Skip to main content

Solar salvation for Rio climate woes?

See that shiny new smartphone in your hand - I had one of those 10 years ago.  Granted it was big, ugly, slow, buggy and furiously expensive, but at the time it was at the cutting edge of mobile technology.  Now of course smartphones are powerful, ubiquitous and above all cheap. This is largely thanks to continued technological advancement that’s made electronics cheaper and better year after year, a process known in the industry as Moore’s Law.

The reason I mention this is that the world desperately needs energy technologies that are following a similar ‘better, cheaper’ path.  The lack of any meaningful media coverage of the current Rio+20 conference is making a rather telling point -  the media and the world’s leaders are squarely focused on our economic woes. Environmental concerns are, it seems, yesterday’s news.  Against this harsh backdrop green energy will start having to pay its way in cold hard cash, rather than avoided external costs added in a cost-benefit analysis.

Into this space steps solar photovoltaic (electric) technology.  This technology’s most recent brush with the UK news has been through the Feed-in-Tariffs scheme.  This is (or was) a generous subsidy scheme to support the use of solar PV that was suddenly scaled back, much to distress of the solar industry and environmentalists alike.  The Government’s stated reasons for reducing the available subsidy was the falling cost of PV modules, which made an already generous payment over the top and unaffordable.  So what’s the real story?

Well, the internet is awash with suggestions that solar is following a Moore’s Law style path, and good sources seem to substantiate these claims.  Solar costs have been falling at an exponential rate for several years now and, assuming this trend continues, it will soon be price competitive with conventional fossil fuel power in sunnier parts of the world.  If this happens solar’s status as a green technology would become irrelevant: people will use it simply because it is cost effective to do so.

Of course solar is not a silver bullet to the world’s energy and climate woes.  Solar only produces power when and where the sun shines.  With electricity notoriously difficult to store and transport solar is only ever likely to be part of the picture, particularly in the UK where it would take an awful lot of cost reduction for solar to be competitive with fossil fuels in the north of the country.  And the cost of a solar installation doesn’t simply follow the cost of the panel – the man crawling round on your roof fitting the system would not be amused at the idea of his salary following a Moore’s Law style trajectory.

Nevertheless the solar story, and that of some other energy technologies, offers a little hope for the future in the otherwise grim environmental picture of 2012. The problem with the barrage of subsidies, taxes and economic instruments used (or not used) to prop up more expensive forms of low carbon energy is that they can be reversed. When the economic noose tightens politicians tend to focus on short term financial problems and lose sight of longer term environmental issues. The idea that green energy may become genuinely cheap might therefore offer some degree of environmental salvation in these uncertain economic times.   


Popular posts from this blog

MPs Blast Government Over Air Pollution Failures

Parliamentary Select Committees are rarely kind to Governments. With a remit to scrutinise the Government's record they normally pick policy areas where heals are being dragged rather than shining examples of success. But even against this background accusing the Government of 'putting the health of the nation at risk' is quite strong stuff. This statement is contained in a new report from the Environmental Audit Committee (EAC), 'Air Quality: A Follow Up Report'. The document is a successor to the EAC's 2010 ' Air Quality ' report, a wide ranging examination of the previous Government's record on air quality. The new report is shorter and more focused, examining what's changed since the previous report was published and making suggestions for key policy changes. As with any select committee report the Committee invited submissions of evidence from organisations and individuals, in his case attracting 26 written submissions. They also heard in

The Green Deal - is it any good?

The Green Deal launched this week in a blaze of publicity, unfortunately much of it negative. The scheme has been the Conservative’s flagship home energy efficiency policy since before they even came to power, so the big question is: is it any good? The short answer is that it’s good for some, but not for others. At its heart the Green Deal is a loan scheme for energy efficiency and renewable energy measures, but rather than homeowners paying back the loan directly to the bank the repayments are made via a charge on their electricity bill. The two key innovations of the Green Deal are that the repayments should not exceed the anticipated savings on your energy bill (i.e. your bills will be lower afterwards, even with the loan repayments) and that the loan stays with the property rather than you (if you move the new owner takes over the repayments). The Green Deal is an attempt to address one of the big problems with some energy efficiency and renewable energy measures. Upg

Good News is No News for Environmental Campaigns

Today the Mayor of London launched a ‘no idling’ campaign , designed to encourage drivers in the capital to switch of their engines when parked. The campaign features cleverly designed adverts urging drivers to help prevent asthma attacks and other undesirable health impacts by switching off their engines and reducing air pollution. It’s a great promotion to see up and running, it’s just a shame they ‘key messages’ accompanying it almost immediately shoots the whole campaign in the foot. The briefing accompanying the campaign gives two key messages, the first of which proudly states 'London’s air quality is hugely better than it was 50 years ago but there’s still room for improvement' . You’d be excused if you didn’t get past the first few words. Whilst the message that air quality is better now than it has been in the past is undoubtedly true it’s hardly a rousing call to action. Faced with a campaign that proclaims things are getting much better most members of the public w