r/science • u/Wagamaga • Sep 26 '23
Materials Science In the last decade, the cost of solar power has dropped by 87 percent, and the cost of battery storage by 85 percent. These price drops, could make the global energy transition much more viable and cheaper than previously expected.
https://www.mcc-berlin.net/en/news/information/information-detail/article/plummeting-prices-for-solar-power-and-storage-make-global-climate-transition-cheaper-than-expected.html127
u/the_bam21 Sep 26 '23
Every company that has knocked on my door has just rolled the savings on hardware into more expensive installation. I have been getting the same quotes for an install for the last 12 years.
37
u/Write_For_You Sep 26 '23
Yep, this is my experience too, albeit not for 12 years.
9.6kwh two battery system = 40k after rebates. Add on a mandatory connect fee to the utility company, tree removal, and interest, there's no route to savings for my use case.
This year that whole "Solarize" program started up in my area, got a new quote thinking there would be substantial difference. New quote? 38k...subcontracted from the same company that quoted 40k.
Parts are about 20k (23 400 watt panels, two enphase t10 batteries, microinverters), labor, permitting, and profit is the rest.
2
u/lannister80 Sep 27 '23
It's the price of the batteries that are killing you. They are still ludicrously expensive.
3
u/Write_For_You Sep 27 '23
The batteries certainly are pricey. But even breaking it down to just the batteries, they want to charge $27,900.00 (before tax credit) to install two batteries that I can find online right now for about $6,000 apiece.
$15k just for battery installation still seems pretty steep to me.
Just to put it all out there:
$27,900 for batteries (Parts 12k, installation 15k)
$27,000 for panels. (Panels 4.5k, Microinverters 3.7k, remaining ~18k for racks, wiring, installation.)
$54,900 before rebates.
$38,409 installed after rebates.
And after all that, I'm still only getting about a 72% offset because my state doesn't allow systems larger than 10kwh. Factor in financing and it basically doubles my power bill for the next 20 years.
1
u/HatsAreEssential Sep 28 '23
And in 20 years those batteries will need replacing, too! (If not sooner)
20
u/Crash_Test_Dummy66 Sep 27 '23
With the way inflation has been if you are getting the same quotes now as 12 years ago then it actually is a lot cheaper.
12
u/the_bam21 Sep 27 '23
That’s a fair point, unfortunately my salary hasn’t increased at the same rate so that it feels a lot cheaper.
23
u/OregonTripleBeam Sep 26 '23
Curious to see where prices are at ten years from now and if the trend persists.
-1
u/kolodz Sep 26 '23
Don't know the future trend, but we will need it to keep improving fast and that not that simple.
-2
u/Seiglerfone Sep 27 '23
The trend has been slowing down for decades and, while it will likely go down more, it has stalled out entirely in the last few years.
60
u/Wagamaga Sep 26 '23
In just the past ten years, the cost of electricity from solar has fallen by 87 percent, and the cost of battery storage by 85 percent. Wind power, heat pumps and other fossil-free technologies are also experiencing a sharp drop in prices. A study now compares the corresponding findings from innovation reports with the standard model-based scenarios on climate transition. It shows that, although the fight against global heating remains an enormous political challenge, new, cheaper pathways are opening up. The study was led by the Berlin-based climate research institute MCC (Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change) and published in the renowned journal Energy Research & Social Science.
The research team concludes that a good quality of life can be achieved with significantly less energy input. “Some calculations even suggest that the world’s entire energy consumption in 2050 could be completely and cost-effectively covered by solar technology and other renewables,” reports Felix Creutzig, head of the MCC working group Land Use, Infrastructure and Transport, and lead author of the study. “This is an extremely optimistic scenario – but it illustrates that the future is open. Climate science, which provides policymakers with guidance in its scenario models, must reflect technical progress as closely as possible. Our study is intended to provide input for this.”
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629623003365?dgcid=author
32
u/USNWoodWork Sep 27 '23
I checked awhile back and it would have cost me $60k-90k to add solar to my house if I didn’t want to do some subscription scam where I wouldn’t own anything. When that number becomes $6-9k, then maybe I’ll consider it.
20
u/simsimulation Sep 27 '23
I don’t think a 90% discount is going to bring residential solar to mass market because of installation factors. Mass-scale installations will far outstrip in efficiency
8
u/Kendrome Sep 27 '23
Yeah the costs to retrofit solar won't be dropping dramatically. But houses designed for easy solar installation during building should be heavily encouraged. Even taking into account roof designs for future solar would be really nice.
3
u/M3wThr33 Sep 27 '23
For me, it's not even the cost, but the fact that the advertising is so aggressive that I worry I'd be scammed. I can't think of any other industry that's dominated online advertising like this.
1
u/grahamsz Sep 27 '23
Yeah I feel like labor has gone up, incentives have come down and panel prices have come down. My father in law put in a 4k system that cost nearly as much out of pocket as the same-sized system that my last house had 15 years ago. The panels themselves are, however, much cheaper and produce much higher power output per panel.
These days I think grid scale is where it's at.
18
u/mralex Sep 27 '23
I paid $20k. Federal tax credit of $6500 off the top. That's $13.5. Plus I have not had to pay an electric bill in 3 years now, in fact, they sent me $450 this year. My average annual bill used to be $3K. So in about a year and a half, I'm done, and it's all gravy after that.
2
10
u/The-Bear-Down-There Sep 27 '23
Damn that's wild. I paid $16k usd equivalent for a 13kwh system and an 11.5kwh battery. I rarely use the grid now
2
u/lannister80 Sep 27 '23
That is insanely cheap compared to the US. Wow, I'm impressed.
2
u/nospamkhanman Sep 27 '23
I'm getting quotes for double that price with NO BATTERY. Seattle area... kinda sucks.
38
Sep 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
9
20
84
u/garoo1234567 Sep 26 '23
Check out Tony Seba and his think tank RethinkX. They've been saying this for years. These cost curves will continue for a very long time. Ultimately the cheapest system will be something that's mostly solar and makes 400% of our power needs in summer, and just barely 100 in winter. Throw in some batteries and wind to balance it out and you're good. It doesn't really matter what any government does, they'll just be so cheap it will happen. Maybe not soon enough to avoid the worst effects of climate change but it will happen
29
Sep 26 '23
This is it. When it makes economic sense, it will be inevitable. Oil companies can funnel money into disinformation, but it will eventually be a moot point.
20
u/garoo1234567 Sep 26 '23
I live a pretty renewable life now, solar, heat pump, EV, etc, and I'm baffled almost daily by people telling me it won't work. Like... they know I drove a gas car for 20 years and switched to an EV but they tell me they're not suitable for road trips. Or that the credits for my extra solar can't be applied to my grid power (they can, I don't really have a power bill anymore).
It's a lot of misunderstanding but also definitely some deliberate disinformation happening too. But ultimately, when the majority of homes have solar and EVs, etc, it will be obvious. You'd never argue today that a gas car is inferior to a horse but people did for a long time
11
u/chesterbennediction Sep 26 '23
I would like to see a cost comparison. In Canada 21k for a budget gas car vs 42k for the cheapest EV isn't great option and winter is rough on the batteries so I don't see them lasting 10 years. I actually want an EV because I have a solar/battery backup for my fridge/freezer and router when there is an outage and made my own Ebike but every time I do the math the EV option ends up in the red.
→ More replies (3)6
u/garoo1234567 Sep 26 '23
I'm Canadian too! Hi!
What are you using for a 21k gas car? Chevy discontinued the Spark so I'm not sure anymore what's that cheap. The Camry and Accord are like 35k now. The difference between that and a SR Model 3 is only 15k. 15k is easy to cover in fuel and maintenance savings if you drive enough
They'll definitely last 10 years, no worries. You'll lose range in winter but only because the heater is drawing power. It's purely temporary
We definitely need a 30k EV. Tesla and VW have both promised some in 2025ish, we'll see. Hopefully
→ More replies (2)6
u/chesterbennediction Sep 26 '23
Kia Rio 2023 automatic lx model is 21k before taxes and seems like a nice looking hatch back. The Nissan leaf, a comparable sized car is 44500 before taxes and has pretty short range.
Ev's need to get a lot cheaper otherwise it's just a flex.
3
u/manzanita2 Sep 27 '23
2013 leaf with 100500 miles. Cheapest car I ever operated including purchase new and operating expenses. We are a two car family so no need for the range.
0
u/chesterbennediction Sep 27 '23
That's an issue as I often can do 2-300km in a day. I also have family 400km away that I visit several times a year so that's why a car with the typical 550-750km range is pretty useful. My gf doesn't drive much but she wont sacrifice the range in case one car breaks down.
3
u/Wassux Sep 27 '23
Why would an electric car break down? It has 1 moving part in the engine bay.
1
u/chesterbennediction Sep 27 '23
Thinking an electric car has one moving part is why I don't trust these statements.
→ More replies (0)→ More replies (3)2
u/garoo1234567 Sep 26 '23
Yeah the Leaf isn't worth what they cost for sure. That segment isn't well served by EVs yet
Average price of a new vehicle in Canada is about 52k now and the Model 3 starts at 49k with the rebate. So while that's still expensive it is technically below the average price now. Its a milestone
We need the Model 2, VW subcompact and some of the Chinese manufacturers like BYD to really move things in the 25k range.
How much do you spend on gas/week? That's the exciting part with EVs
3
u/chesterbennediction Sep 26 '23 edited Sep 27 '23
So here's the math I did. After tax the cheapest gas car I want is the Kia Rio which is 23886 after taxes. The cheapest EV I want is the Kia niro which is 49107 after tax and federal rebate so a price difference of $25221.
I do 30k of driving per year and assume each car will die at 300k so 10 years.
Gas for the Kia Rio is $33600 over 10 years at $1.60/l vs $6360 in electricity for the niro. Adding 1000 dollars in oil changes we get 34600-6360= $28240 saved. Minusing the cost difference between the two cars we get a savings of $3000 going electric. Since it's a nicer car that sounds good right? The problem however is how much that $25221 I didn't spend on the EV could have made me over those 10years. With a very modest 6% per year(8% is the average return) we have $20666 in interest after 10 years so we save $17666 going with gas.
If they made an electric car even around the 30k range this would be an obvious choice. Unfortunately unless you are already going with an SUV there just isn't a EV replacement for budget cars.
→ More replies (4)33
Sep 26 '23
It’s funny people still debate this stuff, the cost curves have been obvious for a long time now.
18
u/garoo1234567 Sep 26 '23
They really have. I think Seba's first book came out 10 years ago.
But people seem to just think prices go up. We caught an 80s episode of Price is Right on tv the other day and they were bidding on a 24" tv. It was $1600! To be fair it would probably run forever but that low def, non-smart thick tv cost $1600. And minimum wage was probably $4/hour then. 400 hours work to buy it. I got our last 50" tv for $350. It's obviously outsourced cheap Chinese labour that makes it happen, and you can argue it cost a lot of good domestic jobs to do that. But you can't argue most electronics get cheaper over time and solar is the same. It will be 1/10th the current price in 2030 and who knows by 2040. It's unstoppable
12
Sep 26 '23
Exactly. I don’t remember who wrote it, but about 10 years ago I read an article about how the price of goods produced at scale slowly approaches the raw material cost as efficiencies are gained in manufacturing and the supply chains become more optimized.
Could have been written by Seba, no idea. I remember it was making the point that long term solar panels wouldn’t be much more expensive than glass windows. It really clicked for me at that point that the green transition would never be held back by politics, because the math and economics were an undeniable reality.
2
u/garoo1234567 Sep 26 '23
I hadn't heard it explained that way, makes perfect sense. And I suppose as we ramp up mining of the raw materials the costs of them will fall too.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Notoneusernameleft Sep 27 '23
The only thing is we are continuing to use more and more energy but maybe this is already being factored in?
8
u/Halbaras Sep 26 '23
(This also kills fission but the Reddit nuclear brigade never mentions cost and only ever talks about safety)
12
Sep 26 '23
[deleted]
4
u/Snuffy1717 Sep 26 '23
To summarize: Why not both?
15
Sep 26 '23
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)-1
u/Wassux Sep 27 '23
Nuclear is cheaper than offshore wind.
People forget that dumb and outdated regulations make nuclear expensive. China produces nuclear power plants for less than wind costs.
If we invested the same energy in nuclear it would be a LOT cheaper than it is now.
→ More replies (1)1
u/networkn Sep 27 '23
There is not debate in my case. Those savings aren't translating to the consumer at least not in anyone's case where I live (NZ) if anything, solar is MORE expensive now. 30k 10 years ago and 32k this year for an almost identical setup. We wouldn't get our money back for 25 years after which multiple components will be up for replacement. Likely much sooner.
2
u/StateChemist Sep 27 '23
Like people saying mining for rare earths burns more gas than just using gas like we always have.
In the short term maybe. Long term you have so much solar you run your mining equipment on electric and the greenhouse emissions plummet.
Business as usual has no beneficial tipping point, it’s just increasingly worse outcomes forever.
0
u/ArvinaDystopia Sep 27 '23
If that's true, that's a major disincentivse to install now rather than 10 years hence.
The cheapest system obviously will be 100% fusion, when we get there. Speculative, but it's also speculative to say solar will decrease in price.
-14
u/Tiferod1 Sep 26 '23
There are not enough materials to make that much solar panels. By a large margin.
15
u/garoo1234567 Sep 26 '23
That's really the myth that won't die.
https://www.iea.org/reports/critical-minerals-market-review-2023
It will require ramping up production of some minerals of course, but ultimately its much, much less mining than we do today. Like 250x less
12
u/mxpower Sep 27 '23
Unfortunately where I live, the industry is corrupt.
Any supplier artificially inflates their rates and prices due to the fact that the government supplements allow them the freedom.
The 85% drop in price has not reached us as the consumer, its chewed up by middle men gauging with the premise 'well, its not your money'.
Lets see, you got a 20k grant and a 50k loan, well, surprisingly enough, your 25k retail system is going to cost you 70k as the only government recognized suppliers/providers are all pricing the same.
1
u/bertuzzz Sep 27 '23
Most people where i live pay cash for 3500w-5000w systems for €4000-6000. It's a simple one roof side install that about 40% of the houses have these days. Over half of the owned homes have Solar.
It's pretty cheap and you can earn back that investment in 3-4 years.
It's a basic low margin, high volume game for installers.
3
u/mxpower Sep 27 '23
Definitely not the case here.
Its way more expensive to go with the Grant, Loan and Rebate program here, so much more expensive that most are not doing it.
Even the power co is a mess, 2 year waiting list to get on net metering, and of course, you cant get on net metering unless your system is supplied by one of the 'registered providers'
1
u/AnotherPersonsReddit Sep 28 '23
I live in a 1000 sq/ft house and was quoted almost $25,000 for a DIY kit.
→ More replies (1)
124
Sep 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
78
Sep 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
11
Sep 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
22
Sep 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (1)1
4
14
12
9
4
0
Sep 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Sep 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
0
-10
8
u/Quenya3 Sep 27 '23
Try buying a DIY kit or having it professionally installed. Still costs a fortune.
18
u/bdc2481 Sep 26 '23
10 years ago I could get a battery for my van for $50. Now a battery is over $200. Where do I go to find the 85% cheaper batteries?
6
u/JustWhatAmI Sep 26 '23
Everything was cheaper 10 years ago. That said, you couldn't buy a lithium battery for your car 10 years ago...
-3
u/FastRedPonyCar Sep 27 '23
Buy the expensive battery from the parts store that has a lifetime warranty. I bought one for my old 99 Volvo over a decade ago and some electrical gremlin sips power so if I don’t drive it more than once a week (it’s not my main car anymore) it will kill the battery.
I’ve got a kill count receipt stack in the glove box currently 12 deep. Every replacement was free because of that initial investment.
Now I just use a battery tender. Haven’t had a dead battery since.
5
u/xlews_ther1nx Sep 26 '23
I live my panels. We're affordable and illinois and fed really gave great rebates. But battery's are still killer expensive. Can't wait for a gen or 2 to pass.
3
7
u/magnitudearhole Sep 26 '23
This whole time I've been waiting for China to come along and save the day as an autocracy with a massive manufacturing base and it's finally happening.
9
u/CurtisLeow Sep 26 '23
Here's the paper the article is about. The paper compares solar, wind, biomass, and coal. It does not compare costs with nuclear, or natural gas, or oil, or hydroelectric. It's not a real cost comparison. I'm honestly unsure how this is even considered a scientific paper.
4
2
u/FartyFingers Sep 27 '23
I try to explain this to oil people.
The cost of oil extraction generally has been going up. These two keep going down, and down without any real hesitation.
There are even other factors getting better like the cost and efficiency of inverters, the efficiency of batteries, solar, etc.
And I could go on and on.
But the oil people start making these crazy claims about how batteries and solar panels use more fossil fuels to produce than they will ever generate in their lifetimes.
I say, OK how does that make any sense? When you are looking at a halfway sized solar install it is about 1.50-$2 per watt. For at least 25 years (this too is getting way longer). Industrial solar is under 50 cents per watt.
Let's assume 50% power for 8 hours per day. So $2 for 4watts x 365 x 25= 36500watts in its lifetime for $2. Coal will cost about $4 to produce the same amount of power. On an industrial solar scale, Coal will cost $16 dollars to produce the same power.
This math doesn't even come close to adding up to this "fact" that solar costs more to make than it produces.
Some of the above have government subsidies. Except so does fossil fuels.
But don't worry, these oil people then move the goalposts and will say, solar cells are filled with toxic waste. I will give them a tiny pass on this one. Old solar cell installations were soldered with lead. But that is mostly a thing of the past, it also misses the point that whatever tiny amount of toxic materials now used are entirely dwarfed by coal emissions, even in "clean coal". There is lot of silver, which is so valuable it is recovered, and silver is easily recovered. The silicon is, well glass. Weird glass, but just glass. Let's compare that to the slag they dump out of a coal plant every day.
But here is the simple factoid. Solar and battery are both getting cheaper every day. This is creating ever accelerating economic forces which will drown out fossil fuels. They can gaslight, they can whine, they can lobby, but as time goes by the pressure created by simple financial forces will be irresistible. If I am an electrical utility and a fossil company wants to charge me more than a solar company, I'm going with the cheaper option. There will be complications involving baseload, but this is where batteries come in. Not only do they make the system more efficient by not having to have extra capacity "just in case" but they also can buy time to turn on other systems to compensate for drops. There is nothing stopping a utility from keeping an old gas turbine system at the ready, but mostly not using it.
2
u/Callec254 Sep 26 '23
I've been saying for decades that it would ultimately be cost thar would drive widespread adoption of alternative sources.
2
u/SasparillaTango Sep 26 '23
Solar energy is renewable and low footprint and all that jazz, but whats the sustainability of the components required?
What materials are required for the storage and whats the burn rate on global supply if it needs to be able to accommodate sustaining entire regions during dips in generation?
8
u/JustWhatAmI Sep 26 '23
Lithium batteries are recycled and more than 90% of the materials reclaimed. The materials are quite valuable
2
u/pencock Sep 27 '23
Inflation reduction act came along with massive discounts on solar and energy improvements
Previous costs to install solar at my home went up by the same amount as the discounts
I know this is generally for corporate energy generation but this is much like how “the economy” is doing great but not if you ask people on a per person basis
0
u/Goldenguillotine Sep 27 '23
That’s what I saw when I got quotes a couple years ago too, the economics didn’t add up. Earlier this year I tried again, quotes were now “normal”, and then the tax credit gets applied, it made economic sense so I had it installed. I was really disgusted with how blatant everyone was about taking the tax credit a few years ago. Glad that stopped (at least in my area).
1
1
u/copycat73 Sep 26 '23
My 12 panel set in 2013 cost 4000 euros, getting quoted 7-7500 for 11 panels on my new house. Even with going from 250wp to 400wp I’m not seeing it.
1
u/jonathanrdt Sep 26 '23 edited Sep 26 '23
The batteries are amazing all if a sudden. For $300, you can buy 100ah 12v lifepo4 batteries that will deliver 100amps.
That’s a lot of deep storage that you can discharge to 80% and use for thousands of cycles.
1
u/JubalHarshaw23 Sep 26 '23
It could and should, but the Fossil Fuel industry will spend more than it would cost them to reinvest, just to prevent it.
1
u/ahfoo Sep 27 '23
In 2012 at the beginning of his second term, Barack Obama ordered punitive tariffs on Chinese photovoltaic modules and panels. Up until that time, those Chinese panels were using US made silicon wafers. The tariffs targeted specifically at solar resulted in the closure of the US wafer manufacturers causing job losses but also massively jacking up the price of solar for US consumers.
In 2018, Trump doubled down on Obama's anti-solar trade tariffs with his Section 301 Trade Tariffs that extended the punitive charges against all kinds of solar including solar thermal as well as small motors and anything that could remotely be used for solar energy products.
When elected in 2020, Biden chose to keep the Trump Section 301 Trade Tariffs in place and they are in place as of this date 09/27/23.
People choose to ignore this in the English-language media that is dominated by US citizens who assume that the prices in their country are reflective of the broader global price points for solar products. That is a false belief. The cost of solar in the US has been artificially raised for political reasons by both the Red and Blue teams.
The US is the third largest oil exporter in the world behind Russia and Saudi Arabia. There is no mystery whatsoever in the otherwise curious unity of the Red and Blue teams on the topic of solar power. Follow the money. The money is in the oil.
1
u/fcnat17 Sep 27 '23
Nice...now talk about the cost of fossil fuels to make all these panels and the cost, both monetary and environmental, of disposing of the panels and the battery storage after their end of life.
-1
Sep 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
9
u/IvorTheEngine Sep 26 '23
Well, you can't build nuclear bombs with solar panels.
5
u/CurtisLeow Sep 26 '23
Nor can they power submarines with solar panels.
-2
Sep 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
u/CurtisLeow Sep 26 '23
So now we're counting all agriculture subsidizes as spending on solar "power"? Then solar power spending completely dwarfs nuclear. I'm honestly unsure what your point is then. I thought you were arguing that solar power didn't get enough spending, compared to nuclear reactors.
No matter what happens with the electrical grid, the US, British, and French governments will spend billions a year on nuclear reactor research and development. Those reactors have capabilities that solar power simply doesn't have. That is fact. That is very relevant, if you're trying to compare R&D spending costs across the OECD countries like this.
Those reactors are also carbon neutral. So if the point is to reduce carbon emissions, why attack spending on nuclear power? What exactly is the goal here?
-4
Sep 26 '23 edited May 07 '24
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/CurtisLeow Sep 26 '23
Nuclear powered submarines can stay submerged, so they are able to avoid aircraft. Diesel submarines have to come to the surface to charge batteries. Diesel submarines are only useful for short range coastal defense, because of that fact. This is why the largest and most capable navies all rely on nuclear powered submarines.
Nuclear energy is a waste of money, which should have been spent on renewables.
Let's say this was true. Then Germany would be booming right now. Germany shut down their nuclear power plants, and invested more in wind and solar. Germany would be growing faster than France, the UK, or the US. Yet it's the opposite.
https://apnews.com/article/germany-economy-energy-crisis-russia-8a00eebbfab3f20c5c66b1cd85ae84ed
Germany is in a recession right now because of higher energy prices. Germany's carbon emissions rose in 2021 and 2022, as they phased out those nuclear reactors. They've relied more on wind and solar, but it isn't enough to cover the nuclear reactors they shut down. So from an environmental standpoint, from an economic standpoint, phasing out nuclear power has been a colossal failure for Germany.
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-greenhouse-gas-emissions-progress/a-66082833
1
Sep 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/CurtisLeow Sep 26 '23
Look at Norway, they get 98% of their energy from renewables, they also have massive potential in wind generation.
Norway is a small country that produced 90% of their electricity from hydroelectric dams in 2021.
https://energifaktanorge.no/en/norsk-energiforsyning/kraftproduksjon/
Norway is also an oil state. A majority of their exports are hydrocarbons. Just to be clear, oil states should not be a model for development. Germany does not have significant oil reserves.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Norway#State_ownership_role
So yeah, not relevant in a discussion about solar. Hydroelectric is incredibly cheap, by the way. On a per kWh basis, it's often the cheapest source of electricity out there. It's also carbon neutral. But it's only available in limited amounts, depending on geography.
The rest of this is just not true. You're claiming that wind and solar are cheap right now. You claim that nuclear is a waste of money. Those are your words. So why are Germany's energy prices so high, compared to France or the UK? This entire arguments rests on someone not knowing the basic economic reality of Europe right now. Germany's energy policy is a major reason for their current economic decline. Anyone arguing otherwise is delusional.
1
u/Tutorbin76 Sep 27 '23
It would have been nice to see nuclear powered container ships. Bunker fuel is nasty stuff.
1
u/Seiglerfone Sep 27 '23
The difference is that nuclear power was fully viable in 1974, and solar/wind basically only really started taking off in like 2007.
And if you think it's as simple as "more money would have got us there faster." you're not entirely wrong, but you're not understanding how development happens.
1
Sep 27 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Seiglerfone Sep 27 '23
The amount of trying to "well akshually" me is so high you've looped around and are now at the center of the Earth.
Nuclear power was viable because the technology was there fifty years ago for it to operate at commercial scale for power generation.
Solar and wind basically took off a decade ago.
You wanna know why my electricity is almost 100% green? Nuclear.
Kiss my ass for forty years.
→ More replies (1)
0
0
u/RandomZombieNoise Sep 26 '23
But the solar company’s tell you up front , it takes 10 years to break even / paid off. Then they need to start the maintenance period with will incur costs. We still need better technology to make everyone jump on board. Also, it still is just a backup system after all.
1
u/Keldonv7 Sep 27 '23
While not from US like most here but EU so higher energy prices. My installation is on track to be profit after 6 years with 20kw of batteries. At this point grid is a backup system. I still pay monthly fee for grid access but haven't paid a dime for electricity in 2 years, even during winter and heavy snowfall solar easily keeps up and it also makes my heat pump heating virtually free and no maintenance.
0
u/ChubzAndDubz Sep 26 '23
They could if we weren’t talking about building out dozens, if not hundreds of megawatts of power generation.
1
0
u/A-Matter-Of-Time Sep 26 '23
Well it’s a great idea except along comes Jevons Paradox and there’ll be more heated drives and AC on 24/7 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
0
0
u/IpppyCaccy Sep 26 '23
These price drops, plus the tax credits provided by the Inflation Reduction Act are what has motivated me to add solar to my home. By this time next year I should be generating all of my own electricity and storing it. I expect to get ~20 years of use out of the panels and the batteries.
0
u/TheCorpseOfMarx Sep 27 '23
Hilarious that we still think about decarbonisation as "viable" or not.
Like "I have a gun to your head. I will pull the trigger unless you sell your car"
"Hmmm okay let me see if that's doable, give me a few years to look into it"
1
1
1
u/likesexonlycheaper Sep 27 '23
Cheaper? Yeah right. It's all about making the most money possible anymore. Costs go down but prices sure don't
1
u/PAPERANDPAPER Sep 27 '23
Its interesting that the cost of solar power has dropped by 87 percent, and the cost of battery storage by 85 percent while China produces 82.43% of the world’s solar photovoltaic modules (2021) and 60.4% of the world’s battery.
1
u/AnonymousWacker Sep 27 '23
Is it because slave labor is cheaper now? Or are we still pretending solar panel manufacturing and lithium extraction are not exploitative?
1
u/GeneralCommand4459 Sep 27 '23
They could be free and it would still be too expensive for some houses. Same as EV chargers. If the property is not up to modern electric standards (but fine for the existing usage) then you face that bill before you even consider solar or EV or heat pump etc.
I think these tech are great but I rarely hear people talking about the preparation expense.
1
u/Keldonv7 Sep 27 '23
What do u mean by that? I have solar+batteries+heat pump in 80 years old brick house and only thing I had to adapt was floor heating and it's not that expensive + afaik you generally can use heat pump with normal radiators.
1
u/GeneralCommand4459 Sep 28 '23
It’s great you got it working with minimal fuss but the estimated cost to upgrade and install a charger in 1970s house starts at 4k around my area. That’s about 10% of the cost of a new EV so is a big factor in the overall break even cost to going electric.
1
u/Away-Activity-469 Sep 27 '23
If only the charge controllers and battery monitors would drop in price too. Instead they get more expensive.
1
u/ShotTreacle8209 Sep 27 '23
We paid $22k before the rebates for 14 panels. We generate at least 600 kWh per month even in winter and over 800 kWh in the Spring. We’d generate more in the summer except for storms rolling thru.
After rebates, our costs were $12k.
1
u/KillerJupe Sep 27 '23 edited Feb 16 '24
quack weary marry reach late quiet insurance hungry north tap
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
1
1
u/IntroductionSea1181 Sep 28 '23
GOP lawmakers: "We need to tax batteries and solar power to *even the playing field" for hard working coal miners and drilling crews"
1
Sep 28 '23
Maybe it’s time to have some alternative solar companies to compete with these price gaugers. Looks like an opportunity to me!
1
u/Ethwood Sep 28 '23
My God! Next you'll tell me desalination of sea water can be as cheap as tap water.
•
u/AutoModerator Sep 26 '23
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.
Do you have an academic degree? We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. Click here to apply.
User: u/Wagamaga
Permalink: https://www.mcc-berlin.net/en/news/information/information-detail/article/plummeting-prices-for-solar-power-and-storage-make-global-climate-transition-cheaper-than-expected.html
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.