Electricity costs vary considerably and solar is already at or better than grid-parity in a lot of places (e.g. Hawaii, Germany). Grid-parity is obviously a goa

Electricity costs vary considerably and solar is already at or better than grid-parity in a lot of places (e.g. Hawaii, Germany). Grid-parity is obviously a goal but does anyone think the current price of electricity contains the fully-loaded cost of carbon pollution and related externalities? Suppose you price carbon at $22 a ton. This is an order of magnitude less than the cost suggested by a team at Stanford. The result would be to drive up the average rate to about 15 cents per KWh. At that price, solar is better than grid-parity almost everywhere (on average etc). Whether that makes it a good investment is a different issue.