• 3 minutes Nucelar Deal Is Dead? Iran Distances Itself Further From ND, Alarming Russia And France
  • 5 minutes Don Jr. Tweets name Ukraine Whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella. Worked for CIA during Obama Administration, Hold over to Trump National Security Counsel under Gen McCallister, more . . . .
  • 9 minutes Shale pioneer Chesepeak will file bankruptcy soon. FINALLY ! The consolidation begins
  • 12 minutes China's Blueprint For Global Power
  • 4 hours Science: Only correct if it fits the popular narrative
  • 47 mins Crazy Stories From Round The World
  • 16 hours What are the odds of 4 U.S. politicians all having children working for Ukraine Gas Companies?
  • 21 hours EU has already lost the Trump vs. EU Trade War
  • 14 hours China's Renewables Boom Hits the Wall
  • 2 days ''Err ... but Trump ...?'' *sniff
  • 6 hours Do The World's Energy Policies Make Sense?
  • 15 hours Forget out-of-date 'dirty oil' smear, Alberta moving to be world's cleanest oil industry
  • 8 hours Impeachment Nonsense
  • 2 days Pioneer's Sheffield in Doghouse. Oil upset his bragging about Shale hurt prices. Now on campaign to lower expectations, prop up price.
  • 2 days Tesla Launches Faster Third Generation Supercharger
  • 21 hours Water, Trump, and Israel’s National Security
  • 2 days Passerby doused with flammable liquid and set on fire by peaceful protesters

Breaking News:

Russia Plans To Boost Crude Oil Exports

Alt Text

Who Is Winning The Offshore Solar Race?

Some of Asia’s biggest economic…

Alt Text

Is This The Solar Technology Of The Future?

Scientists have developed a device…

Alt Text

24/7 Power: The Future Of Solar

Researchers from Curtin University in…

Haley Zaremba

Haley Zaremba

Haley Zaremba is a writer and journalist based in Mexico City. She has extensive experience writing and editing environmental features, travel pieces, local news in the…

More Info

Premium Content

Is Solar Growth Really Lagging?

Solar makes sense. It’s cost efficient, it’s eco-friendly and has no carbon footprint, electricity is generated in the same grid where it is consumed, and the price of installing panels on residential rooftops is a fraction of what it cost just ten years ago, even after Donald Trump’s prohibitive tariffs slapped on imported solar panels earlier this year. So why hasn’t it taken off?

According to opinion polls the majority of homeowners in the United States like the idea of rooftop solar and love the idea of seeing their electricity bills drop. And indeed, in 2017 overall rooftop solar gigawatts of capacity were almost ten times higher in 2017 than they were in 2010, with more than 2 million US homes now sporting solar panels. However, despite these considerable gains, residential rooftop solar panels still account for less than 1 percent of the United States’ total electricity, and growth has slowed considerably in recent years, with volumes actually dropping by 15 percent in 2017.

While volatility is nothing new for the solar industry, the peaks and valleys of recent years are particularly marked thanks for unpredictable regulation and the inconsistent if not erratic business models of solar energy firms. In some cases regulation has been extremely friendly to solar. Just this month the California Building Standards Commission gave final approval to a mandate requiring new homes to include rooftop solar panels starting in 2020, which will provide a big uptick in demand. This is on top of sizable subsidies, just one of which is a 30 percent federal tax credit. Related: The Biggest Oilmen Of 2018

These generous subsidies, however, are a big part of what makes demand for solar panels so variable. This year the solar industry was confronted with the unpredictable spectre of tax reform and considerable uncertainty of how it would impact the solar sector on the whole. This is compounded by the fact that solar regulations vary greatly state by state, not to mention that the fact that sunlight itself is not a constant.

Solar panels may be cleaner, greener, and cheaper than almost all of the alternatives, but not everyone is happy with that. As homeowners are able to create their own energy and even their excess, the very same diminishing electricity bills they are celebrating are being lamented by the power companies that used to provide that energy for them.

Big power companies are losing out on profits thanks to rooftop solar panels, but still bearing the costly burden of maintaining the power grids. However, if these power companies then raise their rates in an effort to make up for the money lost to solar, they will be punishing those without solar panels, therefore pushing more of their customer base away from traditional power and toward installing solar panels themselves, a classic catch-22. Related: ExxonMobil Faces Off With Venezuela’s Navy

In addition to rankling traditional power companies, rooftop solar incentives and mandates like California’s are not universally popular among energy economists either. To be clear, everyone is in agreement that this will help California make good on its extremely lofty goal of dropping their carbon footprint for energy usage to zero by 2045. Homes built under the new mandate will use approximately 53 percent less energy than homes built under the 2016 standard, and could cut the state’s greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 700,000 metric tons over the next three years, according to projections made by the CEC.

This is all good news, but it will not be cheap, and it’s still not enough. 700,000 metric tons is less than 1 percent of the Golden State’s annual emissions. Furthermore, other green ventures like building more solar and wind farms would be more cost efficient--up to three times cheaper if done correctly and developed in ideal locations--and just as effective.

By Haley Zaremba for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:




Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage



Leave a comment
  • John on December 27 2018 said:
    No mention of the elephant in the room - the Trump tariffs on solar panels?
    As far as CA solar mandate on new builds - it will be cheaper than adding solar after. Comparing it to utility solar is comparing apples you grow and are "free" to apples you buy at the store and have to buy week after week.
    As far as transmission infrastructure - this cost should be a separate, reasonable cost broken out by the utility. Not the exaggerated $50/month that utilities want to charge.
  • Daniel Munyan on January 02 2019 said:
    So you want to trade energy independence for a solar industry 100% reliant upon our most dangerous adversary? Madness. The so-called tariffs are nothing more than a balancing of ridiculously poor trade policies and deals of previous administrations. Add to that the corporate greed for profit without investment, and you have the perfect storm for Chinese world domination. The Soviets said we would sell them the rope to hang our republic. The Chinese will sell us that same rope at a profit and we will outsource the scaffold to them at a loss. Also, to say solar energy is carbon free is just silly. Those panels don't magically appear in the factory and fly here on Aladdin's carpet.
  • Paul Smith on January 02 2019 said:
    The fact that it presently takes carbon to deliver the panels is part of the problem. Our total dependence on oil. That problem however is on the way to being solved. Just as electric car sales are on a new tech style growth curve, the same is starting to happen with buses and trucks. The world is learning that there are alternatives to oil and the change will catch many oil investors by surprise.

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News
Download on the App Store Get it on Google Play