Solar Through the Looking Glass

The bankruptcy of one company -- Solyndra -- is being used by oil and coal company agents to portray solar electricity as a failure. It's an outrage how this story is being spun upside down while solar's success is ignored.

I've always been pro-solar -- I just installed a large system on my roof -- but even I was surprised at a recent Sierra Club meeting by the news that solar has come down so rapidly in price that it's now cheaper than new nuclear, coal or natural gas in California. And as prices shoot down quickly driven by increasing demand, it will compete soon nationwide.

But people have a hard time believing this. I recently told one editor that in over a dozen states you can lease a solar system for your roof at no cost and with immediate guaranteed savings on your utility bill. She just wouldn't believe it. Everyone knows solar is too expensive. I was promoting a free lunch, she said! But it's true -- even in the northeast, as the web sites of SunRun, Sungevity and Solar City, among others, can attest.

I suppose when cell phones first came out costing $4,000 you'd have been laughed at for predicting in a few years cell phones with a contract would be free, or DVD players would go from $500 to $50. But each time solar or any electronics manufacturing volume doubles, the price comes down around 20%.

Is this too much of a good news story? 100,000 people now work in the U.S. solar industry. Solar has been called "the next Saudi Arabia" but the relatively small subsidies we provide it as a nation are made a big issue, more than the far greater subsidies to dirty old fuels. The solar subsidies have fueled huge price decreases while our oil and coal subsidies support ever-increasing prices. But the controversy is about solar? And the conclusion is that green jobs aren't happening?

Ok so the government, starting under President Bush, made a bad bet on Solyndra, which was hurt precisely by the rapidly falling prices of other solar technologies. But it was only 1 percent of the DOE loan program -- every venture capitalist makes bets that fail. Meanwhile, the small government subsidies to solar have enabled booming demand and rapid price reductions. I feel like Lewis Carroll -- the world is truly upside down. Success is failure.

And dare I mention that this technology, when widely adopted, might save New York from building sea walls from climate change or save Rick Perry's state from becoming toast? And that solar creates seven times more jobs than fossil fuel investments? And that its cost can never go up, as the fuel is -- oh my goodness, another free lunch statement -- free?

Isn't it ridiculous that we let the dirty fuel propagandists have the upper hand, and that someone has to intervene to keep the discussion honest? Or maybe we should just give the Saudi Arabia of the future to China.

David Fenton is the CEO of Fenton, a communications firm long involved in renewable energy and climate change.

 

Comments

[olerealist]

11:40 AM on 10/01/2011

I GIVE THE ABOVE David FentonCEO, Fenton, Inc. A DOUBLLE A PLUS .

NATIONAL INDUSTIAL POLICY sailing in the right direction but using the wrong boat.

The Dept. of Energy’s green energy loan guaranty program was set up in 2005. In fact the SOLYNDRA guaranty had been initiated by the Bush administration. So the allegation “crony capitalization” overlaps White House administrations even re Solyndra.

In any even this bankruptcy gives a black eye to the guaranty program. Even more unfortunately it falsely discredit’s the broader concept of nationality industrial policy re promoting innovation, import export balance, and even job creation.

It is unfortunate but true that the Solyndra guaranty was rushed by two powerful “political forces, to wit: (1) the urgency of getting “green” energy saving enterprises going, and (2) the urgency of job creation. A recent Congressional hearing suggests that terrible flaws may have existed in the internal management of Solyndra. The D of E itself requires some severe changes of executive personnel.

Solyndra must not be allowed to be the poster child for defaming a great program. We beat the Soviets in the race to the moon. It is more important that we not be sidetracked by the rightist propagandists in the race to beat or equal China in this marvelous solar energy matter. Right now they are ahead of us.

[Eenkling]

03:37 PM on 09/28/2011

While I agree with what this author stated, it is just another example of a corporation given a blank check with no responsibility for how the money is spent. It is reminiscent of when this government gave banks loans and then the financial institutions turned around and gave their CEO's a huge windfall. I would like to see financial responsibility BEFORE the money is spent. If a company is granted 500 million dollars they should have to show that they need 1 million for a specific piece of equipment and then given a check for a specific amount from their available loan to cover that cost. Why did this government hand them a blank check without accountability?

[she343]

01:23 PM on 09/29/2011

because it wasn't a blank check? company was vetted--private investment money was secured--a change in the price of it's competitors caused the problem ( can anyone "predict" such changes-legally?)

[Guitarsandmore]

08:42 PM on 09/20/2011

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/five-myths-about-the-solyndra-collapse/2011/09/14/gIQAfkyvRK_blog.html

Five myths about the Solyndra collapse

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/five-myths-about-the-solyndra-collapse/2011/09/14/gIQAfkyvRK_blog.html

[Matt Norman]

11:21 AM on 09/20/2011

Lets see the stimulus has $38 billion for clean energy about $19 billion has been spent and it has create 3,545 jobs that about $5.4 million per job. Let just divide the money up and give it to people.

[she343]

01:25 PM on 09/29/2011

and they can use it to pay for big coal?.........forgot a few pieces to the puzzle

[Matt Norman]

02:22 PM on 09/29/2011

If there is big coal is the big solar?

[ChrisInYao]

10:40 AM on 09/20/2011

Technologies are always boosting better solar collectors. Graphene may become a big contributor because of it's superior electrical qualities. Not only in panels on the roof but in glass as well, solar is making significant gains. As long as there are innovative people in the world, the world's going toward solar power and away from all those innovative breakthroughs in fossil fuels. Oh, forgot. There aren't any.

[Rory Canfield]

03:15 PM on 09/20/2011

So how do you overcome the times where the sun doesn't shine and panels deliver no power? What is your backup?

[AVCVanadium]

04:52 PM on 09/20/2011

Vanadium Redox Flow Batteries are the answer to your question.

"Obama Hails Vanadium Energy Breakthrough" : http://www.resourceinvestor.com/News/2011/3/Pages/Obama-Hails-Vanadium-Energy-Breakthrough-.aspx

http://www.americanvanadium.com/disclaimer.php

[Genders]

07:04 PM on 09/20/2011

Waste bio char bio fuels burned in existing fossil generators. Duh.

Wind tends to produce when solar does not, which also helps.

what good is electricity when the radiative spew kills you with cancer? and the nuclear costs bankrupts you?

[bd7769]

08:02 AM on 09/20/2011

I looked into solar panels on my house, it would cost me .20/kilowatt, Potomac Edison charges .05/kilowatt, and the net metering does not offset taxes and transmission charges. Even with the grant money and tax credits it will take 20 years to break even on the investment without including any projected maintenance costs of the panels.

I did not decided to install the panels, it did not make good economic sense for me.

Until the economic costs are feasible Solar panels are not a good choice for the average home owner.

[leftcoastindy]

11:28 AM on 09/20/2011

A good decision based on your numbers. 20 cents a kilowatt is a good price. In Soutthern Califonia we pay over 24 in some areas, so the payoff can be as low as 10 years.

[bd7769]

01:44 PM on 09/20/2011

If the payback is under 7 years without a governement subsidy, then solar would take off like a rocket.

[Eenkling]

03:45 PM on 09/28/2011

If there were MORE solar companies to install the panels they would be cheaper. Since there are not many solar companies they can charge whatever they want. This nation should've started investing more money into solar energy companies more than 40 years ago, but our government has been allowing the oil producing companies to convince them that it wasn't necessary to do so. Now this country is being held hostage by OPEC, and they are the direct cause of the financial crisis in this nation. We don't have to go to war with any oil producing countries in the Middle East. They already won the war right here on our turf. They can do whatever they want t us, raise our oil costs, bankrupt this nation, and our government can do nothing.

[MUDPUPPY]

05:55 AM on 09/20/2011

Solar panels will be cheaper. Unfortunately we will be buying them from the Chinese because we have been very unwise in how we have invested in solar panel science and production.

[Matt Norman]

11:04 AM on 09/20/2011

Nope its just cheaper to pay labor at $2 a day as opposed to $18 an hour.

[Eenkling]

03:46 PM on 09/28/2011

How cheap is it when we have no marketable companies in this nation, and no companies that produce jobs?

[Gebby]

12:24 AM on 09/20/2011

Dirty fuel propagandists have the upper hand because they advertise on tv on most news programs or channels. This tv stations and other media then run stories favoring the oil story ignoring the solar story. We have all seen the ads. BP used to run an ad about being green. Chevron runs an ad that they will be ready when solar ismready, implying solar is not yet ready. Exxon says they are good for the economy creating jobs now. Fossil fuel industry had job losses. But the media is bought.

[Eenkling]

03:48 PM on 09/28/2011

I LOVE how EXXON has a commercial they are currently running stating how they are producing thousands of jobs and creating more energy. The thing they don't openly state is that all of the jobs are in Canada.

[Genatco Ltd]

09:03 PM on 09/19/2011

Many of those solar panel fields have weeds growing up through them or have gone bankrupt as well. Not saying solar panels are bad they just don't get people off the grid completly, grid being at mercy to weather conditions as well. Panels also do little or noting for give true energy independence to the individual when still connected to the over loaded grid. Don't bother a comment if you don't actually own a house or business or live in an apartment because U just don't understanbd until U write the check each month for electricity or natural gas for 35 years. I am sick to death of all the support Obama gave to solar and wind while completely discounting other technologies of Main Street the mother of invention. My companies solution to free energy grid domination and big OIL at the gas pump will take decades if not centuries at this pace; http://www.genatco.com Co2 experiment simply shows the simple facts of Co2 buildup http://vimeo.com/climaterealityproject/climate101

[PureEnergy]

10:53 PM on 09/19/2011

PMMs are neat. They won't solve any energy problems, but they're fun to look at.

[Genatco Ltd]

10:09 AM on 09/20/2011

When they are self sustaining and connected to a large generator 100+ kilowatts gridless power becomes a reality. Driving light weight statorless axial flux generators are the holy grail of electric power generation although they require higher velocity rotors of 100k RPM and step down transformers. When mankind keeps doing the same thing for 120 years and getting the same results this is truely insanity; Einstein.

[captioned]

11:22 PM on 09/19/2011

Main Street is the mother of invention!? I think I'll go with the solar lease, thanks. I've worked on enough gen-sets, thanks

[Genatco Ltd]

10:21 AM on 09/20/2011

Sorry you feel jobs in Colorado Voltmaster plant are not worthy of being moved to Prime Power status in homes and businesses as they were designed for. Bet you never paralleled two gensets from initial startup each with electronic voltage regulation. The point everyone misses is the domination the grid has over our wallets FOREVER from the cradle to the cript. If that is not economic slavery by the top 2% income erners over the rest of mankind then I'm not really typing this and nothing unreal exists.

[banana republican]

07:48 PM on 09/19/2011

Help me remember. These cheap cell phones and DVD are all produced in N. Dakota now, right?

[leftcoastindy]

11:31 AM on 09/20/2011

anything that is heavy has a shot at being mfg in the US. shipping cost can make the difference

[sheila]

07:29 PM on 09/19/2011

and if we could get PACE loans and feed in tariffs, WE personally could get all that upside that the leasing companies are getting from us. not surprisingly, SunRun fought very hard to ensure that people would not be allowed PACE financing so they could monopolize the rooftop market, then the sellouts at SC, TWS, CBC and elsewhere had the nerve to accept large kickbacks for endorsing SunRun, despite the terrible harm they had done to the legitimate rooftop solar possibilities in this country.

the ONLY reason the price of solar has dropped is because GERMANY has implemented an aggressive feed in tariff so that DEMOCRATICALLY-owned, not corporate-owned rooftop solar could become ubiquitous enough to spur substantial price drops. imagine what would happen if America actually followed suit - rooftop PV in Germany is already hugely less expensive than wilderness-killing Big Solar here.

PACE loans and feed in tariffs - forget about those middlemen who add no value and skim all the money!

[oneeasyrider]

06:39 PM on 09/19/2011

And the debate continues, by people who don’t have a clue what they are talking about (I’m laughing and shaking my head). Let me attempt to explain what solar deniers just can’t seem to grasp.

The digital smart meter at the service panel acts as your residential power exchange. What does that mean? Excess power generated by solar panels flow past the meter (is recorded) continuing along the grid until it finds a neighbor who demands power.

When solar panels are dormant desired power flows from the grid into the residence (again recorded).

At the end of the year, either you consumed more power -- or delivered more power -- to the grid. Deliver more power and your use is 100% generated by your solar panels. Use more power and you owe the power company for the offset (what you consumed) – which means recalculate and ad more panels if you like.

Will this end the debate…I wish,…not a chance!

[leftcoastindy]

04:56 PM on 09/19/2011

For those who are nieve enough to believe the sun cannot provide our energy needs, why are utility companies investing in solar in a big way? Do you know something they don't?

http://blog.cleantechies.com/2011/09/16/who-says-solar-is-too-expensive/

[alpina]

04:34 PM on 09/19/2011

I don't deny that a solar system is more ecologically friendly than a coal fire power plant. It is however, completely inefficient, unreliable and is not, nor has it ever been cost effective. Even with lowered costs, improved output AND subsidies paid for with taxpayer dollars, solar systems cost more than they save which is what everyone told obama BEFORE he gave millions to Solyendra. Currently, you lay out thousands for a system that is supposed to pay for itself in 15 to 20 years. Problem is, the panels deteriorate and produce less and less over time stretching out that recapture date further and further. Most likely they will need replacing in 7 to 10 years meaning that your system is upside down by a factor of 50%. The tax credits would have to pay for the whole thing which means that we're artificially supporting an industry that would fail on its own in the marketplace. Green technology is a fine idea but solar (in its current form) is not a viable option for anyone other than those living in remote areas off the grid.

[leftcoastindy]

04:51 PM on 09/19/2011

Not cost effective? Maybe you should inform the electiricity companies that are building generation facilities as fast as possible.

http://blog.cleantechies.com/2011/09/16/who-says-solar-is-too-expensive/

Most likely?!? lol

Feel free to post any evidence that suggest panels failing in 7 to 10 years. Most of the mfgers gaurentee them for 15 to 25 years.

[alpina]

04:16 AM on 09/20/2011

A simple google search for "solar panels not cost effective" turns up 7,280,000 results. Pick one.

[sheila]

07:31 PM on 09/19/2011

no offense, but you know absolutely nothing about solar power, it's cost or its lifespan.

[Bibulus]

04:31 PM on 09/19/2011

Good article, however, as Rory Canfield and others who totally are NOT paid shills for the dead-dinosaur lobby will surely tell you, there is no viable future for a solar or renewable energy economy when Holy Price Points tell us fossil-fuels are our best bet moving forward, it's all quite logical!
Look to the FUTURE!
Look to COAL!
War is Peace!
Freedom is Slavery!
Ignorance is Strength!

Perry/Cthulu '12