In 2011 China doubled down on building manufacturing and the prices started plummeting, causing the rate to rise to 74% in 2011.
Here is the global version of the chart in the OP
The number you floated was obviously hyperbole, but let's take a look at 4 doublings over the next ten years, or on second thought, to make it simpler I'll use a doubling every 3 years.
If cumulative capacity of solar were to double thru 2015 to 12.5GW, then double again through 2018, again thru 2021, and once more thru 2024, we could hit 100 GW of capacity at that time.
The US used 95.1 quads (1quad=1.05EJ or 33.5GWy) of PRIMARY ENERGY off all types in 2012. Of that, only 37 quads was actually consumed by a final user. This distinction is important.
If we assume a capacity factor of 18%, that 100GW of solar would be 18GWy of production for Final Consumption.
Total Energy produced by the US Electric Sector for Final Consumption was 415GWy in 2012.
Of that, nuclear provided 88GWy while renewables including hydro provided 127GWy. The remaining 200GWy were provided by coal and natural gas.
If 4 more doublings of solar occurred over an additional 12 years it would bring the total to 1600GW of capacity or - still assuming 18% cf - 288GWy of Final Consumption.
The EPA is preparing rules to regulate carbon emissions. How much room for continued growth do you see?
Oh, and before you answer that, you might want to consider one more important piece of the puzzle:
by Stuart Burns on AUGUST 20, 2013
Not one to shy away from overstatement, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard is not a writer we would normally quote extensively; well-renowned as the Telegraph newspaper is, for which he frequently writes in the Business section, but his article last week on solar power trumping shale gas even had us sitting up and taking notice.
True, many of the figures quoted in his article come from firms involved in the solar industry and as such we can expect them to put a positive gloss on the numbers, but we wouldn’t count the US Energy Department to be biased and they are quoted as saying they expect the cost of solar power to fall by 75% between 2010 and 2020.
By then, average costs will have dropped to $1 per watt for big solar farms, $1.25 for offices and $1.50 for homes, achieving what the Telegraph terms the Holy Grail of grid parity with new coal and gas plants without further need for subsidies. That’s the crunch, isn’t it – the subsidies. But if we think subsidies in the US or UK have been high, consider Germany, early starter in the solar power race.
Households have been bled dry to subsidize solar power – around €100 billion or more has been frittered away on costly feed-in tariffs. In addition, German investors have lost their shirts on a string of solar ventures that have gone bankrupt, only to see the gains leaked out to copycat companies in China which are able to undercut German rivals in their own market with cheap labor and giveaway credit.
Still, that artificially created market has spurred investment around the world; even the US defense establishment is heavily involved, with Evans-Pritchard quoting a string of projects, each of which will help bring down costs and improve efficiencies....
Edit history
= new reply since forum marked as read
