Solar Startups Stepping Forward

At $.15 per kWh that is much closer to twice the price than fairly close to equal.

Very true. In addition I understand that the LCOE is quite variable depending on what assumptions are made and where the numbers are taken from, so a true cost comparison is hard to make. These numbers were from the California Energy Commission, taken from this site.

Safe to say however that from an affordability standpoint, solar is much closer than it used to be, which is encouraging.

This is all good news. I'd like to see more work being done on the small residential units..............small, efficient, affordable. It would be nice to be able to cut the cord in my lifetime.

What is .15 per kWh based on? The cost of the unit? Is it based on the projected lifetime of the unit?

The solar industry, which is going on 20+ years of experience with silicon cells, proves that it takes a substantial amount of time for new technologies to develop to a competitive level. The energy industry cannot expect one breakthrough technology to solve all the problems of tomorrow's "energy crisis". It's the little steps made over time that will make the difference.

No doubt some of these startups may fail with oversupply and reduced manufacturing costs, but ultimately my hope is that solar power technology will continue to grow on its own and make a noticeable impact in both the residential and commercial sectors.

Thanks for that. I think solar is incrementaly going to get better and better over time................through the free market, and driven by profit potential. New technology cannot be forced or mandated.

[Edit]

Before someone yells at me. I definitely think that the government should be involved.

Limited grants given to promote research and developement of promising technology.....................on a small scale. No launching private companies!

To answer your question, kramarat, the basic math behind the .15 kWh LCOE is (Life cycle cost) / (Lifetime energy production) for the utility/unit in question. In this case, the study is for utilities, not residential solar use. The costs include capital, operation, labor, depreciation, and residual (no subsidies which would skew comparisons). If you want the full summary look under the Utility Cost of Electricity section of this page.

For the details of the LCOE comparison, the page points to this this article, published in 2010. I found it particularly interesting that the author estimates prices for solar will drop dramatically once loans for new facilities are fully paid off (see page 3 and 4). He assumes a 6% loan rate for startup utilities of all types, even though solar generally comes out ahead since there is less risk involved and less dependency on outside factors (fuel prices).

Thanks. I feel confident that that number will come down substantially with time. There's so much incredible stuff being worked on that it's impossible to keep up with it all.

There are excellent web sites that give you information regarding your local solar insolation. The proponents of PV always like to give you the performance data from the Mojave desert with dual axis tracking controllers in the summertime. Not exactly Joe Schmoe's roof top in Minnesota in January. As with EPA mileage, your results may vary.

http://eosweb.larc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/sse/sse.cgi?+s02#s01

http://www.anotherurl.com/therm/sol_calc.htm

http://www.nrel.gov/gis/solar.html

Keep in mind that these kilowatt values represent the total broad spectrum energy NOT what a 5-8% efficient PV panel will produce.

I guess my point here is that any wise person will do their due diligence and research the true performance of any system, renewable or otherwise for their particular location and application and make the choice that suits them best. For some people it is a question of economics, for others it may to be assauge their perceived guilt or to make a socio-political statement.

I still don't understand why we aren't using the sun to heat water and put this technology to use. This has been on these pages a couple of times, I've asked the question and never got an answer. No solar cells necessary, and a relatively small amount of natural gas, etc. for night time power generation.

Oops...........forgot to post the link.

http://www.yourownpower.com/Power/

Nothing but crickets.

My thinking here is that solar could easily heat water to well over 100° F, by just using exposed black piping, rather than using mirrors to convert water to steam, or silicon wafers...............................my well water from 200 ft down is very cold all year long. Probably cold enough for the heat exchange.

Solar hot water is just not as glitzy as PV. There's also not nearly the profit in it as there is in solar. It makes a lot of sense, though. It's a whole lot easier to use your 1000 watts/m2 to directly heat water rather than lose most of it converting to electricity first.

I have a friend who has a geothermal loop in his back yard. He put it in over 20 years ago before vertical wells were in vogue, so his is a horizontal system. In the coldest days of January & February, his resistive heat will kick in. The loop is too cold. I tried to convince him to set up a collector to warm up the ground during the sunny days. No dice though.

Glad somebody's paying attention.

The Alaska project is looking at 7 cents per kWh. Granted, the water is already hot from the ground, but it only has to be over 100° F for the system to work. Seems like the profit would be in the sale of the electricity.

I'd like to have a small one of those systems in my yard. I can easily use solar to get water hotter than 100 degrees, for at least 8 months of the year, and at 200 ft deep, my well water stays cold enough to complete the heat exchange.

Actually, you are going to see a lot more about solar thermal in the years ahead. The next wave, which is already coming, will be PV/Thermal. PV/Thermal combines PV with thermal for a system to produce electricity and hot water or hot air. New systems are coming to market now and will have combined efficiencies of around 50%. This will make PV/Thermal costs lower than most other forms of energy. The payback will be much faster than PV alone at only marginally higher cost per panel.

Cool. I can't imagine that they would be too much more expensive. The water in my garden hose gets hot enough scald if it's laying in the sun in summer.

Do you know of any links I could look at?

PV/T systems are a bit more expensive than PV because they use piping, water storge, etc. However, they are much more efficient at 40-50% than PV only at 12-15% efficiency. The payback is therefore much faster. Most new PV/T systems are coming out of Euorpe but there is also one in Turkey. My company will be producing one in the USA.

In Pohnpei State - Federated States of Micronesia the folks are paying $.54/ KWH for electrical power.

If someone knew how to harness the Sun, Wind, and Tidal Channel flows, connect it to the existing grid, and had the investment capital to do it; they could probably sell it at $.35 / KWH.

Is there room to wiggle there?

It's getting to be that way in a lot of places in Oceania where the power comes from diesel generators.

http://www.micsem.org/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=9702&page=1#Item_0

The revenue would be a little more than 3 million a year / per megawatt of average power. The existing utilities would probably handle all of the admin and billing for you.

The Federated States of Micronesia. I was in Yap State a few years ago. Great diving and snorkeling. Huge potential for Tidal Channel Power and adequate topography for Pumped Storage.

Could be some real opportunity for someone who knows this stuff.

Gav