Do you think solar power has an undeservedly bad rap?

Question

We see a lot of comments around here about how solar power is too inefficient and expensive, and nuclear power is the only solution to our energy issues.

However, there's already one Silicon Valley start-up producing thin-film solar panels at a cheaper cost per watt than coal power is produced nationally.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/18/technology/18solar.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin

And a new report from the Prometheus Institute concludes that prices for traditional silicon-based panels should fall from $3.66 per watt (2007 figures) to $2.14 per watt in 2010, and more impressively, thin-film PV should go to $1.81 per watt from $2.96. When coal, currently the least expensive source of power, is around $2.10 per watt to generate, the expected drop in price for solar will make it far more competetive.

http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/1704/83/

Do you think solar power is being given a bad rap, and if so, do you think it's a fair reputation?

Answer 1

Yeah!  It's claimed to be too expensive to mass produce!

Answer 2

Right now its a fair assessment, Solar is more inefficient. That does not mean it has to remain so, the first CD players were very expensive, how about the first computers?  With Oil and especially coal being so abundant, for economic reasons solar energy was not feasible. Today the demand for energy is greater with other nations developing.



I  believe we have the ability and the talent to make solar power a real player in the quest for clean energy .  Right now if some community could get the ball rolling you may see the bad rap on solar go away as other communites follow suit.

Answer 3

That's wonderful news!  I hope I can deprive the government of one more source of taxation (the 28% they confiscate from my energy consumption).  Will I have to hide my solar panels from them so I don't incur their impending "Sun Tax"?

Answer 4

I think we are beginning to see the light at the end of the tunnel as far as coal is concerned.

Answer 5

The price may not be right now, but this is THE NUMBER ONE source of energy that we need to seek to exploit.  There is nothing "greener" than getting energy from the sun, so solar should be our highest priority in alternative energy research.  We need to get efficiency numbers up, and we aren't going to do that by whining about inefficiency.  We should be applauding the fact that thin-film is bringing down the price, and encouraging our leaders to invest in continuing the trend.

Answer 6

It's not perfect, it's not the cheapest or most efficient, but there is plenty of future with it (especially when combined with other forms of green energy). So, yes.

Answer 7

Why is it an either/or?      What's stopping us from using both?

Answer 8

Can solar energy generate the amount of electricity we need today for our homes, factories, stories, offices, and everything else?  No.  Can it generate the electricity we will need in the future?  No.  You will need a source that can produce larger amounts of electricity and that is nuclear power if you don't want to use coal, oil, or gas.

Answer 9

I think people usually can not see the large inital investment worth the "green advantage."  If our country subsidized energy sources like this as oil is being subsidized in nations such as India and China we would be in much better shape.  I agree with the others, advancements in technology should make pricing and integration into the modern home much easier.

Answer 10

bad rap, unfair.

Answer 11

It is expensive now so a lot will need to be done to convince most that it's not going to be so much.

I read a psychological report that stated that humans generally stick with what they first hear but hopefully, time and experience will change theit minds when new technology develops.

Answer 12

The Prometheus Institute?  Not the Department of Energy, or the Solar Power Administration, or the Bureau of Earth Wind and Fire?  How is it possible that a Non-government, free market solution is the answer?  Don't we learn at Berkely that it takes a socialistic, statist, bureaucratic, bloated, inefficient, tax-wasting, Congressionally-approved federal agency to save us and solve our every problem?

Answer 13

There is a new green concept that I think even the conservatives and AGW deniers can get behind if they love their country... it is called ECONOMIC RE-LOCALIZATION.

It advocates the transition back to community based services, food, energy generation, water, construction and natural resource utilization. It allows the diversity and uniqueness that has been lost by corporatization to be restored. It is a great way to create green collar jobs of every type in any community around the world.

The multinational corporations and the Wall Street elite hate this concept because it returns power to the people in more ways than lighting and heating their homes. It is a way to divide and conquer the consolidation of political and economic power that they have been working to consolidate for so long now for the benefit of a tiny minority at the expense of everyone else while they rape the planet.

SOLAR is best used as a decentralized type of local energy generation, on every roof not huge centralized systems that continue to consolidate wealth and power and turn us all into tax and wage slaves!.  As well as WIND, GEOTHERMAL and HYDRO. Why do you think investment hates the alternatives?

You've been duped if you think nuclear is the solution, because you will still have to buy power from a centralized for profit supplier. And sorry, THE WASTE PROBLEM has not been solved and probably never will be.

I have 500 watts (ten 50 watt panels) of solar on my home, it is more than enough power for all my modern technology and a shop too. I choose to still be conected to the grid, because I don't like the hazzards of batteries. Right now I have a credit of $500.00 on my electricity bill. I did the install myself, and with the cost of the inverter system it came in under $9,000.00. I have calculated that based on the cost of energy from centralized sources in my area, this decentralized system paid for it's self in 4 years 2 months and is now generating a monthly profit of $45.00 for me and my family, not some Wall Street Hedge Fund Manager!!!

DO YOU SEE THE LIGHT YET ???

Wake up people, smell the green alternatives growing all around you and get with the program. Take control of your life and help promote economic re-localization! It is how we can wage peace and prosperity for all of mankind and save the planet at the same time.

Ft. Collins Colorado just made it possible for people to have their own chickens in town. Some communities are buying foreclosed homes and re-zoning for small businesses to come in and offer goods and services within walking distance of the neighborhoods that were once suburban islands, Walmart and the big box stores are very concerned... this is the beginning of economic re-localization!

When we take back our water, energy and transpration sytems, make them public and not for  profit we begin to restore the COMMONS that this country was founded on. PRIVATIZATION IS THE PATH TO SLAVERY !!!

WE BEGIN TO RECREATE COMMUNITY as we travel down the path of economic re-localization.  And recreate places we want to live in and interact with others in a positive way, political polerization is seen as the cruel joke the corporations have been playing on for years with wedge issues about what we do in our bedrooms! Let's dismantle the current competetive live or die don't touch me world that has been given to us by the corporate world for their greedy benefit at the expense of our quality of life, liberty, freedom and pursuit of happiness!

Answer 14

Yes!  In my case, I am a late comer to this debate because my knowledge on solar power (as in electric cars) was so out of date.  

I most humbly thank everyone that kept pounding away at the issue till I got curious and started looking up facts.

I believe we are on the verge of economically being able to plate out roofs with solar cells to partially solve our energy consumption

Answer 15

My husband works on the commercial wind turbines.  We get to see charts and graphs about how all the different energy sources stack up against each other.  

Commercial solar power is CURRENTLY seven times more expensive than commercial wind power.

The only way to change that however is to invest in it, and explore advancments in solar technology.  I believe solar has a great deal of potential.  That potential NEEDS to be explored.

However I'm not for just one source of alternative energy.  We need alternative energy from multiple sources, like wind, solar, tidal, ect.   I think we are on the verge of seeing some really great advancments in solar power which will make it MUCH more cost effective.

The solar chargers for our electric fences (miles of fence) on our farm work great!  

~Garnet

Permaculture farming/homesteading over 20 years

Answer 16

Yes and no.

Inefficiency really has no bearing, unless one has unrealistic expectations on how much power you can convert on your garage roof.  It all comes down to $/watt.

When I moved here to Phoenix 15 years ago, I has all sorts of idyllic goals, hoping to be able to use our weather to become energy independent.  When I priced out the systems, they cost more than my home!  So I've waited and watched.

I'm not sure where Prometheus gets their numbers, it's rare to find any panels under $5.00 per watt, and when you do, they are 2nds or used.  Even so, lets use our fair city as an example of why solar currently has a bad wrap.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2...

Now the council spent $850,000 for thin film solar to produce $12,750's worth of electricity per year, ROI of 1.5%.  When you factor in depreciation (40 years) the ROI is -1.2%

The system would be right around 95kw, with an installed price of about $8.95 per watt.  That is all well and good, but from a finanial point of view, nearly criminal.  $850,000 invested at 5% would yield the city $42,500.  The city has the option of purchasing APS's renewable energy at 15 cents per kwh, total cost $22,500.  Net income to the city of $20,000 a ROI 2.3 in perpetuity.

I did not get upset with their decision because the companies manufacturing the product need patrons to support their business while the market matures.

Now on to the more positive aspects.  Nano's 1 meg line is already obsolete, the 25 Mw production facilities will be on line this year, and the 100 Mw in the not too distant future.  XSunX claims to have turn key 25Mw amorphous silicon thin film line, with 100 Mw in the works.  Their facility will be in you back yard, in OR, trading at 42 cents, might be worth a look for a few thousand shares.  They are targeting $1.5 per watt, we'll see.

When supply of the products is great enough to be put into packages and retailed out of Home Depot, we'll see a great change in how PV is percieved,and that will happen over the next couple of years.  As of today , it's still not viable.

Answer 17

I think some of the flow resource technology is coming along (solar, wind, wave).  In Oklahoma, we already have wind farms and the pioneers used wind to power their well pumps.  As the cost of fossil fuels rise, these other resources look more and more attractive.  They may not totally replace fossil fuels, but if it cuts down our dependency, energy costs, and pollution problems, what's the problem -other than special interest trying to keep a large portion of the money spent on energy with the traditional players.  Not very free market of them to try to squelch innovative ideas!