Dawn of Solar Age Declared as PV Beats All Other Forms of Power (bloomberg.com)

Solar power blossomed faster than for any other fuel for the first time in 2016, the International Energy Agency said in a report suggesting the technology will dominate renewables in the years ahead. From a report: The institution established after the first major oil crisis in 1973 said 165 gigawatts of renewables were completed last year, which was two-thirds of the net expansion in electricity supply. Solar grew by 50 percent, with almost half new plants built in China. "What we are witnessing is the birth of a new era in solar PV," Fatih Birol, executive director of the IEA, said in a statement accompanying the report published on Wednesday in Paris. "We expect that solar PV capacity growth will be higher than any other renewable technology through 2022." This marks the sixth consecutive year that clean energy has set records for installations. Mass manufacturing and a switch by governments away from fixed payments for renewables forced down the cost of wind and solar technology. The IEA expects about 1,000 gigawatts of renewables will be installed in the next five years, a milestone that coal only accomplished after 80 years. That quantity of electricity surpasses what's consumed in China, India and Germany combined.

Comments

What happens in 15-20 years?

[RogueWarrior65]

When the performance of these things starts to drop off and they all need to be replaced, are people going to get sticker shock when they not only have to pay more to replace them but have to pay to dispose of the old ones because of "toxic" materials?

Re:What happens in 15-20 years?

[hawkeyeMI]

I have seen a few reports that they are lasting quite a bit longer than expected and still performing, in some cases 10 years past their estimated 20 year functional lifespan. If we have to make a lined pit in the ground and throw them all in it every 30 years, that will be fine.

They have no moving parts (unless you use trackers) and they take advantage of "free" energy that will be here as long as the earth is habitable. It is inevitable that they will take over energy production.

Re:What happens in 15-20 years?

[llZENll]

In 25 years solar "panels" will be as cheap and flexible as plastic sheeting. Energy will be nearly free and we'll be struggling with who should be allowed to have children and deciding which grossly overpopulated areas need to "purged".

Re:What happens in 15-20 years?

[Anonymous Coward]

Gosh, if only Solar arrays were like coal, gas, and nuclear plants that require absolutely no maintenance, part replacement or waste disposal.

Oh wait.

Seriously, in 20 years, they can expand their system to cover increased demand, and if these cells fail, they can recycle the valuable metals and purchase new ones. You might as well be complaining that the sun could go out, or that the cleaner air they breathe lets them go outside so much they get skin cancer.

Re:What happens in 15-20 years?

[Lucas123]

Most people have purchased solar through power purchase agreements that are typically 15 to 20 years long. At the end of that time, they can either buy the cheaper solar panels themselves or resign another PPL. Typically, the solar provider charges a set price -- today $500 -- to remove old panels. So, no. Consumers won't get sticker shock in 20 years. In fact, solar panels are becoming more efficient, so in 20 years, you'll need fewer panels to produce the same energy and they'll be cheaper to manufacture.

Re:What happens in 15-20 years?

[SlaveToTheGrind]

I really can't think of anything wrong with solar, other than the obvious... it only works a part of the day.

There's nothing at all wrong with solar as a way to generate electricity.

The problem comes when people suggest that solar is a way to reliably generate electricity. As you note, it isn't.

Since we like the lights to come on whenever we flip the switch, that means that even if the power companies come up with reasonably low-loss storage technologies to even out the part of a day problem, that still doesn't solve the cloudy/rainy day problem. And thus, installed solar capacity can't be counted on to be there at any particular point in time and requires fossil fuel capacity as a backup.

So at the end of the day, the conventional plants still get built, have to be maintained, staffed, etc., and also have to be spun up and down when needed, which decreases their overall net efficiency. And that means the top-line numbers of installed solar capacity don't have much bearing on how much conventional capacity they're actually displacing in operation.

(I'd be interested to know whether the graph in TFA includes backup capacity, or whether the coal/natural gas installations are solely for standalone capacity. If the former, it seems like there'd be a little something there for everyone.)

Re:What happens in 15-20 years?

[nospam007]

'I winter in Germany, solar output is almost non-existant.'

Get a brush until climate change takes care of the snow.

"Do solar panels work in the winter?

A common myth is that solar panels do not work during winter, but in contrary, the cold temperature will typically improve solar panel output. The white snow can also reflect light and help improve PV performance. Winter will only hurt solar production if the panels are covered with snow."
http://news.energysage.com/sol...

Re:What happens in 15-20 years?

[Known Nutter]

All great points, and you're right. Storage is definitely the next hurdle and one that will be difficult to overcome. But we have to start somewhere. It wasn't all that long ago when driving ~250 miles on a battery was considered impossible -- or cost prohibitive at best. It's not acceptable to just throw our collective arms in the air and keep doing what we're doing just because the numbers don't work out today. What SCE and other utilities are doing in this area is important, even if the overall impact seems insignificant right now.

Re:Rather a Short 'Age'

[spun]

That's already figured into the cost. Still comes out ahead. And once we start using photovoltaic energy to make photovoltaics, we take fossil fuels out of the picture entirely.

Re:Rather a Short 'Age'

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, after 25 years it "only" has 80% of its initial rated max output. Which means you can use them for 50 years easily.

As opposed to coal plants that last forever.

[Brannon]

And nuclear plants have absolutely no expense involved in maintenance or refurbishment.

Re:A great start...

[WolfWithoutAClause]

Actually wind and solar are over 5% of average power supply now and growing exponentially, with large double digit year-on-year percentages. And wind is already well over 10% of power in Europe.

All good, nothing bad to see here!!!

[tflf]

All for solar, but,no fan of sloppy reasoning and lazy writing. As I'm sure many have pointed out, growth in coal-fired electrical production grew at the rate of electrical consumption, which was relatively moderate for most of their lifespans. The explosive growth in electrical usage is a relatively recent development. Comparing growth of solar production to the growth of coal production, without factoring growth of demand levels, looks pretty, but, is illogical. Calling solar energy clean ignores the manufacturing and transportation of the new products, as well removal and recycling once end of active life is reached. I not aware of any solar energy product, past or current, which does not include a number of toxic chemicals and substances. Not as dirty as coal, or oil, but, far from clean. Who pays for the cost of removal and recycling, or disposal? Where will we recycle, another process which is not nice and clean? Where do we store the materials we cannot recycle? Historical reality: taxpayers in most oil producing areas are on the hook for clean-up costs of tens of thousands of abandoned wells. No one knows how much the final tally will be, but, everyone agrees it will be astronomical. We should expect the same when solar manufacturing and generating facilities reach the end of their active lives.

Re:Niggers aren't people

[Maxo-Texas]

Oh, it's grimmer than that. The father was first put in jail as a young man. Gaining a felony record and never having a chance at a regular life.

Meanwhile, the white kid wasn't even stopped, and if he had been stopped, would not have been searched, have been let off with a warning, or if he had actually have been arrested would have been given a deferred sentence (because he had a bright future), and finally if he had actually been sentenced- it would have been 50% to 90% lighter than the sentence given to the black youth for the same crime.

And yes- everything I just wrote has happened to black and white kids over the last 5 years. It's STILL happening. We need equal justice. If the laws fell as harshly on white families (especially rich white families) then the laws would be changed to be less harsh.

Within the last decade, while minority mothers are going to jail for 11 years for less than a joint- willie nelson was paying a $4,000 fine and being let off for a damn bag of pot.

And it's the same story all over the country.

Black kid has a toy gun- reported as "black male brandishing a piston" police pull up and shoot him dead in literally under 2 seconds on the scene. Meanwhile a drunk white man has a loaded ak-47 and the cops spend a half a hour talking him down.

Just in the last year we had a white sheriff defending a bunch of young white rapists because he didn't want to "ruin their life".

As an older white texan who voted for reagan and bush sr, the injustice makes me sick.