Myth 9: Solar Power Will Never Pay For Itself.
"Solar panels are certainly expensive—about $100 per square foot for a typical installation—but eventually, you're destined to end up on the positive side of the equation." Time is the relative factor in the cost equation, also type of panel you buy, but it's just that which causes people to turn it down. The majority of people are near sighted and cannot see the big picture. Time of payback is shortening as technology advances and efficiency goes up, and, with the best current technology, will pay itself off within a the first year says Burr Zimmerman. Not a 100% if this is what a blog entree is it seems more or less like a rant but here it is. To know more myths of energy go to: http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/debunking-myths-about-nuclear-fuel-coal-wind-solar-9
A bit short but you bring up some good points, show insight and gave us a place to go for more info - so great post.
ReplyDeleteChiefly I think you bring up what is perhaps the most important point relative to energy, which is human behavior, and within that the fact that people (particularly western?) adamantly focus on short term costs rather than long term gain, and this reflects so many aspects of our way of life, and plight as a species on this planet.
I think that the world needs to rethink the way that it looks at energy costs. When you look at renewable energy sources, the cost of actually producing the energy is close to nothing because there is no fuel. For solar panels, the sun provides the "fuel". So when people are reluctant to invest in solar energy or wind energy because of the high upfront costs, the overall cost need to be examined. While natural gas or traditional sources seem cheaper because the infrastructure is already in place, the upfront costs of solar need to be compared to the fuel costs of traditional energy sources. Fuel costs are going to rise as supply diminishes, so I think looking at this in a different way can help make energy costs more economical.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree more, Neil. The correlations between behavior and what economists would call 'discounting' is a very important facet of the energy discussion. People are just fundamentally averse to spending more now to save later, maybe too many people heed their grandmother's warning that "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." To me this relates back to the very integral idea of our adversity of spending more to buy longer lasting products, our tendency towards a consumerism/throw-away society, PARTICULARLY dominant in the Western way of life. Is this simply the inevitable result of disposable (literally =P) income? Is this somehow an illustration of our having moved away from survival instincts?
ReplyDelete