Over the past decades solar energy costs have been decreasing as manufacturing processes improve. At the same time fossil fuels become slowly more scarce and therefore more expensive. At some point there will be price parity and then solar will start becoming less expensive than fossil fuels.
Anyone have any good data on when this may occur?
(I’m looking for general times, like “this decade” – 50 years, 100 years, etc)
Thanks 
More Pages:
- Solar Energy: Can Someone Please Briefly List Some Advantages/disadvantages Of Fossil Fuels, Uranium, Wind, Solar, Geo.? (11/24/2011)
- Solar Energy: What Is The Same About Fossil Fuels And Geothermal Energy? (8/24/2011)
- Solar Energy: Solar Energy Vs Fossil Fuels?? (10/5/2011)
- Could solar power, hot water and heating be combined in one system in a way that’s cheaper then fossil fuels
- About what percentage of America’s Energy comes from fossil fuels and….?
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
When the power panels are installed in 24 hour earth orbit. On the earths surface solar cells can only receive good input 5 or 6 hours a day. In orbit they will receive a hundred times the power 24 hours a day and no environmental contamination to degrade or damage them
Some scientific information revealing the truth about global warming, when it happened and what probably caused it.
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/global_warming.html
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
http://reasonmclucus.tripod.com/CO2myth.html
http://mc-computing.com/qs/Global_Warming/Atmospheric_Analysis.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_variation
Where the heat came from and why it was abnormally cold previously
http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~dbunny/research/global/215.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_minimum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sp%C3%B6rer_Minimum
Parity depends on location and a number of other factors. For one, in a location with lots of sun, solar is cheaper, because a smaller array can be used.
Also, avccessability of fossil fuel is a factor. In Hawaii, for example, there isn’t any oil or natural gas, and the amount of coal is trivial. So electricity prices are higher, and Solar has less to compete against. In Kentucky, Solar would have to compete against much lower rates.
Thirdly, we need to clarify whether we’re talking about parity in large-scale generation, or partity from a homeowner’s standpoint. Coal and nuclear are much cheaper for a central power plant, but solar could be cheaper on the scale of an individual house. You could theoretically have your own coal-fired or natural gas-fired boiler at your house, but solar could actually be cheaper, not to mention more quiet.
Our neighbor got a fantastic deal on solar in 2007. 4 kW for $ 20,000 (before rebate). That works out to maybe 25 cents / kWh, which can already stand up to top-tier electric rates in our area. But wait. He got a tax credit from the Feds, and a rebate from California. HIs final cost is more like 16 cents / kWh over the 20 year life of the system. If it lasts longer than that then it’s even cheaper. Grid electricity may be a tad less expensive today, but I’m sure it will catch up once we get out of this recession.
I agree sense there is no limit on solar energy then the price should stay the same and should only occasionally rise for the demand when everyone starts using it once fossil fuels start to cost to much. So slowly the world is leadingcloser to renewable energy for every fossil they burn!