Solar Energy Saves Europeans $135M a Day
Posted by vrganj 9 hours ago
Comments
Comment by alexey-salmin 8 hours ago
To the discussion of whether $50B/y is a big figure or not. EU has around 400GW of PV installed. Cost to install per 1kW ranged between $600 and up to $4000 because a big chunk of that capacity was built when prices were much higher. If we consider average price at $1000 this means $400B on capex alone + yearly operational expenses. It can still be profitable (assuming current PV prices can be sustained + installed capacity doesn't grow faster than storage) but it's going to be many years until the investment is recouped and it starts to actually "save money for Europeans".
In any case, of course it's still nice to depend less on imported oil, even if not for money savings.
Comment by pshirshov 3 hours ago
Thanks, China.
In addition to my primary system, I have a toy installation with 6 500W panels and a micro. I paid around 500 euros for that last August and by this time this toy installation generated me 1281 kWh. That's around €400 in terms of retail energy prices. So, I'll break even this August.
So, everything generated after would be exactly the "money saved".
Comment by nonethewiser 7 hours ago
Comment by random3 5 hours ago
Comment by photonair 8 hours ago
Comment by moffkalast 8 hours ago
People don't give a fuck until gasoline is 2€ per liter.
Comment by luke5441 8 hours ago
Comment by moffkalast 8 hours ago
Comment by vaylian 8 hours ago
But these things don't get momentum in a vacuum. People need to advocate for them beforehand, so that when the time is right, the decision makers will know who to turn to.
Comment by slaw 8 hours ago
Comment by ndhbxyd 8 hours ago
Comment by gritzko 8 hours ago
Comment by runtime_terror 8 hours ago
Comment by lopis 8 hours ago
Comment by ZeroGravitas 8 hours ago
That's evening peaker gas plants in most places. After batteries push gas out of that market they go on to morning peaks and so on.
Comment by tialaramex 5 hours ago
The UK for example basically doesn't have "peakers". Right now it's early evening, demand is high as people cook evening meals but haven't yet retired to bed where they stop using electricity, but renewable generation is reduced as the sun approaches the horizon. So there's 8GW of combined cycle gas power plant production, but only about 100MW of "peakers" and it might grow to 200MW or so at absolute peak.
Comment by outside2344 8 hours ago
Comment by whimsicalism 8 hours ago
Comment by outside2344 8 hours ago
This is being done at scale in California and Texas.
Comment by mayama 8 hours ago
Comment by teamonkey 6 hours ago
Comment by whimsicalism 2 hours ago
Comment by inglor_cz 8 hours ago
New advances in nuclear is what I hope for. First experimental SMRs are being installed in several places of the world, others are in design stage. Looks like a hopeful technology.
Comment by ben_w 8 hours ago
48 hours in Scandinavia is roughly equivalent to turning all their road vehicles electric. And that's even with Norway using the second highest per-capita rate of electricity in the world let alone Scandinavia (second to Iceland, whose electricity is 100% renewables thanks to abundant geothermal): https://www.statista.com/statistics/383633/worldwide-consump...
Given nobody is suggesting an instantaneous transition, this is not at all unrealistic, and I don't know why anyone might consider it to be.
Good luck with new nuclear, but with all the politics in that domain, I don't expect that to work out even if e.g. Helion Energy supplies working shipping-container-sized aneutronic fusion.
Comment by sfn42 8 hours ago
Comment by ndhbxyd 7 hours ago
Comment by whimsicalism 8 hours ago
Comment by ifjfkfkfkfj 8 hours ago
Comment by have_faith 8 hours ago
Also, the more panels we already have, the less reliant we are. Energy doesn't stop flowing because deliveries of new panels stop during a conflict. You just pause expansion. A very different scenario to fuel reserves running dry in weeks.
Comment by triceratops 1 hour ago
"Solar panels come from China" is a made-up problem. Oil pipelines and oil production equipment already have supply chains rooted in China and no one worries about that.
Comment by ben_w 7 hours ago
If someone is genuinely worried about China cutting off their power, the fact my very cheap solar inverter came with an app should probably be a consideration here.
I'm not saying the Chinese did put a kill switch into it, but I am saying that we all know what Snowden reported about the US, and given that it really wouldn't be a surprise.
Comment by fmobus 7 hours ago
Comment by triceratops 7 hours ago
Comment by Tade0 8 hours ago
There are more immediate ways for China to influence Europe.
Meanwhile the recent oil debacle showed how fragile a system it is to have fossil fuels shipped across the planet.
Comment by mesk 8 hours ago
Comment by triceratops 7 hours ago
Comment by bor_real 8 hours ago
Comment by lysace 8 hours ago
Comment by tapoxi 8 hours ago
So far it's covered about 70% of my usage and 5.7 Mwh. I don't have a full year of data yet so I expect that number to grow as it includes the summer months. I drive an EV and this includes the car.
Comment by ctkhn 7 hours ago
Comment by nonethewiser 7 hours ago
Comment by unglaublich 6 hours ago
Comment by seidleroni 8 hours ago
Comment by tapoxi 7 hours ago
Comment by complianceowll 8 hours ago
As an adult, one of the things that fascinate me is self-sufficiency: the idea that you can buy a solar power system, install it, and use your own power -- without getting a bill in the mail every month, many times feeling like a victim of modern day suburban subjugation.
I'm still a good little obedient peasant, but I hope one day I can rely more on well water/rain catchment system, solar power, and propane.
Getting 70% of your electrical usage from your own solar power system has to be a good feeling.
Comment by elevation 7 hours ago
There are some fascinating youtube videos on digging your own backyard shallow well (12-40'). This close to the surface, the water is considered non-potable, and you should have yours tested, but you can pump up what you need for backyard garden irrigation. Wells like this can be seasonal, as it is essential a rainwater catchment system using the permeable ground as your reservoir. Still, a neat concept for a relatively low cost.
Comment by polairscience 8 hours ago
These days it's very much sun-legos. You decide what you can afford and what you think you need, and then you bolt the stuff together. Anyone who is willing to put time into it is capable.
Comment by complianceowll 7 hours ago
Comment by elevation 7 hours ago
This family[0] appears to be 90% agriculturally self-sufficient: they occasionally eat out, but grow most of what they eat. They store a lot of food in their basement, critically, with a DIY ventilation system. If you're building a home from scratch, and you're independently minded, it's the ideal time to build in some food storage and ventilation access in your floor plan.
When I showed this video to a coworker who also eats mostly off her own land, she recommended beginning by experimenting with preserving store-bought produce before planting an ambitious garden that yields more food than you know how to store.
Comment by polairscience 7 hours ago
Comment by ndhbxyd 7 hours ago
Comment by parineum 7 hours ago
You'd never have cheap solar if we didn't have cheap coal first.
The problems of today will be solved by more energy consumption (desalinization or carbon capture, for example), not less.
Innovation is "waste" until it creates something new.
Comment by ramesh31 8 hours ago
This is the problem still in the US. Even at ~$0.23/kwh delivered in the northeast, you're looking at an ROI of nearly five years. Fine if you can float that kind of cash to feel better about yourself, but the economics just aren't there for most people, especially in cheaper parts of the country where rates are ~$0.12. Even financing you're looking at a monthly payment equal to or greater than an electric bill. Of course if you have the time to amortize it you'll come out ahead, but there's simply no cheap solution that can actually save real money out of pocket in any reasonable amount of time beyond theoretical future savings on paper. It will never be a true solution without massive subsidisation that reduces out of pocket to a 1-2 year horizon.
Comment by polairscience 8 hours ago
The way that these discussions get contorted online will never make sense to me. The same people who make comments about ROI and it not making financial sense also have new car-loans on vehicles that depreciate catastrophically and are worth nearly nothing in 10 years. After 10 years my solar install will have been paid off for three years, I will get free electricity, and I will have the following benefits along the way:
Additional home value/equity
Backup power in case of grid problems or catastrophe.
Free fuel for my used battery electric vehicle. (compared to ~$200 a month in gas)
As close to zero carbon footprint as you can have in our contemporary world
And that's all assuming electricity prices stay the same. That's not even talking about how hydrocarbons are a very finite resource. Saying there's no "ROI" is looking at the situation like the only variable is your monthly expenses. It's the best decision anyone with a home who has the climate can possibly make. If you value your independence and personal security you'd be crazy to not do it. What would you pay, if you have the kind of money most people on these forums do, to ensure your home operates independent of external inputs? Imagine a new great depression? Or other such event?
Comment by ramesh31 8 hours ago
That's the reality of life for most people outside of our little bubble of six figure earners. If it's a higher monthly price, it's a nonstarter.
>"Additional home value/equity"
I wouldn't be so sure of that. Solar is a massive maintenance liability that a majority of buyers will avoid. Fine if you find the right one willing to pay a premium, but how much more are they going to pay for an old system vs. installing their own?
Comment by polairscience 8 hours ago
For your equity comment, it reads like astroturfing. Every single report with real-world data shows that it's positive equity and that homes with installations sell for more than those without. It's not a "vibe" I have, it's a cold hard fact. There's a million things you maintain when you own a house, and free energy is literally the easiest thing to want to maintain. Compare that to siding, or septic, or anything else....
Your comments aren't in good faith at all.
Comment by plqbfbv 1 hour ago
My parents put up solar in 2005 when it was very expensive. The original panels, inverters, cables are all still there, nothing had to be replaced in the last 21 years. The only maintenance task is a recommended (not mandatory) yearly cleaning that is probably in the 300€ range and takes maybe 1h, but since 5 years they have 2x EVs and 2x Powerwalls and are self-sufficient for 80% of the year, so that cost is negligible. The area where they live also has enough rain that if they skip cleaning for 1 or 2 years, the average total output is still close to the max they can get.
Comment by marssaxman 6 hours ago
That's not at all true where I live (Seattle): the cost of a solar system goes almost straight over into home equity. Solar energy is a feature - a real selling point. No idea what maintenance liability you could have in mind; one can have panels cleaned once a year, for maximum output, but they still just work if you don't. Other than that there is literally nothing to maintain.
Comment by testing22321 5 hours ago
Can you cite sources please.
I’ve had my system in Canada for 2.5 years, flawless, not one second of maintenance.
Family in Australia have had systems for over 10 years with zero maintenance
Also electricity here is ore approved to increase by a minimum of 5% a year, so a solar install on a house is huge for equity. Most people here spend around $2k to $3k a year on heat. I spend $400.
Comment by toast0 8 hours ago
Three years ago, I was paying about $0.12/kWh, now it's about $0.22/kWh and installing a system makes sense.
It's cash up front for a savings later. My roof was due for replacement 'soon' but not immediately, and I didn't model the cost of moving that 3-5 years from the future to the present.
If you can't manage a 5 year planning horizon on a house, I'm not sure that home ownership is a great idea.
I get it if the ROI is 10+ years... too much uncertainty to put a lot of capital in.
Comment by Kirby64 8 hours ago
Comment by testing22321 5 hours ago
In the real world panels that old are putting out 85%
Comment by forcedtolinux 8 hours ago
That's 15% yearly
Comment by ramesh31 8 hours ago
Comment by toast0 8 hours ago
It's all about the all-in cost of the system vs the reduction in utility bill.
If your system runs 20% of your usage, it still has whatever ROI it has.
Building to cover 100% usage isn't a typical goal if you're planning to keep the utility anyway. Most net metering doesn't pay you if you make more than you use, so if you go over, you spent too much on your system.
Comment by ramesh31 8 hours ago
For the time to payback to be even remotely close to 5 years in that scenario. Otherwise you're easily talking a decade plus.
Comment by toast0 7 hours ago
If a $X system covers 100% of your use, a $X/2 system probably covers 50% of your use.
Ignoring time value of money, if the $X system saves you $X / 5 per year, the $X / 2 system that generates 50% will save you $X / 10 per year. Both systems would have a 5 year ROI.
Even if your half price system generates only 45%, it only brings the ROI out to 5 years 6 months.
There's are some fixed costs to hook into your panel and whatnot, but as long as your system is within a reasonable range, the math should math pretty well until your system generates more than your usage. Assuming the math maths at all... if system costs are high and utility rates are low, it doesn't math. If you roll a roof replacement into your system cost, then yeah, a small system won't get you the ROI, but I don't think the math works to include roofing in the system cost unless your utility power is very expensive per kWh. If you're in a reasonable cost area, and you need a new roof for your system, you need to wait until it's time for a new roof anyway. Or if you can't afford a new roof and a solar system at the same time and don't want to finance the solar system, you could probably have the roofers put in rails for future panels when the roof is installed so that the roof warranty covers the rails. Then you can add solar when you've rebuilt your reserves.
Comment by lowbloodsugar 6 hours ago
Comment by toast0 6 hours ago
But regardless of where you install, if a system with 100% generation has a 5 year ROI, a smaller system should have a similar ROI, because the system cost mostly scales with the system size. Probably not down to a single panel (although the plug and play systems available in some jurisdictions do work for low scale)
Comment by ramesh31 7 hours ago
The time value of money is the entire point of what I've said.
And it goes up exponentially when you are just getting by as most of us are. $17k right now is worth incredibly more to me than saving $200/month for the next 20 years.
Comment by toast0 7 hours ago
> $17k right now is worth incredibly more to me than saving $200/month for the next 20 years.
Would you take a $17k loan today, and pay it back at $200/month for 20 years? That's a 13% loan. Which I guess is a market rate for a personal loan, but those usually have a shorter period. My preferred credit union gives solar loans at 6.25% to 8%.
Would you take a $17k loan, to save $200/month for 20 years, but have to pay $191/month for 10 years to clear the loan? What about if you paid $146/month for 15 years? If not, why not? How about if you paid $331/month for 5 years?
Comment by yoran 8 hours ago
Comment by testing22321 5 hours ago
Comment by brk 8 hours ago
Comment by belorn 8 hours ago
This makes calculating the cost saving from solar and wind a bit complex.
Comment by SkitterKherpi 8 hours ago
EDIT: I just found out that my comments show up as dead to everyone else. Can you please change that or let me know what to do? I am not a bot...
Comment by outside2344 8 hours ago
Comment by RetroTechie 6 hours ago
Doesn't make the solar panel(s) any less great to have though.
Comment by testing22321 9 hours ago
Electricity is pre approved to increase a minimum of 5% a year (it just went up 16% this year for people out of town), so the savings will only increase.
I’ll pocket something like $35k in 25 years for $0. Best investment ever.
I’m in canada in a tight valley where it snows a boatload.
Comment by toasty228 8 hours ago
Pretty sure it's all tax funded.
Where I am as soon as the government introduced subsidies every single installer jacked their price 2-5x, now they all start right at the threshold at which the subsidies kicks in, amazing... it costs twice as much to the community but "0" to the individual
Comment by teiferer 8 hours ago
That's too simple of a statement. Sure, govt grants are involved in subsidies for installation and the loan interest. But that thing is then generating electricity, which is what saves them the money.
So it's not "all" tax funded. Some of it is the sun's energy, and that was the whole point.
Comment by bgirard 8 hours ago
Comment by baq 8 hours ago
Comment by teiferer 8 hours ago
Nuclear energy wouldn't even be a thing without heavy govt subsidies. And it keeps needing subsidies. No nuclear plant is economical without subsidies. (The operators admit this themselves.) In contrast, the solar and wind industry is eventually carrying itself without subsidies. In many parts of the world that's already the case since tech and market have matured.
Comment by rjrjrjrj 8 hours ago
Comment by alexey-salmin 8 hours ago
By that time Germany cumulatively poured around a trilling euros into the green energy and still had coal power plants and 2x the CO2 per capita compared to France.
As of 2026, in Germany 22.5% of electricity still comes from coal and CO2 per capita is still 1.7x of France.
The hard numbers so far are extremely favorable towards nuclear. Roughly speaking you get 1.7x better results at a 1/4 of the cost.
Comment by teiferer 7 hours ago
Comment by alexey-salmin 6 hours ago
Germany wasted enormous amounts of money on green energy and made very little progress.
Which country is more "green"? Which technology is more "green"?
Comment by teiferer 4 hours ago
When Germany started serious bets on wind and solar, after 2000, France didn't really add much nuclear anymore.
So, the comparison you are making just doesn't work well, no matter if one likes nuclear or not.
Comment by alexey-salmin 3 hours ago
Instead they chose to pour money into wind and solar and ended up with:
* higher CO2 emissions
* higher consumer electricity prices
* all that for much higher implementation cost
The gap is massive. I think it's directly comparable: these are two neighboring EU countries, comparable in size, population and GDP. They made different choices which led to significantly different outcomes.
Comment by 1123581321 8 hours ago
I live in a heavily subsidized state and quotes ranged from (after subsidies/incentives) 5-6 year ROI to 20-25 year ROI.
Comment by testing22321 8 hours ago
Yes. I’m very happy my taxes are spent on things that improve the lives of everyday people rather than endless wars.
Either spend it on productive things, or have zero taxes.
Comment by cubefox 8 hours ago
Comment by Tade0 8 hours ago
Spain opted out of this system and is now enjoying cheap wholesale electricity, which is fueling an industrial revival.
Comment by cubefox 8 hours ago
... and solar is heavily subsidized, which could outweigh this effect. So this doesn't explain the high energy prices.
> partly because of the way electricity auctions work in most of Europe, namely every participant sells at the price offered by the highest bidder.
This doesn't explain why Germany has so high electricity prices.
Comment by ben_w 7 hours ago
It's the main thing which does.
Say you have two energy sources, Alice Electric can deliver at €0.03/kWh but only up to 10% of your demand, while Bob Energy can deliver 200% of your demand but all units will cost €0.5/kWh.
The net result of the electricity auction, as described, is that the consumers pay Alice and Bob €0.5/kWh each, which gives Alice a €0.47/kWh profit margin and therefore lot of money to expand operations if she wants to, but until she can actually supply 100% of demand, it's priced by what Bob charges.
Comment by cubefox 5 hours ago
Comment by ben_w 5 hours ago
Bob is not one single concrete thing, it's the abstract concept, anthropomorphised.
Germany's energy is expensive because the marginal generator is so expensive.
Comment by Garlef 7 hours ago
Electricity prices in Germany are lower than last year.
https://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/energiemonitor-strompreis-gas...
Comment by cubefox 5 hours ago
Comment by triceratops 7 hours ago
Comment by cubefox 5 hours ago
Comment by triceratops 5 hours ago
Once you've determined you need new electricity generation, the cheapest source tends to get built. Right now that's solar; that's an objective fact.
Comment by cubefox 2 hours ago
Comment by triceratops 1 hour ago
You can't really blame solar for phasing out nuclear. That was a political decision. Uranium mostly comes from Russia and China too, so it's not like it was geopolitically "safer" than gas.
> The old nuclear and coal plants would have been cheaper than replacing them with solar and gas.
Gas's share of electricity generation has not meaningfully changed in Germany since 2015. [1] It's ranged from 80 to 95 TWh. Last year it was 82 TWh.
That data also shows coal's share of generation reducing since 2022. If coal is really cheaper than solar and wind, why is Germany using less of it?
> Possibly because solar is extremely expensive during the night or on overcast days
Today gas power plants cover the shortage. As I've already showed you, Germany isn't using meaningfully more gas than it used to even during nuclear's heyday (which was in 2006, when nuclear generated 167 TWh and 74.6TWh came from gas).
Solar and batteries are already cheaper than gas in sunny climes. [2] It's only a matter of time before they're the cheapest source of nighttime power in Germany.
You're operating on information from 3 years ago and haven't changed your mind since then.
1. https://ember-energy.org/data/electricity-data-explorer/?ent...
2. https://ember-energy.org/app/uploads/2025/06/Ember-24-Hour-S...
Comment by Analemma_ 7 hours ago
This is "by design" in the sense that it offers big subsidies to more solar generation to come online, but you won't see the biggest price cuts until the last expensive sources are pushed off the grid entirely. Because Germany's marginal source is coal, they pay way more than countries whose marginal source is gas or nuclear.
Comment by cubefox 2 hours ago
Comment by wseadowntown 8 hours ago
Comment by ifjfkfkfkfj 8 hours ago
Comment by lnsru 8 hours ago
Comment by nemomarx 8 hours ago
Comment by superxpro12 8 hours ago
Comment by RetroTechie 5 hours ago
Going forward, a big factor in (lack of) "made in Europe" isn't high wages. It's that a) much manufacturing capacity was lost because it was offshored decades ago. It takes ages to restore that. And b) "how many jobs does it provide?" has traditionally weighed heavily in policy decisions.
Once robotization kicks in bigtime, it doesn't matter where labor is cheap. It matters where energy or raw materials are cheap. Or supply lines are short.
Like it or not, China is way ahead on that curve.
Comment by mark242 8 hours ago
Comment by runtime_terror 8 hours ago
Comment by triceratops 8 hours ago
Comment by slaw 8 hours ago
Comment by kristopolous 8 hours ago
Comment by random3 8 hours ago
What's the deprecation schedule? Which financial "context" is it calculated within? A household may benefit from governmental support and profitable, while the aggregate financial situation may or may not be so. What timeline is it calculated on? A 5-10 year window may be unprofitable, while a larger one may be. An even longer one may change numbers completely...
Comment by reedf1 8 hours ago
Edit: People's general understanding of the scale of economies is genuinely terrifying to witness.
Comment by chiffre01 8 hours ago
Comment by adamrezich 8 hours ago
Comment by Sayrus 8 hours ago
Comment by toomuchtodo 8 hours ago
Comment by cbg0 8 hours ago
Comment by pendenthistory 8 hours ago
Comment by Tade0 8 hours ago
Comment by jasoncartwright 8 hours ago
Comment by sidewndr46 8 hours ago
Comment by wood_spirit 8 hours ago
Comment by throw343 8 hours ago
Comment by toomuchtodo 8 hours ago