# Solar panels failing after 2 years!



## elektra (Feb 26, 2015)

In another blow to "Renewable" Energy, Solar Panels are failing after 2 years of use. Everything we are told about Solar Power being Clean, Green, Renewable, that lasts forever is a lie. 

I must thank Matthew, ClosedCaption, and Old Crock for requesting this thread. Here you go "boys", read it and weep.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/29/b...lar-powers-dark-side.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0



> LOS ANGELES — The solar panels covering a vast warehouse roof in the sun-soaked Inland Empire region east of Los Angeles were only two years into their expected 25-year life span when they began to fail.
> 
> Coatings that protect the panels disintegrated while other defects caused two fires that took the system offline for two years, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost revenues.


----------



## NoNukes (Feb 26, 2015)

Mine are still in excellent shape after 8 years.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 26, 2015)

elektra said:


> In another blow to "Renewable" Energy, Solar Panels are failing after 2 years of use. Everything we are told about Solar Power being Clean, Green, Renewable, that lasts forever is a lie.
> 
> I must thank Matthew, ClosedCaption, and Old Crock for requesting this thread. Here you go "boys", read it and weep.
> 
> ...


Is this your only example? Sounds like defective work like it says in the article. I know a guy that has solar panels that are 20 years old and they still work just fine.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 26, 2015)

NoNukes said:


> Mine are still in excellent shape after 8 years.


Do you guys have "green" roofs as well where you live?


----------



## Mr. H. (Feb 26, 2015)

Think of the hydrocarbons that are used simply manufacturing this stuff. 
Mind blowing. 
The decommissioning/disposal of components and materials isn't exactly friendly to the environment.


----------



## depotoo (Feb 26, 2015)

Interesting  so they demand confidentiality agreements?  I can think of only one reason for that...

Energy analyst Todd Woody points out that no one is exactly certain how pervasive the problem is, writing:

There are no industry-wide figures about defective solar panels. And when defects are discovered, confidentiality agreements often keep the manufacturer's identity secret, making accountability in the industry all the more difficult.

Solar Failures Rising


----------



## depotoo (Feb 26, 2015)

Solar Panels on Tampa Courthouse Fail to Meet Promises

Great article showing they will never recover the costs.


----------



## Old Rocks (Feb 26, 2015)

Well, when you go with the lowest bidder, without looking at the past record of that bidder, this is what you get. Will it affect the manufactures of defective panels? Yes. Will it affect those with a good record? No. Just shake out the less reputable manufacturors. Happens with every new product.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 26, 2015)

Old Rocks said:


> Well, when you go with the lowest bidder, without looking at the past record of that bidder, this is what you get. Will it affect the manufactures of defective panels? Yes. Will it affect those with a good record? No. Just shake out the less reputable manufacturors. Happens with every new product.


Normal business cycles seem to baffle people.


----------



## depotoo (Feb 26, 2015)

Thus, it isn't really getting cheaper...


----------



## NoNukes (Feb 26, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > Mine are still in excellent shape after 8 years.
> ...


Is that a comment on the fact that I live in Ireland, or a real thing?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 26, 2015)

NoNukes said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > NoNukes said:
> ...


I knew you lived in europe but I didnt know what country. This is a picture of a "green" roof in Ireland. It retains water and keeps the home cool during the summer. It consists of plants (usually heat tolerant low water needing plants).


----------



## Old Rocks (Feb 26, 2015)

depotoo said:


> Thus, it isn't really getting cheaper...


Yes, it is. Because even the quality manufacturors have lowered their prices, and will continue to do so.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Feb 26, 2015)

This is a stupid thread that talks about a shitty manufacturer to attack all solar.


----------



## Old Rocks (Feb 26, 2015)

Yup, they bought a Yugo, and the nuts are stating that Cadillacs are undependable because of the experiance with the Yugo.


----------



## ralfy (Feb 26, 2015)

The same thing happens to various manufactured goods.

Ultimately, the problem isn't defective items but low energy returns. The global economy requires the opposite.


----------



## NoNukes (Feb 27, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


I have heard a bit about these, but have done no research on them.


----------



## teddyearp (Feb 27, 2015)

We have some green roofs in Washington. They use moss, lol.


----------



## elektra (Feb 27, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> > In another blow to "Renewable" Energy, Solar Panels are failing after 2 years of use. Everything we are told about Solar Power being Clean, Green, Renewable, that lasts forever is a lie.
> ...



I am speaking of Industrial Scale Solar Panels, not the low use, simple Solar panels a house uses. I see I did not make that clear. 

But it is not my only example, there are thousands and when I have time I will post more examples.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 27, 2015)

elektra said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > elektra said:
> ...


Even if you do then you are only citing examples of a normal business cycle. This is a relatively new market niche. There are always unscrupulous people that flood the market with cheap, poorly made systems or service. Once it levels out then you will see less and less of these stories.


----------



## elektra (Feb 27, 2015)

Matthew said:


> This is a stupid thread that talks about a shitty manufacturer to attack all solar.


Unlike your threads, which is a new thread for each individual installation of a Solar Panel. Of course you link to the Lobbying Groups of the Solar Industry so your individual announcements are unbiased. 

Yes, according to Matthew these Solar Panels last 80-100 years, require zero maintenance, they do not even require to be washed, because unlike everything else in our lives, the are Clean and Green and completely Free, forever. 

Matthew, you may not of got it yet, but all my threads here, are a response to your close minded, narrow posts from the Heavy  Solar and Wind Turbines Heavy Industry lobbyist.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 27, 2015)

elektra said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > elektra said:
> ...


The technology may be older but the industry is relatively new. About 10 years ago I was offered a chance to go into the industry so I learned a lot about it.


----------



## elektra (Feb 27, 2015)

Asclepias said:


> Even if you do then you are only citing examples of a normal business cycle. This is a relatively new market niche. There are always unscrupulous people that flood the market with cheap, poorly made systems or service. Once it levels out then you will see less and less of these stories.


New, in 1767 Swiss Scientist Horace de Saussure was credited with building the world’s first solar collector, later used by Sir John Herschel to cook food during his South Africa expedition in the 1830s. 

Of course Solar goes back even further, centuries, sounds like a great idea for my next thread, thanks for the idea.


----------



## elektra (Feb 27, 2015)

NoNukes said:


> Mine are still in excellent shape after 8 years.


I am speaking of Industrial Scale Solar, which is like comparing apples to oranges, in regards to your home.


----------



## elektra (Feb 27, 2015)

Old Rocks said:


> Well, when you go with the lowest bidder, without looking at the past record of that bidder, this is what you get. Will it affect the manufactures of defective panels? Yes. Will it affect those with a good record? No. Just shake out the less reputable manufacturors. Happens with every new product.


Link, asshole, Link!


----------



## OnePercenter (Feb 27, 2015)

depotoo said:


> Solar Panels on Tampa Courthouse Fail to Meet Promises
> 
> Great article showing they will never recover the costs.



Seems your link is Media Trackers which is a conservative (pro big business) site.

Why no pictures of the panels?

Why no answer to the question; Why aren't the panels delivering as promised?

Why no information of nearby solar on what they are providing? Is it a location issue?

FYI: I own a new condo on South Beach. The building has solar to provide 80% of the common power which what it does. 

Lots of why's in your 'great article.'


----------



## Dragonlady (Feb 27, 2015)

There were a couple of green homes near Withrow Park inToronto. They were built in the 1980's and their solar collectors have never been replaced. Their annual energy bill for heat, electricity and water is less than $100. 

I love how Electra, who claims to work for nuclear power stations, never posts any technical explanations for her posts and relies on the weakest stories to trash green energy. 

Posting stories about defective products is not an indictment of an entire industry. You need to find flaws with the basic science of solar collectors or wind turbines to prove they're a bad idea.


----------



## elektra (Feb 27, 2015)

Dragonlady said:


> There were a couple of green homes near Withrow Park inToronto. They were built in the 1980's and their solar collectors have never been replaced. Their annual energy bill for heat, electricity and water is less than $100.
> 
> I love how Electra, who claims to work for nuclear power stations, never posts any technical explanations for her posts and relies on the weakest stories to trash green energy.
> 
> Posting stories about defective products is not an indictment of an entire industry. You need to find flaws with the basic science of solar collectors or wind turbines to prove they're a bad idea.


----------



## Muhammed (Feb 27, 2015)

The moral of this thread: Don't buy cheap Chinese crap.


----------



## OnePercenter (Feb 27, 2015)

Muhammed said:


> The moral of this thread: Don't buy cheap Chinese crap.



Solar panels aren't cheap. Mine work great!


----------



## depotoo (Feb 28, 2015)

Photovoltaic Reliability and Failure Analysis: Enduring a ...http://www.ewh.ieee.org/r6/scv/eds/slides/2011-Feb-Alers-PV.pdf

Federally funded solar energy project falls short of projected savings - Story abcactionnews.com Tampa Bay News Weather Sports Things To Do WFTS-TV

Solar equipment failures spark demand for defective building material coverage Business Insurance

This industry article shows failure rates are climbing.


OnePercenter said:


> depotoo said:
> 
> 
> > Solar Panels on Tampa Courthouse Fail to Meet Promises
> ...


----------



## NoNukes (Feb 28, 2015)

elektra said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > Mine are still in excellent shape after 8 years.
> ...


How many companies were you dealing with?


----------



## elektra (Feb 28, 2015)

NoNukes said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> > NoNukes said:
> ...


The entire industry all across the globe.


----------



## NoNukes (Feb 28, 2015)

elektra said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > elektra said:
> ...


None of them are working after 2 years?


----------



## elektra (Feb 28, 2015)

NoNukes said:


> None of them are working after 2 years?


Read the OP, or troll another thread.


----------



## Dragonlady (Mar 1, 2015)

We have read the original post. It said that poorly made, defective solar panels are failing. Note the word "defective". 

Solar energy has been used successfully for years. If you're going to go with the cheapest panels you can buy, or buy from countries like China which is notorious for cutting corners and using less than quality materials, you shouldn't be surprised by this. 

But to suggest that solar isn't a viable form of energy based on low quality collectors indicates a level of ignorance about how energy works that is astonishing. Especially from someone who purports to work in the energy business.


----------



## elektra (Mar 1, 2015)

Dragonlady said:


> We have read the original post. It said that poorly made, defective solar panels are failing. Note the word "defective".
> 
> Solar energy has been used successfully for years. If you're going to go with the cheapest panels you can buy, or buy from countries like China which is notorious for cutting corners and using less than quality materials, you shouldn't be surprised by this.
> 
> But to suggest that solar isn't a viable form of energy based on low quality collectors indicates a level of ignorance about how energy works that is astonishing. Especially from someone who purports to work in the energy business.


Get over yourself, what proof do you have that solar is a "viable" form of providing us with electricity. It is just your belief, nothing more. 

This is just one thread I have started, which does not include all the problems, but the basic proof is cost and size. Size equals the increase in consumption of fossil fuels. Cost also equals increase in the use of fossil fuels. 

The lies and denial on the side of those who support Solar is astonishing, when confronted with failing panels the excuse is they were made in China, yet the supporters will praise the low cost of Chinese made panels as being competitive with Fossil Fuels? e

Yes, just one thread here.

Solar power failed in Greece, Germany, Spain, and Australia, as my other threads have stated in which not one person has yet to prove otherwise.


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 1, 2015)

*2015 Worldwide Solar Demand to Grow 16.5%, Emerging Markets Growth to Surpass 40%*

2015 Worldwide Solar Demand to Grow 16.5 Emerging Markets Growth to Surpass 40 EnergyTrend PV

The worldwide solar market demand in 2014 was approximately at 44GW, even though the China market did not perform as well as expectations, due to the continuous growth in Japan and the U.S. market, the supply and demand remained stable. At the end of 2014, the overall supply chain maintained a solid utilization rate, while China’s tier-one module manufacturers also continued to break shipment records. Jason Huang, Research Manager at EnergyTrend, a research division of TrendForce, indicates that the 2015 worldwide solar demand is projected at 51.4GW, with the key markets remaining in China, United States, and Japan, taking up 57% of the overall share, yet it is slightly lower than that of 2014. The rise of the emerging markets (the solar installation countries that are out of top 10) has begun to appear starting the second half of 2014. In 2015, the growth momentum of the emerging markets will become more apparent, and the overall demand will surpass 10GW.

*Don't we all wish we had bank accounts with that kind of growth rates. Pretty good for a failing industry.*


----------



## JFK_USA (Mar 1, 2015)

You mean some products become defected? No way!


----------



## Syriusly (Mar 2, 2015)

elektra said:


> In another blow to "Renewable" Energy, Solar Panels are failing after 2 years of use. Everything we are told about Solar Power being Clean, Green, Renewable, that lasts forever is a lie.
> 
> I must thank Matthew, ClosedCaption, and Old Crock for requesting this thread. Here you go "boys", read it and weep.
> 
> ...



2 year old article- and what is the cause  for the failure according to the article?

_“We need to face up to the fact that corners are being cut,” said Conrad Burke, general manager for DuPont’s billion-dollar photovoltaic division, which supplies materials to solar manufacturers.

The solar developer Dissigno has had significant solar panel failures at several of its projects, according to Dave Williams, chief executive of the San Francisco-based company.

“I don’t want to be alarmist, but I think quality poses a long-term threat,” he said. “The quality across the board is harder to put your finger on now as materials in modules are changing every day and manufacturers are reluctant to share that information.”_

Nothing about the technology itself being bad in the article.

Solar Panels are good for home values though

_http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/realestate/solar-panels-and-home-values.html?_r=0

New research sponsored by theDepartment of Energyshows that buyers are willing to pay more for homes with rooftop solar panels — a finding that may strengthen the case for factoring the value of sustainable features into home appraisals._


----------



## elektra (Mar 2, 2015)

Syriusly said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> > In another blow to "Renewable" Energy, Solar Panels are failing after 2 years of use. Everything we are told about Solar Power being Clean, Green, Renewable, that lasts forever is a lie.
> ...


???

And what happened the last time Fannie Mae overvalued homes? Now its proposed that the cost of Solar be financed for 30 years, as part of our mortgage, Energy the Demorats dictate we must buy. Homes already average around $500k in California, sounds like the Demorats simply think rich. 


_http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/realestate/solar-panels-and-home-values.html?_r=0_


> Fannie Mae has acknowledged the growing proliferation of solar. In December, the government-sponsored institution issued a guideline specifying that if a house has an owned solar system, the appraiser should analyze the system and the market to see if it adds value.


----------



## Muhammed (Mar 14, 2015)

OnePercenter said:


> Muhammed said:
> 
> 
> > The moral of this thread: Don't buy cheap Chinese crap.
> ...


All solar panels are not created equal. Some are awesome and others are crap.


----------



## Andylusion (Mar 14, 2015)

Old Rocks said:


> Well, when you go with the lowest bidder, without looking at the past record of that bidder, this is what you get. Will it affect the manufactures of defective panels? Yes. Will it affect those with a good record? No. Just shake out the less reputable manufacturors. Happens with every new product.



True.... but you have to also factor in that it was explicitly because of these supposed new lower costs, that everyone was claiming solar panels are now cost effective.   When they shake out all the bad manufacturers, the price will rise.  Suddenly your cost-effective solar, isn't so cost effective anymore, when they make them with expensive higher quality controls.


----------



## Andylusion (Mar 14, 2015)

OnePercenter said:


> depotoo said:
> 
> 
> > Solar Panels on Tampa Courthouse Fail to Meet Promises
> ...



Proving leftist can't click on links.  Did you actually click on the links the article cites?  Because you and read right from the governments own website, exactly what the article says.

Of course not.  That's too hard for you. I had to do that for you.

SO the claims are accurate, and sourced directly from the Florida governments own website.  Now what is your excuse?  I know you have one coming, because you never admit you are wrong, but just attack other posters.


----------



## depotoo (Mar 14, 2015)

Dems dictate what one must buy so they may profit from it.





elektra said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> > elektra said:
> ...


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 14, 2015)

No, the market dictates who buys what. And fruitloops like you try to tell the market what to do because of ideology. You are a fool.


----------



## Andylusion (Mar 15, 2015)

Old Rocks said:


> No, the market dictates who buys what. And fruitloops like you try to tell the market what to do because of ideology. You are a fool.



"the market" doesn't dictate anything.

In a Free-Market, consumers dictate who buys what, that's true.

But this is not a free-market.

Most states, including Ohio where I live, have mandated purchases of "Renewable Energy Certificates".

Now to understand how this works....

Say there is a solar power farm in Arizona.   The Solar Farm produces over the course of time, 1 Gigawatt of power.  The EPA issues a Renewable Energy Certificate, to the Solar Farm owner, for 1 Gigawatt of renewable energy produced.   The Solar Farm owner can then sell this certificate on the 'market'.

Now, here in Ohio, we get very little sun, and thus can't generate gigawatts of renewable energy.   Nevertheless, under a previous (democrap) governor,  our power companies are required to produce a percentage of energy from renewable sources.  For the sake of simplicity, let us say 1 Gigawatt of power.

The power company is required to produce a gigawatt of power, from a renewable source it doesn't have available to it.  How then does it meet the requirement?     Easy.  They purchase a Renewable Energy Certificate, REC, on the market, which gives them credit as having produced the renewable energy, even if they did not.

So my power company, buys the REC for 1 Gigawatt, from Solar Farm in Arizona, and this is counted has having produced a Gigawatt of power from renewable energy sources, even if they have not produce a single watt from renewable energy sources.

Now obviously this drives up the cost of power, because my power company clearly has to pay money for power it is not getting.  The actual power produced by the solar farm, is sold in Arizona.  They don't send the power over 1,800 miles of power lines to Ohio, to power a few homes.

Thus our power company has to pay to produce the power used here, and pay for power it is NOT using, from Arizona.

Nothing in this scenario, would happen in a free market system.  Not even close.   No power company would voluntarily purchase credit for power it didn't produce, and never used, to give the illusion that it met some arbitrary goal of renewable energy generation.

You would never pay some guy who owned a Honda Prius, to get a certificate that says you used a fuel efficient vehicle.

Yet that's exactly what is happening in the "green-energy" market.

The only reason "the market"™  is building 'renewable energy', is because the government has mandated that they do so.

And the cost of this is insane.   In fact, we here in Ohio, just found this out.   Our state government recently put a freeze on the 'renewable energy mandates', because the cost was doing to drive huge price hikes on the public.

Ohio renewable energy and efficiency rules frozen for two years as Gov. John Kasich signs legislation cleveland.com

Bad plan.  I wager in two years, they'll freeze the rules again, or start passing rate hikes.  Or possibly change the mandates to be a fraction of what they are now.


----------



## Liminal (Mar 16, 2015)

elektra said:


> In another blow to "Renewable" Energy, Solar Panels are failing after 2 years of use. Everything we are told about Solar Power being Clean, Green, Renewable, that lasts forever is a lie.
> 
> I must thank Matthew, ClosedCaption, and Old Crock for requesting this thread. Here you go "boys", read it and weep.
> 
> ...



So then, if I follow your logic correctly, your little mind tells you that this means solar energy is a waste of time.  Is that right professor?


----------



## elektra (Mar 20, 2015)

Liminal said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> > In another blow to "Renewable" Energy, Solar Panels are failing after 2 years of use. Everything we are told about Solar Power being Clean, Green, Renewable, that lasts forever is a lie.
> ...


 "If" is a big word for many who fail to grasp what they state. $46 Trillion dollars to be spent on Solar and Wind is a big waste of time and money when at the end of the day Solar can not provide the energy to build a Solar Panel or to pump the millions of gallons of water that Solar consumes annually.

One aspect of this failure is the pre-mature failures of Solar Panels and the components that make up the system.

Cost
Failures
Weak electrical output
Increased use of Coal
Increased use of Oil
Increased use of Water
Destruction of Vegetation
Destruction of Animals
Destruction of Birds
Increase of local temperatures

So many little things to consider, which your, "little mind" has never thought of, my OP is simply one that bugs you.


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2015)

Dumb fuck Elektra;

Failures, but the failures of the panels involve ruined panels, and some local fires, not the destruction of a whole river system as we have seen with fly ash spills and chemical spills from coal plants.

Weak electrical output. Just another Elektra lie. 2013, solar accounted for less than 1/2% of our power output, 2014, just over 1%. That is not weak, and that is not slow growth.

Increased use of coal
Increased use of oil   Both just more Elektra lies.

Increased use of water.  Another lie. A coal fired plant must have huge amounts of water for the steam generation for the turbines. A solar installation needs only a little once in a while for the cleaning of the panels.

Destruction of vegitation  Hardly comparable to what is destroyed in strip mining and mountain top removal for coal. 

Destruction of animals
Destruction of birds   More lies from Elektra. Just how do non-moving PV panels destroy either? In fact, I bet you can find bird nests and animal dens in the shadows of the panels.

Increase in local temperatues    Really? Care to explain that?


----------



## Andylusion (Apr 3, 2015)

Old Rocks said:


> Dumb fuck Elektra;
> 
> Failures, but the failures of the panels involve ruined panels, and some local fires, not the destruction of a whole river system as we have seen with fly ash spills and chemical spills from coal plants.
> 
> ...



Again though....  *IF* solar panels actually replaced coal burning power plants, *THEN* you would have a point.   If you could show that installing these solar panels meant that we have shut down all our coal power plants, and there were no ruined rivers, fly ash spills and strip mining and blaw blaw blaw....

But you can't show that.   The amount of power provided by solar panels is such a small fraction of the power needs, that there is not a single example anywhere of a power grid of any size, that the power produced by solar, allowed for the closure of coal power.   Not one.

So all of the strip mining is still happening.  All the fly ash, is still happening.  All of the everything, that happened before, is still happening now.

True, coal as percentage of power has declined, but the numbers clearly show it is because we have moved towards natural gas, not solar.   Solar is an insignificant source of power, that only exists because government is taxing the poor, and paying the rich, to provide solar power.   Without those subsidies, screwing over the impoverished for the benefit of the wealthy, solar would cease to exist as a industrial power generation method.

Now perhaps in some distant future, where technology closes that gap, things will be different.  But as for today, that's how it is.

Solar is insignificant, as a power source.  Proving that is easy.  If you shut off all the PV solar panels across the entire country, it wouldn't even cause a blip on the power grid.  Coal, NatGas, and Nuclear power is more than enough to fill all the power needs of the nation.  If you cut off Coal, or any other, there is no way Solar Panels could even attempt to make up the difference.

That's proof enough, that it is not significant.


----------



## Old Rocks (Apr 7, 2015)

Well, Andy, ever read about the wheat grains and the chessboard? Perhaps you should look into that. Solar doubled it's capacity last year, and now accounts for about 1% of our electricity. A decade of that kind of growth, and there will be no coal mines in the US.


----------



## American Horse (Apr 7, 2015)

NoNukes said:


> Mine are still in excellent shape after 8 years.


Is your place enjoying shade a part of the day?


----------



## rightwinger (Apr 7, 2015)

Drill baby, drill


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Apr 7, 2015)

depotoo said:


> Photovoltaic Reliability and Failure Analysis: Enduring a ...http://www.ewh.ieee.org/r6/scv/eds/slides/2011-Feb-Alers-PV.pdf
> 
> Federally funded solar energy project falls short of projected savings - Story abcactionnews.com Tampa Bay News Weather Sports Things To Do WFTS-TV
> 
> ...



What dya expect? They're cheap plastic that's been laying out in the Sun for two years.


----------



## rdean (Apr 7, 2015)

Republicans want stuff to fail.  It makes them feel better about all their failures.


----------



## rightwinger (Apr 7, 2015)

I love the kneejerk reaction from the right as they celebrate any perceived setback to alternative energy outside their beloved oil


----------



## kiwiman127 (Apr 7, 2015)

If solar energy was such a failure, why is the investment into solar energy leading the boom of renewable energy?
*Solar power drives renewable energy investment boom in 2014 *
Global investment in clean energy jumped 16% in 2014, boosted by fast-growing solar power in the US and China. Solar, whose costs have plummeted in recent years, attracted over half the total funding for the first time.
The green energy market has been gloomy in recent years and the rise in investment is the first since 2011. But despite strong growth in most regions, only a series of large offshore wind farms stopped Europe going into reverse, while the Australian government’s antipathy to renewables saw investment there tumble by 35%.
The new figures, from Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF), show $310bn (£205bn) was ploughed into green energy last year, just short of the record $317bn in 2011. However, as green energy gets ever cheaper, the money invested in 2014 bought almost double the clean electricity capacity than in 2011.
“The investment bounce back in 2014 exceeded our expectations,” said Michael Liebreich, chairman of BNEF’s advisory board. “Solar was the biggest single contributor, thanks to the huge improvements in its cost-competitiveness over the last five years.”
Solar investment rose by 25% in 2014, while wind power rose 11% to comprise a third of all investment. Energy efficiency and electric vehicles rose 10%, including the $2.3bn Tesla Motors raised. But amid concerns over how green they actually are, biofuels investment fell 7% and biomass and incinerator projects attracted 10% less finance.
Solar power drives renewable energy investment boom in 2014 Environment The Guardian


If society had the mindset of the anti-renewable crowd, we'd still be in the Dark Ages.
The first nuclear plant was built in 1954.  So nuclear energy has been around for 61 years.  Has nuclear power been problem free?  No.
First we have nuclear waste problems, yet to be solved.  And then there's the possibility of things like the Chernobyl and the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disasters.
So in other words, after 61 years, nuclear power still has kinks to work out.  It's not perfect by any stretch of the imagination.  It seems Elektra and company, focus only on a few flaws of solar energy and ignore nuclear energy's own flaws. So what else is new?

.


----------



## HenryBHough (Apr 7, 2015)

If you're 70 years old and hell-bent on saving money with solar panels should you buy the cheap 20 year panels or the lasts-a-lifetime panels which cost twice as much?


----------



## Andylusion (Apr 7, 2015)

Old Rocks said:


> Well, Andy, ever read about the wheat grains and the chessboard? Perhaps you should look into that. Solar doubled it's capacity last year, and now accounts for about 1% of our electricity. A decade of that kind of growth, and there will be no coal mines in the US.



Yeah, Solar doubled it's capacity.    No, it's not 1%

What is U.S. electricity generation by energy source - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration EIA 

Solar is 0.4%.

No, there will always be coal mines in the US.  We are already exporting coal, and the demand will only increase, driving up price, making coal mining profitable.

Capacity is irrelevant.   We could cover the artic poll with trillions of gigawatts in solar panels, and produce barely 1% of that in actual power.

This is why in Germany, despite having tons of wind power capacity, produces a tiny fraction of that.






Capacity is irrelevant.   What matters is actual production.

So solar capacity doubled, and it now *produces* 0.4% of our national power consumption.



Whooo hooo... 

"well if the expansion of capacity continues"

Theoretically.... yes.   I lost 10 lbs over the past 6 months.  In theory in about 10 years, I should be lighter than air.   My sister gained 20 lbs in the past 6 months.  In 30 years, she'll be heavier than Shamu. (she's pregnant)

What's my point?  You are making a fairly large assumption that a short term pattern will continue indefinitely.   That's never the case.   Global temperatures have been falling since 2002.  If that keeps up, we're on the verge of an ice age.

Not only is the current trends not automatically going to continue, but it is entirely likely that they will not.

The massive cost of government spending on renewable energy, is very likely to be ended.  When it happens, is completely unknown, but we do know that on a state level, it's already started.

Ohio recently 'paused' green energy subsidies.  The cost was getting high, and thus to maintain a solid budget, the green-energy push was paused.

If the renewable energy field was truly viable, then it wouldn't need subsidies from the government.

Spain recently had to cut renewable energy subsidies, simply because they could no longer afford them.

Spain s solar industry to collapse as govt introduces draconian profit caps RT Business

Without government taxing the poor, to pay the rich solar corporations, they go broke.   Solar, and wind both, are simply not economically viable without government dishing out tax money to rich corporations.


----------



## kiwiman127 (Apr 7, 2015)

Andylusion said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Well, Andy, ever read about the wheat grains and the chessboard? Perhaps you should look into that. Solar doubled it's capacity last year, and now accounts for about 1% of our electricity. A decade of that kind of growth, and there will be no coal mines in the US.
> ...



"If the renewable energy field was truly viable, then it wouldn't need subsidies from the government."-Andylusion

The oil and coal industries received over $20 billion in government subsides in 2013.
Thoughts?


----------



## NoNukes (Apr 8, 2015)

American Horse said:


> NoNukes said:
> 
> 
> > Mine are still in excellent shape after 8 years.
> ...


No


----------



## Andylusion (Apr 9, 2015)

kiwiman127 said:


> Andylusion said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



Great question.   This is a long answer, because it's a deep question.

Most right-leaning people, are against ALL subsidies.  As in all subsidies.  Every single subsidy in the entire country should be eliminated.

In any other context, that should be the ultimate answer.  Unfortunately people have decided to screw with the meaning of words, until it means something completely different.

*If you look up the word "subsidize", you will get this meaning:*

sub·si·dize
ˈsəbsəˌdīz/
_verb_
verb: *subsidize*; 3rd person present: *subsidizes*; past tense: *subsidized*; past participle: *subsidized*; gerund or present participle: *subsidizing*; verb: *subsidise*; 3rd person present: *subsidises*; past tense: *subsidised*; past participle: *subsidised*; gerund or present participle: *subsidising*

support (an organization or activity) financially.
"it was beyond the power of a state to subsidize a business"
synonyms: give money to, pay a subsidy to, contribute to, invest in, sponsor, support, fund, finance, underwrite;More
_informal_shell out for, fork out for, cough up for;
bankroll
"they have agreed to subsidize the after-school program"
pay part of the cost of producing (something) to reduce prices for the buyer.
"the government subsidizes basic goods including sugar, petroleum, and wheat"


*When we on the right talk about 'subsidies'... we are talking specifically about taxing one group of people, and giving that money to another.*

Ethanol is a perfect example.  The government pays the Ethanol producers, so that the cost of a gallon of E85 is somewhat lower than that of regular gasoline.   No one would ever buy E85, if not for this subsidy, because the price would be much higher.

When people talk about coal and oil subsidies, such as the $20 Billion figure you mentioned, that is actually not a subsidy.

Most of that is all tax breaks.   A tax break is not a subsidy.

Say I came to your home, like a Mafia deal, and required you to pay me $100 every week, "for protection".  Then after several months of this, I decided to cut my rate to only $75 a week.... would you feel "subsidized" by me?      Would I go around telling everyone how benevolent I am subsidizing you?

Of course not.   The concept is ridiculous.   The entire logic of the claim, implies that all money that anyone anywhere earns, is really owned by the government, and if they allow you the privilege to keep a little of 'their' money, then they are subsidizing you.

We on the right, obviously reject that notion.   I want everyone to pay as little in taxes as possible.  The fewer dollars government gets, the better it is for everyone.

*But even with the tax breaks, all industries enjoy the same tax breaks.*

For example, oil companies get to deduct depreciation of oil wells.   But wait... don't solar panel and wind mills also get to deduct depreciation of their capital as well?   Yes they do.  In fact, everyone does.  The hot dog vendor at the park, can deduct the capital depreciation of his hot dog cart.

In fact, nearly all the tax breaks given to oil and coal, apply to absolutely everyone.   I get a tax dedication myself.  Am I being subsidized?  I don't think so.


----------

