The price of solar power just fell 50% in 16 months

Post by [deleted] » Wed, May 04, 2016, 3:30 AM UTC

dragontamer wrote: post #232

kragen wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It ain't like a washing machine in 2016, which everyone already has one of. It ai very much like a washing machine in 1916, when not many people had one yet, in that the year-over-year growth rate in installed solar panels is at about 26% ( http://www.economist.com/news/business/21696941-solar-power-... ). An inverter that cost $2000 ten years ago now costs $400. (Amazon has a Bestek 2000W inverter for US$140 right n…

> It's true that financing the up-front investment is a difficulty, and that's why Solar City is doing such great business On the contrary. SolarCity hasn't made a profit and their stock has tanked. It seems like solving the up-front cost issue is difficult. Widespread deployment of Utility-scale Solar will harm SolarCity and their customers (who have entered into long-term purchase agreements). If Widespread Solar L…

Post by bigger_cheese » Wed, May 04, 2016, 3:47 AM UTC

S_A_P wrote: post #229

coryfklein wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And that is why it is a huge problem for the power companies It is a problem, but not necessarily in the way you may be thinking. Peak residential power usage is in the evening when solar isn't available. Power companies therefore end up spinning down coal and natural gas during peak solar, then just spinning them back up again as the sun begins to set. [1] So you haven't replaced the coal and natural gas plants, y…

Can validate. The problem with electricity is that there is no large scale storage like there is for other forms of energy like NG and Crude. Until someone comes along and figures out how to store electricity, this will continue to cause grief to power companies. Power plants are really just options, if the price per kWh is at a certain point then it makes sense to spin up or take down a plant and generate power. Add…

Post by cplease » Wed, May 04, 2016, 4:00 AM UTC

cjensen wrote: post #372

ori_b wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flywheels are another option: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flywheel_energy_storage

Pumped storage is routinely used to store energy. It's not theoretical. Has Flywheel storage every been seriously used in large-scale commercial applications? Someone mentions it on every energy-storage thread, and I'd like to know if the people suggesting it are just spinning our wheels.

Post by antoniotamer » Wed, May 04, 2016, 4:19 AM UTC

ChuckMcM wrote: post #103

The aggressiveness of the price drops on solar is pretty amazing. I just lost one of the inverters on my grid-tie system after it had run trouble free for 13 years. So we're looking at the first "major" repair to the system I installed in 2003. And in 2003 my 5.2kW of panels on my roof cost $38,000 before subsidies and $19,000 after. 28 panels, two 2.5kW inverters, net about 4.2kW of generation. I priced out replacin…

Post by pyre » Wed, May 04, 2016, 4:38 AM UTC

jessaustin wrote: post #367

Spooky23 wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A nuclear plant today would cost something like $6B that's not a regulatory tweak. The problem with nuclear is waste disposal (still not figured out, and a will be a problem for decades/centuries after the plant is closed) and amortization of billions of capital costs. With the price disruption potential of other technology, it's a bad bet, and has been so for many years.

Nuclear was only ever "viable" for political reasons. We had to have enough nuclear weapons to extinguish mammalian life nineteen times over. Eighteen times would have been pathetic. It was all a boondoggle anyway, so the war pigs were happy to spread a bit of cash on the civilian side...