And because solar and semiconductors are also mutually reinforcing, the gargantuan semiconductor industry and all of its many tentacles are also driving storage and EVs. This whole thing is one huge beating heart that just gets bigger and louder with each beat.
Fossil fuels are a much more barren ecosystem. They depend on their scarcity and geographic concentration to be valuable. So when producers do something like this, lowering prices temporarily to try to slow down competition, they're also hurting themselves in the process. These prices are nowhere near profit-optimized for them.
The fact that it's also (in fact, mainly) targeted at undermining the fracking industry is also good news for solar.
Plus, those projections for EV sales figures are always with conservative technology assumptions - i.e., basically just projecting trendlines with current technology, as if nobody achieves any progress in the ensuing years. I don't think such conservative assumptions apply in this sector. This is the computer industry in the 1970s. Or even more explosive than that.
This statement in the cited article says it all about its assumptions: "...as befits the electric vehicle with its limited-range." Range issues are far from inherent to EV technology - in fact, they whittle away consistently the more effort is put into expanding range. It won't be a real issue by 2030 or sooner.
Tesla Motors is far ahead of all other EV-makers on range, continually advances its technology, continually pushes down its costs, and has made its patents open-source. In other words, that study is pretty much already obsolete. It was obsolete last year.
= new reply since forum marked as read