5 ms·
That seems weird. That would imply that the lifetime energy capture of a solar panel is roughly equivalent to the creation and installation energy cost.
by DannoHung 16y ago
That seems weird. That would imply that the lifetime energy capture of a solar panel is roughly equivalent to the creation and installation energy cost.
- GFischer 16y agoIndeed. That used to be said of eolic energy (wind power). For example you can see a cost breakdown in 2005 here: http://www.mnforsustain.org/windpower_schleede_costs_of_electricity.htm http://www.mnforsustain.org/windpower_schleede_costs_of_elec... I believe the energy costs are now competitive (but wind still cannot serve as "base" power), but my yet-unresearched hunch is that solar is still at the same stage that wind was: only viable due to the massive tax breaks.
- randallsquared 16y agoDoesn't seem weird at all, I think. Solar just barely passed breakeven in the last decade, unless you factor in subsidies. I notice that for a random zip code in Maine, http://bpsolar.cleanpowerestimator.com/bpsolar.htm http://bpsolar.cleanpowerestimator.com/bpsolar.htm shows that absent federal and state subsidies, you'll save only about $4600 over 25 years with their default settings. It's phrased as saving $36K, though, due to subsidies and interesting presentation. :) But BP Solar really wants you to buy solar panels, of course.