France Hits Record: 20% Of Market Buys Electric Cars

Home Solar Cost vs Utility Bills compares electricity rates, ROI, incentives, and battery storage, explaining payback, financing, and grid fees while highlighting long-term savings, rate volatility, and backup power resilience for homeowners.

Key Points

Compares home solar pricing and financing to utility rates, outlining savings, incentives, ROI, and backup power value.

✅ Average retail rates rose 59% in 20 years; volatility persists

✅ Typical 7.15 kW system costs $18,950 before incentives

✅ Federal ITC and state rebates improve ROI and payback

When shopping for a home solar system, sometimes the quoted price can leave you wondering why someone would move forward with something that seems so expensive. 

When compared with the status quo, electricity delivered from the utility, the price may not seem so high after all. First, pv magazine will examine the status quo, and how much you can expect to pay for power if you don’t get solar panels. Then, we will examine the average cost of solar arrays today and introduce incentives that boost home solar value.

The cost of doing nothing

Generally, early adopters have financially benefited from going solar by securing price certainty and stemming the impact of steadily increasing utility-bill costs, particularly for energy-insecure households who pay more for electricity.

End-use residential electric customers pay an average of $0.138/kWh in the United States, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). In California, that rate is $0.256/kWh, it averages $0.246/kWh across New England, $0.126/kWh in the South Atlantic region, and $0.124/kWh in the Mountain West region.

EIA reports that the average home uses 893 kWh per month, so based on the average retail rate of $0.138/kWh, that’s an electric bill of about $123 monthly, or $229 monthly in California.

Over the last 20 years, EIA data show that retail electricity prices have increased 59% across the United States, with evidence indicating that renewables are not making electricity more expensive, suggesting other factors have driven costs higher, or 2.95% each year.

This means based on historical rates, the average US homeowner can expect to pay $39,460 over the next 20 years on electricity bills. On average, Californians could pay $73,465 over 20 years.

Recent global events show just how unstable prices can be for commodities, and energy is no exception here, with solar panel sales doubling in the UK as homeowners look to cut soaring bills. What will your utility bill cost in 20 years?

These estimated bills also assume that energy use in the home is constant over 20 years, but as the United States electrifies its homes, adds more devices, and adopts electric vehicles, it is fair to expect that many homeowners will use more electricity going forward.

Another factor that may exacerbate rate raising is the upgrade of the national transmission grid. The infrastructure that delivers power to our homes is aging and in need of critical upgrades, and it is estimated that a staggering $500 billion will be spent on transmission buildout by 2035. This half-trillion-dollar cost gets passed down to homeowners in the form of raised utility bill rates.

The benefit of backup power may increase as time goes on as well. Power outages are on the rise across the United States, and recent assessments of the risk of power outages underscore that outages related to severe weather events have doubled in the last 20 years. Climate change-fueled storms are expected to continue to rise, so the role of battery backup in providing reliable energy may increase significantly.

The truth is, we don’t know how much power will cost in 20 years. Though it has increased 59% across the nation in the last 20 years, there is no way to be certain what it will cost going forward. That is where solar has a benefit over the status quo. By purchasing solar, you are securing price certainty going forward, making it easier to budget and plan for the future.

So how do these costs compare to going solar?

Cost of solar

As a general trend, prices for solar have fallen. In 2010, it cost about $40,000 to install a residential solar system, and since then, prices have fallen by as much as 70%, and about 37% in the last five years. However, prices have increased slightly in 2022 due to shipping costs, materials costs, and possible tariffs being placed on imported solar goods, and these pressures aren’t expected to be alleviated in the near-term.

When comparing quotes, the best metric for an apples-to-apples comparison is the cost per watt. Price benchmarking by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory shows the average cost per watt for the nation was $2.65/W DC in 2021, and the average system size was 7.15 kW. So, an average system would cost about $18,950. With 12.5 kWh of battery energy storage, the average cost was $4.26/W, representing an average price tag of $30,460 with batteries included.

The prices above do not include any incentives. Currently, the federal government applies a 26% investment tax credit to the system, bringing down system costs for those who qualify to $14,023 without batteries, and $22,540 with batteries. Compared to the potential $39,460 in utility bills, buying a solar system outright in cash appears to show a clear financial benefit.

Many homeowners will need financing to buy a solar system. Shorter terms can achieve rates as low as 2.99% or less, but financing for a 20-year solar loan typically lands between 5% to 8% or more. Based on 20-year, 7% annual percentage rate terms, a $14,000 system would total about $26,000 in loan payments over 20 years, and the system with batteries included would total about $42,000 in loan payments.

Often when you adopt solar, the utility will still charge you a grid access fee even if your system produces 100% of your needs. These vary from utility to utility but are often around $10 a month. Over 20 years, that equates to about $2,400 that you’ll still need to pay to the utility, plus any costs for energy you use beyond what your system provides.

Based on these average figures, a homeowner could expect to see as much as $12,000 in savings with a 20-year financed system. Homeowners in regions whose retail energy price exceeds the national average could see savings in multiples of that figure.

Though in this example batteries appear to be marginally more expensive than the status quo over a 20-year term, they improve the home by adding the crucial service of backup power, and as battery costs continue to fall they are increasingly being approved to participate in grid services, potentially unlocking additional revenue streams for homeowners.

Another thing to note is most solar systems are warranted for 25 years rather than the 20 used in the status quo example. A panel can last a good 35 years, and though it will begin to produce less in old age, any power produced by a panel you own is money back in your pocket.

Incentives and home value

Many states have additional incentives to boost the value of solar, too, and federal proposals to increase solar generation tenfold could remake the U.S. electricity system. Checking the Database of State Incentives for Renewables (DSIRE) will show the incentives available in your state, and a solar representative should be able to walk you through these benefits when you receive a quote. State incentives change frequently and vary widely, and in some cases are quite rich, offering thousands of dollars in additional benefits.

Another factor to consider is home value. A study by Zillow found that solar arrays increase a home value by 4.1% on average. For a $375,000 home, that’s an increase of $15,375 in value. In most states home solar is exempt from property taxes, making it a great way to boost value without paying taxes for it.

Bottom line

We’ve shared a lot of data on national averages and the potential cost of power going forward, but is solar for you? In the past, early adopters have been rewarded for going solar, and celebrate when they see $0 electric bills paid to the utility company.

Each home is different, each utility is different, and each homeowner has different needs, so evaluating whether solar is right for your home will take a little time and analysis. Representatives from solar companies will walk you through this analysis, and it’s generally a good rule of thumb to get at least three quotes for comparison.

A great resource for starting your research is the Solar Calculator developed by informational site SolarReviews. The calculator offers a quote and savings estimate based on local rates and incentives available to your area. The website also features reviews of installers, equipment, and more.

Some people will save tens of thousands of dollars in the long run with solar, while others may witness more modest savings. Solar will also provide the home clean, local energy, and U.S. solar generation is projected to reach 20% by 2050 as capacity expands, making an impact both on mitigating climate change and in supporting local jobs.

One indisputable benefit of solar is that it will offer greater clarity into what your electricity bills will cost over the next couple of decades, rather than leaving you exposed to whatever rates the utility company decides to charge in the future.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Tesla Chile Market Entry signals EV expansion into South America, with a Santiago country manager, service technicians, and advisors, leveraging lithium supply, competing with BYD, and preparing sales, service, and charging infrastructure.

Key Points

Tesla will enter Chile to launch EV sales, service, and charging from Santiago, opening its South America expansion.

✅ Country manager role based in Santiago to lead market launch

✅ Focus on EV sales, service centers, and charging infrastructure

✅ Leverages Chile's lithium ecosystem; competes with BYD

Tesla is preparing to bring its electric cars to South America, according to a new job posting in Chile.

It has been just over a decade since Tesla launched the Model S and significantly accelerated EV inflection point in the deployment of electric vehicles around the world.

The automaker has expanded its efforts across North America, where the U.S. EV tipping point has been reached, and most countries in Europe, and it is still gradually expanding in Asia.

But there’s one continent that Tesla hasn’t touched yet: South America, even as global EV adoption raced to two million in five years.

It sounds like it is about to change.

Tesla has started to promote a job posting on LinkedIn for a country manager in Chile, aligning with international moves like UK expansion plans it has signaled.

The country manager is generally the first person hired when Tesla expands in a new market.

The job is going to be based in Santiago, the capital of Chile, where the company is also looking for some Tesla advisors and service technicians.

Chile is an interesting choice for a first entry into the South American market. The Chilean auto market consists of only about 234,000 vehicles sold year-to-date and that’s down 29% versus the previous year.

That’s roughly the number of vehicles sold in Brazil every month.

While the size of the auto market in the country is small, there’s a strong interest for electric vehicles as the EV era arrives ahead of schedule there, which might explain Tesla’s foray.

The country is rich in lithium, a critical material for EV batteries, where lithium supply concerns have also emerged, which has helped create interest for electric vehicles in the country. The government also announced an initiative to allow for only new sales of electric vehicles in the country starting in 2035.

Tesla’s Chinese competitor BYD has set its sight on the South American market by bringing its cheaper China-made EVs to the market, part of a broader Chinese EV push in Europe as well, but now it looks like Tesla is willing to test the market on the higher-end.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

World Bank Offshore Wind Investment drives renewables and clean energy in developing countries, funding floating turbines and shallow-water foundations to replace fossil fuels, expand grids, and scale climate finance across Latin America, Africa, and Asia.

Key Points

A World Bank program funding offshore wind to speed clean power, cut fossil fuels, and expand grids in emerging markets.

✅ US$80bn to 565 onshore wind projects since 1995

✅ Pilot funds offshore wind in Asia, Africa, Latin America

✅ Floating turbines and shallow-water foundations enable deep resources

Europe and the United States now accept onshore wind power as the cheapest way to generate electricity, and U.S. lessons from the U.K. are informing policy discussions. But this novel technology still needs subsidising before some developing countries will embrace it. Enter the World Bank.

A total of US$80 billion in subsidies from the Bank has gone over 25 years to 565 developing world onshore wind projects, to persuade governments to invest in renewables rather than rely on fossil fuels.

Central and Latin American countries have received the lions share of this investment, but the Asia Pacific region and Eastern Europe have also seen dozens of Bank-funded developments. Now the fastest-growing market is in Africa and the Middle East, where West African hydropower support can complement variable wind resources.

But while continuing to campaign for more onshore wind farms, the World Bank in 2019 started encouraging target countries to embrace offshore wind as well. This uses two approaches: turbines in shallow water, which are fixed to the seabed, and also a newer technology, involving floating turbines anchored by cables at greater depth.

The extraordinary potential for offshore wind, which is being commercially developed very fast in Europe, including the UK's offshore expansion, China and the U.S. offshore wind sector today as well, is now seen by the Bank as important for countries like Vietnam which could harness enough offshore wind power to provide all its electricity needs.

Other countries it has identified with enormous potential for offshore wind include Brazil, Indonesia, India, the Philippines, South Africa and Sri Lanka, all of them countries that need to keep building more power stations to connect every citizen to the national grid.

The Bank began investing in wind power in 1995, with its spending reaching billions of dollars annually in 2011. The biggest single recipient has been Brazil, receiving US$24.2 bn up to the end of 2018, 30 per cent of the total the Bank has invested worldwide.

Many private companies have partnered with the Bank to build the wind farms. The biggest single beneficiary is Enel, the Italian energy giant, which has received US$6.1 bn to complete projects in Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, Romania, Morocco, Bulgaria, Peru, and Russia.

Among the countries now benefitting from the Banks continuing onshore wind programme are Egypt, Morocco, Senegal, Jordan, Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines.

Offshore wind now costs less than nuclear power, and global costs have fallen enough to compete in most countries with fossil fuels. Currently the fastest-growing industry in the world, it continued to grow despite Covid-19 across most markets.

Persistent coal demand

Particularly in Asia, some countries are continuing to burn large quantities of coal and are considering investing in yet more fossil fuel generation unless they can be persuaded that renewables are a better option, with an offshore wind $1 trillion outlook underscoring the scale.

Last year the World Bank began a pilot scheme to explore funding investment in offshore wind in these countries. Launching the scheme Riccardo Puliti, a senior director at the Bank, said: Offshore wind is a clean, reliable and secure source of energy with massive potential to transform the energy mix in countries that have great wind resources.

We have seen it work in Europe we can now make use of global experience to scale up offshore wind projects in emerging markets.

Using data from the Global Wind Atlas, the Bank calculated that developing countries with shallow waters like India, Turkey and Sri Lanka had huge potential with fixed turbines, while others the Philippines and South Africa, for example would need floating foundations to reach greater depths, up to 1,000 metres.

For countries like Vietnam, with a mix of shallow and deep water, wind power could solve their entire electricity needs. In theory offshore wind power could produce ten times the amount of electricity that the country currently gets from all its current power stations, the Bank says.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

Electric Vehicle Charging Costs and Times explain kWh usage, electricity rates, Level 2 vs DC fast charging, per-mile expense, and tax credits, with examples by region and battery size to estimate home and public charging.

Key Points

They measure EV charging price and duration based on kWh rates, charger level, efficiency, and location.

✅ Costs vary by kWh price, region, and charger type.

✅ Efficiency (mi/kWh) sets per-mile cost and range.

✅ Tax credits and utility rates impact total ownership.

More and more car manufacturing companies dip their toes in the world of electric vehicles every year, making it a good time to buy an EV for many shoppers, and the U.S. government is also offering incentives to turn the tides on car purchasing. Electric vehicles bought between 2010 and 2022 may be eligible for a tax credit of up to $7,500. 

And according to the Consumer Reports analysis on long-term ownership, the cost of charging an electric vehicle is almost always cheaper than fueling a gas-powered car – sometimes by hundreds of dollars.

But that depends on the type of car and where in the country you live, in a market many expect to be mainstream within a decade across the U.S. Here's everything you need to know.

How much does it cost to charge an electric car?
An electric vehicle’s fuel efficiency can be measured in kilowatt-hours per 100 miles, and common charging-efficiency myths have been fact-checked to correct math errors.

For example, if electricity costs 10.7 cents per kilowatt-hour, charging a 200-mile range 54-kWh battery would cost about $6. Charging a vehicle that consumes 27 kWh to travel 100 miles would cost three cents a mile. 

The national average cost of electricity is 10 cents per kWh and 11.7 cents per kWh for residential use. Idaho National Laboratory’s Advanced Vehicle Testing compares the energy cost per mile for electric-powered and gasoline-fueled vehicles.

For example, at 10 cents per kWh, an electric vehicle with an efficiency of 3 miles per kWh would cost about 3.3 cents per mile. The gasoline equivalent cost for this electricity cost would be just under $2.60 per gallon.

Prices vary by location as well. For example, Consumer Report found that West Coast electric vehicles tend to be less expensive to operate than gas-powered or hybrid cars, and are often better for the planet depending on local energy mix, but gas prices are often lower than electricity in New England.

Public charging networks in California cost about 30 cents per kWh for Level 2 and 40 cents per kWh for DCFC. Here’s an example of the cost breakdown using a Nissan LEAF with a 150-mile range and 40-kWh battery:

Level 2, empty to full charge: $12
DCFC, empty to full charge: $16

Many cars also offer complimentary charging for the first few years of ownership or provide credits to use for free charging. You can check the full estimated cost using the Department of Energy’s Vehicle Cost Calculator as the grid prepares for an American EV boom in the years ahead.

How long does it take to charge an electric car?
This depends on the type of charger you're using. Charging with a Level 1 charger takes much longer to reach full battery than a level 2 charger or a DCFC, or Direct Current Fast Charger. Here's how much time you can expect to spend charging your electric vehicle:

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Green Hydrogen for Steelmaking enables decarbonization in Germany by powering electrolyzers with wind turbines at Salzgitter. Partners Vestas, Avacon, and Linde support renewable hydrogen for iron ore reduction, cutting CO2 in heavy industry.

Key Points

Hydrogen from renewable-powered electrolysis replacing coal in iron ore reduction, cutting CO2 emissions from steelmaking

✅ 30 MW Vestas wind farm powers 2x1.25 MW electrolyzers.

✅ Salzgitter, Avacon, Linde link sectors to replace fossil fuels.

✅ Targets CO2 cuts in iron ore reduction and steel smelting.

A major green hydrogen facility in Germany has started operations, with those behind the project hoping it will help to decarbonize the energy-intensive steel industry in the years ahead. 

The "WindH2" project involves German steel giant Salzgitter, E.ON subsidiary Avacon and Linde, a firm specializing in engineering and industrial gases, and aligns with calls for hydrogen-ready power plants in Germany today.

Hydrogen can be produced in a number of ways. One method includes using electrolysis, with an electric current splitting water into oxygen and hydrogen, and advances in PEM hydrogen technology continue to improve efficiency worldwide.

If the electricity used in the process comes from a renewable source such as wind or solar, as underscored by recent German renewables gains, then it's termed "green" or "renewable" hydrogen.

The development in Germany is centered around seven new wind turbines operated by Avacon and two 1.25 megawatt (MW) electrolyzer units installed by Salzgitter Flachstahl, which is part of the wider Salzgitter Group. The facilities were presented to the public this week. 

The turbines, from Vestas, have a hub height of 169 meters and a combined capacity of 30 MW. All are located on premises of the Salzgitter Group, with three situated on the site of a steel mill in the city of Salzgitter, Lower Saxony, northwest Germany, where grid expansion woes can affect project timelines.

The hydrogen produced using renewables will be utilized in processes connected to the smelting of iron ore. Total costs for the project come to roughly 50 million euros (around $59.67 million), with the building of the electrolyzers subsidized by state-owned KfW, while a national net-zero roadmap could reduce electricity costs over time.

"Green gases have the wherewithal to become 'staple foodstuff' for the transition to alternative energies and make a considerable contribution to decarbonizing industry, mobility and heat," E.ON's CEO, Johannes Teyssen, said in a statement issued Thursday.

"The jointly realized project symbolizes a milestone on the path to virtually CO2 free production and demonstrates that fossil fuels can be replaced by intelligent cross-sector linking," he added.

According to the International Energy Agency, the iron and steel sector is responsible for 2.6 gigatonnes of direct carbon dioxide emissions each year, a figure that, in 2019, was greater than the direct emissions from sectors such as cement and chemicals. 

It adds that the steel sector is "the largest industrial consumer of coal, which provides around 75% of its energy demand."

The project in Germany is not unique in focusing on the role green hydrogen could play in steel manufacturing.

Across Europe, projects are also exploring natural gas pipe storage to balance intermittent renewables and enable sector coupling.

H2 Green Steel, a Swedish firm backed by investors including Spotify founder Daniel Ek, plans to build a steel production facility in the north of the country that will be powered by what it describes as "the world's largest green hydrogen plant."

In an announcement last month the company said steel production would start in 2024 and be based in Sweden's Norrbotten region.

Other energy-intensive industries are also looking into the potential of green hydrogen, and examples such as Schott's green power shift show parallel decarbonization. A subsidiary of multinational building materials firm HeidelbergCement has, for example, worked with researchers from Swansea University to install and operate a green hydrogen demonstration unit at a site in the U.K.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

US Renewable Energy Cost Advantage signals cheaper utility-scale solar and onshore wind versus natural gas, with LCOE declines, tax credits, and climate policy cutting electricity costs for utilities and grids across the United States.

Key Points

Cheaper solar and wind than natural gas, driven by LCOE drops, tax credits, and policy, lowering US electricity costs.

✅ Utility-scale solar is about one-third cheaper than gas

✅ Onshore wind costs roughly 44 percent less than natural gas

✅ Policy and tax credits accelerate renewables and cut power prices

Natural gas’s dominance as power-plant fuel in the US is fading fast as the cost of electricity generated by US wind and solar projects tumbles and as wind and solar surpass coal in the generation mix, according to Guggenheim Securities.

Utility-scale solar is now about a third cheaper than gas-fired power, while onshore wind is about 44% less expensive, Guggenheim analysts led by Shahriar Pourreza said Monday in a note to clients, a dynamic consistent with falling wholesale power prices in several markets today. 

“Solar and wind now present a deflationary opportunity for electric supply costs,” the analysts said, which “supports the case for economic deployment of renewables across the US,” as the country moves toward 30% wind and solar and one-fourth of total generation in the near term.

Gas prices have surged amid a global supply crunch after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, while tax-credit extensions and sweeping US climate legislation have brought down the cost of wind and solar, even as renewables surpassed coal in 2022 nationwide. Renewables-heavy utilities like NextEra Energy Inc. and Allete Inc. stand to benefit, and companies that can boost spending on wind and solar, as wind, solar and batteries dominate the 2023 pipeline, will also see faster growth, Guggenheim said.
 

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News