Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday February 21 2018, @04:23PM   Printer-friendly
from the power-to-the-people['s-homes] dept.

Residential solar is cheap, but can it get cheaper? Paths to $0.05 per kWh

The price of solar panels has fallen far and fast. But the Energy Department (DOE) wants to bring those costs down even further, especially for residential homes. After all, studies have shown that if every inch of useable rooftop in the US had solar panels on it, the panels could provide about 40 percent of the nation's power demand. Right now, the DOE's goal is residential solar that costs 5¢ per kilowatt-hour by 2030.

In a new report from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), researchers mapped out some possible pathways to that goal. Notably, the biggest barriers to cost reduction appear to be the stubborn "soft costs" of solar installation. Those soft costs include supply chain costs, labor costs, and sales and marketing costs that aren't related to the physical production of solar cells at a factory.

NREL wrote: "Because the 2030 target likely will not be achieved under business-as-usual trends, we examine two key market segments that demonstrate significant opportunities for cost savings and market growth: installing PV at the time of roof replacement and installing PV as part of the new home construction process."

The report mapped out two "visionary" pathways (as well as two "less-aggressive' pathways) to achieving those cost reductions within the roof replacement and new home construction markets. The result? The only way NREL found it could achieve the "visionary" cost reductions was by assuming that solar installers would start selling low-cost solar-integrated roof tiles before 2030, "which could significantly reduce supply chain, installation labor, and permitting costs."

[...] [It's] not just Tesla working on this: the Colorado-based lab cites CertainTeed's solar shingle product and GAF's solar panels as examples of products breaking the divide between roof and solar panel installation.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday February 21 2018, @05:29PM (3 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Wednesday February 21 2018, @05:29PM (#641261)

    sacrifice some farmland, and then provide 100% of the necessary power in one, easy-to-access, easy-to-service place without land ownership problems, and solve the problem once and for all.

    I considered starting a wind farm in western Nebraska about 12 years ago, the big challenge is distribution - who in western Nebraska is going to pay you (much) for the power you would generate? T. Boone Pickens is making lots of wind energy in the Texas panhandle, but he's got the billions necessary to invest in upgrading the distribution grid from there to where the power consumers live.

    If electric power distribution were cheap and easy, we'd all be buying our power from the Pacific Northwest where it's cheaply generated - but even relatively nearby Southern California can't get that to happen.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by NewNic on Wednesday February 21 2018, @06:47PM (1 child)

    by NewNic (6420) on Wednesday February 21 2018, @06:47PM (#641313) Journal

    Blame the midwestern NIMBYs. And perhaps fossil fuel companies for stirring up opposition:
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-bc-us--wind-turbine-rebellion-20180220-story.html [chicagotribune.com]

    --
    lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday February 22 2018, @02:28AM

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Thursday February 22 2018, @02:28AM (#641577)

      I think the NIMBYs are just posturing so they can take a bigger cut when they finally do relent and allow windmills to be built on the windiest land in the country. Everybody wants a cut, it's not enough for producers to produce and sell to consumers, you've got to have regulators in-between to make sure that everybody's pockets get lined as thickly as possible.

      I'm not knocking regulations for safety, environmental responsibility, etc. but I am knocking the other 90% of regulations that are thinly veiled money-grabs. In Florida the worst of them are run by the big power company FP&L, protecting their business by making sure competitors aren't profitable.

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]
  • (Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday February 21 2018, @07:14PM

    by frojack (1554) on Wednesday February 21 2018, @07:14PM (#641332) Journal

    I think you over estimate the power potential of the Pacific Northwest. These resources are already stretched thin, with power companies and the federal government spending large sums on alternative sources, as well as end-user efficiency improvements. (Free Led bulbs and installation for your entire house, home energy audits and credits toward upgrades, etc).

    Washington, Oregon, Idaho, really can't support much more than they do already. It doesn't rain 24/7 in the PNW no matter what' you've heard.

    Now lets talk about Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, as well as parts of Colorado, Texas. Horizon to horizon scrub brush with no water. That's actually a bigger resource, with the same problem you mention. Distribution.

    In fact Distribution and/or Storage are the LAST big issues for making renewable energy a reality in a large countries as well as small ones.

    I think if the Federal Government wants to get involved some way, the creation of a nationwide DC Transmission Grid [theenergycollective.com] would be the proper venue. Linking all the dispersed resources more efficiently makes small projects like your Wind farm feasible.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.