3 ms·

Have you considered real estate prices? I don't doubt any of the stats you cite, but it seems that one of the biggest impediments to solar is the huge amount o

Have you considered real estate prices? I don't doubt any of the stats you cite, but it seems that one of the biggest impediments to solar is the huge amount of area it requires. The real estate costs of putting such plants nearby large population centers seems to be one of the major costs. Rooftop solar seems to be a good solution, but it's still not economical without generous government incentives. Anecdote: A colleague of mine is trying to get approval for solar panels on top of a property she owns in a high density area of New Jersey. After doing an in depth cost/benefit analysis, she found it was economical, but only because New Jersey has very large incentives. Roughly 2/3 of the project would be financed by the government either in grants or tax credits.

philipkglass 8y ago
I have calculated the contribution of real estate prices for California solar farms. The cost of land accounts for a tiny part of large scale PV electricity costs -- less than 1%. But of course California is both sunnier and much less densely populated than New Jersey. Rooftop solar is not especially cost-effective. It yields less energy per installed watt than large solar farms and it costs multiple times as much per watt to install in the US. If the US could get its permitting and inspection for rooftop solar streamlined and standardized like in Germany or Australia, then the price premium over ground-mount systems would be more like 40% than 400%, and it would be worth considering in states without large open spaces. Even in Germany rooftop systems are less cost-effective than ground mount systems though the cost-effectiveness gap isn't as large as in the US. I attribute Germany's continued incentives for rooftop solar to a desire to maintain broad societal buy-in to the energy transition. Millions of households and businesses all with their own stake in solar makes for a large and stable coalition of supporters. Just having the legacy energy utilities build their own big solar plants is more cost effective but doesn't give so many people a personal stake in the transition.

philipkglass 8y ago

I have calculated the contribution of real estate prices for California solar farms. The cost of land accounts for a tiny part of large scale PV electricity costs -- less than 1%. But of course California is both sunnier and much less densely populated than New Jersey. Rooftop solar is not especially cost-effective. It yields less energy per installed watt than large solar farms and it costs multiple times as much per watt to install in the US. If the US could get its permitting and inspection for rooftop solar streamlined and standardized like in Germany or Australia, then the price premium over ground-mount systems would be more like 40% than 400%, and it would be worth considering in states without large open spaces. Even in Germany rooftop systems are less cost-effective than ground mount systems though the cost-effectiveness gap isn't as large as in the US. I attribute Germany's continued incentives for rooftop solar to a desire to maintain broad societal buy-in to the energy transition. Millions of households and businesses all with their own stake in solar makes for a large and stable coalition of supporters. Just having the legacy energy utilities build their own big solar plants is more cost effective but doesn't give so many people a personal stake in the transition.