3 ms·

282 U.S. dollars per megawatt hour Here in San Francisco, PG&E charges about $450 per megawatt hour (35 cents for electricity plus 10 cents for delivery, per k

282 U.S. dollars per megawatt hour Here in San Francisco, PG&E charges about $450 per megawatt hour (35 cents for electricity plus 10 cents for delivery, per kWh). So it seems like solar would be cheaper even without any subsidy?

opo 2y ago
Providing the infrastructure and reliability of the grid is very expensive, so there is a huge difference between the wholesale costs and retail rates for delivered electricity. From the latest Lazard report on levelized costs, they estimate utility solar has a cost range of about $29 - $92 per megawatt. Rooftop residential has a cost estimate of about $122 to $284. Both are subsidized, but money is limited and is fungible - a dollar spent subsidizing utility solar will go much further than a dollar spent subsidizing rooftop residential solar. https://www.lazard.com/media/xemfey0k/lazards-lcoeplus-june-2024-_vf.pdf https://www.lazard.com/media/xemfey0k/lazards-lcoeplus-june-...
- rahimnathwani 2y ago
  An earlier comment said "The thing with rooftop/local solar is that it doesn't need to compete with wholesale electricity prices, it only need to compete with retail prices." You seemed to disagree with that? I'm pointing out that, at least where I live, it appears this commenter was correct.
  - opo 2y ago
    Generally people who install solar also want to have power at night and when it is cloudy or raining. I think the earlier comment was maybe implying that there would be no grid connection - but that only works if you have enough backup battery to cover all the times the sun isn't shining. Battery costs have not fallen like solar panels have fallen and buying power from the grid would be noticeably cheaper. Even with the subsidies, few people who install solar panels also install enough battery backup that they don't need to use the grid.
    - rahimnathwani 2y ago
      That's true but irrelevant to my point. If rooftop solar costs me $300/MWh, that's a third cheaper than the $450/MWh charged by my local utility provider. So, even without any subsidy or feed-in tariff, it would be rational for me to install solar, use it when available, and fall back to the grid when it's not. Again, the only point I'm making is that this this statement appears to be true: The thing with rooftop/local solar is that it doesn't need to compete with wholesale electricity prices, it only need to compete with retail prices. It's already competitive there [without any need for subsidies] I'm not arguing for or against subsidies.
      - opo 2y ago
        >If rooftop solar costs me $300/MWh, that's a third cheaper than the $450/MWh charged by my local utility provider. So, even without any subsidy or feed-in tariff, it would be rational for me to install solar, use it when available, and fall back to the grid when it's not. If you want the capability of using your own rooftop solar, you need to install a much more costly battery backup system. With a typical solar system, the electrical output is sent to the grid. (So, if there is an outage on the grid, it will also shut down your panels since they don't want you to possibly electrocute the electrical workers.) https://help.pge.com/s/article/Will-I-still-have-power-during-an-outage-if-I-have-solar?language=en_US#:~:text=During%20an%20electric%20power%20outage,some%20form%20of%20backup%20battery https://help.pge.com/s/article/Will-I-still-have-power-durin....
        rahimnathwani 2y ago
        That's true, but again it's irrelevant to my point.
        opo 2y ago
        What exactly is the point you are trying to make?
        2y ago

opo 2y ago

Providing the infrastructure and reliability of the grid is very expensive, so there is a huge difference between the wholesale costs and retail rates for delivered electricity. From the latest Lazard report on levelized costs, they estimate utility solar has a cost range of about $29 - $92 per megawatt. Rooftop residential has a cost estimate of about $122 to $284. Both are subsidized, but money is limited and is fungible - a dollar spent subsidizing utility solar will go much further than a dollar spent subsidizing rooftop residential solar. https://www.lazard.com/media/xemfey0k/lazards-lcoeplus-june-2024-_vf.pdf https://www.lazard.com/media/xemfey0k/lazards-lcoeplus-june-...

rahimnathwani 2y ago
An earlier comment said "The thing with rooftop/local solar is that it doesn't need to compete with wholesale electricity prices, it only need to compete with retail prices." You seemed to disagree with that? I'm pointing out that, at least where I live, it appears this commenter was correct.
- opo 2y ago
  Generally people who install solar also want to have power at night and when it is cloudy or raining. I think the earlier comment was maybe implying that there would be no grid connection - but that only works if you have enough backup battery to cover all the times the sun isn't shining. Battery costs have not fallen like solar panels have fallen and buying power from the grid would be noticeably cheaper. Even with the subsidies, few people who install solar panels also install enough battery backup that they don't need to use the grid.
  - rahimnathwani 2y ago
    That's true but irrelevant to my point. If rooftop solar costs me $300/MWh, that's a third cheaper than the $450/MWh charged by my local utility provider. So, even without any subsidy or feed-in tariff, it would be rational for me to install solar, use it when available, and fall back to the grid when it's not. Again, the only point I'm making is that this this statement appears to be true: The thing with rooftop/local solar is that it doesn't need to compete with wholesale electricity prices, it only need to compete with retail prices. It's already competitive there [without any need for subsidies] I'm not arguing for or against subsidies.
    - opo 2y ago
      >If rooftop solar costs me $300/MWh, that's a third cheaper than the $450/MWh charged by my local utility provider. So, even without any subsidy or feed-in tariff, it would be rational for me to install solar, use it when available, and fall back to the grid when it's not. If you want the capability of using your own rooftop solar, you need to install a much more costly battery backup system. With a typical solar system, the electrical output is sent to the grid. (So, if there is an outage on the grid, it will also shut down your panels since they don't want you to possibly electrocute the electrical workers.) https://help.pge.com/s/article/Will-I-still-have-power-during-an-outage-if-I-have-solar?language=en_US#:~:text=During%20an%20electric%20power%20outage,some%20form%20of%20backup%20battery https://help.pge.com/s/article/Will-I-still-have-power-durin....
      - rahimnathwani 2y ago
        That's true, but again it's irrelevant to my point.
        opo 2y ago
        What exactly is the point you are trying to make?
        2y ago