revolution solution, oh I long for you

I was obsessed with a certain thought experiment this past week. It came to my attention that the netmetering rules in southeastern wisconsin are unlike any other in the country in that if you, as a customer-generator, provide more surplus to the grid you receive a check in compensation for the excess. Other states, like Wyoming, just credit your utility bill and offer an 'at cost' credit to the customer for his excess. These numbers can be very low. In California, the greatest paradox is that the customer generator can have his surplus credited to his utility bill but at the end of the year the surplus is "granted to the utility". So, not only does Wisconsin buy back the power, but they buy it back at preferred rates. The rate of electricity to the customer in Wisconsin is about 7 or 8 cents a kwh. The states net metering law requires the purchase of electricity by customer-generators of solar power (and some wind) of about 22 cents a kwh. The limit here is 100kw capacity per customer. In addition, government rebates and recompense are virtually assured for investments in solar up to about 500,000 dollars or so I gather.

Leasing a two acre parcel of well exposed farmland, near a three way cable, a drop and the shanty with the net meter in it. And, layed out in horizontal rows, an array of 1,667 60 watt solar panels following the arc of the sun. The colder weather in wisconsin improves the efficiency of the circuit. With a 100kw capacity (130kw installed, assume 70% efficiency), we can calculate the kwh per annum. Assuming a 1 kw system will produce roughly 2000kwh in a calendar year, 100 x 2000=200,000 kwh. At a rate of 22 cents per kwh, thats 44,000 dollars.

The great capital expense at the beginning--totalling 1 million dollars for installation makes this virtually impossible. The sheer cost of traditional solar panels using wafers of purified silicon are where the major expense lie. A new wave of thinfilm solar technologies are in the gate now, such as nanosolar's printable roll technique that can produce 97% materials utilization (compare 20% with standard silicon wafer cells)with an energy return of less than one month compared with three years in traditional technology. See: http://www.nanosolar.com/technology.htm Now, suppose that the price of photovoltaic panels were slashed by 75%....it becomes clear that solar's competitiveness becomes more apparent.