Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

The Solar Subsidy Crutch or an Uneven Playing Field?

By Scott Sklar
April 25, 2006   |   12 Comments

Do you like this opinion & commentary?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 

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.

12 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 12
April 26, 2006
I'd like to know where you can get electricity at 7 cents a kilowatt hour like the first comment notes.

My PG&E bill includes tier 4 prices above 0.30 $/kWh and an average price around 0.18 $/kWh.

My 5600 W grid tied system is going to pay for itself in 4 years or less, considering PG&E's prices

Does anyone honestly think these utility electric prices are going to be any better in the years to come???

Does anyone honestly think the price of PV is going to come down substantially???

I don't think so.

The time to move to a Solar Economy is now...
Comment
2 of 12
April 26, 2006
I am no accountant but...
Assumtions..
$9.00/Watt installed PV (this is a high price and no Subsidies!)

a 1000 W (1 kW) system costs <$9,000>

5 sun hours per day (Annual average for Central Latitude Continental US, and an easy number to calculate)

For every 1 our of full sun hitting 1000 PTC PV watt, you produce 1 kWh

so...
5 sun-hours x 1 kW = 5 kwh per day produced by a 1kW PV system

365 days/year x 5 kwh/day = 1825 kWh/year

year $ lifetime
year 1 : $9000 / 1825 kWh = $4.93/kWh
year 2 : $9000 / 3650 kWh = $2.46/kWh
year 10: $9000 / 18250 kWh = $0.49/kWh

(for year 20 we will add $1000 mantinance, high but honest)

year 20: $10000 / 36500kWh = $0.27/kWh

year 30: $10000 / 54750kWh = $0.18/kwh

this system has produced 54750 kwh @ $0.18/kWh over the course of 30 years!!!
Does anyone really believe that they will only be paying $0.18/kWh in 30 years??!!
Comment
3 of 12
April 26, 2006
This is an area where I think the RE community has made a substantial strategic mistake. We get defensive about taking a pro subsidies position. A more powerful response to people who get on the high horse about subsidies is to request that they name a few world leading, US based industries that did not receive subsidies (its pretty tought to do). There is a reasonable arguement against subsidizing mature industries. However it is short sighted political posturing to suggest that developing industries, RE in particular, with many compelling benefits to this country, be left on life support while other countries scoop up the market and become the dominant players.

Those self riteous folks who scream no to subsidies are mysteriously silent when it comes to those that they support. We need to have the political stamina and tenacity to "Out" them and take it to them. There is no time like the present to do so.
Comment
4 of 12
April 26, 2006
Other "external costs" beyond military expenditures should also be factored, such as health care and environmental clean up. Studies show these two additional factors each cost our economy apx $100,000 billion per year. The study shows that we currently pay between $7 and $17/ gln at the pump but only $3 of that is what we complain about.
Comment
5 of 12
April 26, 2006
I want to add a couple of points to the discussion.
First, if we add in the military cost, we might as well toss in the environmental externalities (deaths and other health impacts) as subsidies given to the fossil industry.
Second, the question of cost of solar power v. conventional should acknowledge that we are talking only about the most basic situation of comparing solar with grid power. There are many other market niches, mostly off-grid, where solar is the more cost effective. Those niches are growing as solar closes the cost gap with grid power.
Third, the question of "how much are the subsidies" begs the question of when we should use subsidies. Seems to me subsidies should be used only to support the future we want AND if the subsidies are necessary to encourage that future. Using those criteria, the subsidies for solar are too small, and the subsidies for the fossil industry are inexcusably too large.
Comment
6 of 12
April 26, 2006
If one is considering the subsidies provided to the multinational petroleum industry, how can one not include the many appropriations to the Defense Department?

Our billions of "defense" dollars frequently go to securing oil rich nations' "loyalty" to a managed international market that is tilted in our favor. This cost needs to be added to every gallon of gasoline and other petro product we demand here.

In short, defense expenditures are a subsidy to big oil.
Comment
7 of 12
April 26, 2006
I agree with Tom that solar PV is not the only supply answer, but I sense it is part of the answer. And though that solar PV electricity is 5 times more expensive than CURRENT grid-power costs, how much will it be once the system has paid for itself? --ZERO, if grid-connected /no batteries are involved.
Comment
8 of 12
" Solar might work one day but the tech has to drop by a factor of 10 in price ".
The immediate way out till tech costs drop is by value addition to solar power.
We have established that large scale fresh water supply to coastal cities by seawater desalination using solar PV energy,at 100MLD scales and more are cost effective. Our small proof-of-concetp tech demonstator is working, but we don't know how to take this forward into industry and commerce even though compelling demand exists.
Comment
9 of 12
April 26, 2006
So "various experts" say electricity is subsidized 2 - 3 c /kwh. Take that as a fact. (It may be less than this).

You did not answer the question. How does solar power, at $0.50 to $1/kwh delivered, compete with regular electricity at 5 cents (with a 2 - 3 cent subsidy) that means 7 - 9 cent electricity? It can't. Imagine your electricity bill at about 5 times what it is now.

Solar might work one day but the tech has to drop by a factor of 10 in price. Considering how all the electronic goods we buy seem to go down in price by large amounts every year, this may happen soon.

There are real initiatives that can actually save $ and lower oil dependence, and clean up the environment. Replacing all the oil furnaces in the US with Geothermal over the next 5 years would do more than wind, solar and other subsidized renewable energy sources combined.
Comment
10 of 12
June 14, 2006
Clayton: What studies? Joe: Seattle area is nearly so cheap, but who else has their hydro?
Also, don't forget 9/11: If our military presence in Saudia Arabia is counted, add about $1 trillion to the cost of oil (infrastructure damage, economic and direct military costs). 9/11 cost me personally several grand in lost sales of macadamia nuts when the Japanese refused to fly for awhile (Hawaii).
Comment
11 of 12
June 15, 2006
After all of the number crunching and brough haw-haw concerning the cost of utilizing electrical energy, there is an ultimate question we must all ask ourselves.
Humanbeings had been capable of surviving on the planet Earth for thousands of years without utilizing electrical energy. The simple fact that we are still here today is testimony to that fact. The question is.
Why is it that within the past 100 years humanbeings on the planet Earth cannot survive without utilizing electrical energy?
Comment
12 of 12
November 15, 2006
No utility industry has had more subsidies and perks than nuclear power. In order to get the industry going, congress had to come up with a way to indemnify the industry from being sued in the event of an accident (Price Anderson Act). Look at your homeowners insurance policy and you will see. This law virtually leaves the public holding the bag and carrying the coffin in the event of a nuclear power plant accident. In the event of a nuclear accident, the Price Anderson Act allows nuclear operators to cause hundreds of billions in damage, enormous loss of life and sickness, yet escape full responsibility for the consequences of their actions. It summarily gets renewed every time it comes up for renewal.
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

Scott Sklar

View Scott Sklar's Profile
About: Scott, founder and president of The Stella Group, Ltd., in Washington, DC, is the Chair of the Steering Committee of the Sustainable Energy Coalition and serves... more »

Advertise With Us

Texas Renewable Energy Industries Association Ingeteam Richardson RFPD, Inc. Ocean Renewable Energy Coalition Comment:Visions Valentin Software, Inc - providing Solar Design Software Nextronex, Inc.
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
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 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