US small-scale solar increased from 7.3 GW in 2014, to 39.5 GW

[cmoreride]

capacity of small-scale solar increased from 7.3 GW in 2014, to 39.5 GW

https://www.reuters.com/business/en...cale-solar-capacity-2022-eia-says-2023-09-11/

 

[JoshPlumSE]

Interesting..... It makes sense though. The government (state, federal) have been offering homeowners excellent tax breaks and incentives to do this. That combined with increased energy costs makes it a much more "affordable" option for homeowners than it once was.

Now, the question I always have is if this is an efficient way for the government to spend it's money as far as reducing CO2 emissions goes. So, I'm interested in the government cost per MW of power produced.... Or, the government cost per ton of CO2 emission prevented.

 

[bones206]

This could expand greatly with a different policy that doesn't rely on tax credits. The vast majority of the country cannot afford solar panels or afford to wait for a tax break.

For the cost of that F-35 that crashed this week, we could literally pave my entire state in solar panels. Why not just have the government bulk buy solar panels and dole them out to lower income communities?

 

[GregLocock]

$1e8=100 MW of panels.=400 M sq m=20 km*20 km. Small state. Literally.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[BridgeSmith]

20 km*20 km. Small state. Literally.

If you're thinking US states, not even close. 400 sq. km is only 15% of the size of the smallest state (Rhode Island). There are a few countries in the world smaller than that, though.

 

[bones206]

I meant it as paving all the rooftops, but my overall point is that direct govt purchasing would really move the needle. These tax credits are kind of a joke IMO. The solar retailers just raise the price 30% and the advertise the “price after rebate”. The 30% just becomes extra profit for them, not savings for the consumer. Solar has become marginally more affordable but is still out of reach for most people. It’s a luxury item.

 

[BridgeSmith]

my overall point is that direct govt purchasing would really move the needle.

Yeah, that'll be efficient, just like everything else the government does.

 

[bones206]

I'd rather waste money on clean energy than trillion dollar fighter jets that have "mishaps".

 

[BridgeSmith]

I'd rather waste money on clean energy than trillion dollar fighter jets that have "mishaps".

Given those 2 choices, I'd put the money into the fighter jet. It doesn't really matter, since neither of us are making those decisions.

 

[ACtrafficengr]

I'm not sure how to make it politically viable, but wouldn't it make sense to focus the incentives to places outside the Pacific Northwest and areas downwind of the Great Lakes? Lake effect only makes the news when Buffalo gets buried, but it happens year round. Western NY gets ~160 sunny days per year. Shouldn't the subsidies go where they will do the most good?

Considering I'm in upstate NY and have a south facing roof, that argument is probably not in my own self interest.

My glass has a v/c ratio of 0.5

Maybe the tyranny of Murphy is the penalty for hubris. -

http://xkcd.com/319/