Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Photoelectricity is Gasoline

Historians tell us that in the early days of automobiles there were several ideas on the table - steam cars, electric cars and internal combustion cars. Smart people backed different horses (some people actually backed horses) but the internal combustion engine fueled by gasoline won out and has become king of the road. If renewables were cars, photoelectricity is gasoline. 

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

The Evolution of FiTs in Germany

It's Evolution Baby!!!
In the Beginning - Gross FiT

The modern FiT*, at least as far as solar is concerned, was born in 2004 when Germany established a FiT rate of 57.4 cent/kWh for photoelectric systems. Among the rules of the program it was set forth that the FiT would be paid for gross production. This means each and every kWh produced would be paid the FiT - this is called a Gross FiT structure.

2004 FiT Stats and Market

Feed-in Tariff rate: 57.4 cent/kWh
Retail Electricity rate: 17.5 cent/kWh

In the Middle - Hybrid FiT 1.0

In 2009 Germany moved from a Gross FiT structure to a Hybrid FiT design. In the hybrid design, the production payments are broken into parts. The portion of production that is exported is paid the normal FiT rate but the portion of production that is self-consumed is paid a different self-consumption bonus (AKA: FiT kicker).

2009 FiT Stats and Market

Feed-in Tariff rate: 43.01 cent/kWh
Self-consumption rate: 25.1 cent/kWh
Retail electricity rate: 22.9 cent/kWh

Consumers didn't mind the change to a Hybrid FiT one iota. Rather than pay 22.9 cent/kWh to buy electricity from the utility Hans was getting paid 25.1 cents/kWh to self-consume his own production. Hans knew this meant he was effectively getting 22.9 + 25.1 = 48 cent/kWh for self-consumed electricity rather than the lower 43.01 cent/kWh for exported production. Five cents better... No brainer.

Still in the Middle - Hybrid FiT 2.0

In Q3 of 2010 the FiT architects, in an attempt to further encourage self-consumption, added a bonus tier to the self-consumption bonus. The bonus tier was formulated around the idea of rewarding people for self-consuming a high percentage (greater than 30%) of their production. This new wrinkle brought more light on the idea/concept/notion of self-consumption rates.

Example 1: Hans produces 10,000 kWh per year and he self-consumes 3,000 kWh of that production. Hans has a self-consumption rate of 3,000/10,000 = 30%

Example 2: Hans produces 10,000 kWh per year and he self-consumes 6,000 kWh of that production. This means he has a self-consumption rate of 6,000/10,000 = 60%

Q3 2010 FiT Stats and Market

Feed-in Tariff rate: 34.05 cent/kWh
Self-consumption rate Tier 1 (<30%): 17.67 cent/kWh
Self-consumption rate Tier 2 (>30%): 22.05 cent/kWh
Retail electricity rate: 23.9 cent/kWh

Example 1 part 2: Hans gets paid the Self-consumption rate of 17.67 cent/kWh for the 3,000 kWh of self-consumed electricity and the regular FiT rate of 34.05 cent/kWh for the other 7,000 kWh of annual production.

Example 2 part 2: Hans gets paid the self-consumption bonus rate of 17.67 cent/kWh for the first 3,000 kWh of self-consumption, 22.05 for the next 3,000 kWh of self-consumption and the regular FiT rate of 34.05 cent/kWh for the other 4,000 kWh of annual production.

In the Now - Net FiT

In April 2012 the FiT structure transistioned from a Hybrid to a Net FiT design. In a Net FiT design you get the FiT rate for exported production but there are no self-consumption bonuses of any sort.

April 2012 FiT Stats and Market

Feed-in Tariff rate: 19.5 cent/kWh
Retail electricity rate: 26.2 cent/kWh

The FiT architects were able to make a smooth switch over to Net FiTs because the FiT rate had fallen below the retail price of electricity. People currently considering installing solar don't care that they won't get paid for the self-consumed portion of production becasue they know they're saving 26.2 cent/kWh. Hans understands that 26.2 cent/kWh in savings is better 19.5 cents/kWh in earnings.

In the Future - Market FiT

The current degression rate of the FiT is 1% per month. This means every month the FiT rate is falling by 1%. In April 2012 the rate was 19.5 cent/kWh... in May 19.31, June 19.11 and so on. If this degression rate holds we'll see the FiT fall below 10 cent/kWh some time in 2016 or there abouts. I suspect the FiT architects are going to step in and accelerate the process. This intervention will likely be initiated in early 2013 after the newly released installation statistics reveal the uptake of photoelectrics has been significantly faster than planned. Conservatives will angrily call for cuts. The industry will sing a sad song. There will be a strange dance.

February 2013 FiT Stats and Market

Feed-in Tariff rate: Approximately 17 cent/kW
Retail electricity rate: Approximately 28 cent/kWh

Analysis will reveal that a FiT of around 10 cent/kWh will be sufficient to promote further adoption in the sub 10 kW system category. The FiT architects may choose to step the FiT down to this rate over several quarters or they may do it in one fell swoop. I'd fell swoop the FiT but there's really no hurry.** A year long comprehensive market study will be comissioned to determine the relative value of the excess photoelectric production. The results of this study will inform FiT revisions in the 2014 timeframe.


The general evolution of FiTs in Germany is instructive for other FiT markets - Japan, Belgium and Italy come to mind. A good plan is to start out with a generous Gross FiT. The second stage of a FiT program can be initiated once the FiT rate approaches the retail electricity rate. At that point you can use Hybrid FiTs to smooth the transistion between Gross and Net FiTs or you can jump straight to Net FiTs. Once reaching a Net FiT structure the goal is to continue driving costs down and improving self-consumption rates such that you can eventually transition to a market rate for excess feed.

Gross FiT --> Hybrid FiT --> Net FiT --> Market FiT

*Note: My use of the term "modern FiT" will cause consternation among some. If you want to get picky we had proto-FiTs popping up as early as 1989 but it wasn't until 2004 that I see an unmistakeably clear signal from the FiT architects that they meant business. This is what I mean by "modern FiT".

**Note in November: I still battle with the concept of pulling the bandaid off slowly vs. ripping it off. I'm currently of the position that if you have a healthy budget a steady gradual removal of the FiT is better than pulling the rug out. The problem with chopping the FiT in a large adjustment is that it introduces an information vacuum. People will find it hard to believe that half a FiT is still profitable. So you side with people/information over policy/money where you can.

I have recently been running into a lot of revisionist history (AKA: bullshit) putting forth the idea that the US created the FiT when they came up with avoided cost payments under PURPA. A fundamental element a Feed in Tariff is that it's specifically designed to deliver a specific profit to a specific generation technology based on that generation technology's specific costs of production. Avoided Cost payments are derived via reference to the market rather than a specific technology - this is totally different than a FiT.

Monday, June 25, 2012

Solar Heat Pumping

The average prices of photoelectric systems in Germany have fallen from roughly 2425 Euro/kWp to 1750 Euro/kWp in the last 12 months. The chart on the right (Long live Excel 2003!) shows a rough estimate of how the underlying electricity production costs have fallen in step with system costs. The blue line represents a photoelectric system financed at 5% while the magenta line represents a system financed at 3%. The headline here is that production costs have fallen from around 15.5 cent/kWh to as low as 11 cent/kWh in the last year. As a side note, the yellow line shows how the price Delta between these two financing arrangements is shrinking as system prices fall.

The drop in photoelectricity prices is opening up some interesting applications for photoelectricity. As a point of reference note that the all in price for electricity in Berlin is 26.22 cent/kWh while the price of natural gas is 7.67 cent/kWh. It's currently no wonder that Berliners predominately heat their homes and water heaters with natural gas.

Knock Knock
Who's there?
Heat Pump
Heat Pump who?
Just Heat Pump

Heat pumps have the seemingly magical ability to convert one unit of electricity into two to three units of heat (See Wikipedia for the details). This means that if a tall blonde Berliner buys electricity from the grid at 26.2 cent/kWh she can use a heat pump to convert the electricity to heating at an adjusted cost of 8.73 to 13.1 cent/kWh. If, on the other hand, our heroine powers her heat pump with electricity from her shiny new photoelectric system, her "fuel costs" will be 3.5 to 4.5 cent/kWh. Unless I'm missing something, photoelectric heating has a big bright beautiful future in Germany.

Saturday, June 23, 2012

Scientific Wild Ass Prediction

Vinod Khosla is a volcano. He periodically has a blowup and spews hot mess all over the place. If my volcano meter is reading correctly it looks like he's about due for an event.

P.S. Damn... 3.5 months latter and no blow yet. This prediction was a bust. Oh well...

Thursday, June 21, 2012

Be Real and Compromise

Duct Tape Rules
My neighbor runs an LED business. He's a very cool guy. He's got a European accent, likes his wine and drives a Porsche. If there was a Most Interesting Man in the World game show he could compete in it. He'd tell some story about an orgy in the Mediterranean that no one would want to follow. No lie... Been there, done that.

There's a snob contingency in the green community that would look down on this fellow because he drives an inefficient car. That's weird, uncompromising and disrespectful.

The next time you see a guy driving a truck with smokestacks you have to catch yourself. Maybe the driver designs wind turbines for a living. Maybe the guy is a zero-emission architect. Maybe you need to ask yourself what makes you so special and get over it.

Mouthful of Diamonds... it's deep...

"the world is not round because of you
you know i'm not around because of you

you've got a mouthful of diamonds
and a pocketful of secrets
i know you're never telling anyone
because the patterns they control your mind
those patterns take away my time
hello, goodbye"

Zen poets should shout Haiku! when they karate chop things

MISSION STATEMENT: Build it they will come

ADMISSION STATEMENT: You use periods too much...

IGNITION STATEMENT: Live more be do love

The Clueless Coalition

CLEAN: Clean Local Energy Accessible Now

It appears they had some sort of brainstorming session to come up with this mouthful of an acronym. Why use four syllables when you can use eleven? Truly the uneducated leading the clueless. If you want to roll out a successful solar program just do the opposite of whatever these clowns suggest and you should be ok.

Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

Octopussies and Dildos

What do you get when you cross an Octopus with a Dildo Factory?

Run!  Run!!!

La la la... Wine is good... num num num... 

If at FERC you don't succeed try try again

Dear Fellow Rooftop Solar Challenge Grantees,

Please join the Clean Coalition on June 20 from 9:30-10:30 am PDT, to learn about its initiative to standardize and improve the interconnection process for small-scale solar PV installation.  Today, while there are standard regulations for interconnection, installers of these systems are not given a clear guide for on-the-ground processes conducted by each utility company.  To address this, the Business Practice Manual (BPM) Initiative works to have each grid operator publish a standard interconnection guide and work towards adopting best practices from around the country.  The Clean Coalition’s Associate Executive Director, Ted Ko, will lead the discussion.  Collaboration with other Rooftop Solar Challenge teams will be critical to the success of the BPM, as it is a tool that will be useful to everyone.  Also, please share this with other team members.

The Clean Coalition is a key partner of the Efficient Solar Market Partners of Northern California (ESMP) team, which is led by SolarTech as part of the Department of Energy’s Rooftop Solar Challenge.  Along with the Clean Coalition, SolarTech is supported by the City and County of San Francisco, East Bay Green Corridor, and Solar Sonoma County in the delivery of this grant.  These partners will also present their work in future webinars.

here to register. 

Reply to SolarWriter

You can use my spreadsheet linked at the bottom. If you don't trust my spreadsheet you can track down Dr. Alfred Körblein's model (in German) and use that. I haven't looked at his model in over a year so I don't know how he's treating self-consumption these days or even if he's kept it updated. I recently saw a comment of his on PV Magazine and he thinks the new FiT rates in Germany are fine. That tells me our models are kicking out similar results.

To use the model go to the Input Parameters page and enter in the current system prices, O&M, kWh/kWp, interest rates, discount rate, etc in the gray fields. The input data needs to be in per KWp increments. You have to be careful but it's hopefully intuitive - if not I'll write up some more in depth instructions. The default values are all referenced and are specifically set to model the current situation in Germany. The results pop up in the Orange box on the right hand side. 

The most under-appreciated parameter is the self-consumption rate. You can vary that from 30% to 50% and see what I mean.

We often hear that FiTs are set to deliver an 8% return on investment. You can play with the model yourself to see how system prices and FiT rates conspire to deliver X% rate of return or Y net present value based on the inputs.

When I play with the model it's clear to me the FiT rates for the sub-10 kW tranche can come down significantly. The FiT rate is actually a secondary concern - you could set it at 10 cent/kWh and still clear the economic hurdle tests. The FiT used to be about making money - now it's about saving money. A counter argument here is that retail rates may come down in the future and this would impact the profitability of your system. That's absolutely true but there's a hedged risk here. If electricity prices go up you save money with PV. If they go down you lose money on the PV investment but you save money on utility bills. The showstopper would be if electricity rates dropped sharply over a short time period but that seems unlikely to me.

I'm guesstimating that prices for small and medium sized systems come down to 1500 Euro/kWp in the near term and stabilize around there. If system prices get down to this level your production costs (the LCOE) are at 10 ct/kWh. This gives you a lot of room to chop the FiT rates. As mentioned previously, things very much depend on your self-consumption profile. 

An additional thought here is that the FiT shouldn't necessarily be based on installed kWs. Another way to go about it would be to base the rate on total backfeed. This structure would encourage a balance between economies of scale and overall system integration (generation matched to load) at the same time. I like that. We shouldn't unnecessarily punish a roof that's good for 12 kW when a 10 kW system may actually back feed more. Make the top FiT tranche apply to the first 10 MWh of backfeed per year. The next tranche would apply to the next 90 MWh and so on.

It's my belief that the BSW, DECC, GEA etc should be putting out a standardized model like this themselves - a better cleaner model of course. Things need to be transparent. The Government should be using the exact same model to set FiT rates so we're all on the same page and everybody is held accountable. People will still complain but at least we'll be clearer on what's being debated.

Disclaimer: I think my model works but some bugs and brain farts may have slipped in/out.

Monday, June 18, 2012


Dear FERC,

I'm relatively familiar with the FERC Open Access orders that got the ball rolling on deregulation. I was wondering if it is within FERC's power/jurisdiction to move forward with a Feed-in Tariff order for small/medium scale solar power installations. I'm thinking specifically of residential and commercial solar PV installations that feed excess power into the grid. I realize this isn't a wholesale power situation directly but was hoping there may be a way for FERC to assert authority here. The idea of the Order wouldn't be to force the US utilities to accept Feed from PV at X price - it would be to force the utilities to transparently lay out their tariff rules on back feeding. Basically an Open Access rule for Solar. The US has plenty of net-metering type programs but the coverage isn't universal. I know a fellow in Georgia that had to twist many arms to get his system connected. I'm sure FERC is busy but it's about time we started moving forward on improving the transparency of feed-in rules with an across the board procedure. I've studied the situation for many years and I believe there's a critical need for standards in this area. This seems to be something that may be right up FERC's alley. If you're already working on it please let me know. If this is not in FERC's jurisdiction then I apologize for the misplaced suggestion. Either way, as a concerned private citizen I'd appreciate some feedback. 


Thank you for your informed email and suggestion. This agency can always initiate a rulemaking in any proceeding within its jurisdiction. You are right, however, that feed-in-tariffs sit on the outer limits of our jurisdiction. This agency did review a feed-in-tariff related filing in California:, but a rulemaking is not something I have heard under consideration, most likely because of jurisdictional issues. Thank you again for your suggestion.


Thank you for the feedback. I can see how this is difficult for FERC to move on but at the same time FERC seems to be the right entity to take responsibility here and set a precedent. Solar power at scale is a new thing after all. Is this something that has to be done one PUC at a time?

Tough question to answer. Like I said it is on the line between State and Federal jurisdiction. I can't really say for sure what the Chairman or Commission would wish to do or not do and I wouldn't want to tie their hands. I can only say, I am not aware of any effort to address feed-in-tariffs on a nationwide scale. Now of course, Congress can pass a law on this issue and that can change the dynamic greatly

Dear Google News

I don't want stories about child molestation or rape. I don't want stories about murders or suicides. I don't want stories about car bombers. I don't want stories about ENTER NAME HERE. Call me crazy... I want some news but I don't want to wake up to downer crap. 

What's the deal Google? I'm sure thousands of folks have posted about this so you know we want this. I've never read a good Google response as to why you aren't adding this. Jeez... Imagine if you didn't allow the minus sign on searches. That would be silly. Imagine if Facebook didn't allow you to delete a stalker from your friend list. All I've ever heard is that you're looking into it. Lame, out of touch and unimaginative. You could be building the news page into a Facebook type page if you put some resources into it. Have you thought about that? Who's in charge there? I send you all sort of good ideas but you goofs got ears like grandpas. 

Friday, June 15, 2012

Now You C-PV, Now You Don't

Unusual solar panels gone from Berger structures in Palm Desert

Not too far down the road there's a matching Now You C-SP, Now You Don't sign... Turn left there... You'll be on LaLa Lane. A little past the Johnson place there's a roadside marker... CIGS was here... Make a right there and you'll be on ShouldaWouldaCoulda Boulevard... You just keep on going down ShouldaWoulda. You have to goes a ways... Once you go by the abandoned CdTe works you can see the highway. Head south on the highway and you'll hit the Crystal City in about an hour. Say hey to the Wizard for me. 

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Project Prices... Shames and WOWs

California...Here's a 200 MW Imperial Valley project for 360 million - $1.8/Watt

Spain...Here's a 60 MW Spanish project for 60 million Euro - $1.3/Watt

These may not be all in costs. Perhaps Solar Magazine has taken to tantalizing their audience with BS statistics. If so, SHAME on them. If not, WOW.

Germany...Here's an update on the German solar market.

United Kingdom...Here's a 3.93 kWp Tesco promotional package for the U.K. market priced at £6,799 - $2.7/Watt. This price is down from £14,499 last November. The extraodinary drop in prices ($5.75/Watt to $2.7/Watt) over a few months shows how much installers in the U.K. were over-charging previously. We've seen the same sort of price corrections following FiT adjustments in Germany, Italy and Australia. We'll see the same sort of price response when the U.S. removes the odd hodge-podge of perversely ineffective incentives they currently have.

California... Speaking of perverse ... The CSI lists the average installed cost of PV systems in California at $7.83/Watt. If you look more specifically at installs over the last month (rather than the last year) the average cost is tracking around $5.5/Watt. Please note this is about where the U.K. was 5 months ago.

Factory..."Module prices are being forecasted at the €0.51–0.55/watt range for Q4..."

Fresco of the Week

Triumphant Achilles dragging Hector's body around Troy, from a panoramic fresco of the Achilleion...

Quote and B.O.T.E.

Kyocera’s Schröer, perhaps embodying the conservative nature of his company (which he sought to emphasize during the discussion), said that Japan is likely to see around three GW installed in 2012, with the same figure being reached in 2012. He also made the important point that a paradigm shift was currently underway in the user market for photovoltaic, in that consumers were no longer looking at how much they will make from an installation, but rather how much they can save on utility bills - as grid parity is reached in certain markets.


Average price of residential electricity in Japan: 30 cent/kWh

Potential production costs of solar: 10ish cent/kWh

Potential share of residential load: About 50%

Average residential consumption: 6000 kWh/year (Same as California)

Savings: .20*3000 = $600/year

Friday, June 8, 2012

Ready, Solar, Go

Hello Mr. Gomez

I'm impressed with the new building efficiency standards and in particular the Solar Ready roof requirement. Can you tell me what the Solar Ready roof requirement costs are per home or business? Is this information broken out in the analysis?


Dear Photomofo,

The final version of the solar ready requirements (Section 110.10 of the 2010 Building Energy Efficiency Standards) may be viewed at  The attached errata includes changes in grey highlight.

The solar ready requirements are really for a reserved piece of roof space that isn’t self-shaded by other features on the building. There are no ‘infrastructure’ type items such as conduit/piping, collateral structural loads, or pre-installed mounting hardware, thus costs are expected to be minimal to none.

For single family homes, the solar ready requirements are applicable to subdivisions with 10 homes or greater. The cost that single family homes built in 2014 would incur to make them “solar ready” was calculated to be $182.  The primary report relied upon for the development of the “Solar Ready Roofs” requirement for single family homes was done by the California Utilities State Wide Codes and Standards Team (CASE).  You can find this report in its entirety at For single family homes there is a requirement for a 200 amp bus bar and spare breaker space opposite of the main breaker/service conductors, which resulted in the $182. The $182 is averaged across expected single family housing starts. For the approximately 80% of homes that would already be designed to have a 200 amp bus bar or electrical service, the actual costs would be less. For the 20% of homes where the 200 amp bus bar or electrical service would be considered an ‘upgrade’, the actual costs would be higher. This is detailed in the CASE report. 

The report for nonresidential buildings can be found at  While there was an added cost determined for single family homes, there was no added cost for nonresidential buildings.  Below is an excerpt from this report explaining why.

From the Nonresidential Solar-ready Building Report done by the California Utilities Statewide Codes and Standards Team

3.5 Cost Effectiveness Methodology
The proposed code change does not require equipment installation nor does it have any incremental
maintenance costs. The only costs associated with the measure are design costs. Initially designers
will need to familiarize themselves with the solar-ready requirement, but over time design will
become streamlined and the costs will be minimal. The LCC Methodology does not include design
costs in the costs of a measure, so for LCC purposes the measure has no costs.

A list complete with links for all documents relied upon for the development of the 2013 Building Energy Efficiency Standards can be found at

If you have any further questions, feel free to email back at the hotline email address below, or contact us by phone at (800) 772-3300.

Best regards,

Javier Perez
Energy Standards Hotline Staff
California Energy Commission
1516 Ninth Street
Sacramento, CA 95814


Thursday, June 7, 2012

Arguments Against a Tariff in Europe

Goya's Madhouse, 1812-1819
1. Germany is a huge exporter and China is their #1 trade partner. 

2. The EPIA is already using non-neutral language against a tariff. 

3. There are a lot more installers in Germany than manufacturers. 

Strangely, there are hints that Germany is going to fight fire with mire... Rather than bring a case against China they may end up implementing WTO illegal trading practices - domestic content rules specifically. This hysterical policy is completely ineffective but it seems to make people happy for whatever reason. It's symbolic I suppose... Shut up and eat your symbolism you sniveling schvine.  

Thank You Sir, May I Have Another

Why Stop at $500K? DoTAX Quietly Multiplies Hawaii Solar Tax Credit

Tuesday, June 5, 2012



I was hoping you could help with a general question. Can you tell me how the average price of residential PV systems in Japan has changed in 2011 and early 2012? Is there a resource that tracks the changes in quarterly average installed costs? Has the JPEA considered tracking this information and providing it as a benchmarking resource for the public?


Dear Photomofo-san

Thank you for your contacting us, but so sorry too late reply to you.

Regarding your question of average residential PV system price. This organization; JPEA hesitates to announce PV system price. Because it might conflict with the Antitrust Law, therefore JPEA is not able to show the PV system price.But we could get average residential PV system price information from Home-Page of JPEC (Japan Photovoltaic Expansion Center).

The Data of actual result are shown as below. We are not able to get the data of 2012 yet.

Case1 :Installation to New House.
Case2: Installation to Existing House

Best Regards
JPEA Secretariat


Thank you so much for this information. I believe it is important for the PV industry in Japan to keep track of installation statistics and regularly provide updates to the public. This gives the commercial and business sectors a reliable source of information to cross-check when they go to buy a system. This cross-check reduces over-charging and spurs healthy competition.

Transparent and reliable statistics also provide government administrators with a benchmark for adjusting the FiT in the future - a benchmark they can be publicly held accountable to when it comes time to adjust FiT rates next year. I have seen very few countries reliably track installation costs and volumes. It is something I humbly suggest the JPEA should think seriously about. If this is against the JPEA's charter maybe the JPEA can encourage a 3rd party to gather and broadcast the information.


Dear Photomofo-san

Good Day!

Thank you for your comments.

Especially cross-checking and updating of data is very important for consumer & contractor to reduce over-charging and to spur health competition.

And also disclosure of PV system installation price contributes to the healthy development and fixation of the FIT system in Japan.

Best Regards

JPEA Secretariat

Friday, June 1, 2012

Economics of Photoelectricity - June

Economics of Photoelectricity - June Update

Calculations & Documentations
Assumption Sets
Input Parameters
Reference Lists
Results & Calculation
Sources - Long
Sources - Short List
Components - Supply, Demand and Price Tracking
Cell Prices by Month
Cell Prices by Quarter & Year
Italy, Price Progression
Module Cost Breakdown
Module Prices by Month
Module Prices by Quarter & Year
Poly Prices by Month
Poly Prices by Quarter & Year
Polysilicon Supply & Demand
Processing Costs, ASP, ETC.
PV Price & Production History
PVX Price Trend
System ASPs by Country
Systemf, Module & BOS ASPs
System Breakdowns
Wafer Prices by Month
Wafer Prices by Quarter & Year
Energy Statistics
California, Electricity Use
Coal, Oil, Natural Gas Prices
Europe, Energy Prices in EURO
Germany, Electricity Trend
Germany, Electricity Use
Italy, Electricity Use
Japan, Electricity Use
World Electricity Prices
World, Energy Prices in USD
FiT Schedules
China, FiT Schedule
France, FiT Schedule
Germany, FiT Schedule
Italy, FiT Schedules
Japan, FiT Schedule
Malaysia, FiT Schedule
Ontario, FiT Schedule
South Korea, FiT Schedule
Swiss, FiT Schedule
Taiwan, FiT Schedule
UK, FiT Schedules
FiT Notes
Et Cetera
Capex Notes
Champion Efficiency
kWh per kWp
Manufacturing Plants
Roof Area by Country
Wafer Dimensions
Watt per Piece
Money Stuff
Current to Constant Dollars
Exchange Rates
Financing Notes
Infation Rates
U.S. Treasure Rates
Installation Statistics
European PV Market Shares
Italy PV Market Shares
Germany, Monthly Installations
Germany PV Market Shares
Solar Projects
Transmission Projects
U.K., Monthly Installations
U.K., Weekly Installations
World Installs
2011 Installations