Solar Growth Continues Unabated in Bay Area (8400+ installations, 82 MW)

[jpak]

http://www.renewableaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=49388

The NorCal Solar Energy Association, a nonprofit solar education group in Northern California, released new findings on the growth of solar energy installations for 165 cities in all ten Bay Area counties.

8,403 total solar energy installations — built at a cost of $787 million — are yielding 82.3 megawatts (MW) of electricity, according to the new report that includes all installations as of December 2006.

The average residential sized system, yielding 3.6 kilowatts of electricity costs $34,199, or approximately $9.49 per watt before rebates and tax credits, states the report.

Approximately 11.5 watts of electricity generated by solar power is produced for every one of the 7.1million residents living in the greater Bay Area.

<more>

[NickB79]

1. So how much per watt after rebates and tax credits were removed?

$9.49/watt is VERY expensive electricity.

[Vincardog]

2. That is figuring in all the expenses of instillation into the first year's production.

Also that is before rebates and tax credits.
You know W's kind of math. Spread that cost over a 10 or 20 year lifespan and it becomes a lot more affordable.

[jpak]

3. That's *before* rebates and tax credits...read the OP

CA rebates for 2007 are $2.50-$3.25 per watt

The current federal tax credit is 30% of the total cost.

These would bring the price of a $34,000 3.6 kW PV system down to $14,800...

edit: which would be ~$61 per month over 20 years.

[GreenGreenLimaBean]

4. my system in Austin

is costing me $7,500 after rebates/credits...it's a 3.3kW system from Meridian Energy Systems. Austin Energy pays $4.50/watt up to 3kW...and they will give the rebate yearly......it currently generates about $50/month of electricity at $0.10/kwHr which is roughly what austin energy charges....my payback, assuming rates stay the same is around 15 years....total system cost $23k....rebate $13.5k....tax credit $2k....

[TheWraith]

5. That math still doesn't help you.

Even if you assume that the panels run for 20 years, and you completely ignore the cost of tax credits and so forth (which really should be counted against the system, since it's not like it's not part of the cost, just not the part the end-user pays), then in the most bullishly optimistic scenario, you're paying $0.14 per kilowatt-hour, which is 50% above the average US price of electricity. That's a pretty bad return when you consider that you need 20 years before the cost per watt reaches even the non-absurd level.

[piedmont]

7. 50% above the *2007* cost of electricity is a bargain if it's fixed for the next 20 years.

Sure, the average right now is arond 9.5 cents/KWH, but of course that's only going to go up. It certainly won't take 20 years for the price to go over 14 cents. And if you believe that an energy crisis is near, it might be worth the extra money to secure your electricity for the longer term.

[TheWraith]

8. Doesn't work that way.

For starters, based on historical trends, it probably WILL take 20 years for prices to reach 14 cents per KWh. Electricity isn't a resource--we can make as much of it as we like, so it tends to follow inflation. Second, that's only 14 cents per KWh under idealized circumstances, completely ignoring the tax breaks, and assuming that the solar panels last the full 20 years. That doesn't compare favorably to other methods like wind and nuclear that generate power at a cost of about 4 cents per KWh, and do so for a vastly smaller investment per kilowatt of capacity.

[piedmont]

9. I think we're talking about different perspectives.

I'm talikng about individuals, and For the homeowner who sees an energy crisis on the horizon and wants to secure a guaranteed supply of electricity, solar is a reasonable option, even at double the price per KWH of grid power. It's certainly better than wind in the large areas of the country where the wind isn't strong or reliable enough, or where the towers would be unsightly, and of course the nuclear-plant-in-the-backyard ain't gonna work. As for wind and nuke generating at $.04/KWH, that's great but that's not the price that the homeowner pays.

And I have a problem with this sentence:

"Electricity isn't a resource--we can make as much of it as we like, so it tends to follow inflation."

Sure, electricity is just a means of delivering power, but we make it using mostly non-renewable resources. When the price of those resources are affected by shortages, their price jumps. While nuclear and wind may help solve the problem in the long run, I'm not sure how much faith I have in our society getting enough production from them up and running before petroleum and natural gas extraction peaks and coal use is drastically limited due to global warming. Electricity price increases may have more or less correlated with inflation in the past, but that doesn't mean they will in the future, or that the inflation rate itself will remain relatively small as it is now.

[NickB79]

6. I did read it

That's why I asked "So how much per watt after rebates and tax credits were removed?".

You stated: "These would bring the price of a $34,000 3.6 kW PV system down to $14,800..."

Ok, so going on $34,000 costing $9.49/watt before the rebates and credits, wouldn't that mean that $14,800 would translate into $4.13/watt?

[jpak]

10. The last nuclear power plant actually built in the US cost $6/watt

$4.13/watt is a bargain...

[One_Life_To_Give]

11. Too be fair, the capacity loading

That Nuke has 4 times the utilization of the solar panels. Solar at best might run peak power 25% of the time. (Not really but) The Nuke will be at peak power over 90% of the time.

And of course power is a poor way to measure these systems. Should use cost per unit energy produced. i.e. $/KWH, $/J, etc.

[bananas]

12. And the ones that were cancelled cost $billions/0watts = $infinity/watt

Nuclear power is infinitely expensive!

[jpak]

15. Yup - more nukes were canceled than completed stranded costs exeeded $112 billion

and consumers (not the plant owners) paid these costs...

[Dogmudgeon]

20. And yet, anti-nuclearists were happy about that.

Fascinating.

And it made Poppy Bush, Dick Cheney, and Prince Bandar tons of money, too.

Cui bono, baby?

Destruction is the gift that keeps on giving.

--p!

[NickB79]

24. I wonder how much nuclear plants cost per watt to build in Europe and Asia

For example, there was a news article posted here at EE within the past year of an Indian nuclear reactor that came in at a very low cost per watt and had a lot of the pro-nuclear advocates here salivating a bit.

Anyone remember the name of that facility, or at least know how much per watt, say, the last French nuclear reactor cost?

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Systematic Chaos]

16. But dude, it's like, UNABATED!

Not even simple logic and facts can stop it! :scared::scared::scared:

[4dsc]

13. So what

The simple matter about all this that everyone is missing is that in 30 years all these solar panels will need replaced and we won't have the oil to manufacture these solar panels!!

[NNadir]

18. You fail to account for the fact that one of the world's largest solar manufactureres is Beyond

Petroleum.

Solar cells do not require any energy input and they have no external costs and they are free.

They last forever and now they work in the dark.

You may not have noticed by California has stopped importing natural gas.

[One_Life_To_Give]

17. Too Little, Too Late

While interesting. What is needed is a Federal Project of $100Billion/yr for the next 10 years. (Total $1 Trillion) to install 250,000MegaWatts. Then we can talk about wether to shutter some of the Nukes vs displacing Coal.

[Dogmudgeon]

19. Does anybody know ...

... how much toxic metal is used in making photovoltaic solar cells?

The metals include mercury, cadmium, arsenic, gallium, germanium, as well as several more-exotic elements. They are extremely toxic to organic life. Extremely small amounts can cause painful death -- to all living beings.

Some of the metal goes into the photovoltaic cells, but usually a greater amount is wasted. In most places, this waste is just dumped. Otherwise, it is stored, but in plastic jugs, not metal-and-concrete casks. It has a half-life of >10^35 years (the estimated half-life of the force that binds protons).

These chemicals, though, are not radioactive, so they won't make you glow in the dark. They will just make you vomit painfully in the dark, and have seizures in the dark, and have uncontrollable diarrhea in the dark, and cry for your mother like a child in terror in the dark. And it's always dark, too, because blindness is one of the first effects of these poisons.

--p!
Itai! Itai! Itaaaaaaaaaai!

[jpak]

21. I call BS - where are they "dumping" all this toxic PV waste???

and please show us all those "plastic jugs" filled with toxic PV waste.

>97% of PV cells produced today are Si-based - tell us how much mercury they use to manufacture Si-based PV.

(clue: none)

Here's some fun facts on CdTe PV cells...

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TW0-4MW9032-C&_user=2139839&_coverDate=05%2F31%2F2007&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000054279&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=2139839&md5=b020353056a682a4b80fc2bf37f58795

life cycle emissions of Cd from nuclear power plants are 3 times greater than from CdTe modules.

and where are all these folks retching in the dark from toxic PV wastes???

(clue: they don't exist)

[Dogmudgeon]

23. "Where are all these folks retching in the dark from toxic PV wastes???"

(Tomoko's Hand -- W. Eugene Smith, 1971.)

Niigata-Minamata disease. Methyl mercury waste from the Showa-Denko plant in Kanose, Japan. Electronic components manufacture. Over 600 victims. The company dumped the mercury, but first claimed it was an accident. There have been hundreds of such incidents, but this was one of the largest.

I'm not sure if "Tomoko"'s disease was caused by mercury intended for or washed from a PV cell or some other electronic component. Unlike with nuclear energy, individual chemical sources are not accounted for, and not in the late 60s, when Tomoko's exposure probably took place.

"My father was crazed like a wild beast and then died—agonized, in pain... like a dog."

"...one cat ran into a small clay cooking stove containing burning charcoal. With the pupils of its eyes dilated, salivating, convulsing and uttering a strange cry, the cat breathed its last breath".

The PV connection: Mercury, cadmium, and tellurium are used in most thin-film high-output (>5%) photovoltaic technologies being developed, and several already in use. Ramping up production of PV cells using such technologies for primary electricity use will increase the likelihood of toxic exposure tremendously (100- to 1000-fold) -- and contamination standards for toxic metals are far less stringent than for radiological exposure.

The main risk posed by the solar PV industry is to the safety of workers who manufacture the PV materials, a process that can involve hazardous solvents, potentially toxic or explosive gases, and the possibility of inhaling dust. The most common solar PV materials also use cadmium, a recognized carcinogen, which workers may be exposed to if they aren’t properly protected.

(source - Greener Choices)

The exposure-control challenge is very similar to that presented by radionuclides -- except that toxic metals won't decay until the cosmos itself starts to come apart.

--p!

[Dead_Parrot]

22. In the case of mercury...

...The Alloy, WV Si smelter produces about a hundred pounds a year, which is carefully stored in the streams of WV and VA, and selected Atlantic fish.

Since PV accounts for fuck all energy, used panels can be chucked in a landfill and ignored. So that's all right, then.

However, I should point out that you're not allowed to ask where PV panels come from, or where they go: This is the Forbidden Knowlege of the Ancients™, and you don't need to know. If you persist in asking, Helen Caldicott will be sent to your house to fill your hat with ice cubes.

[Dead_Parrot]

25. Out of interest...

Approximately 11.5 watts of electricity generated by solar power is produced for every one of the 7.1million residents living in the greater Bay Area.

...Is that peak or average?