3 ms·
Yes, it is. Solar pays for itself in raw kWh over ~8 years, probably even better at utility scale which negotiates huge panel purchases. Batteries cost more, bu
by gibolt 5y ago
Yes, it is. Solar pays for itself in raw kWh over ~8 years, probably even better at utility scale which negotiates huge panel purchases. Batteries cost more, but can apply stored power when they can earn the most (during peak), reducing viability of polluting alternatives.
The cherry on top is that all future energy uses no more material and creates no more pollution, with materials mostly all recyclable at end of life. Over a 30 year horizon, fossil fuel infra cannot compete.
- heavenlyblue 4y ago>Solar pays for itself in raw kWh over ~8 years AFAIK in this thread the calculation that gave the answer of 8 years also included the bonus that comes from the government subsidies. What is the number if we excluded that subsidy?
- gibolt 4y agoThat is part of the cost analysis. Costs continue to fall, only rising recently due to macro materials costs. In a few years when the subsidy vanishes, the difference should be nearly made up for by reduced cost. And this subsidy only applies to residential AFAICT, not grid-scale which is the main discussion. Grid scale tends to come in far cheaper