Solar power needs a more ambitious cost target

Solar power is increasingly economical, but its value to the grid decreases as its penetration grows, and existing technologies may not remain competitive. We propose a mid-century cost target of US$0.25 per W and encourage the industry to invest in new technologies and deployment models to meet it.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Estimates of the falling long-term value of solar PV as penetration increases.
Figure 2: Historical learning curve for PV modules.

References

  1. 1

    Stranks, S. D. & Snaith, H. J. Nature Nanotech. 10, 391–402 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Chuang, C.-H. M., Brown, P. R., Bulović, V. & Bawendi, M. G. Nature Mater. 13, 796–801 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    He, Z. et al. Nature Photon. 9, 174–179 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Sun Shot Initiative Fact Sheet (US Department of Energy, 2015); http://go.nature.com/Pa72yY

  5. 5

    Wesoff, E. First Solar CEO: ‘By 2017, we'll be under $1.00 per watt fully installed’. Greentech Media (24 June 2015); http://go.nature.com/5BNvtT

  6. 6

    Trends 2015 in Photovoltaic Applications (International Energy Agency, 2015); http://go.nature.com/GEB3Qm

  7. 7

    Energy Technology Perspectives 2014 (International Energy Agency, 2014).

  8. 8

    Solar Photovoltaics Technology Brief (International Renewable Energy Agency, 2013); http://go.nature.com/bvnzce

  9. 9

    Shah, V. & Booream-Phelps, J. Crossing the Chasm: Solar Grid Parity in a Low Oil Price Era (Deutsche Bank, 2015).

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Levelized Cost and Levelized Avoided Cost of New Generation Resources in the Annual Energy Outlook 2015 (US Energy Information Administration, 2015); http://go.nature.com/56G1xc

  11. 11

    Shiao, M. J. US solar PV system prices continue to decline in Q3 2015. Greentech Media (16 December 2015); http://go.nature.com/SfvByS

  12. 12

    Lamont, A. D. Energy Econ. 30, 1208–1231 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Laughton, M. Renewable Energy Sources (CRC Press, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Denholm, P. & Margolis, R. M. Energy Policy 35, 2852–2861 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Amatya, R. et al. The Future of Solar Energy (MIT Energy Initiative, 2015).

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Hirth, L. IET Renew. Power Gen. 9, 37–45 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Olson, A. & Jones, R. Electricity J. 25, 17–27 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Mills, A. & Wiser, R. Changes in the Economic Value of Variable Generation at High Penetration Levels: A Pilot Case Study of California (Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2012).

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    Gowrisankaran, G., Reynolds, S. S. & Samano, M. Intermittency and the Value of Renewable Energy (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Gilmore, J., Vanderwaal, B., Rose, I. & Riesz, J. IET Renew. Power Gen. 9, 46–56 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Clò, S. & D'Adamo, G. The Impact of Solar Penetration on Solar and Gas Market Value: An Application to the Italian Power Market (Universidad de Valencia, 2014).

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    Darghouth, N., Barbose, G. & Wiser, R. Electricity Bill Savings from Residential Photovoltaic Systems: Sensitivities to Changes in Future Electricity Market Conditions (Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    St. John, J. California's NEM 2.0 decision keeps retails rate for rooftop solar, adds time-of-use. Greentech Media (28 January 2016); http://go.nature.com/aBIvTa

  24. 24

    Borenstein, S. The Market Value and Cost of Solar Photovoltaic Electricity Production (Center for the Study of Energy Markets, 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25

    Nykvist, B. & Nilsson, M. Nature Clim. Change. 5, 329–332 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26

    Safaei, H. & Keith, D. W. Energy Environ. Sci. 8, 3409–3417 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27

    Mills, A. D. & Wiser, R. H. Appl. Energy 147, 269–278 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28

    Wozabal, D., Graf, C. & Hirschmann, D. OR Spectrum. 37, 1–23 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29

    Delarue, E. & Morris, J. Renewables Intermittency: Operational Limits and Implications for Long-Term Energy System Models (MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, 2015).

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30

    Subtil-Lacerda, J. & van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 54, 331–340 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31

    Rubin, E. S., Azevedo, I. M. L., Jaramillo, P. & Yeh, S. Energy Policy 86, 198–218 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32

    Reichelstein, S. & Sahoo, A. Cost and Price Dynamics of Solar PV Modules (Stanford University, 2015).

    Google Scholar 

  33. 33

    Mayer, J. et al. Current and Future Cost of Photovoltaics (Fraunhofer ISE, 2015).

    Google Scholar 

  34. 34

    Sivaram, V., Stranks, S. & Snaith, H. Perovskite solar cells could beat the efficiency of silicon. Scientific American (1 July 2015); http://go.nature.com/h5TrhQ

  35. 35

    Almansouri, I., Ho-Baillie, A. & Green, M. A. Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 54, 08KD04 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36

    Green, M. Commercial progress and challenges for photovoltaics. Nature Energy 1, 15015 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37

    Leo, K. Nature Nanotech. 10, 574–575 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38

    Kamat, P. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 4, 908–918 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39

    Zimmerman, E. et al. Nature Photon. 8, 669–672 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40

    Jones-Albertus, R., Feldman, D., Fu, R., Horowitz, K. & Woodhouse, M. Preprint at http://go.nature.com/5qQRHP (2015).

  41. 41

    Baker, E., Fowlie, M., Lemoine, D. & Reynolds, S. S. Annu. Rev. Res. Econ. 5, 387–426 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Varun Sivaram.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sivaram, V., Kann, S. Solar power needs a more ambitious cost target. Nat Energy 1, 16036 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nenergy.2016.36

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing