RIT Study: The economics on solar energy suck

[skookerasbil]

More AGW k00k losing.........

Study throws cold water on residential solar-plus-storage economics

Combining storage with solar panels does not make grid defection economically viable, researchers say


Another academic study is challenging the economics of pairing rooftop solar panels with behind-the-meter energy storage.

The study, by Eric Hittinger and Jawad Siddiqui for the Rochestor Institute of Technology, was published earlier this month in Utilities Policy. It follows on the heels of a study in Nature Energy that said storing solar power can increase energy consumption and emissions levels.

Hittinger said his study was undertaken as a reaction to the media coverage in the wake of the unveiling of Tesla’s Powerwall residential battery. The study also takes on recent studies by the Rocky Mountain Institute that have predicted that solar-plus-storage systems will reach grid parity and defection will become an increasingly popular option.


http://www.utilitydive.com/news/study-throws-cold-water-on-residential-solar-plus-storage-economics/436482/


When costs are exponentially higher with renewables it will continue to be fringe........and why solar is still fringe after 20+ years. Of course, to the progressive k00k climate change OCD's, costs don't matter to people.

So much losing..............

 

[Billy_Bob]

But some here will say that its the cheapest power around ........ then demand others pay for it!

 

[skookerasbil]

But some here will say that its the cheapest power around ........ then demand others pay for it!

Yep.....check my source and then check theirs!! The AGW people stick the phony right in your face, the hope being, the reader doesn't check the source OR doesn't check the whole story. The AGW community is famous for posting links that don't explain the ENTIRE costs of these renewables.........like you snap a finger and the production sites are there forever!! Especially with wind.....they leave out the most expensive parts of production and post up finished product costs.Being phony is ghey.

 

[Old Rocks]

Study throws cold water on residential solar-plus-storage economics

Hittinger concedes that the study was designed test grid defection, and it focuses on a narrow use-case for storage that is not necessarily the way storage would be used.

Hittinger also notes that the paper does not address using a solar-plus-storage system for arbitrage, which is storing solar power during the day and discharging the battery in the evening to offset peak rates. The key to making that type of arbitrage work is rate structure such as time-of-use rates, which aren’t very prevalent right now, he said. He also notes that would be the opposite of how arbitrage would usually be conducted: to charge batteries during off peak and discharge them during peak periods.

This is comparing the economics of an off grid solar and storage system to the costs of staying on grid. At present, staying on grid is cheaper. It is not commenting on the cost of utility scale solar, either. And, as the cost of the storage goes down, and the cost of solar continues to go down, one can expect this to be reversed in the near future. The cost of the batteries will decline rapidly, for the same reason that the cost of the solar panels have. Plain old good capitalistic competition for market share.

 

[skookerasbil]

Study throws cold water on residential solar-plus-storage economics

Hittinger concedes that the study was designed test grid defection, and it focuses on a narrow use-case for storage that is not necessarily the way storage would be used.

Hittinger also notes that the paper does not address using a solar-plus-storage system for arbitrage, which is storing solar power during the day and discharging the battery in the evening to offset peak rates. The key to making that type of arbitrage work is rate structure such as time-of-use rates, which aren’t very prevalent right now, he said. He also notes that would be the opposite of how arbitrage would usually be conducted: to charge batteries during off peak and discharge them during peak periods.

This is comparing the economics of an off grid solar and storage system to the costs of staying on grid. At present, staying on grid is cheaper. It is not commenting on the cost of utility scale solar, either. And, as the cost of the storage goes down, and the cost of solar continues to go down, one can expect this to be reversed in the near future. The cost of the batteries will decline rapidly, for the same reason that the cost of the solar panels have. Plain old good capitalistic competition for market share.

But then why are all reputable projections on solar energy......30 years out......showing wind/solar combined equaling less than 10% of providing our electricity? Certainly they have the same information as posted above! And we've been hearing all these promises for many years now. The "costs are going down" is impressing few.

I took my kids for a drive through a local neighborhood the other day for shits and giggles. Saw about 300 houses. How many had solar roofs? Five! And that's here in NYS where they give you a $7,500 tax credit!

The rhetoric and hype on solar just isn't being realized in the real world. People just aren't impressed...........which is exactly why solar is providing only 1% of our electricity in America. Oh.....they've also figured out that after 15 years, they gotta go replace what they installed........5 years ago, people were thinking you pop these roofs in once and forget it. Oooooops!

 

[Old Rocks]

That is definetely alternative facts. Here is the reality of the longevity of solar panels;

What Is the Lifespan of a Solar Panel? > ENGINEERING.com

Degradation Rates
The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) performed a meta-analysis of studies that examined the long term degradation rates of various PV panels. They found that the 1% per year rule was somewhat pessimistic for panels made prior to the year 2000, and today’s panels, with better technology and improved manufacturing techniques, have even more stamina than their predecessors. For monocrystalline silicon, the most commonly used panel for commercial and residential PV, the degradation rate is less than 0.5% for panels made before 2000, and less than 0.4% for panels made after 2000. That means that a panel manufactured today should produce 92% of its original power after 20 years, quite a bit higher than the 80% estimated by the 1% rule.

So a solar panel purchased today will be putting our 80% of it's rated power at your latitude 50 years from now.

 

[skookerasbil]

Solar panels don't last forever and degradation varies wildly, study says
Top-performing solar modules were produced in China and Tijuana, Mexico

http://www.computerworld.com/article/3058270/sustainable-it/study-solar-panels-dont-last-forever-and-degradation-varies-wildly.html

In actual tests.......degradation values range between 1% and 35%



Some say 15-18 years.......some say 25.......some say 30. As per my role in this forum.........gotta keep it all real!!