There probably won't be a win on a purely mathematical/financial level at first. 3000 kWh in 6 months is only about $300 worth of electricity at 10 cents/kWh.

There probably won't be a win on a purely mathematical/financial level at first. 3000 kWh in 6 months is only about $300 worth of electricity at 10 cents/kWh. I don't care how low the cost of paving gets, it's not going to compete with the cheapest form of energy in human history (burning stuff - traditionally wood, then peat, then coal as the availability of fuel inevitably dwindled, and now to deep sea exploration, fracking and tar sands that are only economical if externalities aren’t considered). The real win (as I see it) is in converting economies from continuous financial outlays going up in smoke to one-time investments with exponential returns spread over similar time frames. Automation and amortization are the future. Each time a drag on the economy like inefficiency, unsustainability or rent seekers are innovated around, the truth that sustainability is cheaper eventually proves itself in their absence. Even if some of these clever experiments cost 10 times more than the market rate at first, it will click for people that maybe they can lower their own energy usage by half through minor lifestyle changes (whose side effects include greater health and happiness), and drop that by half again with more efficient devices. So most people can get down to 1/4 of their current usage for next to nothing essentially, and now we're only talking a factor of 2.5 times more expensive to go from an unsustainable to a sustainable society. Then if we live with that liberated mindset long enough, the Moore’s law of alternative energy takes care of the discrepancy in a matter of decades. This is already happening and probably unstoppable at this point except through excessive lobbying and fast tracking, which we are seeing as well.