←back to thread

Solar Is Cheapest Electricity in History, U.S. DOE Aims to Cut Costs 60% by 2030

(cleantechnica.com)
131 points mg | 1 comments | 26 Mar 21 20:07 UTC | HN request time: 0.348s | source
Show context
rich_sasha ◴[26 Mar 21 22:13 UTC] No.26597628[source]▶
If solar were free, but we still needed to pay for battery storage, how would it then compare in cost to fuel-based alternatives (fossil fuel, nuclear etc)?
replies(6): >>26597661 #>>26597691 #>>26597763 #>>26597783 #>>26597850 #>>26598615 #
turtlebits ◴[26 Mar 21 22:29 UTC] No.26597783[source]▶
People use way too much power for battery storage to be viable. The average household consumes 28.9kwh in a day (in 2017), which is way more than rooftop solar can provide.

Maybe when we have smaller houses and don't have a bajillion devices plugged in all the time.

replies(7): >>26597883 #>>26597905 #>>26597922 #>>26597926 #>>26597927 #>>26597962 #>>26598216 #
hn_throwaway_99 ◴[26 Mar 21 22:48 UTC] No.26597927[source]▶
Most people will have a big battery in their garage capable of powering their house for days pretty soon.
replies(1): >>26598116 #
turtlebits ◴[26 Mar 21 23:14 UTC] No.26598116[source]▶
Unless battery prices drastically drop, 2 days of power is 60kwh (quoting earlier figure), even if batteries were $100/kwh, that's $6000 in batteries (or ~$9 if you're on grid)

edit: bad math, had $60k

replies(3): >>26598217 #>>26598312 #>>26605896 #
1. makomk ◴[26 Mar 21 23:26 UTC] No.26598217[source]▶
I think you're off by an order of magnitude there? $100/kwh * 60kwh is $6000, not 60 grand.