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! ×

U.S. Solar Market Blooms, Challenges Remain

Ucilia Wang, Contributing Editor
March 10, 2011  |  152 Comments

Federal lawmakers are fighting over budget and programs that would hamper the U.S. solar market, so any numbers to show the solar industry's contribution to the economy will help. So here comes a report released Thursday by the Solar Energy Industries Association that showed the U.S. solar market grew 67 percent to reach $6 billion in 2010 from $3.6 billion in 2009.

The $6 billion reflected the sales of solar energy equipment including photovoltaic (PV) systems, concentrating solar thermal equipment and solar heating and cooling systems, said Shayle Kann, managing director of solar practice for GTM Research, which co-produced the report. Gear for producing solar electricity added 956 megawatts last year, bringing the cumulative installations in the United States to 2.6 gigawatts.

The 956 megawatts include 878 megawatts from PV systems while 78 megawatts from concentrating solar thermal equipment.  The 878 megawatts were systems connected to the grid and reflected a 102 percent jump from 435 megawatts added in 2009, the report said. The cumulative PV installations in the country reached 2.1 gigawatts in 2010.

The growth seems to corroborate with the industry’s expectation that the United States will become the largest market one day. Germany was the largest market last year, followed by Italy. Generous government subsidies in these two countries helped to add 17 gigawatts of PV systems worldwide in 2010, up 130 percent from 2009. As a result, the U.S.’s share of the global market actually fell to 5 percent in 2010 from 6.5 percent in 2009.

That trend is likely to reverse this year and beyond, however, Kann said.

“The U.S. market has the potential to double again in 2011 whereas the global market isn’t likely to do the same,” Kann said. “In the next two years, we’ll see the U.S. market increasing its share in the global market.”

The United States could become the largest solar market by 2015, said Tom Kimbis, director of policy and research at SEIA.

The growth has largely come from state policies that mandate renewable energy consumption and federal policies that provide grants, loan guarantees and tax credits to solar project developers and equipment manufacturers.

A federal program that covers 30 percent of the cost of a solar power project propelled the growth significantly, and the industry fought for its renewal last year. The program materialized under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, and Congress extended by one year last December. Solar companies are hoping lawmakers will allow the program to continue after this calendar year.

Another sought-after program, which provides loan guarantees, has been under scrutiny by Republicans who are looking to make big budget cuts. The U.S. Department of Energy also recently drew criticism from its own inspector general for not keeping good electronic records of loan guarantee program. The program has offered billions of dollars in loan guarantees to solar project developers including First Solar, BrightSource Energy and Abengoa Solar. Equipment manufacturers that have gotten loan guarantee offers to build factories include Abound Solar, SoloPower and Solyndra.

Installations in the residential and commercial segments, including projects for government agencies, schools and nonprofits, fell in their market shares. Residential projects accounted for 30 percent of the systems added in 2010, compared with 36 percent in 2009, the SEIA/GTM report said. Commercial installations declined from 48 percent in 2009 to 42 percent 2010. Utility-scale projects grew from 16 percent to 28 percent.

Utility-scale projects are expected to drive a bulk of the growth in the next five years because many utilities are signing power purchase agreements or developing their own projects in order to meet their state mandates to increase the amount of renewable electricity they buy and sell. In 2010, developers planted 242 megawatts of utility-scale power plants, compared with 70 megawatts in 2009.

States have relied on different types of policies to spur renewable electricity generation.  Rebates, renewable energy credits trading and feed-in tariffs (guaranteed solar electric pricing) have been key tools for states to encourage utilities and consumers to embrace solar and other sources of renewable energy.

Kimbis said several obstacles are hampering the solar industry’s growth, including rules by homeowners association to restrict rooftop PV systems to the availability of transmission lines to transport and distribute solar electricity. 

 

152 Comments

Register To Comment
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
April 10, 2011
2000 laminates coming any day. World record price per watt, again and again and again.

Posted on April 10, 2011 by John Kimball

While the rest of the guys promise less than a dollar a watt for the last two years Sun Electronics has been supplying it. This is monocrystalline and polycrystalline. Call me for more information.

John 786-521-3049.
Sun Electronics
Making Solar Affordable
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
April 10, 2011
Hey Hiker,

No need to apologize. I can tell you're not being mean-spirited at all. Catalina Island is awesome! It's like diving in the caribbean, only in colder water. First time, 1978 with Jean Michel Cousteau on a trip with Project Ocean Search. My buddy got a job as Harbormaster there in about 1980 & I sailed his 42' wooden yawl from Ventura Isle Marina to the harbor at Catalina one night. All the other "sailors" were passed out from drunkeness & one was seasick as well. Funny.

I worked as a research diver where we planted kelp off of Elwood pier, north of Goleta. We studied growing & harvesting it. Definitely wouldn't be eliminating kelp beds. Diving in kelp is magical . With the sun on the golden kelp & critters all around, it's one of the most beautiful sights I've ever seen. On the way back to the harbor in Santa Barabara, we'd drop over on a reef & snag abs, scallops, fish, etc. & do the barby thing almost every night. I loved my "job".

Well wishes to you also!
jim douglas
jim douglas
April 7, 2011
Luke,

Sorry about my stupid comment! I was raised in Southern Cal also and spent much of my youth diving around Catalina island. Back when there where plenty of pink abalony for the taking! I just can't imagine eliminating kelp beds. I also had an electrical contracting business in that area and know it's hardships. Hope you succeed!
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
April 7, 2011
Although fossil fuels are mature and renewables currently cost more, fossil fuels still gobble up the lion's share of subsidies. The fossil industry worldwide benefits from $312 billion in consumption subsidies. Renewables only get $57 billion. (Note: This sort of stat will make fossil advocates switch from arguing that 'subsidies are wrong' to 'larger subsidies to larger industries make sense.

Michael Kanellos: April 6, 2011
greentechmedia.com
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 30, 2011
Will Thurmond, Emerging Markets Online and author, Algae 2020

Seaweed

Seaweed has gained favor with petrochemical majors Statoil, Dupont, ENAP because it grows faster than terrestrial crops, has a high sugar content for conversion to ethanol and advanced biofuels, absorbs more airborne carbon than land-based plants, has no lignin, can be easily harvested compared to microalgae, requires no pretreatment for ethanol production, and can be harvested up to six times a year in warm climates. Seaweed biofuels include ethanol, methanol and biobutanol. BP-Dupont's Butamax will collaborate with BAL, a leader in the field to produce biobutanol for drop-in fuels and chemicals.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 29, 2011
Promise?
ANONYMOUS
March 29, 2011
Why doesn't this website remove the childish comments of a solar-promoter (above) Luke Divemaster?

Does this website have ANY credibility?

The majority of the comments in this discussion were insightful and helpful. The last several comments By Solar Luke are childish, disruptive and an obvious effort to either promote solar or dismiss other thoughts/comments.

If his behavior is allowed I will no longer visit this site.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 29, 2011
Henrik14 March 16, 2011

@Andrew_W

If I prove to You that I have affordable and very profitable Solar with option to install Wind Power Stations if location has economicaly usable wind, which I described in my previous posts, would You consider investing money in development of prototypes even if I am not US citizen nor live in US but in Republic of Croatia in Europe.


Andrew_W March 17, 2011

@Henrick: If you can prove you are able to produce "clean, affordable and scalable electricity," yes I would be interested in investing. I sent you an email.

Henrik14 March 18, 2011

@Andrew_W
So far I did NOT have received Your Email.
Can You check wether You have sent it or not (perhaps it is still in Drafts or there was some misspeling, since You misspelled my nickname as Henrick while it is Henrik14?
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 29, 2011
RA RA RA (the ancient egyptian Sungod)
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 29, 2011
Andrew_W February 10, 2011

@Anumakonda: It's great to hear that India has a Plan, complete with goals. America does not.

Neither does Andrew_W, except for the secret one he "and others" are working on. How's your "solution" coming along Thomas Edison?
Andrew W
Andrew W
March 29, 2011
It looks like solar-cheerleaders now make comments anonymously and attribute them to Andrew_W.

Just so we're clear - solar deserves research and development investment in order to (hopefully) make it affordable and scalable. Until then it's a waste of money. DOE hopes to reduce costs significantly during the next 10 years, making it a viable alternative. For now it is just an over-hyped and under-performing "supplement."
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 29, 2011
Re: Free-Marketeer is "God's gift to women".

Women probably want to regift him once they find out he's from a pink (actually peach) state. His picture has a pink face.
ANONYMOUS
March 29, 2011
Free-Marketeer is "God's gift to women". The problem is that women want to regift him.
ANONYMOUS
March 29, 2011
Solar is clean, affordable and scalable. We should invest heavily in solar so we don't have to hugely subsidize war for oil.

Andrew_W
ANONYMOUS
March 28, 2011
I'm not saying that SB3 is a great law. It classifies burning wood as "renewable." Environmentalists say the targets are too low. It's called a giveaway to the utility companies.

But the fight illustrates an important principle. Get business on your side, get big business on your side, and today's "expensive mandate" becomes tomorrow's "job-building industry."

Small solar projects may in fact be a lot more efficient than big ones, especially when the loss from hauling the power across country is taken into account. A small group of community-based wind turbines may be more efficient and cost effective than a corporate wind farm. But big projects get big business behind you, and with big business on your side it's the other fellow who becomes a crazy ideologue.

And the winning side of the political fence is the one to be sitting on, when all is said and done.
ANONYMOUS
March 28, 2011
Effort to Stop Renewable Energy in North Carolina Hits a Utility Wall

By Dana Blankenhorn
March 25, 2011

There's a rule in politics. Things that are hard to get are harder to get rid of.

One reason is that industry accommodates itself to the change, finds it's not as bad as first thought, and sees an effort to go back as more uncertainty it doesn't need.

That's probably why the effort to repeal SB 3, a landmark 2007 North Carolina law aimed at making utilities buy renewable energy, is going nowhere despite all the money poured into gutting it by climate change denialist Art Pope's John Locke Foundation.

Pope and the Koch-backed Americans for Prosperity spent millions of dollars during last year's elections, winning the General Assembly for Republicans, and they want payback. But the state's biggest utilities – Progress Energy and Duke Power – are now standing in the way of repealing something they fought hard to stop four years ago.

Here's why.

The North Carolina Sustainable Energy Association recently put out a 2010 "green energy census" identifying 12,500 green energy jobs in the state. Renewables are now a $3.5 billion industry in North Carolina, the report says.

Last year Progress Energy issued a report expressing satisfaction with the law, but concern over changing federal standards in the area of clean energy. A 2008 effort by liberal challenger Jim Neal to tar now-Sen. Kay Hagen for pushing SB3, allegedly on behalf of Duke Power, went nowhere.

What's left for supporters of repeal is an ideological argument, or a climate change denial argument, against a business argument. Utilities are making money from renewable energy in North Carolina, and they like it.
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 28, 2011
All the other forms of energy you list, the cost is for a working power plant with out continuous requirements for man power, fuel, maintenance, etc. Look at the capital cost plus the operating costs for 25 years for each energy source and divide by the total MWH generated then tell me about the final cost of each energy source. By the way, by the time you pay for the environmental costs of Fracting for natural gas,global warming costs for coal and natural gas, disposal costs of coal refuse, disposal of nuclear waste long term, we will see what is cheapest with all costs figured in. Then the discussion really begins. Cheapest up front cost isn't always a good deal long term.
ANONYMOUS
March 28, 2011
According to those involved in the energy business and from an article in the Dallas News:

"Solar photovoltaic: $236 per megawatt-hour.

Nuclear: $117 per megawatt-hour.

Wind: $115 per megawatt-hour.

Coal: $63 per megawatt-hour, or $87 if you include the cost to mitigate carbon dioxide.

Natural gas: $57 per megawatt-hour, or $67 including the cost to mitigate carbon dioxide."

Solar energy remains 5 times as expensive as our current baseload electricity of coal/natural gas.

Maybe by 2020 solar will make sense ....

Link: http://www.dallasnews.com/business/headlines/20110324-former-txu-exec-said-cost-too-high-to-build-new-power-plants.ece
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 28, 2011
Ignorance is bliss!
ANONYMOUS
March 28, 2011
Michael - Solar is good for hobbyists to install on their roofs, but it's not a solution to our energy needs. Clotheslines instead of a dryer are another option for you to consider.

I want solar to make sense, but it doesn't yet. It's too expensive and unreliable. DOE is hoping it will be by 2020 - I'll hope with them, for now.
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 27, 2011
Well anonymous it's a free country and maybe in your case it isn't attractive for you but for many of my customers it pays back in as few as 4.5 years. And if you are waiting for the 2020 ship to come in with some major price reducer,then that ship may already be here. Inflation, insurance, fuel, metals, glass, wire, wages, trucks, etc are all going up as time goes by. The cost of a PV panels only represent 30-40% of the systems cost. You get a 30% Tax Credit now, so it is unlikely that the real cost of solar will reduce by that much and the cost of other energy will continue to rise.
The "Solar Gimmicks" have provided power to my home for 20 years and my bill is -$168.00 for the past 10 months. I wish I could find more"gimmicks" that worked so well and saved so much money.
ANONYMOUS
March 27, 2011
DOE is hoping to make solar affordable by 2020. Until then, I'm not wasting any money on expensive solar gimmicks.
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 27, 2011
Luke- it is really pointless to waste time taking about going to the free market any way as we don't have that kind of time to play these silly games. What James doesn't realize is that the market already exists and it is only capital holding us back now. We had over a million $ in sales in 2010 that people just couldn't get the money to make the purchase. This year we have leasing to help those people and with the Echo PVT system the economics are even stronger. We already had a 4-8 year break even and now we are capturing another 35% of the energy falling on the solar panels allowing us to provide space heating, water heating and night time cooling in our climate zone. Let the fun begin. Don't have anymore time to argue non plus ideas.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 26, 2011
Now even in the Econ 101 courses, the professors will mention some nuances to this blanket statement, for example to account for the difference in shipping costs to deliver an otherwise identical product from different locations. Similarly, as Wikipedia notes

The law also need not apply if buyers have less than perfect information about where to find the lowest price.

Yet here we are in the brave new 21st century, equipped with the world's greatest information tools in history, and even still, prices for identical products differ by enormous magnitudes. An example: this Samsung 32-inch flat-panel TV, as shown through Google shopping.

Check it out… the lowest price shown is $382 and the highest price shown is 149% higher at $950. The screenshot doesn't capture all the offers that the Google search unearthed, but obviously prices vary widely within those two outliers.

How can this be? How can there be so much difference in prices for an identical product? Well, economists and business analysts can probably offer quite a few explanations, but they all boil down to this: the market is not free. It is not efficient.

So keep that in mind next time someone says that all we need to do to solve some problem is to "set the market free," "get rid of government interference," or "blah blah blah."Sometimes it will make sense to reduce the government's influence on a particular aspect of some particular market, but too many people have adopted a blindered ideology that the "free/efficient/unfettered" market represents an ideal that we should be always and everywhere be pursuing. Not only is that doubtful that the ideal is actually ideal, but it simply cannot be achieved. And as the "theory of the second best" teaches us, that means there is no good reason whatsoever to think that the best alternative is to move as close as possible to this unachievable so-called ideal.

Class dismissed
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 26, 2011
Proponents of the "free market" have a tendency to ignore one inconvenient fact: there is no such thing as a free market in reality. Never has been one. Never will be one. The "free market" is a myth, a fairy tale told over and over by newspaper columnists and TV pundits and quite a few professional economists.

This is not to say that markets, as a system for organizing economic activity, are no good. There are some good things about markets, flawed as they always are. There are also bad things about them. Sometimes, the flaws are their saving grace! That's because some "flaws" in what might otherwise be a fully "free" market (theoretically, that is, but only in theory since it simply cannot exist in reality) make the results of the market activity more socially beneficial. The opposite is also true: some flaws lead to worse social results, relative to what might happen if the markets were to be fully "free." But again, that's all pie-in-the-sky philosophizing, because markets are never, ever fully free.

One result of a free market, proven beyond any doubt in multitudes of Econ 101 courses for the past century, is the so-called "law of one price." As Wikipedia states,

The law of one price is an economic law stated as: "In an efficient market all identical goods must have only one price."

(Where "efficient" is econo-speak for what laymen call "free.")
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 26, 2011
Kelp Perfume.

German scientists, K. Lüning and D.G. Müller, have discovered a pheromone (perfume) produced by the microscopic female kelp plant that causes the release and directs the sperm to the egg - no small task in that large, often turbulent ocean. Reportedly, the discovery was made when the researchers smelled what they thought was gin in the laboratory but in reality was the sexual pheromone. I find it interesting that two very different substances solicit similar responses in kelp and humans.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 26, 2011
You're prescient hiker
Welcome to the future...

Biomass

Scientists are also researching new ways to obtain natural (methane)gas from biomass—a fuel source derived from plant and animal wastes.
Methane gas is naturally produced whenever organic matter decays.
Today, we can drill shallow wells into landfills to recover the methane gas. Landfills are already required to collect methane gas as a safetymeasure. Typically, landfills collect the gas and burn it to get rid of it.
But the gas can be put to work. Last year, over four billion cubic feet of landfill methane gas was used for heating and electricity production.
There are other ways to convert biomass into natural gas. One method converts aquatic plants, such as sea kelp, into methane gas. In the future, huge kelp farms could also produce renewable gas energy.
jim douglas
jim douglas
March 25, 2011
None of this really matters because some day we are going to convert kelp into methane gas.
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 25, 2011
Cheerleaders? No, money.

My point of view will be surrounded by money.

It talks. Lofty wishes about "America's independence from foreign oil" (which has nothing to do with Solar, you concede that much, no?) and "spend whatever it takes for solar, it's for our children" -- walks.

The money is what will flow from Joe's pocket into yours, once you and I (yes, you're being converted, you just don't realize it yet) succeed in nudging the market to produce what he wants: a solar array that MAKES ECONOMIC SENSE (seriously, have you ever seen a $35,000, net $14,000 10KW array? I'm betting not; but even THAT's too expensive, and so it STILL doesn't sell!).

And that will be mass-commodity level money, not rich eccentric greenie money, going into your pocket.

Now this is rich: "Lots we can't do here as the codes won't let us."

So, nanny government won't let you. Seems like you need to relocate to Georgia, no?

I'm serious. It's a near-virgin market, you'd clean up! "Go East, young man...."

I agree, I'm not Joe Six Pack. I was thinking of claiming to be god's gift to women, but I'm not sure how much traction I could get on that one.

RE: "By the way we offer a PVT system by Echo Solar." Can you send me the web address so I can review that? I'm primarily interested in hearing from someone who's invested in that Israeli firm's system, or any such similar system, and what sort of net cost per energy unit analysis they've done, if any. I find a lot of greenies invest in systems and brag about net annual output -- but never disclose what it all cost, and thus the payback cycle (Sunpower's good at featuring a lot of their customers on Facebook, but cost data's NEVER disclosed).

Welp, off to my farm. You have a good weekend, too, you old Blue Stater (BTW, I'm from New York; just came South for the women).
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 25, 2011
James-thanks for the links to the pvt site. I already deal with Israeli products from UMA, they have some interesting technology. Lots we can't do here as the codes won't let us.
By the way we offer a PVT system by Echo Solar.
Also you aren't Joe Sixpack, get over it.
And when you quote me with out all the inflections and tongue and cheek humor it is like you only want readers to see how smart you are! BTW not likely to see your Red State viewpoint anytime soon. Have a good weekend.
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 25, 2011
James-Suffering from Dilutions of Grandeur or as you you'd put it Arrogance. I suppose you can see Russia from your front door.You can surround yourself with cheer leaders of your view point but that doesn't make you right! If you win we all lose. Just a question, what profession do 95% of the people in Washington, D.C. have in common with you?
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 25, 2011
"Here's my strategy," said Reagan in 1983, "for handling the Cold War: We win, they lose."

Here's my strategy for handling this debate I've got going with you two Blue-Staters: I win, you lose.

Click here: https://sites.google.com/site/freemarketsolarpower/home/comments/comments----appendix
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 25, 2011
Licensed, Bonded and Insured?

Just because the ad says it doesn't mean it's true!

Many complaints about unlicensed contractors are received where the home or business owner believed they had contracted with a Licensed, Bonded and Insured contractor, but they had not. The ads that appear in the yellow pages are not regulated by the publisher, and should be considered accurate only about the name of the company or individual and the phone number to call. The only sure way of knowing that your contractor is licensed is to call the Registrar of Contractors to confirm it.

With the technology available today, the local phone number you think you are calling may be being answered by a telemarketer in some other state. Such operations may not even be licensed in Arizona, and you might be paying thousands of dollars down on work that will never be performed or completed.

Nothing in the law prevents a property owner from building or making improvements to structures or appurtenances on his or her own property, and do the work themselves, or with their own employees or with a duly licensed contractor as long as certain conditions are met.

1.The work is intended for occupancy solely by the owner and is not intended for occupancy by the public, by employees or business visitors.

AND

2.The structure or appurtenances are not intended for sale or rent for a period of at least one year from the date of completion or issuance of a certificate of occupancy.

This section of the statute is intended to insure that potential buyers, renters, employees or business visitors to a premise are not put in jeopardy. In such situations where the structures or appurtenances will be utilized by or open to the public, their health, welfare and public safety must be protected, and licensed contractors must be utilized to complete the project. Also, you must keep in mind that you are still subject to compliance with local permit and building code requirements.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 25, 2011
Germany set to abandon nuclear power for good
By JUERGEN BAETZ | March 23, 2011


Associated Press/AP Online, Wed Mar 23, 2011 BERLIN - Germany is determined to show the world how abandoning nuclear energy can be done.

The world's fourth-largest economy stands alone among leading industrialized nations in its decision to stop using nuclear energy because of its inherent risks. It is betting billions on expanding the use of renewable energy to meet power demands instead.

The transition was supposed to happen slowly over the next 25 years, but is now being accelerated in the wake of Japan's Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant disaster, which Chancellor Angela Merkel has called a "catastrophe of apocalyptic dimensions."

Berlin's decision to take seven of its 17 reactors offline for three months for new safety checks has provided a glimpse into how Germany might wean itself from getting nearly a quarter of its power from atomic energy to none.

And experts say Germany's phase-out provides a good map that countries such as the United States, which use a similar amount of nuclear power, could follow. The German model would not work, however, in countries like France, which relies on nuclear energy for more than 70 percent of its power and has no intention of shifting.

"If we had the winds of Texas or the sun of California, the task here would be even easier," said Felix Matthes of Germany's renowned Institute for Applied Ecology. "Given the great potential in the U.S., it would be feasible there in the long run too, even though it would necessitate huge infrastructure investments."

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/partner/free-green-concepts/news/article/2011/03/germany-set-to-abandon-nuclear-power-for-good?cmpid=WNL-Friday-March25-2011
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 25, 2011
James- if everyone could do everything properly there would no need of your expertise or ours. I pay my $300/hr when I need legal help. I am glad you can do everything by your self better than anyone who has studied, broken their knuckles learning how to do the job properly while talking your neighbors into providing free labor.Sounds like Huck Finn) I got it your thrifty, that's great but not everyone is you.
Here is directly to the point. There is no energy industry that pays its way. Some government subsidy is received by all. With out subsidizes Solar is at %0.13- $0.18/kwh installed by guys like us. The system can produce power for a fixed rate for excess of 25 years. And because of the European subsidies you were able to buy product at $3.50 not $10.00/watt. But lets get real, the social benefits out weigh the detriment to the country. America continues to be less competitive every day it puts off developing energy sources that provide clean power.As other nations add renewable's to their energy mix. We are in a revolution of technology.When the sun can provide the energy of 500 square feet of surface area in the foot print if an I-phone then your analogy of computers will be correct. Until then, it takes materials to cover the kind of area you need for sun power. You have about 1000' of panels.
You know we are the lucky ones,you, Luke and I have the time and inclination to care enough to worry about the future of our country. Old Joe is probably working two jobs to make ends meet it he can find a job at all.
I am glad we are passionate about life, we still have a pulse!
We just don't agree with your conclusions.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 25, 2011
(1) come see a licensed contractor, like me, and pay my fee; or (2) go to that guy down the street, who by all accounts is pretty good, just didn't pass the contractors board requirements, but charges half.
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 25, 2011
Having come from the streets (lived in the woods, my car, the back of a store), indeed, the shit-bottom of the economy, I know something about hard work and making and saving a buck. And I know that both you guys know that it's sheer madness to put out products that NO ONE wants to buy, then force them to buy it by taxing them and back-feeding the vendor with their tax dollars.

Yes, there's a free market solution, and in 1981, when I paid $2600 for a used Northstar computer (and new IBM-PC's would soon be retailing for $5000), people would have said "ridiculous" if I predicted PCs would someday cost only $300-$400 for 50 times the power and capacity.

I want you to be right about "good FITS," Michael. I do. Let me know when you see a positive, "good FIT" market result (i.e., Solar PV systems selling UN-subsidized at commodity level, like PCs). In fact, show me ANY subsidized product scheme that's EVER worked, OK?

And hey, Luke, glad you join me in free-marketing legal representation: For years I've been preaching the abolition of Unauthorized Practice of Law statutes and thus opening that market up to two tiers (1) come see a licensed lawyer, like me, and pay my fee; or (2) go to that lady down the street, who by all accounts is pretty good, just didn't pass the bar, but charges half.

It should be your choice. Alas, it's not. She goes to jail for even attempting to practice without a license.

Yes, why shouldn't it be your choice?

And yet, you guys want to force me to subsidize your trade thru FITs and RPS's and "required permits" (hence, use "professional installers" only for my solar array) and other Big, Fat, Nanny government practices.

Because Joe's just a dumb-ass, and needs your "guidance" (permits), right? He needs you to take his money to subsidize your overpriced solar packages because YOU two know what's best for the environment after all, right?

There's a term for that: Big Government Arrogance.

Y'all come visit. I'll "educate" you!
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 24, 2011
I think we should change the conversation to instead of decreasing the incomes for hard working solar people to decreasing the rates of legal representation, counseling, fees, etc. Is there a free market solution for that? You would think that James would want solar folks to make more money so they could pay more taxes which would assure his income. Of course, if the government comes up short, they can just print up some more greenbacks but I don't know if that's a viable free market solution.
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 24, 2011
James, could not figure out how to respond directly to your site with out going through your email.
First of all California is broke but it has nothing to do with renewable's incentives. As far as the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I think the road to hell is paved with no actions.
Your points about Spain's FIT being wrong I will agree it was to high, your right but Germany's has been working and does decrease with time. I said the FIT would have to be at the right level not Spain's, not even Germany's.I repeat if you take away all subsidies then I will be happy to take none.
$9995 being the magic number for Joe Sixpack to a a 10KW system is redicules. Joe has no credit, his house is upside down in value and he probably cares more about about NASCAR and beer than making a good investment.
Lets do it your way and wait for the ark come and save us.
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 24, 2011
I have posted my response to you, Michael, here:

https://sites.google.com/site/freemarketsolarpower/home/comments
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 23, 2011
James- we certainly have different approaches for the same end goal. Your enthusiasm for solar and willingness to put your money where your mouth is wonderful. I don't see how we actually move the system forward with a free market approach. Too many power brokers out there too far entrenched to move forward in a timely manor. That is why I would favor a feed in tariff that would drive demand like Europe has done. After all rather reinventing the wheel we should learn how to use it. Even China is coming on strong with its target of 18% renewable's by 2020. When your power comes from renewable resources, your independence from foreign fossil fuel imports strengthens your country. This is what is happening around the world and we can't wait for a philosophical change to sweep the nation. It is imperative that we move forward with the rest of the world towards energy independence using a fairly benign energy source such as renewable's. We just can't wait for an intellectual revolution that probably won't come if it does it could take years.
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 23, 2011
Frank and honest "town square" debates like this, then, are welcome. Ditto for tinkerers tweaking newer, more efficient (price-lowering) products. So I support thinkers/doers like you guys, and I'm funding one of my own ("country genius" partner working on that cooler). Plus I'm endeavoring to change the law and eliminate legal barriers -- clear the decks for a FREE market. I'm offering free legal assistance to fellow Georgians, and am confronting, legally if necessary, my utility's anti-solar practices: https://sites.google.com/site/gridtiedsolarpv/
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 23, 2011
Very interesting/inspiring story, thanks for sharing.

Looks like we're all old enough to be grateful for what we have, and to struggle for our children's future. Blessed with some modest resources and legal knowledge, I've decided that the best way to achieve energy independence with less pollution is via the free market -- this after hypocritically pocketing $21,000 in subsidies.

My book's core theme is this: Forget about environmental arguments (whether there actually is global warming, the "true" scale of Solar PV's benefits), they go nowhere in Red States (Georgia). Better to prey on Joe Six Pack's greed by eliminating regulatory and price barriers to "a chicken in every pot" (a 10KW or so solar array on every roof or in every yard).

Subsidies are stealth price barriers. When gov't subsidizes, producers simply raise prices to cop the subsidies. And disgusting waste ensues: Wind turbines were being built in WINDLESS areas of the U.K. because investors were "farming subsidies," not wind; my book cites two Biomass Boondgoggles -- right near my farm!

Meanwhile, I define free market success as $1/watt (10-year payback cycle for 10KW) because Joe can do the math and decide that's a deal he can't refuse. At least one free-marketeer is claiming reasonably probable success on that soon: http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/how-to-drop-solar-to-1-a-watt-try-diamond-saws-says-dick-swanson/

Catch that? A free market solution.

Carter's subsidy scheme helped send Solar PV prices north of $30/watt. Only rich greenies invested. That convinced "Joe" that "solar's too expensive, maybe in 50 years...." Georgia Power's (anti-green but pretending to be green) website claims $8 - $10/watt to go solar in Georgia, which I've just disproved. But brownies cite to the very inflated prices that Carter-subsidizers created -- in order to (via disinformation) THWART Solar PV.

See how subsidies are just bad on so many levels?
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 23, 2011
Luke thanks for the kind words, I figured that I owe my nation that much for sparing me from the Viet Nam war when by high school friends were coming back in body bags or some standing the corners. The efforts to strengthen our nation by use of renewable's only makes since and although we continue to die for petroleum it is not written that is how it must be. We need the capital spent on war to provide health care for our citizens and to improve our citizens standard of living!
Instead of Costa Rica how about sticking around and helping build sustainable housing for native people. Probably harder considering all the red tape- just a thought. However I do realize we must eat and provide shelters for our families and put something away for the future to make sure we don't starve to death in our old age! Sounds like you are on an adventure, best of luck.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 23, 2011
Michael,

Thanks for your valuable info.

This is a great statement:

"I believe this is a very important time to change the way we use resources and I did this for my kids and we ended up with a bankrupt nation and continue to do this for my granddaughter and your grand children."

That's heartfelt. You're a good soul.

Tom Scott, who has been in the solar business as long as you have and owns the Green Store here in Eugene worked on Steve Baer's passive home. Tom's an instructor in the renewable energy program and I love to hear his experiences in the industry.

James,

Thank you for your knowledgable information also. You're right, debate IS good. It gets the thoughtful, creative and innovative juices flowing. Your system is on target to surpass the 14,400 kWh/year mark. Good on ya!
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 23, 2011
James, make sure that the grade of aluminum you use will be compatible with propylene glycol as it is a less toxic glycol used in food products. I will become contaminated with aluminum oxides which will need to be separated during the recycling process. Also, glycol becomes acidic if allowed to stagnate at high temperatures for long periods of time, so the additives are very important. Lessons learned from installing 3-4,000 solar water heating systems.
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 23, 2011
The quality of life we can achieve by using alternative energy can only be achieved with hard work and keeping the crooks out of the industry. The crooks took over solar water heating and left the honest guys to mop up the mess. It is critically important we try to make sure we do a great job, offering great products. Mistakes will be made, but correcting these mistakes will bring trust to the industry. I try to only use products from profitable companies with 0+ tolerances on product performance. 25 years is a long time to guarantee performance and quality is important.
Sorry for the self indulgence in telling my story, but I believe this is a very important time to change the way we use resources and I did this for my kids and we ended up with a bankrupt nation and continue to do this for my granddaughter and your grand children. It is important to this countries future, a turning point as to how well we will compete in a world economy.
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 23, 2011
Just a little story on how I decided to get into this. First job out of CalPoly San Luis Obispo was at Lawrence Livermore Lab working in nuclear research. While working there I read about Steve Baer in New Mexico working with solar products. I left the Lab to work in air quality research in Ely, NV for the EPA monitoring Kennecot copper smelter. While in Ely the 1973 oil embargo happened. Ely is 300+ miles from any major city and everything is trucked in, food and fuel. We had a warm winter only -28 deg F. People were worried watching their tv sets seeing the city people lined up to get gasoline. We were concerned that we would be able to get food and fuel, a real question of life and death. I remembered reading about Steve Baer and solar energy and began to research the subject. Ely has about 345 days of sun, 14 mile/hr wind speed and geothermal hot water on the edge of town. This place had everything to be a survivor and almost able to stand on its own. That is when I thought of the name Solarponics, using solar and hydroponics to gain independence from OPEC and other tyrants. My vision of America is a self sufficient country using resources that were provided naturally without pollution. I moved back to san Luis Obispo to start my business. I was fortunate enough to find a job at Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant is Quality Engineering Supervisor for the electrical safety systems for the electrical contractor building the plant. This funded my business and I was able to start Solarponics in 1975 going full time in 1977.
Solar energy is a natural and has the benefits of independence, clean environment and saves resources for higher temperature uses such as making steel, etc.
When Pres. Carter took office and he seemed to share the same vision, I thought that we could achieve this in my lifetime. When Pres. Regan tore off the solar water heating system in 1981, I became aware this would be a long time coming. We are close today to being able to achieve the dream!
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 23, 2011
Just a little story on how I decided to get into this. First job out of CalPoly San Luis Obispo was at Lawrence Livermore Lab working in nuclear research. While working there I read about Steve Baer in New Mexico working with solar products. I left the Lab to work in air quality research in Ely, NV for the EPA monitoring Kennecot copper smelter. While in Ely the 1973 oil embargo happened. Ely is 300+ miles from any major city and everything is trucked in, food and fuel. We had a warm winter only -28 deg F. People were worried watching their tv sets seeing the city people lined up to get gasoline. We were concerned that we would be able to get food and fuel, a real question of life and death. I remembered reading about Steve Baer and solar energy and began to research the subject. Ely has about 345 days of sun, 14 mile/hr wind speed and geothermal hot water on the edge of town. This place had everything to be a survivor and almost able to stand on its own. That is when I thought of the name Solarponics, using solar and hydroponics to gain independence from OPEC and other tyrants. My vision of America is a self sufficient country using resources that were provided naturally without pollution. I moved back to san Luis Obispo to start my business. I was fortunate enough to find a job at Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant is Quality Engineering Supervisor for the electrical safety systems for the electrical contractor building the plant. This funded my business and I was able to start Solarponics in 1975 going full time in 1977.
Solar energy is a natural and has the benefits of independence, clean environment and saves resources for higher temperature uses such as making steel, etc.
When Pres. Carter took office and he seemed to share the same vision, I thought that we could achieve this in my lifetime. When Pres. Regan tore off the solar water heating system in 1981, I became aware this would be a long time coming. We are close today to being able to achieve th dream!
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 22, 2011
Michael,

The buyer needs to be AWARE. You and others in the industry have been working hard (a long time, in your case... thank you very much) to spread the awareness. I wake up in the morning feeling great knowing that I've contributed to the reduction of the carbon footprint in a big way.
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 22, 2011
Thanks Mike, for the "stress crack" info. Our solar cooling jacket's uniformly mating the back of our test (MAGE 230w) panel. We're still experimenting with sealants (to bond the jacket to the panel's back) and cooling fluid (glycol, etc.). Your ideas welcome. You too, Luke.

Leases -- They can work but too many that I've seen are designed to capture subsidies, and thus there could be complicating tax angles to consider (in addition to my philosophical opposition to subsidies). Also, if you sign, say, a 30-year lease for one on your building but then sell your building 4 years later, the buyer typically takes subject to the lease. That can be good, of course, but it also can be bad if the buyer wants to purchase a property free of all other property interests (that buyer would also be locked in to that generation of solar panels, too).

I agree on this: "Solar Incentives should probably go away when all other forms of energy incentives go away."

I also thank you for the cost data. And I thank you, Luke, for your posts. Information enables calculation, and investment decisions.

BTW, South Central Georgia's a step down insolation-zone-wise, wish I had that CA sun. My 10KW system's record thus far is 61.40 KWH (3/2/11), and from 10/2/10 - 3/11/11 it generated 6000 KWH. As explained earlier, it went up at $3.5/watt unsubsidized, $1.4/watt subsidized. MAGE, the vendor (plant nearby in Dublin, GA), projected 14,400 KWH/year output and I'm on target thus far (that 6 MW was in the fall and winter season, longer days are coming).
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 22, 2011
Luke- That is why I don't understand all the complaining that this string has had as this with a small system. We get down to as low as $0.08/KWH with 8-10KW systems. I all seems like a no brainer to me.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 22, 2011
I ran your numbers and came up with the same conclusion. I used 85% overall, which is equivalent to 90% and 80%, which is more precise. This is conservative, considering that the sun shines for more than 5.5 hours/day in California. I know you're speaking of peak sun hours over the year but I also know that it can be very hot & intense at 8am until 8pm at certain times of the year, spinning the meter way back. It's good to be realistic and conservative, then you can feel great when customers tell you that their system is doing better than you promised. Your system cost is very reasonable also.

$0.13/kWh is about baseline for PG&E. The rate goes up considerably beyond baseline (about 500 kWh), so you're locking in $0.13/kWh for a guaranteed 25 years (with no pollution). All you have to do is refer a past customer to someone who is skeptical. Happy, satisfied customers are your best advertising. Thanks Michael.
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 22, 2011
FYI
Here is an analysis of the cost for a solar PV system quoted in our area with tile roof. This is a California installation on the higher end of costs due to system size and existing conditions.

True Cost of Solar Electricity
Cost of PV average 2.5KW system $16,250.00
Less Rebates PG&E $0.35/watt - $ 875.00
Less Federal Tax Credit 30% - $4,612.50
Out of Pocket cost of Solar PV System $10,762.50
Potential Inverter Replacement Year 15 $ 3,000.00
TOTAL OUT OF POCKET COST OF SOLAR 25 YRS. $13,762.50
Daily Average Sunshine Available 5.5 Hrs./day
System size X 2.5KW
Average Energy Produced per Day 13.75 KWH/Day
Days of Energy Production per Year 365 Days/Year
Average Energy Production per Year 5018.75 KWH/Year
First 10 Year Guaranteed Output 90% X 5018.75 KWH/Year X 10 Years = Guaranteed Panel Output for 10 Years 45,168.75 KWH
Years 11-25 Guaranteed Output 80% X 5018.75 KWH/Year X 15 Years =
Guaranteed Panel Output for years 11-25 60225 KWH
Guaranteed Panel Output for 25 years 105,393.75KWH
Average Cost per KWH for next 25 years $13,762.50/105,393.75KWH
$0.13058/KWH
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 22, 2011
Yes Luke that is me. and Yes to your earlier observation that my bill did have a - sign for the year. I getting to be an old fart in this business.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 22, 2011
Michael,

Is this your company?...

Solarponics not only stands behind all of their products, they live by them. Solarponics' founder and Cal Poly Graduate, Michael J. Emrich, has turned his own home into a test laboratory for most Solarponics' systems. Mike's home has solar hot water, radiant heat, solar electric and wind turbines. Mike's YEARLY energy bills for this 3000+ sq ft home are less than $150.00, so we know from hands-on experience how effective and affordable solar can be for your home or business. We have testimonials from many of our happy customers, who say they can't believe the savings.
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 22, 2011
Solar Incentives should probably go away when all other forms of energy incentives go away. There is really no need to subsidize oil, coal, uranium, oil shale, wind or solar. But can you imagine the out cry from everyone when prices rise and fair market costs including carbon taxes. That is when solar, wind, wave, etc. will stand on their own! The fossil fuels have 100 year head start on alternatives regarding subsidization. Alternatives will continue to fall but at a rate nowhere as large as they have fallen during the past 10 years or even the last 5 years.
What everyone for gets is that there are a lot of environmental factors that have nothing to do with cost that is beginning to drive the market. Right now you can install PV system in California for a guaranteed production rate for 25 years of $0.12 - $0.18 per kwh unsubsidized. Clean Power guaranteed for 25 years now fined me another source with that guaranteed price which is environmentally neutral. I highly recommend to all of you to see the Sundance award winning movie "Climate Refugees" to get some in site as to where this global weather change will take us and the impacts it will have on future government stability and world food production. Very eye opening and thought provoking. And it doesn't make any difference if it is man made or a natural cycle the results will be the same. If it is man made, then maybe we can buy some time or slow down the process by using environmentally neutral energy sources.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 22, 2011
First Solar to Build Solar Module Factory in Mesa, Arizona
Tempe, Arizona, United States March 17, 2011

New Factory Will Create 600 Jobs
Annual Production of More Than 250MW

First Solar, Inc. (Nasdaq: FSLR) today announced it will build its new U.S. manufacturing center in Mesa, Ariz. First Solar will invest about $300 million in the factory, which will create approximately 600 jobs and will include four manufacturing lines with a capacity to produce more than 250 megawatts (MW) of advanced thin-film photovoltaic (PV) modules per year. The new factory, in combination with First Solar's recently expanded facility in Perrysburg, Ohio, will increase First Solar's U.S. production capacity to more than 500MW per year.

Construction will begin in the second quarter of 2011 and is expected to last a year, creating an average of 400-500 construction jobs. Module shipments are scheduled to begin in the third quarter of 2012. The facility is located on a 135-acre site that was previously home to a General Motors vehicle testing facility and is designed to accommodate future expansion. The facility will include a 3MW rooftop solar installation as well as an extensive ground-mounted PV testing facility. The factory will utilize First Solar's continuous manufacturing process which transforms a sheet of glass into a complete solar module in less than 2.5 hours, which contributes to the industry-leading energy payback time and low carbon footprint of systems utilizing First Solar's thin-film modules.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 22, 2011
Yingli Green Energy and GRID Alternatives Partner to Provide Solar Energy to 400 Low-Income Families Across California

Combined with a network of community volunteers and green job trainees, Yingli Americas and GRID Alternatives will work together to install 1 MW of solar energy systems for 400 low-income families during 2011 using a combination of donated modules and modules purchased from Yingli at fair market value. These solar energy systems will generate $10 million worth of renewable energy over their lifespan, while eliminating 40,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, the projects will provide hands-on job training opportunities in solar PV installation to thousands of individuals looking to enter the solar workforce, through direct participation in the installations.

"Social responsibility is a key pillar in our mission, and we're very proud to announce this partnership with GRID Alternatives," said Robert Petrina, Managing Director of Yingli Americas. "At Yingli, we believe in making solar power an affordable option for everyone, and addressing our local underserved communities is an important step in achieving this -- we're delivering clean energy and job training where it's required most."
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 22, 2011
When you enter a modern PV factory it is all robotic from beginning to end. Most every component inverter to BOS are mass produced. Main reductions will come with using less materials where possible or speeding up installation time, ie Zep, Andalay,
Schuco Thin Film, etc. But the factories for panels are already hands off.
Andrew W
Andrew W
March 22, 2011
REW has become a website to advertise solar schemes. Let the buyer beware.
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 21, 2011
We also offer a lease similar to SolarCity's, SunRun, Sungevity, etc. If you don't have capital it can make sense. Never recommend it to my customers who can find financing or that pay cash, not as good a deal.
James- The stress to the cells is caused by lack of 100% temperature consistancy across the back of the PV panel. Anywhere a tube is not in contact with the cell such as a fin, the temperature will build unevenly.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 21, 2011
Includes Free Monitoring and Repair Service
With a SolarLease, you have peace of mind that your system will continue to perform beautifully for years to come. SolarLease includes SolarGuard® proactive monitoring for the full life of the lease. SolarGuard allows you and SolarCity to continuously monitor your system to ensure it is running smoothly and performing as expected.
In the unlikely event that your system underperforms, SolarCity will alert you and help to remedy the situation. We will send out a repair crew for free warrantee repairs over the life of the lease. This includes replacing a worn out part such as the inverter. The good news is that solar panels typically last up to 30 years or longer, and have few moving parts. So once systems are installed, they require little ongoing maintenance.
We Guarantee System Performance or We Will Pay You Back
We're so confident with our system installation and design that we guarantee your system will perform as promised or SolarCity will pay you the difference! Our guarantee considers normal weather variations and solar panel performance over time. We track your system performance through our SolarGuard monitoring service, so we know exactly how much energy it is producing every day, week, month and year!
Flexibility to Upgrade the System Later
When your SolarLease ends, the power is still in your hands. You can upgrade to a new system with the latest solar technology. You can also extend your lease in 5 year increments or simply have the panels removed for free.
If you sell your home before the end of the lease, you can transfer the lease to the new owners if they qualify with excellent credit, or you can prepay the lease and add it to your home asking price. A solar system will help differentiate your home from other properties on the market—new buyers are looking for green homes that are energy efficient and will help them save money on energy costs.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 21, 2011
SolarCity's SolarLease Program (I have no affiliation)

Go Solar for $0 Down
Now you can afford to go solar without the high initial cost of installing a system. Instead of buying the equipment, you simply lease it. SolarLease is the most popular residential solar financing option in the country!

Save on Electricity Costs from Day One
With a SolarLease, you pay as you go, instead of all at once. The combination of your low monthly lease payment and smaller electricity bill is typically less than what you pay the utility company today. So you can start saving money from the very first day.

Savings Grow Every Year
Your savings can grow over time as utility rates continue to increase. Historically, utility rates have increased over 5% every year. With SolarLease, you can lock in lower electricity rates for the term of your lease.
Smart Financial Investment
A SolarLease can be a better investment than purchasing your system with cash because you do not have a big upfront payment and can save your money for other opportunities. You save money every month on electricity bills so you can be cash flow positive from day one. In addition, you do not have to worry about unexpected repair costs because they are covered under a SolarLease
jim douglas
jim douglas
March 21, 2011
Kelp for methane gas? Lawyers in the solar hobby business? Reality is, the vast majority of people don't have the capitol to invest in solar, and it's to complex anyway. They will continue to pay cheap monthly energy bills. Japan will fix their reactors (the safety systems worked) and we will keep drilling for oil in the Gulf. All politically correct BS. Pray for surf!!
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 20, 2011
Got it. Plugged it into my site (everything there is free, I accept no ads, and I have no affiliation of any kind with any commercial source). Thanks!
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 20, 2011
James,

Sun Electronics have a number of grid-tie size system deals as well as great pricing on individual modules, inverters, BOS options. Check out their home page... http://sunelec.com/
Located right next door to you.

There logo is Making Solar Affordable.
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 20, 2011
Michael, you wrote this: "I had some interesting talks with a solar manufacture who specializes in only top quality panels. He buys only highly inspected cells micro crack free. His feeling is stresses introduced by cooling, as in attached to back of pv panel an absorber sheet, will cause micro cracks which will lead to cell reduced performance and reduced panel performance and life expectancy. There has been a German manufacturer showing a PVT panel for a couple of years but unable to deliver."

That's very useful info to me. Our design uses a pure aluminum encasement along the back of the panel with glycol-based coolant running through a radiator -- all with a putative, mass-produced cost of $50 per panel. No dramatic temperature swings are contemplated, more like lowering panel's peak summer heat down to the 105-degree zone so as to thwart hi-heat caused decrease in voltage flow. I'm having difficulty conceiving of that representing so much thermal stress that it would cause micro-cracking, but please be share with me any additional info you may have: freeemarketsolar@juno.com

My interest overall interest, by the way, is in collecting/sharing knowledge to further my goal - Solar PV for the masses (hence, get the price down so people don't have to bribed to buy it).

To that end (getting the price down), I ask of all installers and vendors (especially those with add-on features like Echo Solar System), just one question: How much money will the proposed array cost me, and how much electricity will it produce? Big Solar Welfare Queens (the ones who lobby my government for subsidies at every level, including unfunded mandates like Renewable Portfolio Standards and inflated Feed-In-Tariffs), I find, typically use advertising that diverts the average Joe away from that bottom line -- with gauzy green images and "feelings."

I want bottom-line data, which is what any sensible consumer would want. Share, please.
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 20, 2011
Thanks, Luke. I have posted your tip here:
https://sites.google.com/site/freemarketsolarpower/a-look-at/best-known-10kw-grid-package-deals

It's a sub-page to my web-book. If you email me directly at freemarketsolar@juno.com I'll post all future deals you send to me. Information is the free market's oxygen.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 19, 2011
10 kW system... $2.87/watt


http://sunelec.com/index.php?main_page=pv_systems&id=1059&type=GT
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 18, 2011
Installing solar correctly is an art and a science. Sizing the inverter so that it is able to handle cold extremes (high voltage conditions) and minimum voltage output to start the inverter is important. Orientation, shading, structural considerations, etc. need to be addressed by someone who knows what they're doing. An array can have up to 600 VDC, and 120/240 VAC on residential. A mistake there could ruin your plans for the future. A reputable solar installer will get it right. If they don't, action can be taken. You have no recourse with yourself if you get it wrong. You only have yourself to blame, if you're still alive.
Andrew W
Andrew W
March 18, 2011
Solar is great for DIY hobbyists. Getting your neighbors to pay for most of your electricity is great.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 18, 2011
That's a minus sign on your electric bill, right? You've obviously been involved in solar for a long time. I could tell by your knowledgable postings. I started in 1978 with the SolaHart systems in Camarillo. I lived in the Santa Barbara area for about 10 years. Hoh hum, another day in Paradise. I've been around for a while myself and like a fine wine, we oldsters only get better with age. I'm headed to Miami in July to work with a large international solar equipment supplier. They may want me to open an office in the San Francisco area. I plan on building sustainable homes in Costa Rica in the future. Thanks for your intelligent postings.
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 18, 2011
I live in Atascadero, CA. Built the solar heated house in 1977. Saves 90+% plus heating. Original PV system 1985, upgraded in 2000 when incentives came out. Now 4000 watts current electric bill $-168.00
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 18, 2011
Michael,

Here's a video link for the Echo Solar System Michael has referenced.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnhq78sTolg

Thanks, Michael. The students in the Energy Management/Renewable Energy degree program that I'm graduating from in June, bat ideas around all the time and this is a concept that has come up in a number of bs sessions. I'll have to share this with them.

Where are you located? I'm just curious to know what environment you work in. Although I'm in Oregon now, I sold, designed and installed hundreds of solar PV systems in the Central Valley of California for years. I also worked with SolaHart solar DHW systems and solar pool heating systems. I was also a research diver for a year, studying the feasibility of growing and harvesting kelp for alternative fuel production (methane). A professor at UCSB had a grant from GE and NSF to study that.

Sales people are opinionated but one thing that we all agreed upon was that lawyers were the worst customers and my personal bias is with engineers that don't work in the solar industry. They know more than all solar professionals and don't even try to convince them otherwise. People are entertaining.
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 17, 2011
Luke- I saw that after posting but to delete would require more time duplication and I do appreciate the latitude allowed for my lousy typing skills and some time spelling. I figured that sometimes I have to make sense of others errors on line.
I also offer in my product mix a PVT system called "Echo Solar System" which uses heat under panels to make domestic hot water and supplemental heat. During nighttime hours it can use night time sky radiation to cool dwellings.I had some interesting talks with a solar manufacture who specializes in only top quality panels. He buys only highly inspected cells micro crack free. His feeling is stresses introduced by cooling, as in attached to back of pv panel an absorber sheet, will cause micro cracks which will lead to cell reduced performance and reduced panel performance and life expectancy. There has been a German manufacturer showing a PVT panel for a couple of years but unable to deliver.
Yes, James it would be nice if we had less intervention by government agencies, but one thing stands out is that the crooks use every loophole now to screw people, can you imagine how bad it would be if the bankers, developers, lawyers, doctors, politicians, etc., etc. were not watched at all? The biggest thing is that if people did their jobs well and honestly then we wouldn't as many rules and rule inspectors. We could concentrate on researching the best ways to do things and accomplish them in a safe manner. However, that is not our world. You sound like an interesting person and this may/may not apply to you, but we have so many lawyers that sue for anything regardless if it is moral or right. In 35 years I have been sued 3 times, each time no fault found in my workmanship or products installed. However that hasn't kept me from defending myself and having to sign documents not sue for expenses. Also having to buy my way out to keep out from having to provide representation through lengthy court proceedings. Free Market next lifetime.
Andrew W
Andrew W
March 17, 2011
@Free-Marketeer:

Great, thoughtful comments. It's reassuring to see some insightful comments here.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 17, 2011
Here's an exerpt from a paper I just handed in for a solar thermal class.

One recommendation to help with overheating is to install or retrofit thermally activated venting to solar paneling. Solar manufacturers have developed heat-triggered ventilation systems that can be installed underneath solar collectors. When fluids inside the collector become stagnant, reaching higher temperatures, vents open to let additional cool air inside the solar panel.

A cooling jacket for PV modules sounds like a cool concept.

Re: You need area as the sun only gives a given amount of power per sq.ft and concentrating systems only work where there is parallel bean radiation.

Would that be the reflectance off a frijole farm? Just messin' with ya Michael. Keep up the good work. Solar installation is hard work and you get my respect.
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 17, 2011
I am a lawyer.

And everything I build is ABOVE national code -- by my choice, and not because some bureaucrat (I'm also a government bureaucrat, by the way) orders me too.

But I also know that we Red Staters are more apt to eschew nanny government and unionists who, together, drive up costs and destroy free markets. And out here in the country (Gillis Springs, GA), the right to self-build is right up there with the right to crank a shotgun and protect one's turf.

Sure, safety's important, but too often the inspector's a jerk who advances false-confidence, not safety (in Savannah, Georgia, an entire subdivision's infrastructure is crumbling because an incompetent goofball "approved" sub-grade construction, so now the citizens must foot the repair bill).

So I regret that you are as burdened as you are, and thus your customers cannot benefit from lower prices. The remedy is to air and speak out against such obstacles in electronic town squares (forums like this), not just put up with them. My local utility, for example, has received my pre-litigation demand letter, publicly: https://sites.google.com/site/gridtiedsolarpv/

Solar PV is not just an environmental win, but a net-new wealth generator. All will thus benefit if the non-timid raise their voices and clear the way for a free-market (hence, lower prices) to emerge. I'm demonstrating how it can be done at the prototype level (built my array cheaper than anyone else; am funding development of a panel cooling jacket now) and, soon, at the legal level (litigation/legislation enabling all individuals to capture the sun for their own personal benefit). I invite you to visit. Find me on FB: James Christopher Desmond
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 17, 2011
I think that using reasonable feed in tariffs would bring the banking industry to the table as they will lend on guaranteed revenue. DIY are a small portion of the market place and will probably not install systems in compliance with the safety codes National Electric Codse 2008 & 2011. While I think the current codes are over thought and sometimes beyond necessary, there are certainly many safety issues that must be addressed to protect the public. You can work around most of this where you live because as you said your state is very lax. But with all the starving lawyers, I can't afford to, even if I was so inclined, which I am not. I've been in the solar industry for 35 years
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 17, 2011
You may be right, Michael, but read this:
http://www.facebook.com/notes/home-power/report-addresses-permitting-costs-for-solar-electric-installations/193518270682862

Money Quote: "The report found that wide variations in permitting processes and practices add $0.50 per watt, or $2,516 per 5 kW installation—the equivalent of a $1 billion "hidden" cost of solar over the next five years."

So, my 10KW array would have cost $5000 more in "high permitting cost" jurisdiction.

That's just one cost layer that can be eliminated with the proper political will. Want proof? In my part of the world, there are NO codes, permits, etc. Indeed, my entire prototype home/array went up with just ONE bureaucrat showing up -- for the mound septic system (he was from the State, not my county).

In fact, many Georgia counties have no zoning, and no codes of any sort. Nor are there any union fellas showing up to jam up jobs.

My son, girlfriend and I, plus some "barn-raising" friends installed my system, and I paid $3000 for a guy to do the tricky electrical parts -- and my skill level is limited to changing out electrical outlets!

I also price-shopped and hoofed it to get the job done at $35,000. Three months later I re-priced it at $29,000, though (thanks to subsidies), the prices have since gone back up to $35,000.

My point is this: If the price is right, average Joes like me will invest. If not, then the product isn't ready. Part of my reason for publishing this https://sites.google.com/site/freemarketsolarpower/ is to drive home to vendors that there exists a critical-mass, price-point and that's found in "freedom zones" like mine, populated by DIY's, who congregate here: http://www.builditsolar.com/index.htm

Areas like mine, then, are where Solar PV vendors should start first -- because the "market-take-off" price point can be achieved there, not nanny-government jurisdictions.

THAT is how to build a free market for Solar, NOT subsidizing high-cost jurisdictions.
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 17, 2011
The price of PV will not fall like PC's in my opinion as looking ant my job costing reports for the last 3 jobs we did, the total materials were about 50% of the installed costs of the system. The solar panels account for 65% of the total materials, the rest is labor, overhead (including insurance, truck fuels,advertising, etc), permits, sale commissions and a little bit of profit. If panel prices fall to $1.00 per watt this will only reduce the installed cost on the retail level by maybe $1.20/watt, mean while all the other costs of doing business will continue to rise as will the metals, glass, cost of transportation, etc. used to make solar panels.
I think the numbers I have given in my prior posts shows that solar electric is very near grid parity on the retail level. We will experience reductions in costs but no where as near those of computers did due to miniaturization of transistors. You need area as the sun only gives a given amount of power per sq.ft and concentrating systems only work where there is parallel bean radiation.
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 17, 2011
Yemen -- no coal, no oil, needs electricity to run massive desalination plants (no water = death), no choice.

It will use the cheapest source. Won't be oil, not at $100/barrel. And there's no coal or hydro or useful wind sources.

That leaves Solar, on cost/watt alone. For that matter, Seba ("Solar Trillions" at 75) says nuclear goes up at $8-12/watt installed. That sounds plausible to me.

Compare to my system at $3.5/watt unsubsidized, $1.4/watt subsidized.

Obama just signed away $8 billion in loan guarantees for a new nuclear plant 55 minutes from my farm. No private investors are willing to risk their money on nuclear, so WE (via ultimately uncollectable loans) must invest.

6000 people live in my county. One of these plants, presumably at less than $3.5/watt unsubsidized (economies of scale, gotta be cheaper), supplies electricity for 5000 homes: http://investors.sunpowercorp.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=558404

$8-12/watt vs. $3.5/watt.

That's a lot of pull, and where I live land's cheap ($2500/acre or less) with no zoning codes or bureaucrats to get in your face.

Yes, it's true, I've cited a press release, so consider. And yes, it's true, Solar PV's variable, not base load.

But it can mated with base load (nuclear, coal) power generation to diminish, accordingly, the AMOUNT of base load generation plant that needs to be built. Solar PV, especially at the individual ownership level, for that matter, offers the best way to harmoniously (incrementally) blend with brown-power grids.

My web-book, meanwhile, hypothesizes that if we must use subsidies (for nukes, solar), then consider how that $8 billion could be "back-end-distributed" (to avoid wasteful, imprudent investment) to individual Solar array owners to produce 13GW of power.

Private industry building MW-scale Solar PV plus Joe Six Pack with 10KW-scale Solar PV. Once the payback cycle falls to 7 years or less ($9995 grid-tied package price), the PV market price-falls like PCs did.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 17, 2011
Price cutting won't be cheap. Crystalline modules now can sell for $1.48 per watt. Modules will have to drop to 50 cents to hit the $1 per watt goal. The balance-of-system costs will have to plunge from around $1.70 cents to 40 cents. Inverter costs will need to drop to ten cents per watt.

Still, the industry, if anything, has shown it can squeeze costs. The 1980 cost of a solar module was around $21.83 a watt in 2002 dollars, and the current prices exceed the projections from 2005. Sure, those gains in part came from economic dislocations, but they were accomplished nonetheless.

Other things on Swanson's mind:

--Robots. Crops get harvested with automated tractors. Why can't solar fields get planted the same way? Another balance-of-system idea that will gain traction will be pre-built solar plants. Solon and SunPower last year unfurled 1 megawatt power-plants-in-a-box. Others, like SunPods, have worked on technologies to be able to truck solar arrays to sites without having the modules fly off in traffic.

"This is going to become a real race, dropping the balance of system costs," he said.

--Efficiency will grow, but crystalline silicon is hitting a plateau. SunPower, the leader in high-efficiency silicon, has already produced 24.2 percent cells in the lab. The practical limit, other SunPower execs have said, may sit around 25 percent.

--Concentrators will help. A concentrator on crystalline panels can lower the LCOE by 20 percent. "It's not like it cuts it in half," he said. Last year, SunPower revealed that it has a concentrator in the works.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 17, 2011
How to Drop Solar to $1 a Watt? Try Diamond Saws, Says Dick Swanson
The founder of SunPower looks to the future.
. Indian Wells, Calif. --- Under its recently unveiled SunShot program, the Department of Energy wants to lower the cost of solar energy to $1 a watt by 2017 and to 73 cents by 2030. Those prices include modules, electronics and balance-of-systems.

The price now hovers around $4 and is going down to $3 by the end of 2011.

So how will the solar industry pull that off?

Diamond wire sawing will help, said Dick Swanson, the founder of SunPower and greentech hall of famer, during a keynote at the Solar Industry Summit 2011 earlier this week in Indian Wells, Calif.

"I think it will have a huge impact," he said. Right now, solar cell makers saw wafers from silicon ingots with highly accurate saws capable of cutting off rounds that are 160 to 180 microns thick. Still, the process turns a lot of pure silicon into expensive dust.

In a few years' time, diamond sawing could help get that figure down to 135 microns thick or less. More wafers per ingot directly leads to a lower price for solar power. (Startups like Crystal Solar, 1366 Technologies, Alta Devices and others are working on techniques for creating even thinner wafers -- think 50 microns -- based on advanced crystal growing and separation techniques.)

Swanson, in fact, believes the DOE roadmap is conservative. By 2020, the DOE is calling for solar modules with rear contacts to maximize output on a module. SunPower already does that. SunPower is also pulling in thin wafers -- of an undisclosed width -- to 2017. The DOE has that on the roadmap toward 2030.

"Get ready for production in the next six years," he said. "This will dramatically reduce the cost of crystalline silicon modules."
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 17, 2011
And check out my comments here:

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/podcast/2011/03/leadership-roundtable-getting-from-here-to-there#readercomments
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 17, 2011
I do THANK my neighbors.

And I concede that interest groups exaggerate.

On the other hand, I work for the federal government, and I don't believe much of what it says.

We all do our best to collect, analyze, and make judgments based on "facts." It's tough. It's a situation. But it's all we've got right now (any doubt we'll be bullshatted to death by the 2012 Presidential Candidates very shortly?).

Cuba can't afford ANYTHING because its dictatorship has run its economy into the ground, so that's not a useful example to me.

I disagree on diesel vs. solar costs, especially when solar's mated with LED-output lighting (hence, solar can cost-effectively displace part of liquid-fuel based electrical generation). For that matter, check out the impact a simple, $80 solar panel had on this one African: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/25/science/earth/25fossil.html?_r=1

We are all burdened with sifting truth from claims, which are politically driven. I welcome useful debate like this. I'm taking it one step further by actually building some of this stuff and analyzing it (you'll note my super-green home also featured on my website).
jim douglas
jim douglas
March 17, 2011
As I've said before. Cuba, the only country on the planet defined as being sustainable, and with LOTS of sunshine, can't afford solar. By the way, it's still cheaper to install diesel generators on large remote mountaintop microwave relay stations, than installing and maintaning solar.
Andrew W
Andrew W
March 17, 2011
@ FreeMarketer:

I was only suggesting that you THANK your neighbors for paying the majority of your electricity bills. Sure, politics give us all these silly programs - that doesn't make them smart or valuable. In fact, if politics did it, it is likely to be stupid.
ANONYMOUS
March 17, 2011
"Free-Marketeer" asks us to check out:
"And this (where I got the $72 billion from): http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2011/02/top-eia-energy-trends-watcher-no-definitive-count-on-dirty-energy-welfare "

He should be more careful about taking blog posts--especially by lobbyists and PR people--at face value. Had he read some of the comments he would have realized that the author of that piece neglected to mention that the $72 billion dollar total was for a SEVEN year period. If he had carefully read the actual report he would have further realized that it included subsides that no longer exist and subsidies that don't go to the fossil fuel industry and things that are not subsidies.

As for his notion that the entire world will be generating 50+% of its electricity by solar by 2035 because places like Yemen and places without grids "have NO choice BUT to go solar" it is strange. If one wants to understand where world electricity production will be in 25 years one should consider what China and India will be doing not Yemen and the undeveloped portions of the third world.
5% of electricity from solar by 2035 would be a miracle, 50+% is a delusion.
Steven
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 17, 2011
Debatable, not comical, Anonymous. For the 50% solar power figure I was relying Tony Seba's "Solar Trillions" and other sources that combine projected Solar PV with Concentrated Solar Thermal production (with molten-salt-based, nighttime storage), mostly the latter, and that's because areas of projected growth (places like Yemen) have NO choice BUT to go solar (oil reserves AND fresh water will be depleted there in the 2020-2035 time frame). Seba also says (sounds credible) that 2.5 Billion people live OFF the grid and the simple economics of solar alone (yes, prohibitively expensive to us, but not to them, who rely on diesel generators and other, more costly energy sources) will spur production/use of solar on a massive scale. Another example: The US Military finally figured out that, with convoy costs figured in, liquid fuel for Afghan operations is astronomical, so go Solar PV wherever it can.

Desalinization plants (indispensable, and inevitable for burgeoning Middle East and other sectors), says Seba, also will drive substantial demand for Solar-based power production.

That's a LOT of solar growth, no?

Sure, I can't prove my 50% figure beyond all doubt. No one can. Economists and in-house financial analysts can't, either. They do their best and corporate/gov't leaders know this, then formulate policy and spend our money accordingly. That's why economics is not a science, but a social science. Ditto for "political science." And that is, at bottom, what's in play here.

Brown Power subsidies: Sure. Debatable. Check out: http://www.grist.org/article/2011-02-16-what-is-coals-true-cost

And this (where I got the $72 billion from): http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2011/02/top-eia-energy-trends-watcher-no-definitive-count-on-dirty-energy-welfare

Yes, interest groups exaggerate. Truth emerges from robust debate. I welcome it.
ANONYMOUS
March 17, 2011
"Free-Marketeer" writes:
"But see, Brown Power gets $72 billion in subsidies each year despite record profits. Insane? Of course. "

Fossil fuels do NOT receive "$72 billion in subsidies each year." He is off by a factor of about 7. (The "72 billion" number is commonly cited from an ELI study of a 7 year period which is padded up with things that don't exist or that are not subsidies.)

He also writes:
"no reason why it (solar power) can't supply 50% or more of our power by 2035, if not sooner"
Which suggests his grasp of economics is slim. Even if FREE solar panels rained down like manna from heaven for most of us the balance of system costs would make them uneconomical to connect. The notion that we could produce >50% of our electricity from a method that produces no power at night and little power all winter long (at last if you live in the north) is comical.
Steven
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 16, 2011
And speaking of Government-Entangled "Free Markets" (mandates, subsidies, etc.) check this out:

http://www.forbes.com/2011/03/16/chevy-volt-ayn-rand-opinions-patrick-michaels.html
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 16, 2011
Actually, Andrew, y'all paid for 65% of my array.

Outrageous? You bet.

That's my point. If Big Fat Arrogant government's going to take money out of my pocket to give it away to others, then I'm gonna be first in line with my tin cup to put it back in my other pocket.

Silly? No doubt. But as I explain in my web-book, just minutes away from my farm are two biomass boondoggles that will just make you sick given all the water they consume, the collateral pollution they create, and the taxpayer money they waste. And hey, it's even worse in states that mandate Renewable Portfolio Standards -- an unfunded mandate monopolistic utilities simply pass on to ratepayers. Ditto for inflated Feed-In-Tariffs. But see, Brown Power gets $72 billion in subsidies each year despite record profits. Insane? Of course.

There's a term for this: Politics. And it's funded by deeply entrenched Welfare Capitalism, with Solar Vendors vying to become Big Corporate Welfare Queens just like Big Oil, Big Nuclear, and Big Agribusiness. Meanwhile, even with super-subsidized Solar PV, total renewables at best will supply 14% of US electricity by 2035, and do nothing to de-addict us from foreign oil. That's why my book advocates de-subsidization of all economic sectors, and supplies ideas for growing a truly free market for Solar (no reason why it can't supply 50% or more of our power by 2035, if not sooner).

By the way, my array's paying me $910/year in reverse-meter payments alone. And I'm calculating about $100 in energy savings (consuming my array's power directly). So, pay-back is in 14 years or so (yes, subsidized), and thus pure gravy for the remaining 16 years of the array's warranted life. I don't know anyone who's erected a 10KW array for $35,000 or less. I've told my neighbors I'll only help them erect same if they pay $25,000 or less up front (and I'll use my connections to get them that price), since Solar needs downward price-pressure, not price-inflating subsidies.
Andrew W
Andrew W
March 16, 2011
@FreeMarketeer:

So, for $35,000 you can generate $1,300 a year ($.10 kWh) in electricity? In 27 years you will recoup the initial investment. (I don't make a distinction about the subsidies because your neighbors are paying them for you).

In a "free market" your solar-scheme wouldn't require your neighbors money - they have paid 60% of your installation costs. Maybe if PV costs can be reduced by 70% (SunShot scheme) solar energy will show some real promise. Until then you are just making your neighbors pay for your electricity. That doesn't seem very "fair."
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 16, 2011
I erected my Gillis Springs, Georgia, 10KW Solar PV array in October, 2010, for $35,000 up-front cost, $14,000 after Fed/GA tax credits (no rebate program of any kind in Georgia, which has NO solar power program). That's $3.5/watt, $1.4/watt subsidized. My record output thus far is 61.40 KWH in one day. I'm currently on target to generate 13,000 KWH a year (I'm being conservative, it's projected to make 14,000 KWH). My utility charges me $.12/KWH (but also nicks me $25/month in nuisance fees) and pays me $.07/KWH in reverse-meter credits ($70 last month). Thus, I've got a working operational/economic model, not a theoretical construct. As I describe here, https://sites.google.com/site/freemarketsolarpower/home, Solar PV necessarily involves economics and politics (my utility is a "brown power" operator and next month will decide whether to LOWER my reverse-meter rate, pursuant to Georgia law -- did I mention Georgia's a brown power state with NO solar program?). My web-book also cites the US Gov't's 2011 report projecting (due to the rise of cheap natural gas) LOWER electricity rates through 2020. I'm thus dealing with hard numbers and hard political/economic realities (in Georgia, it's such a big deal to erect an array that media coverage ensues -- which I also cite), and I invite fellow-travelers to contact me. Documentable data, I find, is worth a lot more to me than debates over randomly culled internet-snips.
Andrew W
Andrew W
March 16, 2011
"SunShot goal of a 75% reduction in the total cost of solar energy systems by the end of the decade."

Maybe, if this research is successful, solar-energy just might be affordable by 2020. We'll see.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 16, 2011
The SunShot Initiative Fellowships Program will select either recent Masters or Ph.D. graduates to focus on critical technology innovations that will advance the SunShot goal of a 75% reduction in the total cost of solar energy systems by the end of the decade. Those selected will aggressively drive innovations in the ways that solar systems are conceived, designed, manufactured, and installed. They will work at DOE's Solar Energy Technologies Program headquarters in Washington, DC, and will help develop new research and development programs to achieve the cost-cutting goal. See the DOE press release, the SunShot Initiative Fellowship Program website, and the SunShot Initiative website.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 16, 2011
DOE Fellowships to Support the Next Generation of Clean Energy Innovators

DOE announced on March 10 the launch of two new fellowship programs designed to attract the best and brightest scientific minds in the United States to work on advanced renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies. The programs—the Postdoctoral Fellowships Program and the SunShot Initiative Fellowships Program—will prepare scientists and engineers for careers in clean energy. These programs will increase U.S. economic competitiveness and support job growth by promoting science, technology, engineering, and math education.
Under the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Postdoctoral Fellowships Program, DOE is seeking up to 20 postdoctoral fellows whose academic careers have focused on the following technology areas: building efficiency, industrial efficiency, advanced vehicles, fuel cells, wind or water power, or biomass, geothermal, or solar energy. The new program will support research and development of breakthrough technologies over a two-year period. Selected fellows will be encouraged to pursue innovative, independent new projects in addition to the specific research project area selected by the fellow when applying to the program. Applications for EERE Postdoctoral Fellowships are due on June 30. Fellowships will begin by mid-November and will last up to two years. See the EERE Postdoctoral Fellowship Program website.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 16, 2011
BPA to seek 6-10% rate hike
The federal agency that generates much of Lane County's electricity tells utilities it faces lower revenue, higher costs

By Susan Palmer
The Register-Guard
Appeared in print: Tuesday, Nov. 16, 2010, page A1

The Bonneville Power Administration is not averse to a little prayer as it anticipates a near future of declining revenue and increasing costs.

In a presentation to local utilities on Monday, BPA administrator Stephen Wright invited folks to "pray for snow and economic recovery."

A couple of years of red ink — covered by hefty reserves — means that rate increases are coming from the federal agency that provides one-third of the electricity consumed in the Pacific Northwest. Those rate increases will hit Lane County utilities that get much of their power from the BPA. The impacts for residential, commercial and industrial rate payers depend on the individual utilities. The Eugene Water & Electric Board, for example, has a standing policy of passing on BPA rate increases to customers.

"Our hair's not on fire; we're not in crisis," Wright said on Monday. But with regional power consumption down due to the ongoing recession, BPA system maintenance and improvement costs up, and surplus energy sales revenue dropping, the agency plans to raise rates in 2011.

BPA will file its request with the federal government on Thursday and expects to ask for an increase of between 6 percent and 10 percent, Wright said. Underscoring the level of uncertainty, the agency also wants permission to impose a second rate increase in 2012 if the economy stays flat, rain doesn't fall or unexpected expenses crop up.

The BPA sells power generated from 31 federal dams and a nuclear power plant to utilities in the Northwest.

The increases just keep increasing.

Economies of scale are stifled by waiting. You also would lose savings by waiting while rates continue to climb.
ANONYMOUS
March 16, 2011
Luke,
Regarding your comments in comment #54: All you did was point out there were some regions where for some years increases were large, you didn't provide examples of any locations where increases were regularly 6% or more and even if you had this would not be a counter example to my claim--note carefully the words "almost nowhere". 6% increases year after year and not normal or reasonable. If you are unfortunately enough to live in one of the few exceptions where price increases for electricity are consistently well above the national average you should wonder what your region is doing wrong....

You also write: "you and others are still forgetting the environmental factor which is important to those of us that care about the survival of our species." In this you are quite mistaken. I am actually concerned that the ineffectual manner in which environmentalists and renewable energy activists often use (squander really) scarce resources may cause their efforts to prevent serious climate change to fail.

You write; "Renewable prices are going the other way (decreasing)."
This is true, and it should suggest to you the possibility that it is more cost effective to delay most PV installations until prices come down. If your goal is the "survival of our species" you should agree, for instance, that 2 PV installations ~10 years from now would be better for the environment than 1 installation now. Why pay to mass produce overpriced prototypes now? By contrast, wind power is either at or at least near to prices from other energy sources. Expenditures for R&D and for grid infrastructure should also be a much high priority than building residential PV now--at least if you are concerned about the environment.
Steven
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 16, 2011
Steven,

You stated, "Electricity prices almost nowhere increase at 6% a year" but I just proved to you they do. If the average increase for the past 11 years is 3.1-3.5% for all over the US, that's still an increase. Renewable prices are going the other way (decreasing). The areas that have higher rates of increase are a better environment for renewables, of course, but you and others are still forgetting the environmental factor which is important to those of us that care about the survival of our species.
ANONYMOUS
March 16, 2011
Luke:
Anecdotal data (as presented in comment #50) is no replacement for comprehensive compilations. The EIA lists average retail prices for electricity for 1998-2009 here:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat7p4.html
You could tabulate the year over year increases for the last 11 years if you want but if increases were perfectly uniform electricity prices would have increased by 3.5%/year. 3.5% is a bit above inflation but it is much lower than the 6% rate you quote. If instead we treat only residential users for this 11 year period we would get a typical increase of only 3.1%
Steven
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 16, 2011
Andrew W- your information must be dated as in California the price per kw installed is $5250-$6000 with average sunshine 5.5hr/day.X 365 days/yr X 25 years = 500187.5 KWH. $6000.00/50187.54 = $0.1195515/kwh with out incentives. Thats grid parity today. And more and more commercial systems are coming in under $5000.00/KW. $4000-4750/kw is very common. So you may have a hard on against solar but it is coming and you can watch the rest of the world pass us by or get on board. You can argue about ways to provide power when the sun is down or when it's cloudy, but based on the average available sunshine in the USA the cost per kwh is $0.12-0.18 before any incentives are used. Take into account the 30% tax credit and utility incentives and California is $0.08 - $0.13 per kwh over 25 year period.
Ucilia Wang
Ucilia Wang
March 15, 2011
@billtoe: you are right, the federal program I mentioned is an alternative to the 30% investment tax credit. You can take the credit even now if you want, but cash is so much more attractive. The cash program is set to end this year, but the tax credit is supposed to last through 2016. I don't think the industry will give up on the cash program when the economy improves.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 15, 2011
Syracuse, NY National Grid officials on Friday asked state regulators to grant the utility a 20 percent increase in electric delivery rates beginning in 2011 — an extra $390 million a year.

OLYMPIA, WA - State regulators allowed a rate increase Friday for natural-gas and electric customers of Puget Sound Energy.
The three-member Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission approved a 2.8 percent rate increase for electric customers and 0.8 percent increase for gas customers.
The new rates likely will take effect next week.

The utility had asked for a 7.4 percent boost in electric rates and a 2.2 percent boost in gas prices.

14% Seattle City Light rate increase gets council approval
November 12, 2009 Followup on last night's story – according to a City Council news release we just received, councilmembers approved the highest proposed Seattle City Light rate hike under consideration – nearly 14 percent over 2 years.


Granite Falls, Minn. —
Following a presentation by Tim Miller of Missouri River Energy Services, Granite Falls council members set a hearing for a proposed two-step increase in electrical rates for Monday, March 7, 2011 at 8:00 p.m.

The recommendations come in the wake of a two-step increases instituted after recommendations from a 2006 study that raised rates 6.5 percent in 2006 and 6.2 percent in 2007.

Need more proof? I could go on & on.
ANONYMOUS
March 15, 2011
Luke writes in comment #48:
"Here's what PGE charges NOW, as of March 1, 2011

Tier 1 (Baseline)4 $0.12233
Tier 2 (101-130% of baseline $0.13907
Tier 3 (131-200% of baseline) $0.29385
Tier 4 (201-300% of baseline) $0.40352
Tier 5 (Over 300% of baseline) $0.40352

Just think what it will cost in 5 years at about 6% rate increase per year. The Sun doesn't raise it's rate on you..."

CA rates are already well above the national average of ~10 cents/kWh. Electricity prices almost nowhere increase at 6% a year, but if CA proves an exception to this rule it would most likely be BECAUSE of a pell-mell rush to adopt renewable generation before it becomes affordable. PG&E claims that the average residential rate--after averaging usage at all tiers--is 22.6 cents/kWh now, which is well over double the national average. CA residents should be wondering why the state's energy policies are failing so badly and ask what needs to change to REDUCE these rates. Here is a hint for them: adding solar PV to the generator mix now won't get them better rates.
Steven
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 15, 2011
Here's what PGE charges NOW, as of March 1, 2011

Tier 1 (Baseline)4 $0.12233
Tier 2 (101-130% of baseline $0.13907
Tier 3 (131-200% of baseline) $0.29385
Tier 4 (201-300% of baseline) $0.40352
Tier 5 (Over 300% of baseline) $0.40352

Just think what it will cost in 5 years at about 6% rate increase per year. The Sun doesn't raise it's rate on you and it doesn't pollute to produce it's energy. You also have something of value on your property. You're also proving that you care about future generations.

You're afraid to call one of these providers aren't you Andrew? You know you'll be proven wrong. You better hurry, when other people find out what a great deal it is, there's going to be a waiting list.
Andrew W
Andrew W
March 15, 2011
Despite the colorful cheerleading by "solar providors" that solar is "affordable," check with the DOE - even by 2016 solar will still be very expensive $.25-$.40 per kWh.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/2016levelized_costs_aeo2010.pdf
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 15, 2011
If someone is interested in real numbers, contact a reputable solar company in your area (Real Goods Solar, Westinghouse Solar, REC, SolarCity, etc.) and have a solar representative explain options for your particular situation.

Have your electric utility bill for the past year ready. You can go online for that information if you don't save the bills or enter and save it in a spreadsheet.

This is a better approach than pulling numbers out of a hat and categorically stating that solar is "unaffordable".
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 15, 2011
Well you can't afford your own nuclear power plant and that is why you rent your electricity from the utility company so maybe instead of buying a solar system, you could lease one. The cost of solar energy is dropping but it won't drop to nothing as it costs money to run a business that markets, installs and services what it sells. I have lost site of what this site is all about RA RA. If you want solar power you will have to pay for it. If you want a FREE Market then move out of the USA as one does not exist for any energy source here. And if you are too rich to conserve and just want to waste, all our children will pay for your greediness. Just keep doing what you've been doing until the USA is a real third world country and we will see how you like that! Oh well the earth will out last us as we are the endangered species and just to egotistical think otherwise. Over and Out
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 15, 2011
RA RA RA

To the Egyptians, the sun represented light, warmth, and growth. This made the sun deity very important as the sun was seen as the ruler of all that he created. The sun disk was either seen as the body or eye of Ra (aka Re).

Ra was thought to travel on two solar boats called the Mandjet (the Boat of Millions of Years), or morning boat and the Mesektet, or evening boat. These boats took him on his journey through the sky and the underworld. When Ra traveled in his sun boat he was accompanied by various other deities including Sia (perception) and Hu (command) as well as Heka (magic power). Sometimes members of the Ennead helped him on his journey, including Set who overcame the serpent Apophis and Mehen who defended against the monsters of the underworld. Apophis, an enormous serpent tried to stop the sun boat's journey every night by consuming it or by stopping it in its tracks with a hypnotic stare. In the evening the Egyptians believed that Ra set as Atum or in the form of a ram. The Mesektet or Night boat would carry him through the underworld and back towards the east in preparation for his rebirth. These myths of Ra represent the sunrise as the rebirth of the sun by the sky goddess Nut, thus attributing the concept of rebirth and renewal to Ra and strengthening his role as a creator god.
James Desmond
James Desmond
March 15, 2011
I think Solar PV has great potential, in a free market. That's free as in unsubsidized, with no corporate welfare queens. I've written about it here: https://sites.google.com/site/freemarketsolarpower/home
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 14, 2011
I don't get it. You bitch that solar is $0.6276 per KW to install and then give no value to the fact that it will continue to produce energy for a guaranteed 25 years with little or no maintenance. That can't be said for any other energy source. You are paying upfront for 25 years of power. If you average 4 hours of sun per day (which is a very low number) 365 days per year X 25 years your cost is $6276kw/36500 hours of generation time = .1719/kwh for 25 years. Deployment time 3 weeks. Match that time line for any other source of energy!
Andrew W
Andrew W
March 14, 2011
This forum isn't intended to be a marketing venue for Solar-cheerleaders Luke. If you get business by exaggerating the efficiency of solar projects, fine. Most of us seek facts, not the repeated cheers of those selling solar schemes.
Thomas M
Thomas M
March 14, 2011
Sometimes it takes negative input to see how ridiculous, and uneducated some people can be to the point where others can finally see the benefits of what those type of people are bashing. As mentioned, if a person has enough money to pay outrageous energy bills, they could afford technology to eliminate those bills and put more money in their pockets. But unfortunately, their benefactors are smarter than they seem to be by keeping them in their wallets instead. When they die penniless and see their next generation suffer, then maybe they will see their arrogance.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 13, 2011
This benighted, obnoxious fellow Andrew_W doesn't sound like he's on Stephen Lacey's Xmas card list. He has nothing of value to add to the discussion, just negativity. He offers up the same old parroted pablum repeatedly. As if the dedicated, hard-working and intelligent people in the renewable industry are as slow as he is at learning. He doesn't have the right to yell "Fire" in a crowded theatre or "Fossil Fuels" on a renewable energy forum. He should be banned from this forum unless he can promise to add something positive or of value.
William Brown
William Brown
March 13, 2011
@Ucilia Due to its brevity, your paragraph about the Treasury Grant Program (TGP) seemed a tiny bit misleading (at least to me). On the other hand, it would probably take an entire article to explain why. Having said that:

As I understand it, the Renewable Energy Tax Credit subsidizes solar projects to the tune of 30%, and that program will not end until 12/31/2016. However, due to the recession, a limited number of financial institutions were able to finance projects by taking advantage of tax credits.

Therefore, the Treasury Grant Program (TGP), which provides a cash payment of up to 30% of equipment costs, in place of the Investment Tax Credit, opened up new (and often the only) sources of capital for project developers. The TGP is due to expire at the end of the year, but the good news is that, as the economy improves, the TGP becomes less critical to the continued expansion of the industry.

So, if the TGP is not renewed, we will not be losing the 30% subsidy, but rather will have to convert back to the Tax Credit. Note that I'm not an expert on this, and I have not received the memo that states where the economy will be at the end of the year.

ALSO.. wouldn't it be just amazing if there was a filter on all comment sections that would remove all entries from:
1) Trolls
2) FUD throwers

Anyone know how much a FUD thrower actually makes in a year?
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 13, 2011
If cost is your main concern, check these folks out. They have the best pricing on solar equipment anywhere.

http://www.sunelec.com/
jim douglas
jim douglas
March 13, 2011
Sounds like a step in the right direction. I hope it makes the cut!
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 13, 2011
Headquartered in Eugene, Oregon, Grape Solar provides one-stop shopping for solar projects by assembling residential, commercial and utility scale solar systems (including panels, inverters and racking systems) in the West and East Coast of the United States to provide just-in-time delivery of Grape Solar's signature "All-Positive-Tolerance" solar panels, effectively eliminating the prohibitive delays and transactions associated in the dynamic solar industry.


1 SolTech utilizes highest quality U.S. components to produce best-in-class PV modules. These modules feature 3 bus-bar mono-crystalline silicon cells with high-absorbency and enhanced low-light performance, produced by Suniva, Inc. (Norcross,GA); high-transparency, low-reflective tempered glass 25 percent thicker than industry standards for superior durability; and lightweight, heavy-duty anodized aluminum alloy frames. Cell efficiency is rated at 18 percent, producing overall module efficiency of 15+ percent.


Founded in 2006 by industry veterans, GlobalWatt has developed cutting edge solar products for specialty markets. Our advanced solar module manu-facturing plant located in Saginaw, MI will be home to a technologically advanced facility utilizing new products to develop a more efficient, longer lasting module and new age solar powered applications. We differentiate ourselves from traditional overseas manufacturing by focusing on local communities. By utilizing local partners and local suppliers we create local employment opportunities, new business markets, local community pride and local wealth.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 12, 2011
Recent evidence from Japan suggests that life expectancy is longer than expected. A company that reuses old panels reports that it has tested 330 panels made in 1984. 90% of these units can still generate 80% or more of their initial output. The industry expects that products made today will be even more durable than those made in the 1980s. The backing materials used to create the solar panels should be less susceptible to discolouration. So typical lives of thirty or more years can probably be assumed.

These findings are important because they will improve the financial assessments of solar installations and, as importantly, because they will encourage banks to lend more money against the security of the panels because they are expected to last longer. Put another way, if the bank was forced to seize solar panels because the debtor failed to make payments, these panels would have a longer expected future life and thus be worth more to alternative owners. This makes banks more comfortable and we can expect that they will eventually agree to lend more and require repayment more slowly.

In a coincident development, the UK Department for Energy and Climate Change has announced that its feed-in tariffs for solar PV will actually run for 25 years, not the 20 envisaged in its July 2009 consultation document. This will also substantially improve the attractiveness of investment in PV systems.
jim douglas
jim douglas
March 12, 2011
"Oh well, it doesn't affect me and my gas guzzling Hummer and my $700/month utility bill because I'm rich enough not to care. What's that you say? it will affect my children? Half of the world will be starving in 30 years? You have data to back that up?" Well, I didn't have any children because I wanted to waste my life enjoying myself because no one else matters but me."

You must be able to afford solar.
Andrew W
Andrew W
March 12, 2011
Too many cheerleaders here.

It doesn't matter if something makes economic sense, it matters if they can make a buck pretending it does.

That's solar.
ANONYMOUS
March 12, 2011
What solar system has ever lasted 40 years? That's bunk.
Dude Astronomy
Dude Astronomy
March 12, 2011
"The problem with solar and wind energy sources is that we don't need them, at least not now. Our lives are OK without them. So far they only account for less than 1% of the energy consumed in this country. They are driven by a demand based on climate change science, peak oil, and the lowering of dependence on foreign supplies and all of these seem to be political, debatable, and cloudy at best."

This is exactly the kind of lazy minded nonsense that is the reason there are so many environmentalists. "Oh well, it doesn't affect me and my gas guzzling Hummer and my $700/month utility bill because I'm rich enough not to care. What's that you say? it will affect my children? Half of the world will be starving in 30 years? You have data to back that up?" Well, I didn't have any children because I wanted to waste my life enjoying myself because no one else matters but me."
Dude Astronomy
Dude Astronomy
March 12, 2011
"@DudeDdude: You have to include the capacity factor of 20% which renders your example expensive beyond recapture. In it's current development Solar is far from "affordable."

What on earth are you talking about? Please think twice before rattling off vague terms like "capacity factor". I don't have a clue what that is, and I know how solar installations work, so perhaps you could enlighten us.

It's simple math. If a household is spending $250/mo on utilities, let's say $120 of it is electric. They are spending 12*$120 = $1440/yr on electricity. If they buy a $10,000 Solar/Wind system the government kicks in about $3000 on average. So the sum total they've spent is $7000.00 In the first year they make back that $120 per month = $1440. Then they make that back again next year (meanwhile the cost of electricity is going up). so, in 2 years they've recouped $2880.00. In five years its = $7200, and now they are saving money they would have spent on electric bills.
A lot of solar installers are now offering financing, which yes, may cost a little more in the long run, but the life expectancy of current solar and wind technologies is about 40 years. So let's say it takes you seven years to pay it off (at the same rate you've been paying for gridded electricity (no extra money out of pocket), then you get 33 years of free electricity for the price of 7 years. That's a pretty good deal.
jim douglas
jim douglas
March 12, 2011
OK, let's all put our laptops away, Luke-you go on a dive, Me- I'll go hiking and Andrew- who knows. Remember this is Capitalism (good and bad) and the people who make the money will dictate.
Jeff Anderson
Jeff Anderson
March 12, 2011
Some people believe that throwing lots money at something will somehow fix the problem. It may, but in most cases it seems to never come up with the best answer. Others believe that placing even higher taxes on fossil fuel in an attempt to make the renewable fuel sources more competitive. This will only cause runaway inflation that will destroy what is left of the economy. In this case natural market forces should come up with the best solution. Is solar more expensive than fossil fuels? Yes in most cases. If you install a PV system in Hawaii the pay back could be as short as 5 to 10 years. The reason for this is that Hawaii has some the highest electrical rates, and is blessed with a lot of sunny days. You take the same system and install it Wisconsin the pay back could be between 20 to 40 years. The reason for this is that we have less sunny days and our electrical rates are less than half that of Hawaii's. But there is one big unknown that can tip the scales either way that is inflation and fuel cost in the future. This is the deal maker or breaker. If you knew that gas would be $10 gallon two years from now. Would you go out and still buy vehicle that got only 19 MPG. The smart person would be looking at the 50 MPG car. The problem is we don't know what the fuel cost will be down the road. One sure bet is that fuel prices are going up, but how much?
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 12, 2011
So, again, what are you or others working on (or is it a secret)?

OK everybody, uninstall all those Terawatts of solar systems because Andrew_ W is working on a secret project and you're "not there yet".

Andrew you have no there there.
Andrew W
Andrew W
March 12, 2011
@Luke: Really, because you have no idea what others are working on you suggest it involves "mining, drilling and burning fossil fuels to pollute or hazardous materials with storage and safety problems."

That's childish.

We need to find a solution and many on this website have accurately defined it as "clean, affordable and scalable electricity."

Despite your childish remarks there are many people working on a solution and we already know it isn't solar. Maybe there will be some advances in the near future, but as of today solar remains over-priced and under-performing. But keep up your cheerleading - it helps some in your industry make money.
jim douglas
jim douglas
March 12, 2011
You are correct Luke. "Wind and solar are not the solution- not yet, at least." And the solution will have to be sustainable and that means technology will have to come up with something (if it can) that is passive and that does not create waste and does not create growth for growths sake. And your right. I have no answers, just questions.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 12, 2011
Re: Andrew_W March 11, 2011
@StevenLacey: I am supporting innovation that can lead to "clean, affordable and scalable electricity." That's the missing solution and we haven't found it yet. Wind and solar are not the solution - not yet, at least.

There are several groups exploring new ideas and I believe somebody will figure it out soon. The $1 billion prize would speed things up dramatically.

What a lame "answer". What's your solution? Are you and your panel of experts still workin' on it? Get back to us when you figure it out. Does it involve mining, drilling and burning fossil fuels to pollute or hazardous materials with storage and safety problems? Meanwhile, the Renewable Energy Problem Solvers will keep installing Gigawatts of Solution.
jim douglas
jim douglas
March 12, 2011
The problem with solar and wind energy sources is that we don't need them, at least not now. Our lives are OK without them. So far they only account for less than 1% of the energy consumed in this country. They are driven by a demand based on climate change science, peak oil, and the lowering of dependence on foreign supplies and all of these seem to be political, debatable, and cloudy at best. It's like putting the cart before the horse. A supply side industry based on government subsidies will only create more dept.
Dude Astronomy
Dude Astronomy
March 12, 2011
The correct calculation is $6,000,000,000 / 956 MW = $6,000,000,000 / 956,000,000 Watts = $ 0.62/ watt which compares with about 0.12/ watt for conventional electricity. What must be realized is that the 0.12/watt comes off the price of .62/watt in the first year, and every subsequent year. You were taking the amount spent on all renewable energy activities in one year. That included things like research and planning, that the customer doesn't pay for. When you add in the incentives it comes down even more. The point is, these things pay for themselves in about 5 years, and then you are saving money from then on.
Jeff Anderson
Jeff Anderson
March 12, 2011
Best way to increase the number of solar installation over the long term is not by government incentives. The best way for long term for growth is threw public awareness, and cost being driven down by large scale mass production. This was demonstrated by Henry Ford when he started mass producing the automobil. For the solar market to grow we need a strong economy so people have more disposible income to purchase a PV system. The big problem is that most people have a poor, or incorrect understanding of solar power systems (PV or thermal). Educating the public so they have correct realistic understanding of solar power.
As for installing a solar system on your home this is the year you should do it!! The reason is that their is an over stock of solar panels because of the slow economy. The federial government incentives are still inplace for this year. But for next year they will most likely be reduce or be gone.
Stop thinking about it, and make your choice.
Andrew W
Andrew W
March 11, 2011
@StevenLacey: I am supporting innovation that can lead to "clean, affordable and scalable electricity." That's the missing solution and we haven't found it yet. Wind and solar are not the solution - not yet, at least.

There are several groups exploring new ideas and I believe somebody will figure it out soon. The $1 billion prize would speed things up dramatically.
Michael Emrich
Michael Emrich
March 11, 2011
Andrew W- You can find lots of fault with government monies spent. Loan guarantee failures, 2 space probes blew up after launch costing 600 million, nuclear research in the 10's of billions, government limited liabilities for the nuclear power stations, Wall Street, etc.
However, the example you gave for the cost of building power plants for solar at $6,276.00/KW and falling rapidly, now under $5,0000.00/KW is only the upfront cost for the building of the power plants and roof top installations. The True cost with warrantied products producing 90% of their rated power for 10 years and 80% for 15 additional years leaves you with an average fixed cost of $0.164/kwh with an average of 5 sun hours per day. This is a fixed cost for 25 years + some maintenance so lets be generous and call maintenance of $0.036/kwh for a total of $0.20/kwh for 25 years. What other source of energy when you take the real cost including health,disposal, maintenance will come in that cheap for the next 25 years. Now factor in byproducts of no black lung, mining accidents, CO2 emissions and ability to provide more jobs for millions of people and whats not to like? You can debate whether the incentives should be tax credits or feed in tariffs to promote solar. If we used a feed in tariff the money lenders would lend money as the systems would be a guaranteed revenue stream and the government wouldn't have an impact on the treasury.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 11, 2011
http://ivanpahsolar.com/blog
Andrew W
Andrew W
March 11, 2011
Solyndra Solar is defaulting on "loan guarantees." Evergreen Solar is defaulting on "loan guarantees." There will be many more.

When our government has to guarantee 100% of a project's capital - there must be a problem with that deal. Those problems are showing up now. The Federal government will end up holding those loans. That makes them "grants," not loan guarantees.

Maybe someone can provide an example of one of the loan-guarantee development schemes doing well? Just one. Please.
ANONYMOUS
March 11, 2011
StephenLacey writes in comment #8: "And as I said in a much earlier post: to think that we won't need the same kinds of investment to scale some emerging technology is crazy. It takes decades to create true scale in energy"

There may well be a rational role for governments to play in spurring technological innovation beyond that of basic research. However, recent government incentives in the solar PV business have been of very questionable effectiveness. A few years ago, in the midst of supply constraints on silicon, the Europeans instituted oversized FITs that lead to a predictable sharp increase in production (and also kept prices higher than they otherwise would have been during the period of constrained supplies). Now FITs are being rolled back at a furious pace and there is a glut of supply on the market and the industry is taking a major hit. Boom and bust cycles are a poor way to move a technology forward. Much of the PV installed worldwide is now in cloudy environments and small residential installations--not a very efficient distribution of resources. In North America we see incentives for PV in places such as NJ and Ontario that are not obvious candidates for early adoption of this technology. More generally, we see large RPS requirements being passed in various US states but very little investing in grid infrastructure that will be necessary for efficient deployment of renewable generation. There might be greater support for government involvement in spurring adoption of new technology if it wasn't so ineffectual at the process....
Steven
Mike Maybury
Mike Maybury
March 11, 2011
It seems very important that government start to tax the dirty energy providers and all fossil fuels. As the tax increases year on year more fulds should be available for energy saving (insulation etc) and financing of new projects. The whole scale needs to increase year on year, which should enable costs to reduce.
Using renewable energy is no longer a 'choice' it is a necessity as fossil fuels run out and, in most cases, pollute the environment as well as creating transport costs.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 11, 2011
Andrew_W is an athletic supporter
ANONYMOUS
March 11, 2011
Andrew_W writes in comment #5: "DOE is not "investing" in renewables, they are underwriting development schemes for solar and wind. As much as $7 billion is being wasted on these development deals. DOE hasn't invested in any new innovation since the 70s."

It is obfuscation to say that billions are being wasted by DOE development deals. The DOE is not directly investing in the private sector, it is only providing loan guarantees. Arguably this isn't a good role for the DOE and if we were not still mired in a major meltdown in the financial sector this type of program would almost certainly not exist. The difference between a loan guarantee--wise or unwise--and a direct investment is not subtle and surely Andrew_W understands the difference but continues to conflate the two.

As for the claim that "DOE hasn't invested in any new innovation since the 70s" this is nonsense. The DOE funds lots of basic research of very high quality.
Steven
Stephen Lacey
Stephen Lacey
March 11, 2011
Andrew_W:
I can certainly appreciate your desire to put more funds toward R&D. However, I don't recall seeing any ideas from you about what kind of technologies you support.

You are constantly hammering away on things you don't support -- but I'm very curious to hear what it is you DO support.

And as I said in a much earlier post: to think that we won't need the same kinds of investment to scale some emerging technology is crazy. It takes decades to create true scale in energy. If you look at every single energy source (coal, oil, gas, nuclear, renewables), the path toward commercialization is equally long and expensive!

Anyway, I'd love to hear more about what you think could work.
Andrew W
Andrew W
March 11, 2011
@Luke: DOE invests $2 million for "innovation" and $7 billion for "development deals." That's 3,500 times the amount invested in innovation.

Amazing.
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 11, 2011
Obama Administration Announces Launch of i6 Green Challenge to Promote Clean Energy Innovation and Economic Growth

March 11, 2011

The U.S. Department of Energy joined with the U.S. Commerce Department's Economic Development Administration (EDA) and its Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship today to announce the opening of the $12 million i6 Green Challenge, which will also be conducted in partnership with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the National Science Foundation, and Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology and U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
The funding will support awards for six teams around the country with the most innovative ideas to drive technology commercialization and entrepreneurship in support of a green innovation economy, increased U.S. competitiveness and new jobs. The Department of Energy will invest up to $2 million to support the $12 million multi-agency i6 Green Challenge, which will establish or expand Proof of Concept Centers across the U.S. In order to be eligible for DOE funding, applicants will be required to demonstrate innovation in the areas of renewable energy, energy efficiency, or green building technology.
Andrew W
Andrew W
March 11, 2011
DOE is not "investing" in renewables, they are underwriting development schemes for solar and wind. As much as $7 billion is being wasted on these development deals. DOE hasn't invested in any new innovation since the 70s.

One wind deal DOE is providing a loan guarantee for is a $1 billion wind farm in Texas. The "development fees" are $247 million. The "developer" is a newly formed team of notable Democrats. This is what DOE is doing. They are NOT investing. They are giving money to their "friends."

Excellent report by Dave Michaels:

http://energyandenvironmentblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/12/the-political-connections-behi.html
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 11, 2011
PG&E Raises Rates for 2nd Time in 2010

Have you checked your electricity bill lately? Did you know PG&E raised your electricity rates on January 1, 2010 and again on March 4?

Since December 2009, what you pay PG&E for power has
increased by:
Tier 1 = now $.118 (up 3.0%)**
Tier 2 = now $.135 (up 3.0%)
Tier 3 = now $.286 (up 9.5%)
Tier 4 = now $.425 (up 11.6%)
Tier 5 = now $.497 (up 12.2%)

Simply put, electricity from PG&E is getting very expensive. If you install a solar system on your home or business today, you can take control of your cost for power. Solar system prices have decreased 49% over the last 18 months and incentives are at their highest level. With inflation on the horizon, the best time to go solar is now.

**Source: http://www.pge.com/tariffs/electric.shtml
Luke Divemaster
Luke Divemaster
March 11, 2011
We have a president that understands the value of investing in renewable energy for energy independence, job creation, climate change abatement and security. He will get my vote (again) in 2012.
Andrew W
Andrew W
March 11, 2011
$6,000,000,000 / 956 MW = $6,276,150.63 MW

This corresponds to electricity costs of $.29 - $.49 kWh

Solar schemes may have garnered huge incentives and some investment (mostly government), but it's NOT affordable. It is 5-10X current electricity production costs.
china eu
china eu
March 11, 2011
the market is very large worldwide. certainly, it should be the same in US. please find our solar products:
http://solar-lamp.chinaeu.de/
http://www.chinaeu.de/

Add Your Comments

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

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
Ucilia Wang

Ucilia Wang

Ucilia Wang is a California-based freelance journalist who writes about renewable energy. She previously was the associate editor at Greentech Media and a staff writer covering the semiconductor industry at Red Herring. In addition to Renewable...
  • About
  • Articles
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Editors' Picks

  • EU Debate Over Climate Change Policy Could Dampen Renewable Energy Growth
  • The Future of Solar in Latin America
  • Fighting Blackouts: Japan Residential PV and Energy Storage Market Flourishing
  • The Economic Case for Divesting from Fossil Fuels
  • Are Run-of-River Hydroelectric Systems Ready to Ride US Currents?
  • Moniz Unanimously Confirmed As New DOE Chief

Most Commented

  • 15
    Fracking and Solar: Friends, Foes or the Bridge to Clean Energy Adoption?
  • 12
    Breakdown: Penetration of Renewable Energy in Selected Markets
  • 8
    San Antonio Solar Fans Delay Introduction of SunCredit Program
  • 6
    Renewable Energy Research Initiative Launched in UK

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • Array Technologies
  • SolPowerPeople, Inc.
  • ASME - American Society of Mechanical Engineers
  • Solar Electric Power Association
  • Kipp & Zonen
  • Intersolar
  • Talesun Solar USA, Ltd.
  • EcoFasten Solar
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