(Page 2 of 2)
It's unlikely that a climate bill that puts a price on carbon dioxide will pass this year, but other legislation could further help the industry. A jobs bill, for example, might include incentives that were originally included in a climate and energy bill passed in the House last year. These incentives could include a renewable energy standard, which would require utilities across the country to use renewable energy. Just as important could be a national standard for connecting solar installations to the grid. Right now some states don't have laws that allow people to connect rooftop solar panels to the grid and receive credit for the power they generate, and the laws that do exist vary from state to state. A uniform standard could speed sales and installations.
Some experts, however, expect that a large number of the solar projects planned for the next several years will fall through--perhaps as many as 75 percent--because of the relative "immaturity" of the industry. Few large projects have been built so far, and so there will likely be large cost overruns.
For many solar companies, regulations, land-permit requirements, and the need for transmission lines have slowed down projects. In some cases, smaller solar projects located close to substations have a better chance than large solar farms that require special new transmission lines, even though the latter could, in theory, be more economical. One thing that could help with this would be designated areas that are preapproved for solar farms, and equipped with transmission lines that would serve a cluster of such farms. "But that would require a degree of strategic thinking that's currently absent," says Jim Barry, the chief executive of the Dublin, Ireland-based NRT, a company that's currently developing large solar projects in the United States.
Even with these problems, according to some estimates, the U.S. could account for 25 percent of the world's solar market by 2013, up from about 8 percent today. But the fraction of this solar that will be supplied by U.S. companies is less certain. Arun Majumdar, the director of the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy, said in testimony before the House Science and Technology Committee last month that over the last 15 years, the U.S. went from supplying 45 percent of the world's solar panels to less than 10 percent. But the growing U.S. market has started to attract solar manufacturing. Suntech Power, for example, which currently makes all of its solar panels in China, is building a solar factory in Phoenix this year. "We're the first Chinese company to export jobs to the U.S.," Efird says.
A new lab is inventing innovative ways to package and install solar cells, with the aim of making solar energy far more affordable.
Researchers have demonstrated a new mechanism for converting both sunlight and heat into electricity.
A startup's polymer sticker increases power output by 10 percent, and can be applied to panels that are already installed.
I agree that most public funds and other policy levers (e.g., the tax system, feed-in tariffs) should be directed at fostering solar R&D, rather than funding technologies that are currently not cost-competitive. The counter argument of course is that using public spending or charging electricity consumers extra to drive the solar market, will: a) generate economies of scale; and b) attract new private funds into the solar industry, leading to more R&D. But, as an investment strategy, this seems to lack direction. As with most economic problems, there is no reliable way to know the optimal solution in advance. Given that government and consumers are pretty tapped out these days, I hope that most measures to promote solar will be aimed as directly as possible at promoting R&D, particularly the “D” part, i.e., applications development and demonstration projects, etc. These are the most costly components of R&D. (p.s. Getting off fossil fuels is not just an economic problem; it is involves national security and environmental protection. Nevertheless, allocation of scarce government and consumer dollars to generate rapid development of a cost-competitive solar industry, while minimizing negative economic consequences is, in my opinion, an economic problem.)
Re: Incentives and Solar Research
article right here I believe said that solar industry says essentially that they are ready to go.
you seem to be 'behind the curve' in that you don't appear to know what is going on.
There are massive companies producing gigawatts of capacity, like First Solar. These are non-crystalline panels, and are decreasing in costs in the double digits yearly. Dow is even making roofing tiles / solar panels combos.
small satellite dish type CTM modules produce solar thermal with no added water use except to wash dust off the mirrors occasionally.
They don't need R&D, they just need people to install them. they need (in a few states) laws to allow interconnect & sale of power, quick pre-zoning for solar farms as mentioned, and in addition, laws to allow / encourage town sized solar farms, which will beef up the reliability of the grid a great deal and avoid transmission losses for local use.
Re: Incentives and Solar Research
Your ideas on what the solar industry needs make sense to me, except for the one that the industry doesn't need more R&D. Maybe I am a bit behind the curve but I still think that solar technology could benefit from ongoing R&D. The article mentions that a 5KW installation will require a subsidy of $12,000, although the subsidies are expected to fall further. Sounds like there is still a cost disadvantage here. Perhaps if the hidden subsidies received by conventional energy (e.g. GHGs, pollution) were removed, solar would not have to be subsidized. Will people support this? Anyway, at less than 1% of total electricity supply, the solar/PV energy industry is in its infancy and will require a significant amount of further R&D, a lot of which will need public funding.
Re: Incentives and Solar Research
why would a cost differential necessarily indicate R&D needed?
Instead of throwing money at companies (gov'ts are not particularly good at picking winners, and much is politically motivated) something like the carbon tax, which would compensate for the bad effects of the cr*p in the form of particulates, sulfur, co2 that regular plants spew out would help even the playing field.
And when utilities install solar in hot areas near peak load sites, they've got reductions in cost of transmission and keying to peak use time.
The govt simply cannot foot the bill for all the development of all solar technologies, so they rely on a trickle down effect.
The govt makes incentives for investment to current technologies. People buy in, creating/growing a market, which then encourages private investment(much more money than the govt could, nor should, provide) in the solar technology companies which then are able to continue development. Seriously, tell me you did not read this article and think "I should look into investing in solar"
Like any technology, the early adopters kinda get the shaft in hindsight, but their investment in the early tech allows it to advance.
They key sentence I spotted was the one that states the costs will go down low enough for the Middle Class to acquire the service. If you look at the price point - $15 to $20K, and then realize these things have a pretty decent lifespan of a couple decades, it make sense for anyone who can afford them to buy and install them. This is less costly than most tradtional ICE automobiles.
Since we're heading to electric vehicles anyway, why not get your power plant online sooner than later.
Re: Middle Class Affordability
While that may be affordable, I'd like to know exactly how much I can expect to save and at what rate I might sell power back to the grid. It's my understanding that regulations prevent me from selling at the same rate at which I buy power. That needs to change to make that kind of investment in my property attractive.
As the article states, while cost to the consumer appears lower, it is in fact subsidized heavily, which means the consumer is paying a tax elsewhere to fund the subsidy.
Re: Middle Class Affordability
This exactly the kind of false economics that govt subsidies cause.
$20,000 for a 5KW solar IS NOT economic unless you steal money from taxpayers to pay for much of it and pretend that money has no cost.
Do the math. Here in VA, a 6KW system actually only generates about 10MW-hr of energy per year.
This may sound like a lot, but it's only $800 retail and $130 wholesale (nuclear) based on Virginia Dominion Power rates.
Solar PV systems only last 25-30 years, and their inverters, which cost $2500/5kw, last only 5-10 years. And forget it if you want power 24/7 and need batteries -- a 5kw-hr (usable) battery costs $1000 and lasts maybe 5 years, and you will need several.
America would be better off building nuclear power plants.
Re: Middle Class Affordability
Amen,
Just because you don't pay for it directly doesn't mean the cost isn't there. Another problem is the sheer inefficiency of how the government distributes it's cash.
I don't think I be incorrect if I said that $1 from the government represents $2 dollars from the tax payer. Why not let the tax payer fund it directly? (That is called investment.) You'd get twice the bang for the buck.
Government funded research also bothers me. I'd bet the money goes to people who are best at writing grants, not to researches who are best at research.
Brian
http://tooele-homes.com
Space Solar Power Input To The Grid
Just imagine how the output of solar power could be boosted by a giant input of space solar power via concentrated microwaves, as described in the book I read called Sunstroke, written by US aerospace engineer David Kagan. Thousands of megawatts could be pumped into the energy grid by giant solar power satellites in geosynch orbit that harness the energy of the Sun by converting it into high-intensity microwaves and beaming them to ground-level to supply us with unlimited electricity. Although you might have to worry about severe bioeffects from the intense concentrated microwave beams, like frying passengers aboard aircraft that inadvertently fly into the invisible beam (think microwave oven), or maybe roasting families living in rural areas surrounding the receiving antenna for these hot microwaves. But it could be better than fossil-fuel burning. You never know.
I am confused person due too the actions of the government and what is going on with all the spending and investing in green energy , but yet why is Obama approving for a nuclear power plant to be built???????
Shupes
www.shupes.net
I am all for solar power. Opportunity for all around. The article showed a picture of mirrors concentrating sun rays on a tower to generate electricity. Now will cleaning the mirrors be a work opportunity for the unemployed or how are these cleaned?
if they were so smart??? then why can't they aline giant mirrors??? like on my laser engraver,, & bounce sunlight, 2 middle of a desert, & solve the problem,, with all the transmission loss,,, which would increase productivity,,almost 1/2....
why we need clean energy in america
this debate about climate changing and global warming is getting us nowhere. what matters is 1) energy independence 2) creating jobs in america and 3) growing energy demand. There are 6 billion people in the world today, and there will be 9 billion in 25 years. This growing population will need power, and solar energy can help with this. we'll make more of our own power and create jobs right here in America. Check out http://freecleansolar.com to learn more.
why we need clean energy in america
My energy bill is way too high.I was talking with my boss who agreed he pays to much in energy costs. He said solar can help reduce the monthly energy bill.He was saying that this one time investment will save me a lot and take care of my future power needs.Moreover, my energy company won’t bug me with increasing rates all of the time.So I did some research on this solar panel thing.I hit upon a website <a href="http://FreeCleanSolar.com"> FreeCleanSolar.com </a> which has a lot of info and price comparisons, financing and leasing, tax credits and rebates.I feel more knowledgeable now.Do you guys think that I should go for this solar?Let me know
This is an amazing step towards saving the non renewable resources of energy. Even India is progressing very fast in the field of Solar Panels
Solar is here to stay and eventually costs will come down, but as stated very soon the people who invested in solar are going to be shafted with an enormous bill. The solar panels will degrade over time and fail in 5 years. Sooner in a hail storm.
Anyways...side stepping a bit..
Lightning is the single greatest source of power on the planet and not even harnessed.
If i were the government id put R&D into lightning collectors that can dispense the charge back to the grid at a reasonable rate.
or perhaps a lightning rod to reenergise that solar panel would be a step forward in future....
Wouldnt it be great if we had solar whens its sunny, lightning rods when its stormy and the grid whens its overcast.
Assuming population increases indefinately..which it may or may not then there will be no places left to build solar farms and the grid will just be every interconnected house on the planet.
actually the cost is not coming down from a long time. it is now that the government is offering subsidy on solar panels in India.
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:
On Twitter
Become a Fan on Facebook
Subscribe to the Feed
Matthew Putman
37 Comments
incentives and research
As the article notes Germany has had excellent incentives which have led to a great increase. This is also true in Belgium. I think though that the real incentive needs to remain research to make effective IR solar cells, lighter flexible polymer cells, and new long term storage devices. When that happens people will be happy to buy them without special incentives.
Reply