufacturing difficulties when scaling up. Which efficiency do you want?

Thin films are very promising but the name alone implies environmental vulnerability. Unlike silicon based PV, there are no real world performance records over 30-40 years in a variety of harsh conditions. There will be in 30-40 years. Price and/or reliability?
Comment
13 of 17
December 28, 2008
Looking at energy only and not the energy opportunity cost lost by PV use is a common mistake. If the financial return is bad, then the real energy return is also likely bad. But most people without a degree in economics don't understand the concept of energy opportunity cost of non-energy inputs. I know I did not when I was first introduced to it. Price signals provide an excellent source of complete information about optimal use of resources. If it does not make sense financially; beware.
Comment
14 of 17
December 31, 2008
It makes great press to talk about future declines in PV prices but your average consumer will put the brakes on any thought of investing in PV if he thinks the price will go down in 6 months. What should also be considered is the fact that, as product prices decline so will the incentive programs. Incentives are designed to achieve grid parity and will be reduced or end as the price goes down. I bought a Prius in 2004 for $27K and got a $5K tax credit. I bought another one in 2008 for $24.5K and got NO tax credit. California has a declining rebate program and Florida's program ends in 2010 and is having trouble finding funding. Electric rates continue to climb and oil prices are totally unpredictable. The best time to buy solar is always NOW!
Comment
15 of 17
December 31, 2008
I think the optimists have this one right. The 2 main forces involved are supply and demand for components, and competition in the industry. At the point of PV economic viability, demand should skyrocket, putting an upward pressure on prices as the industry scrambles to meet demand, but competition from the myriad of producers should stabilize the costs near conventional energy costs. PV is just much more attractive as an energy source, and all things being equal, it's really a no brainer.
Comment
16 of 17
January 1, 2009
Jennis,

You misunderstand a fundamental difference in the the PV vs. CPU market dynamic. The reason CPU computational power goes up every year is that given the same silicon real estate, if you shrink the size of the transistors, you can fit every more circuitry on to the same chip.

But that doesn't happen in PV, you need a big silicon surface area no matter what. The only equivalent would be increasing PV efficiency, but practically speaking, we haven't seen much efficiency increase in 20 years, whereas the CPU industry doubles transistor counts every 18 months.
Comment
17 of 17
February 7, 2009
This is playing right into my hands. Perfect!!!!!!
My method uses 0.002" of multi-crystalline Silicon and requires no sawing at all! Plus, my cells (15%) are on a heat dissipating substrate that is non fragile. About US$ 600,000 for each unit capble of making about 6MM watts per year.
Lkelley@goruby.com
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

Via Expo Applied Energy Technologies (AET) PLANSEE SE Valentin Software, Inc - providing Solar Design Software Delta Rigging & Tools KYOCERA Solar, Inc. National Solar Trainers
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