Ryan's Comments

Ben,

I agree the adoption of solar electricity panels will not be the only solution to the GHG problem, but every bit helps...

Related to the solar cost thread -
I believe solar will be cost effective in less than 10 years in many locations throughout the U.S. - particularly CA. Using the Author's financial example for a 3 kW system at over $8 / Watt is far from cost effective. Commercial rooftop systems are 15-30% less costly.

Approx historical PV module prices:
1980 $~20 / watt
2008 $~4 / watt

In addition, companies such as REC Solar (Norway) predict silicon cell prices to drop approx 50% by 2012. Considering solar panels currently make up ~50-60% of total cost, that will reduce the kWh price of non-subsidized grid-connected PV systems to $0.10-$0.15 for over two decades; even with an inverter replacement around yr 15. And all along natural gas energy production will continue to rise in costs...

I agree with many of the writers that solar doesn't make financial sense in all locations. In fact, most applications don't make strict financial sense....
Neither does a luxury car, over-priced dinner, or vacation,. However, people buy it anyway and many of the same nay-sayers regarding solar waste money all over the place and don't even think twice about it. We all have a choice.

Solar didn't make strict financial sense to put it on my home, but I made the choice to "be the change" our world desperately needs and I proudly produce my electricity from the sun.

Branding solar right now should not be based on financial merits, but should stimulate those people out there that believe it is the right thing to do for our future. In order for RE to become mainstream and the global dependence on fossil fuels reduced, we need to stop trying to convince those that choose to continue with fossil fuels, but start being part of the change and the technology will become more cost effective as well.

Imagine the difference we can make if we stop arguing about the financial costs of solar and those that believe it is right for our world and the future, just do it!

Sign me up! I agree the industry needs to work together and create a brand. Imagine the difference we all could make if we worked together. What do you suggest for a campaign slogan?

I do believe that large centralized solar installations are necessary to achieve the amount of clean energy production our country needs. However, The Author, "Stop Killing the Wilderness" has a point that it appears the Solar and Clean Energy Act is heavily focused on large centralized installations instead of utilitzing the massive amount of existing rooftops and parking lots that are already near electrical service and do not disturbe new land. In addition, strong support for commercial rooftop systems will spread the financial gain across more investors and business owners instead of a few powerful groups.

How much per kWh will the feed-in tariff (AB 1807) provide for commercial decentralized solar systems like the projects installed on Costco's?

Imagine the benefit for our electricity grid if shopping centers (without significant trees) throughout California had covered parking with solar panels offsetting electricity usage. It would be a shame if legislation lost sight of that huge opportunity for producing energy with space that currently only holds parked cars.

It is beyond disappointing to continually see billions handed out for energy technologies that do not advance our society with regard to independence, stability, or environmental improvement.

Solar electricity, solar thermal, energy efficiency, and strict fuel standards should be front and center to our energy landscape, but our government continues to do nothing...  I am embarassed for the millions of Americans that don't realize what is really going on!!!

 

Excellent move! REC Solar Norway continues to focus on reducing the cost of solar electricity while maintaining quality.

Our government has given billions and billions in "hand outs" to the nuclear, coal, and oil industry.... 

Complaints about a few hundred million dollars for solar that will create jobs, spur innovation, and provide more clean energy seems like an absolute no-brainer by my book.  The sun powers our entire world.... Let's work together and figure it out.  I like this quote by Thomas Edison: 

"I'd put my money on the sun and solar energy. What a source of power! I hope we don't have to wait till oil and coal run out before we tackle that."   ---Thomas Edison, 1931

 

Your home does consume a fair amt. of power.  You would need approx 1,000 sq ft of panels to offset virtually all of your electrical bill.  I agree that some homes aren't feasible to install solar due to trees, roof configurations, and other challenges.  

Currently in CA, the additional charge to fund solar legislation is a fraction of 1%.  On your bill their is a public purpose charge that is approx 1%.  That charge covers much more than just solar: recycling programs for old equipment, conservation education classes for the public, energy efficiency rebates.  In my opinion, that 1% is the best return on investment a bill payer could spend to help deter from massive energy price increases in the future for all. 

If you want to complain, what about the charge paid for nuclear decommissioning?  How about the health costs of murcury poising in our oceans caused by the burning of coal? 

Well put Carolyn.  At this time Citizenre is not a reality and it is unfortunate so many people believe the hype.  However, there are many real companies working hard to make solar affordable. 

Long term financing through Power Purchase Agreements is available for commercial applications, but residential PPAs are still developing. 

Join together, write congress, and let's direct our country onto the right path!

 

$500 Billion?  Yeah right....  Try over a trillion.  There are hundreds of billions not publicly accounted for hidden in deferred maintenance.  Basically, we have run our equipment into the ground.  Just wait for the inevitable equipment bills coming down the pipe...  It really makes me sick!!!!!! 

Hundreds of billions that could have been spent directing our country and the entire world to a cleaner future....  Well...   let's not give up! We need to pull together and demand that renewable energy and increased efficiency is essential to moving our country forward.

With all due respect Mr. Berry, I believe you need to get your facts straight.  First off, comparing a depreciating asset such as a car to a solar electricity system, which generates electricity and will appreciate in value as utility prices increase is not a valid argument.  Secondly, if you were to reference the price per kWhr of solar electricity on solar buzz today you will notice the price quoted is $0.21 kWhr.   http://www.solarbuzz.com/SolarPrices.htmAlso according to Solar Buzz "Over the last 20 years the cost of Solar Energy Systems has come down seven fold."...  What do you mean "this is not progress?"...  In my opinion installing megawatts of clean power will reduce grid loads during daily peak hours, boost solar panel manufacturing volumes, which will further reduce the cost of solar.  The more government provides short term incentives to increase volume, the faster solar will compete with conventional electricity prices.  In my opinion.  That's progress.....

 

Mike,

You are right that a simple timer that prevents the vehicle from charging before a certain time will solve the peak power surge when residents return from work.

I am curious what a "reasonable" return on investment is for you?

In my biased opinion, several U.S. states provide PV subsidies that make the ROI very reasonable (Payback of 10 years or less). I am biased because I work for a solar company (REC Solar), but even with my work affiliation aside, PV makes sense financially and environmentally. That's why it's on my home...

I agree that mounting a system flat is not the smartest way to install solar electricity from a production standpoint. In fact, you will produce approx 6 percent less with a system flat instead of a 10 degree tilt. Carports and Shade structures should be engineered with a tilt.

However, I would argue that BIPV is aesthetically pleasing, serves dual purposes (shade and electrical generation), and in some instances reduces material use of other building products.

I would say that not using BIPV on open parking lots, building facades (awnings), and large roof structures is a waste of space and not smart.

I applaud Mayer Brian Brennan and the residents of Ventura for supporting this project.

Solar electricity is the only form of energy that is a physical process. There are no moving parts (unless a small fan inside inverter). This equates to longer life and low maintenance costs.

CSP technology is mechanical and the entire process is much more complex. This will surely lead to additional maintenance costs.

Ten years from now we will have a much clearer idea of the true costs per kWhr comparing the different technologies. Peak power generation will continue to become more valuable as natural gas prices increase further.