Solar Power Cost Effectiveness

Solar power is still not cost effective with photovolticsOREGON 6.21
(PV) costing in the neighborhood of 30 cents perSOUTH CAROLINA 6.22
kilowatt and 20-22 cents per kilowatt for solar thermalMINNESOTA 6.24
plants. Taxpayers subsidize this inefficient roll out ofKANSAS 6.37
solar panels by way of government (on the backs ofIOWA 6.40
taxpayer) subsidized incentives instead of waiting forMONTANA 6.40
the technology to improve.VIRGINIA 6.43
Solar thermal essentially uses mirrors to heat water orSOUTH DAKOTA 6.44
other liquids, turn it into steam that cranks turbines toOKLAHOMA 6.50
provide electricity. PV, by contrast, takes the rays ofGEORGIA 6.58
the sun and converts it into electricity without water orILLINOIS 6.80
a turbine.WISCONSIN 6.88
There is hope in a company called AusraOHIO 6.89
(manufactures a solar thermal product) who haveMICHIGAN 6.94
developed technology that cuts the cost of solarCOLORADO 6.95
thermal to 8 cents per kilowatt. They use batteries toNORTH CAROLINA 6.97
provide power when the sun isn't shining.MISSISSIPPI 7.00
Solar panels for PV use the same expensive siliconNEW MEXICO 7.10
that computer chips do. The shortage of the silicon isLOUISIANA 7.13
driving up prices. It is not clear if or when at all thatMARYLAND 7.15
solar power will become cost competitive with oil, coalARIZONA 7.45
or nuclear power.DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 7.47
Ask construction advice atDELAWARE 7.53
U. S. Average Revenue per KWh is 7.62 centsTEXAS 7.95
STATE CENTS PER KWhPENNSYLVANIA 8.00
KENTUCKY 4.63FLORIDA 8.16
IDAHO 4.97NEVADA 8.56
WYOMING 4.98MAINE 9.69
WEST VIRGINIA 5.13CONNECTICUT 10.26
INDIANA 5.58NEW JERSEY 10.29
ARKANSAS 5.67MASSACHUSETTS 10.77
UTAH 5.69RHODE ISLAND 10.96
NORTH DAKOTA 5.69ALASKA 10.99
NEBRASKA 5.70VERMONT 11.02
WASHINGTON 5.80NEW HAMPSHIRE 11.37
MISSOURI 6.07CALIFORNIA 11.45
ALABAMA 6.08NEW YORK 12.55
TENNESSEE 6.14HAWAII 15.