Wind Energy | All Energy Solar

How much does solar cost?

Solar Energy Cost

Would you like to own your electricity? Want to stop worrying about rate inflation from your utility company, charging you whatever they like? Did you know that rates have been rising by about 6% each year in California for example? They will only keep going up and up unless you do something about it!

By installing a solar electric system you can SAVE MONEY, break free from the clutches of your utility company and HELP the Environment too.

Only 20 Years ago, solar energy cost 7 times as much. Advanced technologies have contributed to the enormous decrease in price, but it is mainly due to the increase in manufacturing volumes, as more and more people realise the benefits of solar energy.

There’s more good news. Solar energy cost will continue to decline as the market continues to grow, making it even more affordable.

Governments too have realised the benefits. Incentives are available form state, federal and local governments, as well as some utility companies. Check out the DSIRE websiteto find out what’s available in your area (USA only).

Another cost benefit is that you will get paid for the excess electricity you produce through a system called – Net-metering.

$ – Just how much does solar energy cost? – $

It varies. Depending on the size of your household, the amount of electricity you use, the particular solar energy system you choose, how much sunshine you receive in your area and available government funding to name only a few.

As a very rough guide, depending on the above conditions – - -

A solar hot water system will cost between US $2,000 and $4,000.

A photovoltaic system will cost between US $8,000 and $10,000 for a 1kW system. (or $8 – $10 /Watt)

An average American family, living in a 3-bedroom home will require a 1.5 – 3kW system, which will cost between US $13,000 and US $27,000, before rebates.

Lets take a couple of example of a Californian household to illustrate just how much you can save with all these incentives:

Example 1:

An average family needing 2.5 Kilowatt system –
(current electricity bill between $50 and $75 per month)

Cost of Solar electric system incl. Installation: $22,500

LESS: Government Rebate: – $7,000 *

LESS: Tax credit: -$1,163 **
___________________________________

You pay only: $14,337
___________________________________

Example 2:

An average family needing 3 Kilowatt system –
(current electricity bill between $75 and $100 per month)

Cost of Solar electric system incl. Installation: $27,000

LESS: Government Rebate: – $8,400 *

LESS: Tax credit: -$1,395 **
___________________________________

You pay only: $17,205
___________________________________

Save even more with Net Metering each year.

* (2.5 Kw system = 2500 watt x $2.80 per watt rebate = $7,000)
(3Kw system = 3000 watt x $2.80 per watt rebate = $8,400)

** (7.5% of system cost after rebate. $22,500 – $7,000 x 7.5% = $1,163)
(7.5% of system cost after rebate. $27,000 – $8,400 x 7.5% = $1,395)

As a rough guide: Add .5 to your system size for each additional $25 on your bill and $4,500 to the cost before incentives.

PLEASE NOTE that these prices are only estimates and will vary depending on many different factors that needs to be taken into account for each specific installation.

See this article in its original location here

Check us out on the web at www.allenergysolar.com

What Feed-in Tariffs Could Do for Japan’s Electricity Shortage

By: Paul Gipe – April 18, 2011

California, USA — If Japan adopted an aggressive renewable energy policy like that of Germany, it could, within ten years, generate more than four times the electricity lost at the Fukushima 1 nuclear power plant, cutting the country’s reliance on nuclear power by one-half or more.

As Japan expands the evacuation zone around the damaged Fukushima 1 nuclear plant from 20 km to 30 km and Tokyo Electric Power (TEPCO) skirts the edge of bankruptcy, the country confronts a stark choice: undertake a massive construction program to replace the nuclear reactors with more of the same, or, instead, follow a new, less risky, and potentially more strategic path toward rapid renewable energy development. The stakes are high and the fight is already intense as Japanese elites debate the future of their electricity system, and literally, the future of their country.

However, it is clear now that if Japan were to follow the path blazed by Germany, it could more than replace the electricity generation lost by the damaged plants at Fukushima in less time than it would take to build new reactors.

Germany alone added as much new renewable generation in less than five years as Japan lost at Fukushima. Wind energy alone generates more electricity in Germany than the doomed Japanese reactors once did.

If Japan were to develop renewable energy at the same pace as Germany has over the past decade, it could add 120 TWh per year of new renewable generation. It could add significantly more, if it kept up with Germany’s blistering pace of solar energy development over the past five years.

Using a system of Advanced Renewable Tariffs, the modern version of feed-in tariffs, Germany added 80 TWh of new generation from wind, solar, and biomass between 2000 and 2010.

The six damaged reactors at Fukushima 1 generated about 30 TWh in 2010, and Japan’s fleet of aging nuclear reactors generate a total of about 260 TWh per year.

Recovery Act Will Have Doubled American Renewable Power by 2012

According to a study unveiled today by Energy Secretary Chu and VP Joe Biden, the US is on-track to achieve the three major renewable energy goals that the Energy Department set out to achieve with the $90 billion in Recovery Act investments in science, technology and innovation projects across the country.

1. Make solar power as cheap as dirty energy by 2015
2. Make electric vehicles as cheap as gas ones by 2015
3. Double US renewable energy generation and manufacturing by 2012

All three goals are on track.

The Recovery Act funding for renewable energy will probably go down in history as truly changing America. Only three Senate Republicans crossed the line to vote with the Democrats to pass it. Collins and Snowe survived the wrath of Republican voters – in 55% renewably powered Maine. Arlen Specter didn’t. He will be gone in January, but he has a lot to be proud of in standing up to the Party of No on renewable energy.

1. Cheap solar. The goal was to bring down the cost of solar power to become competitive with dirty energy prices. As a result of Recovery Act investments, the cost of solar energy is forecast to drop by half between 2009 and 2015, through implementation of the latest solar technologies.

The cost of power from rooftop solar panels is expected to drop from $0.21 per kWh in 2009 to $0.10 per kWh in 2015, about the nationwide average for household electricity rates.

As a result of investments made in the Recovery Act, by 2015, utility-scale solar, currently $0.13 per kWh is also expected to be on a par with wholesale prices of $0.06 a kWh

2. Cheap electric vehicles. The lifetime cost of electric vehicles will be on-par with that of its non-electric counterpart, by cutting the cost of batteries for electric vehicles by 70 percent between 2009 and 2015.

This means that the cost of batteries for the typical all-electric vehicle will fall from $33,000 to $10,000, and the cost of typical plug-in hybrid batteries will drop from $13,000 to $4,000. At those battery costs, electric-drive cars actually will actually be less expensive over the life of the car (beyond 2015) than similar non-electric vehicles.

The innovations funded will reduce battery weights 33% by 2015 to 222 kilograms, so that less energy is wasted in moving an electric vehicle with the old heavier battery. Battery lifetimes are being lengthened, to last 14 years, instead of today’s 4 years.

3. Doubling renewable energy. US renewable energy generation is on target to double by 2012, with over $23 billion in ARRA funds installing generation capacity from renewables like wind, solar, and geothermal. The US is on track to get 58 Gigawatts of its electricity from renewable energy by 2012; double what it had installed until the passage of the Recovery Act. As much renewable power is being installed in these 3 years as over the previous 30 years.

Until now, the US only manufactured a paltry 8% of global renewable energy needs such as turbines, batteries, solar panels and inverters. The Recovery Act investments have doubled renewable energy manufacturing to 14%, probably the easiest of these lofty goals to achieve.

The Department of Energy investments are going to a variety of science, technology and innovation projects across the country, ranging from building a nationwide smart energy grid, to investments in innovations in cutting edge solar technologies, batteries for electric vehicles and new techniques for renewable energy storage that we’ve covered here.

Clean Energy Builds Slowly, Despite Federal Cash

For the second time in two weeks, President Obama will deliver an economic pep talk at a company that has received Recovery Act funds for electric car batteries. He has recently given similar speeches at companies that create solar panels, wind turbines and biofuel.

The Recovery Act has provided billions of dollars in matching grants for clean energy programs. Despite this massive infusion of federal money, it is unlikely that these technologies will make a dent in Americans’ fossil fuel consumption anytime soon.

Clean technologies such as solar and wind power are growing at dramatic rates, says John Denniston of the venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. “Seven or eight years ago, the solar industry was tiny,” he says. “Today, globally the solar energy market is a $50 billion industry. That surpassed, last year, the size of the global online advertising industry.”

But those technologies still make up a minute fraction of Americans’ energy use.

“Wind energy is about 1 percent of America’s total energy supply,” says Daniel Yergin, president of IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates. “Solar is about one-hundredth of 1 percent of our total energy supply.”

As James Sweeney, who directs the Precourt Energy Efficiency Center at Stanford University, puts it: “You can talk about large percentages of tiny, small numbers and get a ‘gee whiz’ factor without making much significance to the U.S. economy.”

But that doesn’t faze Denniston. “Back in 1980, you could have looked at the number of personal computers in the country and said, if you multiply that tenfold, it wouldn’t make a difference. Or in 1985, look at the number of cell phones that were being used.”

Stop Coal Emissions in 20 Years

This is an interesting article and it would be great if the world adopted this same mentality. We are, however, somewhat against nuclear power. What do we do with all that radioactive material? Continue to bury it in Nevada?
What do you think we should do about it?

Minneapolis Solar

Blog Archive

Most Recent Posts