From Guest Blogger Emma Sturgis: Is Solar Power Actually Affordable? (Spoiler: Absolutely)
Over the last decade, between its installation boom, advancements in technology and the growing understanding of its eco-friendly characteristics, the cost of solar energy has dropped a significantly. Currently, there is enough solar energy capacity in the U.S. to provide energy to millions of homes. In 2014, solar energy was responsible for a large percent of total new power generation. That meant solar energy, though still trailing behind natural gas, exceeded wind and coal energy.
Industry experts believe this explosive growth will continue. The United States’ extension of the investment tax credit is a good sign. It further enhances the attraction of solar systems for both commercial and residential installations. Alongside the expansion of solar manufacturing capacity, the price of the equipment has also plummeted. In a lot of markets, solar energy is actually more affordable than grid-supplied power.
Educating the Public
Many organizations, from panel installers to environmental advocacy groups, are intent on helping consumers get a better grasp of the industry. This will only improve solar energy’s attractiveness. Right now, the industry is evolving so quickly, a lack of having needed information is hurting both solar companies and consumers. This deficiency has either left consumers with packages they couldn’t afford or kept them away altogether. In fact, aggressive marketing and practices that lacked transparency has created consumer skepticism. Education would include understanding that solar solutions are not expensive, especially when one factors in long-term savings and knowing how to select the right companies and packages.
Building Trust
Better comprehension of shopper options is critical. Marketers can throw overwhelming and intimidating information at uninformed homeowners. They’ll push packages of their choosing and often will not be transparent. Consumers looking for affordable packages have to shop for solar systems. With objective information, quotes and financing options from varied sources—as opposed to marketers pushing their agenda—consumers will connect with the best solar companies, potentially saving thousands and growing the industry’s reputation.
Affordability
Part of what has helped make solar power more affordable, is the increase in financing options. The industry has proven itself to be a low-risk and safe investment with high return. This has prompted lenders to create appealing homeowner loans. This has cut into solar leasing, but solar ownership is an option many shoppers prefer. With that, solar companies have had to be more competitive to attract consumers.
Research and Improvement
The technology is also seeing significant efficiency gains, creating greater energy resources for smaller surface areas. There are currently solar panels that produce a 22 percent greater efficiency. Laboratories have developed solar cells that can push that efficiency up to 40 percent, though this technology isn’t publicly available yet.
Solar systems are known to start saving money from the very first day. The first half of 2015 saw consumers spending an average $3.79 per watt in gross costs and seeing a payback in a little over seven years. In 2015, homes using a 7.9 kilowatt solar system were saving in the vicinity of $2,000 in costs each year. Factor in the lifespan of equipment can be up to three decades and the answer to solar power being affordable is absolutely a resounding “Yes”.
The article completely failed to mention the problems resulting from the intermittent nature of solar power. Although many people are installing PV panels, very few have disconnected themselves from the grid. That alone should be sufficient to show the limitations of solar power.
It may well be that power storage systems will become more practical and more economical. Even so, when deployed with sufficient capacity to solve the intermittency problems of solar power, solar power will not seem so economical as it currently seems to those who have PV panels on their roofs.
Frank: The solar industry with its 6.5 million employees and its exponential growth curve is already pretty much aware of the fact that the sun doesn’t shine at night. You seem to make this point every week or so. I’m not sure that’s required.
The point seems to be constantly overlooked.
By whom? There are 23 GW of solar PV installed in the US alone. The people who generate, sell and consume this don’t know that the sun doesn’t shine at night? That seems a bit sketchy to me.
http://www.seia.org/research-resources/solar-industry-data
I believe this is my first reply to your comments over the many years, but I felt I really had to jump in here. 🙂
Nevertheless, it is a problem which is widely ignored.
We often see figures about how solar and wind power are rapidly growing but rarely is it explained where the power will come from when the sun is not shining and we have eliminated all nuclear and fossil fueled systems. When energy storage systems are mentioned, which is not often, it is assumed that either those using currently available technology can be adequately scaled up or that new storage technologies will become available to make intermittent sources of power adequate.
What you’re saying would be correct if we had huge penetration of solar and wind into the grid-mix. Right now we’re at ~5% wind and far under 1% solar. Storage is not a gating factor in moving that forward, and will remain true for a long time to come.
Craig,
It certainly is true that the intermittent nature of solar power is not important as long as penetration remains low. It may even be that penetration could be as high as 30% before intermittency becomes a serious problem. But to reduce CO2 emissions to an acceptable level would require getting about 90% of our power from non-CO2 emitting sources, including power for transportation and other uses. And, since there is no guarantee that storage technology will ever advance enough to make that possible, we should be working on technologies which can deliver adequate power without emitting CO2. Hydro and geothermal power can do that, but it is doubtful that they could deliver adequate power.
We know that nuclear power can do the job; about that there is no question. Unfortunately, our current nuclear technology has disadvantages which would be magnified if expanded to deliver most of the required power. So, even though it probably should be expanded anyway, but hopefully temporarily, we should be putting much more effort into developing better nuclear technologies which are less expensive, safer, and use the nuclear fuel more efficiently so that we will have only a fraction as much waste. An effort on the scale of the Manhattan Project could be justified.
Because many people still see storage as a non-issue, it is important for them to learn that it is very much an issue and, since it is unclear that adequate storage will ever become available even if we keep working on it, which we should do, a plan B is essential. And, the plan B has to be nuclear.
Storage would be helpful even if we got 100% of our power from nuclear reactors. Load following reduces the efficiency of both nuclear and fossil fueled power system and storage could level the load. So, if economical storage becomes available, which would require more R & D, it would be useful regardless of the power sources.
Good stuff. Thanks.