5 ms·

Solar has a barely positive EROI. When all costs are considered it typically uses more energy than it produces. This has been studied extensively in multiple Eu

Solar has a barely positive EROI. When all costs are considered it typically uses more energy than it produces. This has been studied extensively in multiple European countries. http://energyskeptic.com/2018/solar-pv-has-a-net-energy-losse-in-germany-and-switzerland-eroei-is-less-than-1/ http://energyskeptic.com/2018/solar-pv-has-a-net-energy-loss... These articles making claims to the contrary basically don't make any sense. If solar panels and wind farms resulted in large amounts of cheap energy they would be going up at a massive rate. We have a relatively free economy. Utilities and entrepreneurs would be going nuts building the things. Instead they only exist as tax scams anywhere in the industrialized world. Use your head, people.

bufferoverflow 9y ago
It used to be that solar panels never paid for themselves, then it was 20 years to break even. Now, I think, we're down to 5 years. Solar panels are getting cheaper and cheaper, and they definitely have a positive ROI now. And there are huge solar farms being built all over the world. I'm pretty sure they did the math before investing millions of dollars.
- maoistinquisitr 9y ago
  If you can highlight a plant that is not a "tax farm" I would be interested to read about it. "we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That's the only reason to build them. They don't make sense without the tax credit." --Warren Buffet This illustrates the reality of every "renewable" facility I've heard of to date. If the business case has changed just now, that's great and I look forward to the future. But most of what I've seen has been very silly industry propaganda.
  - politician 9y ago
    Is the 40GW of production in China a "tax farm"? Your argument that "solar is a gimmick because tax subsidies" seems flawed when international counterexamples are considered.
    - maoistinquisitr 9y ago
      > Is the 40GW of production in China a "tax farm"? According to everything I can find online the answer is a clear Yes?
      - phil248 9y ago
        What you call a "tax farm" is traditionally called industrial policy, and it has an exceptionally good track record.
  - bufferoverflow 9y ago
    Some areas have produced cheaper energy without subsidies as far as 2014. See pages 2-4. It's way better now, since the solar prices went down so much. https://www.deutschebank.nl/nl/docs/Solar_-_2014_Outlook_Let_the_Second_Gold_Rush_Begin.pdf https://www.deutschebank.nl/nl/docs/Solar_-_2014_Outlook_Let... And to answer your question about non-tax-farm, I don't know. If the government gives a subsidy, why wouldn't you take it even if you're profitable without it? Subsidies alone don't prove that the solar farms are not profitable.
  - phil248 9y ago
    It's almost as if initial government investment has allowed the technology to advance to the point that it no longer requires subsidy to be cost effective. Kind of like every other major industrial and technological breakthrough over the last 100 years.
ph0rque 9y ago
"Looking at the bulk of the research, it’s more likely that solar panels, over their lifetime, generate 10-15 times as much energy as it takes to produce them and their associated hardware. That number may be as high as 25. And it’s rising over time." http://rameznaam.com/2015/06/04/whats-the-eroi-of-solar/ http://rameznaam.com/2015/06/04/whats-the-eroi-of-solar/
- maoistinquisitr 9y ago
  These claims are based on simplistic spread sheet models. We have REAL WORLD DATA. The real world experience throughout europe and the USA shows net losses. I repeat: if it worked the plants would be profitable and they would be going up without tax subsidies. Do you dispute this? Does the legal environment somehow prevent entrepreneurs throughout the western world from selling solar power into the grid?
  - bufferoverflow 9y ago
    Nothing prevents anybody from selling solar power. Lots of solar farms are live and many more are being built. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_photovoltaic_power_stations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_photovoltaic_power_sta... (note how the biggest ones are all new)
  - telchar 9y ago
    If you think tax subsidies have anything to do with EROI (i.e. EROEI) you are very confused. This is calculated on the basis of Wh/Wh. Simple dimensional analysis shows that $ doesn't show up at all in the calculation. Of course tax subsidies are useful to bootstrap on a $ cost basis, but with current costs and rate of falling costs even that will soon become unnecessary (let's get rid of fossil fuel subsidies to make this "real world data" comparison fair though).
    - maoistinquisitr 9y ago
      Cash flows are in fact a reasonable proxy for energy in many cases. Manually tallying up the uses of energy and materials is a handwaving exercise at best, but net losses of cash in the energy industry indicate with certainty that you not yielding net energy to society as an enterprise.
cromulent 9y ago
That article you link to is based on the Ferroni and Hopkirk 2016 paper, but that has been discredited somewhat, I believe. The paper below revised the EROI figure from 0.8 to around 8.0. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421516307066 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030142151...
projectramo 9y ago
The simplest response to this is: they are going up at a massive rate.
tasty_freeze 9y ago
What kind of economics would allow a solar panel manufacturer to spend $301 worth of energy to produce a panel which sells for $300?

bufferoverflow 9y ago

It used to be that solar panels never paid for themselves, then it was 20 years to break even. Now, I think, we're down to 5 years. Solar panels are getting cheaper and cheaper, and they definitely have a positive ROI now. And there are huge solar farms being built all over the world. I'm pretty sure they did the math before investing millions of dollars.

maoistinquisitr 9y ago
If you can highlight a plant that is not a "tax farm" I would be interested to read about it. "we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That's the only reason to build them. They don't make sense without the tax credit." --Warren Buffet This illustrates the reality of every "renewable" facility I've heard of to date. If the business case has changed just now, that's great and I look forward to the future. But most of what I've seen has been very silly industry propaganda.
- politician 9y ago
  Is the 40GW of production in China a "tax farm"? Your argument that "solar is a gimmick because tax subsidies" seems flawed when international counterexamples are considered.
  - maoistinquisitr 9y ago
    > Is the 40GW of production in China a "tax farm"? According to everything I can find online the answer is a clear Yes?
    - phil248 9y ago
      What you call a "tax farm" is traditionally called industrial policy, and it has an exceptionally good track record.
- bufferoverflow 9y ago
  Some areas have produced cheaper energy without subsidies as far as 2014. See pages 2-4. It's way better now, since the solar prices went down so much. https://www.deutschebank.nl/nl/docs/Solar_-_2014_Outlook_Let_the_Second_Gold_Rush_Begin.pdf https://www.deutschebank.nl/nl/docs/Solar_-_2014_Outlook_Let... And to answer your question about non-tax-farm, I don't know. If the government gives a subsidy, why wouldn't you take it even if you're profitable without it? Subsidies alone don't prove that the solar farms are not profitable.
- phil248 9y ago
  It's almost as if initial government investment has allowed the technology to advance to the point that it no longer requires subsidy to be cost effective. Kind of like every other major industrial and technological breakthrough over the last 100 years.

ph0rque 9y ago

"Looking at the bulk of the research, it’s more likely that solar panels, over their lifetime, generate 10-15 times as much energy as it takes to produce them and their associated hardware. That number may be as high as 25. And it’s rising over time." http://rameznaam.com/2015/06/04/whats-the-eroi-of-solar/ http://rameznaam.com/2015/06/04/whats-the-eroi-of-solar/

maoistinquisitr 9y ago
These claims are based on simplistic spread sheet models. We have REAL WORLD DATA. The real world experience throughout europe and the USA shows net losses. I repeat: if it worked the plants would be profitable and they would be going up without tax subsidies. Do you dispute this? Does the legal environment somehow prevent entrepreneurs throughout the western world from selling solar power into the grid?
- bufferoverflow 9y ago
  Nothing prevents anybody from selling solar power. Lots of solar farms are live and many more are being built. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_photovoltaic_power_stations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_photovoltaic_power_sta... (note how the biggest ones are all new)
- telchar 9y ago
  If you think tax subsidies have anything to do with EROI (i.e. EROEI) you are very confused. This is calculated on the basis of Wh/Wh. Simple dimensional analysis shows that $ doesn't show up at all in the calculation. Of course tax subsidies are useful to bootstrap on a $ cost basis, but with current costs and rate of falling costs even that will soon become unnecessary (let's get rid of fossil fuel subsidies to make this "real world data" comparison fair though).
  - maoistinquisitr 9y ago
    Cash flows are in fact a reasonable proxy for energy in many cases. Manually tallying up the uses of energy and materials is a handwaving exercise at best, but net losses of cash in the energy industry indicate with certainty that you not yielding net energy to society as an enterprise.

cromulent 9y ago

That article you link to is based on the Ferroni and Hopkirk 2016 paper, but that has been discredited somewhat, I believe. The paper below revised the EROI figure from 0.8 to around 8.0. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421516307066 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030142151...

projectramo 9y ago

The simplest response to this is: they are going up at a massive rate.

tasty_freeze 9y ago

What kind of economics would allow a solar panel manufacturer to spend $301 worth of energy to produce a panel which sells for $300?