Big increase for US solar in 2016: Report

[Pitt Gorilla]

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/12/big-i...-2016_report_1

The U.S.'s solar power capacity continues to grow after more than two gigawatts (GW) of solar photovoltaic (PV) installations took place during the second quarter of 2016, according to a report released on Monday.

The latest U.S. Solar Market Insight Report from GTM Research and the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) stated that the installations represented a 43 per cent increase compared to the second quarter of 2015.

"We're seeing the beginning of an unprecedented wave of growth that will occur throughout the remainder of 2016, specifically within the utility PV segment," Cory Honeyman, associate director of U.S. solar research at GTM Research, said in a news release.

Solar is becoming an increasingly important part of the world's renewable energy mix. In 2014 the International Energy Agency stated that the sun could be the planet's biggest source of electricity by 2050.

"With more than 10 gigawatts of utility PV currently under construction, the second half of this year and the first half of 2017 are on track to continue breaking records for solar capacity additions," Honeyman added.

The report found that utility scale installations represented 53 percent of all installed PV in the first half of 2016, with an extra 7.8 GW set to come online in 2016.

"Solar works in all 50 states and this report proves that what many would consider non-traditional markets are now firmly a part of the clean energy movement," Tom Kimbis, SEIA's interim president, said.

"While it took us 40 years to hit 1 million U.S. solar installations, we're expected to hit 2 million within the next two years," Kimbis added. "That record-breaking growth is made possible by solar's cost-competitiveness and the vast benefits it provides consumers, our nation's economy and environment."

[aturnis]

Originally Posted by sd4chiefs

I had solar panels installed last month. It will pay for itself in about 6 years. So far it is producing more than we are using which is amazing since my Wife has turned our house into a meat locker with the A/C.

I think the average residential install has a payoff of around 6 years. Many businesses much sooner.

[aturnis]

Originally Posted by TigerUppercut

This country needs nuclear energy..

Nuclear is good as dead. Being propped up currently and the future looks uneventful.

[aturnis]

Originally Posted by Chief Pagan

For people out in some rural area not connected to the grid, this could make sense. For somebody connected to the grid with solar, I'm not sure the cost of the battery versus the amount of storage is going to make financial sense.

Depends on your energy market. Makes loads of sense in Australia, Hawaii, etc.

[Nickhead]

we were two steps from signing up with our power company for free solar. no up front costs. the only thing was, you had to sign a contract that you would use them as the host for the energy we produced. we backed out at the last minute. was uneasy not knowing enough about different schemes. just cant afford the upfront costs for solar on our own atm.

[GloucesterChief]

Originally Posted by aturnis

Nuclear is good as dead. Being propped up currently and the future looks uneventful.

In the US. Not in Europe.

[GloucesterChief]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

Cars on 100% renewable would neuter the middle east.

Hydraulic fracking already has. The new low price for oil is the price where it becomes profitable to frack it out in North America. SA basically drained their treasury trying to put the NA oil fracking companies out of business.

Also petro is not going away it is used for many many other things.

[Iowanian]

Efficiency in production and cost are hurdles but are definitely improving.

The major obstacle making it tough in all forms is the lack of "energy ice cubes" or batteries in addition to problems in transmission of the energy that is created. Solar and wind production are both problematic in that the peak production times aren't typically in line with peak use.

I'm glad to see improvement but it is still detrimental to our country to move away from coal and nuclear. Clean Coke and natural gas still need support and development if we want to be energy independent.

It would be outstanding if we could get to the point where solar or wind were legitimate for single home use and was reliable.

[Discuss Thrower]

Originally Posted by Iowanian

Efficiency in production and cost are hurdles but are definitely improving.

The major obstacle making it tough in all forms is the lack of "energy ice cubes" or batteries in addition to problems in transmission of the energy that is created. Solar and wind production are both problematic in that the peak production times aren't typically in line with peak use.

I'm glad to see improvement but it is still detrimental to our country to move away from coal and nuclear. Clean Coke and natural gas still need support and development if we want to be energy independent.

It would be outstanding if we could get to the point where solar or wind were legitimate for single home use and was reliable.

Do that British shit where they pump water to a high elevation before peak time and then release it during peak hours to power water turbines.

[scho63]

Originally Posted by Hydrae

You want to accelerate the improvements of solar? Pass a law that says that any new big box store must have that flat roof covered in panels and be (as close as possible right now) self-sufficient. This would create a large market which would add more money into the industry and help push innovation. This would not be a noticeable cost to customers but should help to push overall costs of panels down just due to the increased volume.

So government should FORCE solar on corporations even if it costs them 5 x's as much as traditional?

Not feasible, not reasonable, not democratic and not capitalist.

Corporations by nature will seek the best and most cost effective solution. If solar doesn't cut it they will look at other options.

[Mr. Laz]

Originally Posted by GloucesterChief

Hydraulic fracking already has. The new low price for oil is the price where it becomes profitable to frack it out in North America. SA basically drained their treasury trying to put the NA oil fracking companies out of business.

Also petro is not going away it is used for many many other things.

at the cost of being able to set our tap water on fire and risking contaminating our water table permanently

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Moore's Law, bruh.

I'm not going to start a big to-do with you, but Moore's law is specific to the fundamental physics underlying transistor fabrication limitations.

I hate being pedantic about it, but people have these unrealistic expectations about innovation based on our finally harnessing the size and speed of electrons that don't translate to harnessing other physical capabilities.

I appreciate good news on affordability and performance in solar and storage technology, but we are still in the infancy of seeing how it all develops. How many of these numbers are predicated on artificial subsidies and rosy predictions needs time to verify.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by sd4chiefs

I had solar panels installed last month. It will pay for itself in about 6 years. So far it is producing more than we are using which is amazing since my Wife has turned our house into a meat locker with the A/C.

Originally Posted by aturnis

I think the average residential install has a payoff of around 6 years. Many businesses much sooner.

I'd need to see the numbers on that, particularly how much is coming from incentives. Just 2 years ago our EE senior class tasked everyone with coming up with an estimate for insolation. Payback hovered in the area of 15-17 years. My team came up with a plan that paid back with then current incentives in 12 years and we were interrogated six ways to Sunday vetting our methods and calculations.

Also important to remember, there's payback and then there's payback. A big portion of your upfront is your inverter and most inverters have a 15-year operating life, which means that every 15 years expect a sizeable portion of your upfront costs to recur.

MoF, a big key in our shorter payback window was that is we went with small inverters with a shorter life span but much lower cost on each panel instead of one big expensive inverter for the entire installation.

[Chief Pagan]

Originally Posted by aturnis

Depends on your energy market. Makes loads of sense in Australia, Hawaii, etc.

Sure, the batteries make sense in a few niche places.

[Chief Pagan]

Originally Posted by GloucesterChief

In the US. Not in Europe.

I would say it is on life support in Europe also. Germany is closing all of their nuclear plants. The recent plants that are under construction (with the newer style technology) are way over budget even by nuclear power plant standards.

The UK is contemplating approving a plant that is already estimated to cost $20 billion (this is before overruns).

[beach tribe]

So, I would imagine it would be smart to invest in Solar?

I've never invested and know next to nothing about the stock market, but have recently decided to start educating myself in prep to get started.

Would this be a promising opportunity to begin that venture with?