Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Rocky Mountain Institute: Achieving Low-Cost Solar PV

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-24-11 07:03 PM
Original message
Rocky Mountain Institute: Achieving Low-Cost Solar PV
Achieving Low-Cost Solar PV:
Industry Workshop Recommendations for Near-Term Balance of System Cost Reductions


Near-term balance of system (BoS) cost-reduction recommendations developed at Rocky Mountain Institute’s Solar PV Balance of System Design Charrette indicate that an improvement of ~50 percent over current best practices is readily achievable. Implementing these recommendations would decrease total BoS costs to $0.60–0.90/watt for large rooftop and ground-mounted systems, and offers a pathway to bring photovoltaic electricity into the conventional electricity price range

In the context of numerous global challenges—including climate change, volatile fuel prices, energy infrastructure insecurity, and rising energy costs—solar photovoltaic (PV) technologies have made great strides during the past fifty years from their origins in special applications like satellites and off-the-grid systems. However, they have not yet been widely adopted for electrical generation. One of the main reasons is cost. Although solar PV has reached grid parity in select markets, significant reductions are still required to make it a true “game-changer.”

Technology development and economies of scale have helped manufacturers of both crystalline silicon and thin film (such as CdTe) PV modules create aggressive yet credible cost-reduction roadmaps.

These trends make BoS costs—which account for approximately half of typical commercial and utility project costs—ever more significant. In addition, BoS cost-reduction opportunities are fragmented—usually not road-mapped or coordinated—and, therefore, progress is unlikely to be as aggressive as it is for modules. In this report, “balance of system” refers to all of the up-front costs associated with a PV system except the module: mounting and racking components, inverters, wiring, installation labor, financing and contractual costs, permitting, and interconnection, among others...


http://rmi.org/Content/Files/BOSReport.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-24-11 07:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. You forgot the opening paragraph:
Solar photovoltaic (PV) electricity offers enormous potential to contribute to a low-carbon electrical system. However, costs must drop to fundamentally lower levels if this technology is to play a significant role in meeting U.S. energy needs.


:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-24-11 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. No, I didn't forget it.
First, we are limited to 4 paragraphs and that one simply restates the message in the title of the paper.

Second, the part I quoted is from the *beginning* of the Executive Summary, which reads "Near-term balance of system (BoS) cost-reduction recommendations developed at Rocky Mountain Institute’s Solar PV Balance of System Design Charrette indicate that an improvement of ~50 percent over current best practices is readily achievable. Implementing these recommendations would decrease total BoS costs to $0.60–0.90/watt for large rooftop and ground-mounted systems, and offers a pathway to bring photovoltaic electricity into the conventional electricity price range".


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-24-11 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Does not invalidate anything eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-24-11 11:54 PM
Response to Original message
4. Again? Uncle Amory was handing out the same line of shit in 1976.
It was a pipe dream in 1986, a pipe dream in 1996, a pipe dream in 2006.

Maybe nobodies told the dumb BP funded anti-nuke that climate change has been a problem the whole damn time, while he grew up from being a dumb kid to a dumb old man.

If solar was going to be competitive with anything, it would have done it while Amory was still middle aged.

He's, um, sixty three.

Maybe his excuse in 1976 could have been that he was puerile. What's his excuse now, that he's senile?.

It's eight years after he told us that hydrogen HYPErcar would be in showrooms "by 2005."

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/10/1016_TVhypercar.html

Who cares what the old senile Suncor funded car CULTist thinks? Nobody on this planet - with the exception of people who have never opened a science book in their lives - takes him seriously.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-26-11 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Poor little nuclear industry pusher just can't help himself...
Lovins is a world renowned expert on energy that rejects nuclear industry - therefore the nuclear industry never tires of attacking him.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC