Solar Power: Finally, A Reason to Invest Says HSBC

You are so busy with your cute journalism you don’t even know the correct YGE co.

Observer is right, there are many mistakes in this story. I think you need to do it over. Also, it makes no sense to continue quoting industry averages. Sectors move ahead as a result of a powerful and consistent surge by a handful of low cost leaders that can execute with volume and finance over time. Press coverage of the evolution of the solar industry is still stuck in the Popular Science mentality and needs to grow up. Okay so it never grew up in the case of the auto industry, but it needs to in the power generation biz. Consider the recent solar pv facts: low cost volume leader at 87 cents per watt mfg cost not counting profit margins or install costs. That number is headed down to 80 cents this year and below 80 cents in 2010. Coal and nuclear costs are legacy artifacts given the effective moratorium and lack of new cases. Policy studies of nuclear need to specify “old” nuclear and “wishful” nuclear and also acknowledge that Yucca Mtn is closed. We’ve done an excellent job of ignoring the on site storage of spent nuclear rods at sites today. If you want to get a scoop on a story, cover the insane solar projects in remote locations serving cities and states 100s of miles away and wind promotion efforts with implied taxpayer subsidies of multi billion dollar transmission needs. You might also delve into the long regulatory review processes for alt energy projects that exceed the quick install characteristics of solar pv over any other type of power generation project coupled with the fact that ground PV projects can start producing before the entire project is finished. Consider that last point with the help of an engineering project finance expert. If you redo the story and consider the facts mention here, you readers might get to an understanding of how in the world Calif and NY and a few other states could have grid parity solar by as early as next year in the case of large-scale ground arrays.

Ted, at $4 installed, you will likely produce let’s say 1.25 KWh per watt installed (middle of your range), so 31.25KWh per watt in the lifetime of your system (25 years minimum) or $0.128 per KWh flat. You have taken 1KWh and called it 10cents, why? 1KWh for 25 years is 25KWh for $4 or $0.16 per KWh. 1.5KWh for 25 years is $0.10 per KWh. Conventional electricity may well cost you that now.

Also, consider that your $0.128/KWh does not rise whereas conventional electricity will. Likely, by 2034, at the end of the system, carbon produced electricity may cost double or more than now due to the inevitable rises in mining, workforce, carbon taxes etc.

Also, for any electricity that you produce that does not get used, you get paid for by FITs, Feed in Tariffs. Currently, those rates are set for decades ahead and are often much higher than conventional electricity, making you a tidy profit.

Due to their low capacity factors wind and solar only reduce CO2 by 25 and <15 percent respectively far short of the Waxman reqirement to reduce CO2 80%. This will result in maximum damage to the economy as noted by the US DOE (EIA)study of Waxman.

In contrast nuclear will reduce CO2 100%. With the power sector doing more than its share of the reduction, the economy will suffer much less according to the EIA (and common sense).

Wind and solar are so caustic to the power system and economy that the EIA study excludes them and focuses on biomass as renewables.

In the sunniest parts of the USA, we can expect 1 to 1.5 kilowatts to be produced for each 1 watt in a solar panel. This equates to 10 to 20 cents per year per watt of solar panel. That would take from 16 to 40 years to pay off if you buy panels at $4 a watt.

That simply does not make sense for end users, small businesses, etc. Bring in the repayment time to 7 years and it gets feasable.

Missing from these articles is any discussion of competing costs for Coal power per kilowatt. Coal is directly tied to the USA shipping/rail infrastructure and will not easily be replaced due to vested government and industry interests. Coal is 50% of the rail traffic for example.