On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 00:14:27 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
brought forth from the murky depths:

"Old Nick" wrote in message
What is the source for the claim that solar electricity has a 2-5 yr.
ROI,
Larry? The figures I've seen show a payback period of...never.

One of the mags I read oh, 2-1/2 years ago, maybe Mother Earth
News. They figured in gov't and local utility rebates, etc.
Homemade solar water heat had a ROI of less than a year. Of
course, that ROI is less in CA (PRK) due to the ex-Gubnuh's
deal with the power companies. Man did we get raped back then.
I'm proud to be an EX-Californian.

ROI varies greatly by the amount of solar hours in the area
and the cost of the electricity in the area. Zonies probably
make out better than Mainers.

http://www.solarbuzz.com/Consumer/Payback.htm
"Incentives by some Utilities are currently bringing the cost of
solar energy down to 10-12 cents per kilowatt hour - which can
imply a payback of 5 to 7 years."


There was one claim here, I can't remember by whom, that solar power
actually had a negative _energy_ valkue, in that it took more energy
to make a solar cell and the associated batteries etc than it
generated in its life.

I don't know what the present status is, but that was the case at least 15
years ago. Someone I talked to around that time who seemed to know what he
was talking about (he was an engineer for a company that did process work on
manufacturing of semiconductors) said that the life of PV cells had passed
the threshhold, and that some cells made at that time (early '90s) were
producing positive net lifetime energy. Gary C. probably knows more about
this.

Newer technologies have cut the cost by 3/4 in the past 7 years alone.
I don't know how much of that was energy related. And the cost has
dropped to 1/7th of what it was 30 years ago.


..-.
Life is short. Eat dessert first!
---
http://diversify.com Comprehensive Website Development