<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Solar costs could fall below 50 cents a watt by 2017</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/2012/12/12/solar-costs-could-fall-below-50-cents-a-watt-by-2017/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/12/12/solar-costs-could-fall-below-50-cents-a-watt-by-2017/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 23:59:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/12/12/solar-costs-could-fall-below-50-cents-a-watt-by-2017/#comment-1316250</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2013 18:38:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=593720#comment-1316250</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I do not think the price of solar panel costs less than $1.00. But such solar panels to absorb the light is too poor. The future technology is PV developed in UK.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I do not think the price of solar panel costs less than $1.00. But such solar panels to absorb the light is too poor. The future technology is PV developed in UK.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: H</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/12/12/solar-costs-could-fall-below-50-cents-a-watt-by-2017/#comment-1304103</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[H]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jan 2013 22:33:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=593720#comment-1304103</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The FOB price for chinese solar panels is already below 0.50 cents.  
I received several quotes between US$0.48 and 0.50. 
The price for 5kW inverters is US$550.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The FOB price for chinese solar panels is already below 0.50 cents.<br />
I received several quotes between US$0.48 and 0.50.<br />
The price for 5kW inverters is US$550.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/12/12/solar-costs-could-fall-below-50-cents-a-watt-by-2017/#comment-1304090</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bill]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jan 2013 20:44:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=593720#comment-1304090</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[WOW - that&#039;s really going out on a limb saying $.50 by 2017.

I was quoted $.59 on January 11th, 2013 - I&#039;&#039; likely see $.50 by year end.

I&#039;d expect to see $.25 in 2017, especially if  1366 Technologies unleashes by then.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WOW &#8211; that&#8217;s really going out on a limb saying $.50 by 2017.</p>
<p>I was quoted $.59 on January 11th, 2013 &#8211; I&#8221; likely see $.50 by year end.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d expect to see $.25 in 2017, especially if  1366 Technologies unleashes by then.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/12/12/solar-costs-could-fall-below-50-cents-a-watt-by-2017/#comment-1264438</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2012 01:33:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=593720#comment-1264438</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The short answer is: Solar is already as cheap or cheaper than other sources of electricity on a cost per kw/hour basis &gt;in some areas&lt;. The big variable is how expensive the local power is and how much the sun shines. So, for example, in Hawaii... solar is cheaper than almost anything else.

In many areas, it&#039;s cost competitive today. In other areas, it&#039;s not yet there. As GreenPlease says, there are a lot of other costs besides panels, much of them are not parts at all, but permits and so, for example, it costs 2x as much per watt to install residential solar in the U.S. as it does in Germany -- using the same equipment!

When the panels are 50 cents/watt, there&#039;s a near certainty that solar will compete on a kw/hour basis in the bulk of the world. 

Now, that said, solar only makes power a portion of the day, so it can still only solve a part of the power equation for the time being.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The short answer is: Solar is already as cheap or cheaper than other sources of electricity on a cost per kw/hour basis &gt;in some areas&lt;. The big variable is how expensive the local power is and how much the sun shines. So, for example, in Hawaii&#8230; solar is cheaper than almost anything else.</p>
<p>In many areas, it&#039;s cost competitive today. In other areas, it&#039;s not yet there. As GreenPlease says, there are a lot of other costs besides panels, much of them are not parts at all, but permits and so, for example, it costs 2x as much per watt to install residential solar in the U.S. as it does in Germany &#8212; using the same equipment!</p>
<p>When the panels are 50 cents/watt, there&#039;s a near certainty that solar will compete on a kw/hour basis in the bulk of the world. </p>
<p>Now, that said, solar only makes power a portion of the day, so it can still only solve a part of the power equation for the time being.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Wise</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/12/12/solar-costs-could-fall-below-50-cents-a-watt-by-2017/#comment-1253395</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike Wise]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2012 09:27:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=593720#comment-1253395</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Soft costs now dominate the cost of installing solar. This is a shame because they are &quot;easy&quot; to avoid and boil down to bureaucracy and inertia, not physics. Those need to come down for solar to make further progress. For example see:
http://phys.org/news/2012-12-nrel-teams-solar-pricing-trends.html]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Soft costs now dominate the cost of installing solar. This is a shame because they are &#8220;easy&#8221; to avoid and boil down to bureaucracy and inertia, not physics. Those need to come down for solar to make further progress. For example see:<br />
<a href="http://phys.org/news/2012-12-nrel-teams-solar-pricing-trends.html" rel="nofollow">http://phys.org/news/2012-12-nrel-teams-solar-pricing-trends.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Albert Hartman</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/12/12/solar-costs-could-fall-below-50-cents-a-watt-by-2017/#comment-1251389</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Albert Hartman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2012 17:43:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=593720#comment-1251389</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Solar technology is following an exponential curve. And just like with other exponential technologies (communications bandwidth, cpu speeds, data storage, DNA sequencing, etc) there will be a sudden enabling of all sorts of applications that seem outlandishly impractical or expensive today.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Solar technology is following an exponential curve. And just like with other exponential technologies (communications bandwidth, cpu speeds, data storage, DNA sequencing, etc) there will be a sudden enabling of all sorts of applications that seem outlandishly impractical or expensive today.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/12/12/solar-costs-could-fall-below-50-cents-a-watt-by-2017/#comment-1251249</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:36:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=593720#comment-1251249</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ah ok thanks a lot man!!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ah ok thanks a lot man!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GreenPlease</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/12/12/solar-costs-could-fall-below-50-cents-a-watt-by-2017/#comment-1249135</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[GreenPlease]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2012 02:47:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=593720#comment-1249135</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Jason: that&#039;s a trickier question than you&#039;d imagine.

First, the article above refers to the cell price. At $0.50/watt for cells, you might be looking at $1.10-1.25 including the balance of system (inverter, wiring, racking, installation). To get the cost per kwh, one calculates the number of hours of sun exposure over the system&#039;s life multiplied by the capacity factor (insolation above/below the standard 1,000w/h/m^2). Divide the resulting number by 1,000 to get total kw/h produced for the system&#039;s life. Divide the cost by this amount.

For example, at $1.25/watt installed, assuming 1,000w/h/m^2, 6hrs/day of sun (I&#039;m adujusting for the distribution of sunlight throughout the day... weak at dawn, strong at noon, weak at dusk.... and approximating), and a 20 year life:

$1.25/[(1x365x20x6)/1,000]= $0.028 or 2.8 cents per kwh.

That&#039;s not entirely accurate as you have to include the costs of financing. Say you pay 5% over 20 years for you financing. Off the top of my head, that $1.25 turns into ~$3.20 so your cost would be ~$0.068 or 6.8 cents per kilowatt hour.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Jason: that&#8217;s a trickier question than you&#8217;d imagine.</p>
<p>First, the article above refers to the cell price. At $0.50/watt for cells, you might be looking at $1.10-1.25 including the balance of system (inverter, wiring, racking, installation). To get the cost per kwh, one calculates the number of hours of sun exposure over the system&#8217;s life multiplied by the capacity factor (insolation above/below the standard 1,000w/h/m^2). Divide the resulting number by 1,000 to get total kw/h produced for the system&#8217;s life. Divide the cost by this amount.</p>
<p>For example, at $1.25/watt installed, assuming 1,000w/h/m^2, 6hrs/day of sun (I&#8217;m adujusting for the distribution of sunlight throughout the day&#8230; weak at dawn, strong at noon, weak at dusk&#8230;. and approximating), and a 20 year life:</p>
<p>$1.25/[(1x365x20x6)/1,000]= $0.028 or 2.8 cents per kwh.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s not entirely accurate as you have to include the costs of financing. Say you pay 5% over 20 years for you financing. Off the top of my head, that $1.25 turns into ~$3.20 so your cost would be ~$0.068 or 6.8 cents per kilowatt hour.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/12/12/solar-costs-could-fall-below-50-cents-a-watt-by-2017/#comment-1248528</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 2012 20:28:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=593720#comment-1248528</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How does this compete with coal, natural gas and nuclear? I&#039;m having trouble finding cost per watt for these power sources since most articles use the metric of kw/h.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How does this compete with coal, natural gas and nuclear? I&#8217;m having trouble finding cost per watt for these power sources since most articles use the metric of kw/h.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
