More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Mark Sinclair

GET UPDATES FROM Mark Sinclair
 

Smart Solar Marketing

Posted: 09/23/09 03:40 PM ET

A window of opportunity has opened in the world of solar power. With the cost of solar panels decreasing as well as expanded state and federal incentives, the average American can now have a realistic reason to go solar.

But there's a problem: Americans still believe that solar energy technology is too expensive, unreliable, and hard to purchase. As a result, solar comprises less than a fraction of 1% of U.S. electricity generation and is selling to only a small group of early adopters. To overcome these misperceptions and create a robust marketplace, the solar industry must begin to market solar energy like Coca-Cola sells soda or McDonald's sells hamburgers. Essentially, the industry must create a greater demand for solar energy than exists now. For the solar power industry to grow and attract mainstream buyers, it must create a new "buzz" about the technology. From a marketing perspective, if granite counter-tops are in demand for new homes, solar should be too.

Today, states and the federal government are spending a considerable amount of money on solar incentives. In addition to creating these financial inducements, part of the public funding should be used to teach people about the financial advantages and overall benefits of having solar energy in their lives. No amount of tax credits is going to get Americans to buy into solar if they don't think it is reliable. States must start to think and act like retailers. By creating new marketing initiatives, solar incentive programs can help potential customers understand that solar power is both a smart financial investment and a reliable source of energy, and that there are many new state and utility financing programs that make buying solar as easy as financing a car.

Increasing consumer interest is not the only reason that a better marketing strategy is important. The more consumers invest in solar panels, the more green jobs will be created. There are examples where this marketing strategy is working in states like Arizona, California, Connecticut and Oregon, and in the Department of Energy's "Solar America Cities" partnership. These state and federal programs are headed in the right direction. Just as states compete against one another today for technology, corporate investment and manufacturing jobs, they also compete for clean energy jobs. If solar providers don't see a robust market in one state, they will just move their operation to another. With that company could go hundreds of green jobs, and the wealth that's created by economic opportunity.

To be effective retailers and compete in this new green economy, it is important for states to learn how to market solar effectively. Recent research by SmartPower, an energy marketing nonprofit, found that in the clean energy area, the traditional "environmental" or "save the planet" message is not compelling to the broader public. However, when renewable energy is depicted as a cost-saving measure, the public is more likely to adopt solar. Consumers must hear the positive message that solar can reduce a homeowner's annual electric bill by as much as 60% and increase a home's property value an average of $20 for every $1 annual reduction in utility costs (Source: U.S. Housing and Urban Development Department, CNN.) The industry needs to do a better job of showing that a solar home is a wise investment.

So, while the future of solar looks bright, solar programs, state clean energy funds and the industry must learn to tell its "value" story. Doing so will mean stronger state economies, more jobs, a cleaner environment and another step toward energy independence.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 12
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
04:55 AM on 09/25/2009
I have found an answer, finally, for all my questions.

To produce 300kwh a month, in NE PA, will cost $24,000 if I buy a solar system with cash. The payback period is 22 to 34 years depending on how much my electrical costs go up each year.

Because I do not earn enough money for any tax credits and PA has no rebate program I will pay full price for the installation. I also do not have any knowledge of a feed in tariff in PA.

And there is no 20 year guarantee that the system will be trouble free!!!
10:41 PM on 09/24/2009
With the price of solar panels approacing $1/Wp we have reason to be optimistic. However, I have considerable concern about the relaibility of the thin film stacks. With thermal cycling of 100's of degrees Celsius I worry about cracking and delamination. The standard 85-85 tests for semiconductors aren't good enough for solar. All we need is to start seeing failures after deployment in homeowner rooftop systems and the market will get gun-shy real fast. Large scale demo projects of GW capacity is warranted in locations of widely disparate climate conditions. Hey, even outdodr paint is tested to exposures fro 5 years before new formulations are marketed, We need better data than taht for solar.

If someone wants to put inexpensive solar panels on their roof, go right ahead, but don't say you weren't warned.
04:46 AM on 09/25/2009
You are correct. I have used Sharps solar calculator and found that the payback period for a solar installation costing $24,000 is between 22 and 34 years!!! This is unacceptable and foolish.

I have no respect for those "environmentalists" who are " marketing " alternative energy while spreading false information.

What I found, using Sharp's calculator, is that the less electrical energy I use, the greater the payback period from savings. Also, the calculator uses $140,000 a year income and calculates a "tax benefit credit" which remains the same even at a lower income level of $20,000 a year.

In other words, "garbage in, garbage out ".

Solar is not for everyone and I resent our government subsidizing the foreign manufacturers with taxpayer money.

In states like PA ( where I live ), conservation, coal and natural gas are better alternatives than solar.

Sorry Shelia but you are not making any sense.
09:28 AM on 09/24/2009
Most manufacturing of solar is done abroad, much of it in Asia. US manufacturers won't be able to compete because costs are too high. First Solar, for example, does all their manufacturing in Malaysia. If more folks move from electricity from utility companies to solar, it will transfer a lot of money away from US utility companies, natural gas and coal companies, manufacturers that support nat gas and coal, etc and have that money go abroad to Asia. Is that a recipe for a better economy? I don't think so. And most those green programs are run by an excessively large number of govt bureaucrats, which in the long run makes our economy poorer by increasing inefficiency and created more govt debt. I think we need to focus on natural gas and nuclear. We have tremendous natural gas resources in this country and it's a very clean fuel. Increased demand for nat gas will create jobs in places like Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Louisiana, where the inland shale areas are.
07:50 AM on 09/24/2009
I have been trying to find out what rooftop solar really costs and how it will benefit me.

So far, all you solar backers do is talk, talk, talk...but no cost /benefit analysis. Is electricity from solar power cheaper than electricity from coal? How long will a rooftop solar setup last...10 years, 20 years or more? Does anybody know?

I live in northeast Pa. I do not see very many rooftop systems in any of the towns that are within 20 miles of my home. WHY?

I am tired of all the HYPE. Marketing isn't going to convince me to go solar. Saving me money with cheaper electricity is.

Also, I am very conservation oriented. I use an average of 300 kilowatt hours of electricity a month.
So what will a solar installation cost to produce 300kwh of electricity per month?
11:37 PM on 09/23/2009
It is very important to have more consumer-focused marketing efforts behind solar energy products and brands. Consumers must see them as approachable and, above all, relevant in their lives. All of us must remember have to talk with consumers - not at them - in a way they can easily understand and act upon. Greater understanding equals greater brand acceptance equals relationships...and that equals sales. Coke and McDonald's don't sell the technology behind their brands - they sell the experience of using them. Solar technology marketers could benefit from doing the same. When we introduce SolarChoice Heaters this Friday (http://solarchoiceheat.com), we will be very focused on communicating our message without any techno-speak...and focusing on one clear benefit. And we're communicating the technology of our passive solar heaters in simple language and supporting graphics. Ours is a passive solar product anyone can own at a very affordable price...helping households across the country to remove at least a toe from their carbon footprint.

David Strandberg, Minneapolis
SolarChoice Heat
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
drkazmd65
Mom Taught me - Question Everything - Thanks Mom!
10:06 PM on 09/23/2009
Tax credits,... or no tax credits,... Solar panels are on the 'list' of things I want to do as home improvement over the next year or so.

Right after paying down some old credit card debt,... that's next on my list.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:47 PM on 09/23/2009
Where are our loans and feed in tariffs?

The issue is not "marketing," it is "lousy policy that prevents return on investment for anyone other than a huge over-consumer." We would ALL put PV on our roofs if we were allowed to size our systems however we wanted (instead of being constrained by pro-utility caps), if we were paid fairly for all our excess PEAKER power (instead of being forced to give it to utilities for free) and if we didn't have to pay 25 years' worth of electricity bills, upfront, for a system we may only benefit from for 5 years (as in, the average length of time people stay in their homes).

We need GOOD ENERGY POLICY more than advertising. The panels sell themselves in EVERY SINGLE PLACE THERE IS A DECENT FEED IN TARIFF - 100% of AB 811 loans and legitimate FIT programs are OVERSUBSCRIBED.

So, let's save our marketing money and use it to lobby against the Big Energy interests that are destroying our chance at energy independence. Start in CA, one of the worst greenwashing states of them all.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nirek
Proud progressive Vietnam vet. against WAR
03:01 PM on 09/23/2009
I have 24 panels and love them. Net metering and have a credit of 1593 KWH for winter. I use 8-19 KWH per day.

Nirek
07:56 AM on 09/24/2009
nirek,

What did your installation cost you? Where do you live? What is the payback period for the investment you made?

I would appreciate your reply.
photo
SeenItBefore
Ya want to super size that?
01:36 PM on 09/25/2009
JXJASON

Moved to Texas in '92 and got into it with the power co-op wanting to run lines through old growth oaks. Started considering alternates, solar, wind etc.

I have a good site for both. Carrizo Springs was disassembling and recycling panels. I bought cheap, unframed bronze at $199. After installing the first quad, I was impressed, the panels were rated 80% because they were burned, I found them to be producing 89%. Ordered another quad. Added two BP laser cut 85 watt, a 1800 sinewave inverter, controllers and am on the second battery bank.

The system produced 10-12 amps per hour, summer, and as much as 18 amps per hour winter. When I'm at the studio, I use two computers, listen to LOUD music, run fans, lights, tv and a standard mini fridge. Short solar days in the winter are supplimented by a 400 watt wind genny, bought used. Have run short only 3 times in the last 16 years.

Total cost for my system is $2,400. $2,400/192 months = $12.50 per month. The local co-op charges $20.00 per month to be a member and you get NO electricity.

The difficulty most have is maintainence. They have to be cleaned and the batteries have to be watered, but, small enough to warrant the savings. Now a large household is a problem where payback is concerned. Do the numbers, but keep in mind, cutting CO2 is the goal.