SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Non-Tech : Alternative energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Triffin who wrote (2108)9/2/2005 7:55:44 AM
From: Rock_nj  Respond to of 16955
 
Solar has been stuck for years now in the 25 to 50 cent per kWH range, being around 5 to 10 times more expensive than traditional grid-based electrical generating schemes. Without government incentives solar would still be essentially dead. I agree with you on that point. Solar would have limited applications in places that are far away from the grid and too expensive to connect or amongst enthusiasts.

Government incentives help level the playing field (of course, government is also subsidizing fossil fuels and nuclear which puts solar at a competitive disadvantage, nuclear wouldn't even exist without the government's support).

The big change I see coming from solar is that new production methods and technologies like nanotechnology will soon be bringing solar down in cost, perhaps even to parity with traditional grid-based electrical generating schemes. You're right that this is similiar to where wind was 10 or 20 years ago. What brought wind down in price was massive increases in efficiency of wind turbines. A typical turbine a generation ago might be expected to produce 250 kwH, now you can get anywhere from 6 to 12 times more energy out of a single turbine. It is interesting that now that wind has become competitive the free market has taken over to build wind projects. Wind is growing by 30%+ per year. Solar will have a similiar growth spurt when it becomes competitive.