Solar PV now world's cheapest electricity.

ROFLMFAO.

So why do they need subsidies again harry?

Why give an inaccurate subject line? The actual title of the article in The Independent is: "Solar power becoming world's cheapest form of electricity production, analysts say". That word "becoming" is there for a reason.

A couple of quotes from the article: "Renewable energy is cheap in developing countries that are looking to add more electricity to their national grids."

"However, in rich nations where new renewable energy generators must compete with existing fossil fuel power stations the cost of carbon-free electricity can be higher."

Zealots! Sheesh...

Are the costs for storage or an for alternative source for when it's dark factored in?

Course not.

And the actual costs will be less the massive subsidy they got to install them, and the 'green bank' zero rate loans...

The one thing you can be sure of is fossil fuel energy will go up as the years go on. If the cost of the energy from the sun does too we're in real trouble.

I realise that this doesn't allow the claim to be scaled up in the way harry did

but I think the point of the article was talking about areas where there was no other means of supply

leccy for 12 hours a day has got to be better than leccy for zero hours of the day

tim

So why are solar power companies not meeting expectations, Harry?

The article is a puff, written by a know-nothing journalist (are there any others?) fed misleading information by a vested interest.

Might it also be that world oil and gas prices are very much lower than when the project was envisaged?

But I'd guess we all know these low prices won't last.

Not if te main use for it is lighting after dark.

Well, it might mean that, but I don't think so. The article says that Ivanpah simply haven't produced as many MWh as they said they would at the beginning. I think the same was true of the N. African solar plants, but I can't find the link now. But IIRC these are not photo-voltaic plants, but solar thermal, which may or may not be significant.

A side effect of solar thermal plants is the very unpleasant deaths it causes birds that fly through the concentrated beam of sunshine. They burst into flames in mid air, and can be seen falling to the ground leaving a trail of smoke as they go, either dying in flight or shortly after they hit the ground, burnt alive. Very green, I don't think.

They'll last as long as fracked gas is cheaply available. It's fracked gas that's caused the fall in energy prices generally, and especially in the US. When it runs out, fossil fuel prices will rise again, and no doubt renewables will hitch themselves onto the bandwagon along with the rest of them.

Solar thermal, not PV.

From the same website:-

The same reason nuclear needs subsidies I 'spect. But solar PV subsidies are reducing. Nuclear costs ever more.

The technology is with us.

Harry is a card, really.

He either Believes, or he is paid to lie.

Yebbut I see the Ivanpah people are blaming the weather. Not sunny enough. That would effect all types of solar.

Did you listen to the R4 bit on crystallised graphite? Potential use for irradiated power station graphite ... everlasting batteries.

I think the problem with solar is pretty obvious to anyone. It only works when its sunny and daytime. A slight inconvenience that.

Anyone know how that project to drill into a volcano is doing to use geo thermalenergy? However I'm not living near a volcano just coss the leccy is cheaper and I don't think there are many volcanoes in Surrey. Brian

In about five billion years we'll get lots more energy from the sun :-)

In the meanwhile, all those fancy 'renewables' will be priced to follow the increase in fossil fuel prices (when they go up), but then demand more subsidies (when the latter go down).