Solar power much cheaper to produce than most analysts realize, study finds
December 13, 2011
The public is being kept in the dark about the viability of solar photovoltaic energy, according to a study conducted at Queen’s University. The real cost in 2011 is under $1 per watt for solar panels purchased in bulk on the global market, he says.
“Many analysts project a higher cost for solar photovoltaic energy because they don’t consider recent technological advancements and price reductions,” says Joshua Pearce, Adjunct Professor, Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering. “Older models for determining solar photovoltaic energy costs are too conservative.”
Pearce believes solar photovoltaic systems are near the “tipping point” where they can produce energy for about the same price other traditional sources of energy.
Analysts look at many variables to determine the cost of solar photovoltaic systems for consumers, including installation and maintenance costs, finance charges, the system’s life expectancy, and the amount of electricity it generates.
Dr. Pearce says some studies don’t consider the 70 per cent reduction in the cost of solar panels since 2009 . Furthermore, he says research now shows the productivity of top-of-the-line solar panels only drops between 0.1 and 0.2 percent annually, which is much less than the one per cent used in many cost analyses.
Equipment costs are determined based on dollars per watt of electricity produced. One 2010 study estimated the this cost at $7.61, while a 2003 study set the amount at $4.16. According to Pearce, the real cost in 2011 is under $1 per watt for solar panels purchased in bulk on the global market, though he says system and installation costs vary widely.
Pearce has created a calculator program available for download that can be used to determine the true costs of solar energy.
Ref.: K. Branker, M.J.M. Pathak, J.M. Pearce, A review of solar photovoltaic levelized cost of electricity, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2011 [doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2011.07.104]
Comments (9)
by Jewell Matlock
Well said, but everyone needs to realise that adding Solar on their house is an asset that could raise the actual value of their building if / when they decide to sell. With the environment the way it is going we cannot ignore any system that gives 100 % free power at no cost to both the client and more importantly the world!
by Rob Fleming
I’ve been considering solar for my DC townhouse roof, but don’t want to jump in with something that will be obsolete next year. We need to think about modular or component-friendly systems. I’ve been upgrading my PCs bit by bit as performance increases and cost comes down, but usually in the same case. We need designs that put in a “case” once and then provide the active components on a plug-and-play basis. That is, I want to put in the frame and cabling once, put holes in my roof once, and then be able to put the latest panels into the frame and plug them into the cabling with a standard plug. Anybody working on standards?
by ClintJohnson
That is a little disingenuous to conflate the absolute cheapest solar panels for initial cost and then the most expensive solar panels for productivity drop over time. But even if it was free, there are still too many problems with solar as it is being implemented.
I do think that there is a place for terrestrial solar power as a single digit percentage “helper” source of electricity if it becomes cheap enough for home and business installation on rooftops without subsidies. What I don’t like is the wholesale environmental degradation that would be required for terrestrial solar power to become a large contributor to the power grid. The area required to be paved over in panels would be in the thousands of square kilometers and I don’t see that as particularly “better” than a few oil spills. On top of that, solar is an intermittent source like wind power and so we would still require another source that is ready to go online whenever the clouds roll in… and it can’t be something that is sitting idle and needs to be started up, it have to be there and ready to instantly take over. it would be less than we need without terrestrial solar but not by a lot.
I used “terrestrial” specifically up there. The only way that I can get behind solar power as a major contributor to our energy needs is if it is manufactured on the moon and constructed in geostationary orbit. No toxic manufacturing facilities on earth, no clouds or dust and only an hour out of every 24 that they are in the “night”.
On earth, there would be hundreds of tons of solar panels reaching the end of their useful lives every year and that would mean either expensive recycling or landfilling. In space, when they reach the end of their life you just do the math on the economics of recycling versus tipping them into the sun and go with that.
If we are stuck on earth, then nuclear is the least damaging of our options. If you want solar then we need to grow up and leave the cradle.
by Have done it
This is a giant step towards an eventual WEDS – World Energy Distribution System that is described in “21st Century Blueprint” of 1994.,
Three transcontinental collector- transmission lines will be used that are connected in the north-polar regions with a subsea tier-in under the Bering Strait.
Fixed solar arrays will be used for solar orientation and all year output.
The availability of exceptionally low cost arrays may well preclude the need for any necessary maintenance/repair facilities – just construct replacements.
The 254 page printed book is available on hittp://Cleareducation.com and as an ebook on http://www.bn.com/Ebooks with search for Thomas Albright. The book covers virtually all aspects of human endeavor.
by josdorpjossie
How is the price per Watt relevant? Its the price per Kwh that counts.
by Have done it
You multiply by time and divide by 1000.
by DennyBoll
I recently built two small solar arrays of 20 panels (1 pallet load each) at around $1.50/watt (if I had risked getting them from China ~$1/watt). Grid tie micro-inverters were about $1.50/watt & aluminum supports $0.50/watt.
But in PG&E territory (CA), the land of $0.40/kWh electricity, it will pay for itself in 3 years! Not many investments have returns that high…
by melajara
This is great but what about batteries cost (including replacement after xxx cycles)?
I’m still hoping for a real breakthrough here (e.g. with high-performance capacitors).
A fair comparison should include batteries in the cost of the solution, IMHO.
by DennyBoll
Grid tie systems use inverters to add power back into the grid, but the grid itself becomes the “battery”. The best part is that it is a “free”, infinite life “battery”.