6 Home Solar Myths Debunked

Hearing mixed messages about solar electric power? We dig into some energy facts to help refute six common renewable energy myths and reveal the many advantages of home solar technology.

Solar Panels

Solar panels prove an aesthetically pleasing addition to any home.

Photo by Shawn Lessord

Content Tools

Despite the many advantages of solar electricity, including its recent cost effectiveness, some remain skeptical about photoelectric technology. A number of common misconceptions fuel this skepticism. In this piece, I’ll debunk six of these, most importantly those regarding the cost and reliability of home solar electricity. Let’s get started.

1. There’s Not Enough Sunshine In My Area for Solar

America is bathed in sunlight. Solar works, even in the Pacific Northwest or the Northeast where cloudy days are more frequent — you’ll just need a bigger system. Photoelectric systems produce optimally in spring, summer and early fall. Bear in mind, you don’t need a crystal-clear, blue sky to generate electricity. Even on cloudy days, solar electric systems easily generate 10 to 20 percent of their full capacity.

2. The Cost of Solar Is Too High

The costs associated with home solar electric systems have plummeted in recent years, mostly because of industry streamlining. In fact, solar has never been cheaper.

Moreover, solar electricity’s lifetime cost per kilowatt-hour (kWh) is significantly cheaper than other North American utility options, in part because of the federal Investment Tax Credit extension, which is now good until 2022. (See http://goo.gl/F3iPHt for more on tax credit extensions.)

In the Midwest, electricity from a solar electric system currently costs around 6 to 7 cents per kWh with the 30 percent credit, based on installation costs. In sunnier regions, such as the West and Southwest, the cost of electricity from a solar electric system is even lower. For comparison, large, investor-owned utilities typically charge 10 to 17 cents per kWh, sometimes more.

Even without the federal tax credits, solar electricity is still less expensive or on par with energy costs from

major utilities. And, unlike conventional power, the cost of electricity from a solar system won’t steadily increase. Consequently, solar electric systems hedge against inflation and spikes in energy prices, frequently providing a return on investment in the range of 3 to 5 percent.

The challenge with solar is that prepaying your electric bill requires a huge chunk of change. Because you have to pay for 30 to 50 years of electricity upfront, solar often appears outrageously expensive, at first glance.

Fortunately, in many areas, installers will lease you a system. And they’ll install a system on your home free of charge. You’ll simply pay them for the electricity the system generates for a set period, usually about 15 to 18 years. In this case, customers’ electricity bills are often cheaper than what they would have paid to utility providers throughout the life of the lease.

When the lease is up, the solar system will be yours, and all of your electricity will be free from that point on. You could easily benefit from another 15 to 20 years of free electricity, although you might need to install a new inverter.

3. Solar Module Production Takes More Energy Than It’ll Ever Produce

The energy payback for a solar electric system, including modules, inverters and associated equipment, typically ranges from one to two years.

In eastern Missouri, where I work, the energy payback for systems incorporating polycrystalline technology takes about a year and a half. For monocrystalline modules, payback takes about two years, and thin-film modules take around a year. That energy payback period will shorten in lucky areas with more sun and will lengthen in locations with less sunlight.

No matter where you are, you’ll never see net-positive energy from electricity produced by coal, oil, natural gas or nuclear power plants. 

4. Solar Energy Requires Significant Changes in Lifestyle

Although demand will, at times, exceed the output of your solar electric system, if your system is tied to the grid (as are the vast majority of solar electric systems), your local utility will meet excess demand.

Even better: When a system produces a surplus in many states, that electricity will feed back onto the grid. If you need that electricity to meet your demands, it will be yours, free, within your billing period. If you need even more, you can purchase it from the utility.

Remember: You can power whatever you want, whenever you want if you install a grid-tied system.

Battery storage limits off-grid systems, which run on batteries. Therefore, these systems usually require a lifestyle that relies on about one-tenth to one-twelfth of the electricity of a standard grid-tied home.

Off-grid homeowners can enjoy the amenities of a modern home but must dry clothes on “solar clothes dryers,” also known as clotheslines, or gas- or propane-powered dryers. These folks must cook their food and heat their homes with gas or wood.

5. I Should Wait for More Efficient Modules to Come Onto the Market

Solar module efficiency is improving, and some exciting new technologies are in development. However, there have only been slight improvements in the efficiency of commercially available modules over the past 25 to 30 years.

Many of the more efficient solar cells you hear about on the news occur in the laboratory, as experimental prototypes. Because they are, for the most part, extremely expensive, the market has been slow to adopt higher-efficiency solar cells.

6. Solar Systems Rely on Ancient Battery Bank Technology

The vast majority of solar homeowners choose grid-tied systems, which require no batteries. The grid serves as a “battery bank,” as explained earlier. I’ve found these battery-free systems easier to install, cheaper, more efficient, and virtually maintenance-free.

As far as battery technology goes, better, lower-cost storage batteries have resolved many challenges associated with off-grid living, and Tesla’s new “Powerpack” option will be another exciting leap forward. (Read more about the Tesla Powerwall and Powerpack.)

Bottom line: solar technology harnesses a clean, reliable resource, and offers many benefits to customers and all of humankind.

envirostudiesdotnet
4/9/2016 2:07:54 PM

The 2-year method mentioned in this article is experimental (using fluidized-bed reactor) and damages the manufacturing equipment. State of the art scalable manufacturing of that type of PV requires 3 years of electricity. Scaling up would cause national electricity shortages since there are not enough hydro power dams. The type of solar electricity that is cheap and practical are solar trough plants, which like dams last indefinitely and generate millions or more times the energy required to manufacture, and are financed like dams. For an example search for P131256 at worldbank.org, built near a dam. PV manufacturing plants could be connected to such power plants, but just sending the cheap electricity from those plants straight to consumers saves costs and requires less plants to be built.


envirostudiesdotnet
4/2/2016 5:08:55 PM

Solar photovoltaics (PV) is not ready for widespread use and may never be. Further R&D is needed. PV panels wear out, especially fast in dry/sunny climates, and cannot be recycled. Unused power must be dumped by utilities that are required to buy it from PV users without being able to use it. Meng Tao, Terawatt Solar Photovoltaics, p. 77, states: "Recycling of solar modules...will become obvious in about 15 years when today’s installed solar modules have gone through their life cycles and start to scatter along highways or pile up in junk yards." Manufacturing PV causes pollution and wastes energy, using a lot of electricity. Tao (p. 74) states: "To contain cost, many polycrystalline-Si and Si wafer producers place their factories near hydropower plants for cheap electricity. This strategy works only when the solar cell industry is small, since the availability of hydropower is limited." Small scale PV is more practical, can be used for low-power portable devices, smaller water pumps that run all day instead of intermittent pumps, heat transfer liquid pumps for solar water heaters, etc. PV may also be used for remote locations that would otherwise not have any electricity.


patriot1st
3/18/2016 10:15:04 PM

Well here is a factual example of just how ready solar electrical generation is for prime time. http://constitution.com/solar-plant-got-1-2-billion-feds-2011-now-look-well/ Extremely high cost of production and very low output, coupled with billions of dollars of taxpayer money = possible closure! This is no myth, this is just cold hard fact!! Solar is good for cooking and heating, but poor for electrical generation!


patriot1st
3/11/2016 2:12:23 PM

Not any thing like a really poorly written article to put one off towards solar! Where are the Myths being Debunked, as the title states??? All that is written is some vague conjectures about power, with nothing in the way of supported facts! I only pay .075576421 cents per kWh per year. At a range of "6 to 7 kWh", it will only take me, oh forever to pay back the system cost!!! Not to mention none of the panels are actually rated for more than 20-25 years by the installers. Shorter in the high UV areas and high snow load areas. The costs of inverters is glossed over also, they are not cheap! At a cost of a few thousand dollars for a new grid tie inverter, along with installation, that is a major expense, which adds a significant amount to the cost per watt!! While PV solar is making strides, it is far from cost effective for most people. If one needs to include the government subsidies, money stolen from other people, to make it cost effective, you have a serious problem in the making! Solar heating makes sense and can be done cost effectively most places around the world. Solar PV is not really ready for prime time and this article shows nothing to indicate it is yet!


jamesv
3/11/2016 9:57:27 AM

Efficiency has nothing to do with the viability of solar PV. It is all about cost. If costs are going down, it might be better to wait rather than get a high priced system now that you will be stuck with for many years. I built a solar DHW system over 20 years ago, and I'm sure it has paid me back well over the years. That was low hanging fruit. Still haven't gotten a PV system.