US Solar Market Sets New Record, Installing 7.3GW of Solar PV in 2015

[ScienceRocks]

US Solar Market Sets New Record, Installing 7.3GW of Solar PV in 2015


by Mike Munsell
February 22, 2016]

In yet another record-breaking year, the solar industry in the United States installed 7,286 megawatts of solar PV in 2015. GTM Research and the Solar Energy Industries Association announced the historic figures today ahead of the March 9 release of the U.S. Solar Market Insight report.

FIGURE: U.S. Solar PV Installations, 2000-2015

Source: GTM Research / SEIA U.S. Solar Market Insight report

For the first time ever, solar beat out natural-gas capacity additions, with solar supplying 29.5 percent of all new electric generating capacity in the U.S. in 2015.

Key findings:

• The U.S. installed 7,286 megawatts of solar photovoltaics (PV) in 2015, the largest total ever and 17 percent above 2014
• The 7.3 gigawatts installed in 2015 is 8.6 times the capacity installed five years earlier in 2010
• Residential was once again the fastest-growing sector, installing over 2 gigawatts for the first time and growing 66 percent over 2014
• Utility solar PV also had a record year with over 4 gigawatts installed, up 6 percent over 2014
• 110 megawatts (AC) of concentrating solar power (CSP) capacity came on-line in late 2015 when SolarReserve’s Crescent Dunes project began sending electricity to the grid
• Non-residential solar was essentially flat for the third year in a row, installing just over 1 gigawatt
• Cumulative solar PV installations reached over 25 gigawatts by the end of the year, up from just 2 gigawatts at the end of 2010
  
  
  US Solar Market Sets New Record, Installing 7.3GW of Solar PV in 2015

Man, oh man this will make the loserterians go nutz. Solar is proving them wrong and growing faster then anything else!

 

[there4eyeM]

Onward and upward. There is some hope in the world.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Any minute now................................

 

[elektra]

Maybe, where is the proof that Greentechmedia is anything but propaganda? They include Ivanpah, and as we all know, Ivanpah is the biggest Solar Plant in the World, and is also the World's Largest Solar failure.

Ivanpah Solar Project Faces Risk of Default on PG&E Contracts | The California Report | KQED News

Majority owner and plant manager NRG Energy said in its most recent quarterly report that it won’t be able to deliver the electricity promised in its power purchase agreements with PG&E. The agreements cover output from two of Ivanpah’s three units.

The contracts are confidential, but in its Nov. 4 filing NRG said it “expects that the units will not meet their guaranteed energy production amount for the initial performance measurement period,” which ends in January, two years after commercial operations began. NRG said that if that happens “PG&E may, at its option, declare an event of default,” and that it was “exploring options to mitigate this risk or its consequences.”

 

[elektra]

The figures in the OP include rooftop solar that is failing and is extremely expensive.

Customers tell horror stories of solar company that gets $422M in tax dollars - Watchdog.org

Customers tell horror stories of solar company that gets $422M in tax dollars
“For a $600 fee up front, I would pay $182 a month for the next 20 years,” Leeds said. “They have a performance guarantee. If I don’t make enough electricity, they said, ‘No problem, don’t worry, we will write you a check.’ I thought, ‘I’m covered.’”



A SIGHT FOR SORE EYES: Jeffrey Leeds is reminded of SolarCity every time he looks at his house.

Tacked on to that would be what the company called a small bill from the local utility company allowing the customer to use the grid and to cover the use of any electricity Leeds drew from the utility rather than from his SolarCity solar panels.

Now, 15 months later, the local utility company has raised its rates and instead of a lower bill, Leeds is pushing $500 a month with no way out for the next two decades. And he has the eyesore of solar panels that cover most of his roof.

“As a customer, you have no say,” Leeds said. “With a solar lease, you are putting the stuff on your roof. You have a signed contract with the devil and you are stuck with the stuff.”

 

[elektra]

Consumer Complaints Reveal Solar Companies Ignoring Ethics Code

Consumer Complaints Reveal Solar Companies Ignoring Ethics Code
One review, posted by a community church, alleges that SolarCity representatives had promised that installing solar panels would reduce the church’s energy bills by 50 percent. When the savings failed to materialize, SolarCity responded blithely that the church should expect to see “some savings” within the next 20 years.

“They broke their word and contract; we would never recommend them,” the reviewer concludes. (RELATED: Rampant Fraud Pervades Rooftop Solar Industry)

 

[elektra]

One must remember, that Solar is a 100% subsidized by the government. But other than the subsidies, it is a failure with the public stuck with the cost.

Buyer Beware: Complaints from Rooftops - The American Consumer Institute

The situation has gotten so bad in Arizona that Attorney General Tom Horne recently issued a consumer alert warning the public about potential consumer fraud problemsrelated to solar systems. The alert noted that there is no guarantee that installing solar systems will reduce consumers’ total electricity costs, especially when leasing and financing payments are taken into account. The alert also mentioned that some companies “engage in unethical behavior to obtain more customers and perform more installs.”

Issues abound in California as well. Yelp reviews of SolarCity in Sacramento show a number of problems. One customer reported that installers drilled random holes all over his roof trying to locate rafters to anchor the solar panels on. Rain began leaking in and it took a slew of repair attempts before the issue was finally fixed. Other customers experienced long delays for installation and repairs, difficulty reaching customer service representatives, and unclear responses.

The Better Business Bureau of Greater San Francisco (which encompasses SolarCity’s headquarters in San Mateo), has aggregated consumer complaints from across the country.

 

[elektra]

We must pay taxes to subsidize Solar and we also get crippling rate hikes.

California regulators approve higher electricity rates for most residents

The commission adopted a plan for two price tiers for residential customers, with a 25% price increase as households use more power. Currently, prices more than double in many locations as heavy users use more electricity.

A higher premium will remain in place for a much smaller percentage of customers under a new "super-user electricity surcharge," designed to penalize energy guzzling and encourage conservation.

 

[Old Rocks]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/24/b...-win-on-price-vs-conventional-fuels.html?_r=0

In Texas, Austin Energy signed a deal this spring for 20 years of output from a solar farm at less than 5 cents a kilowatt-hour. In September, the Grand River Dam Authority in Oklahoma announced its approval of a new agreement to buy power from a new wind farm expected to be completed next year. Grand River estimated the deal would save its customers roughly $50 million from the project.

And, also in Oklahoma, American Electric Power ended up tripling the amount of wind power it had originally sought after seeing how low the bids came in last year.

“Wind was on sale — it was a Blue Light Special,” said Jay Godfrey, managing director of renewable energy for the company. He noted that Oklahoma, unlike many states, did not require utilities to buy power from renewable sources.

“We were doing it because it made sense for our ratepayers,” he said.

According to a study by the investment banking firm Lazard, the cost of utility-scale solar energy is as low as 5.6 cents a kilowatt-hour, and wind is as low as 1.4 cents. In comparison, natural gas comes at 6.1 cents a kilowatt-hour on the low end and coal at 6.6 cents. Without subsidies, the firm’s analysis shows, solar costs about 7.2 cents a kilowatt-hour at the low end, with wind at 3.7 cents.

Solar and wind will lower the price of energy.

 

[elektra]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/24/b...-win-on-price-vs-conventional-fuels.html?_r=0

In Texas, Austin Energy signed a deal this spring for 20 years of output from a solar farm at less than 5 cents a kilowatt-hour. In September, the Grand River Dam Authority in Oklahoma announced its approval of a new agreement to buy power from a new wind farm expected to be completed next year. Grand River estimated the deal would save its customers roughly $50 million from the project.

And, also in Oklahoma, American Electric Power ended up tripling the amount of wind power it had originally sought after seeing how low the bids came in last year.

“Wind was on sale — it was a Blue Light Special,” said Jay Godfrey, managing director of renewable energy for the company. He noted that Oklahoma, unlike many states, did not require utilities to buy power from renewable sources.

“We were doing it because it made sense for our ratepayers,” he said.

According to a study by the investment banking firm Lazard, the cost of utility-scale solar energy is as low as 5.6 cents a kilowatt-hour, and wind is as low as 1.4 cents. In comparison, natural gas comes at 6.1 cents a kilowatt-hour on the low end and coal at 6.6 cents. Without subsidies, the firm’s analysis shows, solar costs about 7.2 cents a kilowatt-hour at the low end, with wind at 3.7 cents.

Solar and wind will lower the price of energy.

Solar and Wind are more expensive according to your article Old Crock, higher taxes and higher electric bills dictated by a powerful central government, we are forced to subsidize Wall Street.

Those prices were made possible by generous subsidies that could soon diminish or expire

 

[Old Rocks]

Better take that fourth grade remedial math class, Elektra.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/24/b...-win-on-price-vs-conventional-fuels.html?_r=0

In comparison, natural gas comes at 6.1 cents a kilowatt-hour on the low end and coal at 6.6 cents. Without subsidies, the firm’s analysis shows, solar costs about 7.2 cents a kilowatt-hour at the low end, with wind at 3.7 cents.

 

[elektra]

Better take that fourth grade remedial math class, Elektra.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/24/b...-win-on-price-vs-conventional-fuels.html?_r=0

In comparison, natural gas comes at 6.1 cents a kilowatt-hour on the low end and coal at 6.6 cents. Without subsidies, the firm’s analysis shows, solar costs about 7.2 cents a kilowatt-hour at the low end, with wind at 3.7 cents.

Show us the analysis, give us the link to the study Old Crock.

Post a link to the Study, without the study what the New York Times posts is simple propaganda.
Your article is old,

NOV. 23, 2014

Old Crock, how about posting something from this year, my article is much newer, and specifically addresses the low figures given by Lazard.

But either way if you are going to use Lazard as a source, as you say Old Crock, LINK, LINK, LINK. Otherwise you can be known as a liar, link to the source, not to an article which is nothing more than propaganda.

Being the scientific mind that Old Crock is, I am sure Old Crock would rather present the actual study than one sentence taken out of context.

Either way, as long as Old Crock is using articles as fact, I trump your article with an article that is newer, and states Lazard is using low figures when the true cost is 3 times the amount.

http://www.newsweek.com/whats-true-cost-wind-power-321480

ON 4/11/15 AT 5:22 PM
TALLYING THE TRUE COSTS OF WIND
Depending on which factors are included, estimates for the cost of wind power vary wildly. Lazard claims the cost of wind power ranges from $37 to $81 per megawatt-hour, while Michael Giberson at the Center for Energy Commerce at Texas Tech University suggests it’s closer to $149. Our analysis in an upcoming report explores this wide gap in cost estimates, finding that most studies underestimate the genuine cost of wind because they overlook key factors.

 

[Old Rocks]

http://www.newsweek.com/whats-true-cost-wind-power-321480

Editor's note: The author of this piece, Randy Simmons, is the Charles G. Koch professor of political economy at Utah State University. He's also a senior fellow at the Koch- and ExxonMobil-fundedProperty and Environment Research Center. These ties to the oil industry weren't originally disclosed in this piece.

Nothing more needs to be said.

 

[elektra]

http://www.newsweek.com/whats-true-cost-wind-power-321480

Editor's note: The author of this piece, Randy Simmons, is the Charles G. Koch professor of political economy at Utah State University. He's also a senior fellow at the Koch- and ExxonMobil-fundedProperty and Environment Research Center. These ties to the oil industry weren't originally disclosed in this piece.

Nothing more needs to be said.

Of course not, not when you get cornered, you run. Your figures come from those who profit from wind power and solar, yet that is okay?

So post the study so we can actually discuss something other than heresey.

Or should we play how you play and simply call you a liar.

Link to the lazar study old crock.