Rooftop Solar: Is There a Case? (Part III)

From MasterResource

By Robert Bradley Jr.

“And you wonder why people are skeptical. [Bradley] made a comment. You disputed it. He provided support. You deflected and avoided the issue with a completely illogical statement. Oh, that’s right, you are a ‘journalist’.” ( – Mike Robinson to Elisa Wood, below)

Elisa Wood, writer and editor at Energy Changemakers, [1] posted:

A 75-year-old science group offers a new direction following the Trump administration’s climate rollback. Here’s why the plan features rooftop solar, batteries, microgrids and other forms of distributed energy.

commented:

Rooftop solar? Those big companies (like Sunnova) have gone bankrupt and left customers with long-term contracts they do not like. It is a litigation paradise.

Wood: “Logical fallacy here. One company’s bankruptcy doesn’t damn a whole technology.”

Bradley: “Sunnova was the biggest. But okay, let’s continue with some of the rest. [I listed around 100 firms on the solar bankruptcy list.]

Wood: “Rob Bradley, 50 clothing stores went bankrupt in the US last year. By your logic, this makes clothes a bad thing.”

Bradley: “Fallacious. Can you document how many solar companies went under as far as the total population? And unlike clothing stores, solar is a government/taxpayer play. We need clothes but not solar.
Yes, the rooftop solar industry is in serious decline. If you have a link to argue oppositely, please provide.”

Elisa Wood went silent, as she has no argument to make, evidently. She just ‘did her job’ as best as she could in a ‘say it to help make it true’ postmodern world.

At this point a Mike Robinson commented with what should be the last word:

And you wonder why people are skeptical. He made a comment. You disputed it. He provided support. You deflected and avoided the issue with a completely illogical statement. Oh, that’s right, you are a “journalist.”

Which came after his comment on the real economics of rooftop solar:

There’s no “new direction” offered in this article. Just the same old buzzwords: “reimagine”, distributed energy”, and “no subsidies needed because it’s so cheap”.

The simple fact is that “rooftop solar” only is economically viable when the State steps in and makes the Distributor pay “retail” for mid-day solar “surpluses”. This practice is being phased out in many areas because it’s a loser on every level for anyone who doesn’t have rooftop solar. That means that the people that were inclined to do it, have already done it. This is a dead end market right now.

—————

[1] Wood’s biography states:

Elisa Wood is an award-winning writer and editor who specializes in the energy industry. She is the founder, editor, and publisher of EnergyChangemakers.com and its magazine, Decentralized Grid. She also leads the company’s content services division.

She co-founded Microgrid Knowledge and was editor-in-chief and co-host of the publication’s popular conference series from 2014 to 2023.

In addition, she co-founded RealEnergyWriters.com, where she led a team of energy writers who produced content for energy companies and advocacy organizations for two decades.

She has been writing about energy for more than three decades and is published widely. Her work can be found in prominent energy business journals and mainstream publications. She has been quoted by NPR, the Wall Street Journal and other notable media outlets.

“For an especially readable voice in the industry, the most consistent interpreter across these years has been the energy journalist Elisa Wood, whose Microgrid Knowledge (and conference) has aggregated more stories better than any other feed of its time,” wrote Malcolm McCullough, in the book, Downtime on the Microgrid, published by MIT Press in 2020.

Elisa’s specialties include distributed energy resources, electrification, grid modernization, smart grid, energy efficiency, electric transmission, competitive wholesale and retail power markets, investor-owned and public power utilities, renewable energy, energy policy and economics, and other topics related to the electric power industry.

She wrote for S&P Global/Platts for more than two decades. Her work can also be found on several energy news sites, among them Renewable Energy World, Power Engineering International, GreenBiz, Public Power Magazine and Utility Dive.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
5 7 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
28 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Halla
February 27, 2026 6:46 pm

Rooftop solar was always virtue signaling. For anyone on the grid, and using significant power, solar is a parasite on the grid as far as reliability is concerned.

Reply to  Tom Halla
February 28, 2026 5:07 am

Just after the blizzard, walking the ‘hood- stopped to talk to a neighbor. Saw his rooftop solar about half covered with snow. The sky was partially clouded. I asked if he thinks he’s getting much energy today. He said, “oh, sure”. Got out his phone and checked the app then looked disappointed and said, “oh, not much today”.

Beta Blocker
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
February 28, 2026 6:24 am

On a cloudy winter day with his roof-top solar half-covered with snow, this man has to look at his phone app to understand what ought to be plainly obvious just by seeing with his own eyes what the situation is. It shows you how completely illiterate modern society is in having any practical knowledge about how things work.

Here is another story of a similar nature.

Several months ago, a six-car pileup with injuries happened on a local freeway when an SUV suddenly changed lanes, side-swiping another car which was right next to it on the passenger side. A chain reaction series of collisions with four other cars then commenced.

The driver of the vehicle which suddenly changed lanes had not been warned by the SUV’s driver assist system that another car was present on her right side. Assuming that another car wasn’t present, the woman changed lanes without even looking to see if another one was there.

Reply to  Tom Halla
February 28, 2026 6:07 pm

Yep. Virtue signaling and public tax harvesting are the best things going for home solar.

I installed my solar exactly for these reasons. Finally, after 10 years, it has paid itself off. That was 3 years longer than the estimate. Of course, the 20 year warranties are useless because all the installers and manufacturers have gone bankrupt, so there is still the chance of eating the 20 year promises.So far so good though.

But I still get much more value pointing at it when arguing with my liberal friends about climate change. They all have hilarious and hypocritical reasons for not installing it, but arguing for it.

William Beal
Reply to  Tom Halla
March 1, 2026 2:54 pm

I know a person that has rooftop solar and is satisfied with it. But his is a special circumstance. He has had it for over a decade. When he installed it, the cost with batteries was less than half the cost of getting mains power which was $45,000 at the time.

Rick C
February 27, 2026 7:01 pm

Solar companies dropping like flies.
Major western auto manufacturers discontinuing EV and booking massive loses.
Hydrogen economy failing to launch.
Carbon Capture and Storage projects throwing in the towel.
Dozens of major wind energy development projects terminated or on indefinite hold.

None of these industries would exist without huge subsidies which are going extinct. If any of these businesses were actually economically viable there would be private sector investors and entrepreneurs booking big profits and creating strong industries. It must be hard for folks like Elisa Wood to realize they’ve spent most of their professional life backing losers.

Reply to  Rick C
February 28, 2026 5:09 am

“It must be hard for folks like Elisa Wood to realize they’ve spent most of their professional life backing being losers.”

fixed it 🙂

February 27, 2026 7:20 pm

Elisa Wood’s bio (see above) suggests that she should know that distributed solar is mostly a scam, thus she is in the “knave” category. Knaves know better, while “dupes” are the people the knaves prey upon. Dupes are the misinformed masses who believe the “consensus” (like the purported climate crisis) since they never see (or are not allowed to see) any contrary information.

Of course, Google’s demonetizing a site like WUWT is a perfect example of knaves preventing the masses from seeing contrary information. Ironically, Google had a “X-Project” back during the Obama Admin. that was to fix the climate change crisis policies. It was quietly closed in ~2011 and the result sealed since it didn’t comport with the CO2 mitigation consensus.
http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/what-it-would-really-take-to-reverse-climate-change

antigtiff
February 27, 2026 7:40 pm

I just saw a story about a house fire caused by a solar light. Probably made in China. A good lightning arrestor should be required for a roof top installation. It has been pointed out that it is the cost of installation that makes roof solar not very attractive. No, if your utility company if located south of 40 degrees latitude – it can consider a solar farm as part of the grid but most people should not be “going solar” in their homes.

Bryan A
Reply to  antigtiff
February 27, 2026 11:26 pm

It was discovered that the Tubbs Fire (which started on Tubbs Ln in St Helena) back in 2017 that burned Coffey Park Subdivision and much of Northern Santa Rosa likely started at a private Solar Installation (not rooftop) that caught fire under the panels from a short.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  antigtiff
February 28, 2026 9:27 am

Here in the UK fire services faced blazes involving solar panels and their batteries once every 2 days in 2024, a 60% increase in the previous 2 years according to insurance company QBE.

It was also found that fires were increasing twice as fast as the rate of installation so the increase in fires could not be related the growth of installations.

There is along history of cowboy firms benefittng from government backed schemes in the UK.

February 27, 2026 8:27 pm

Solar and grid are two words that should not be combined.

Solar is ubiquitous. In most parts of the world, the sun is a regular daily feature. If you cannot stick panels on your roof, back yard or side fence to send electricity to a battery for your own on-demand use then you can guarantee a grid cannot either.

If solar/battery was the economic option, there would be no grids.

Australia is definitely destined for that situation with present policy as the grid is now uneconomic.

South Australia as a region has the most advanced use of solar in the world. There is so much of it that the government has mandated a Solar Sharer scheme where all retailers have to offer free energy from 11am to 2pm. That is enough time to recharge a household battery. So people in SA can now buy a battery that delivers energy on demand for an average cost of 7c/kWh over its 20 year life. Grid energy at average retail is 47c/kWh. The grid now needs these batteries to provide some load simply to keep the grid stable.

South Australian households can now get zero cost grid energy for 3 hours but the baseload cost is now $97/MWh. In 2003, base load power was $23/MWh. That low price made motor vehicle manufacturing in Australia viable. There is no viable heavy industry in Australia now.

Alexy Scherbakoff
Reply to  RickWill
February 27, 2026 9:31 pm

Rick, you can say whatever you like, but I’m not buying it. There is no way that I will buy into solar. I am not interested in spending money for a return on investment in 20 years. I’m effen 77. I am currently receiving a government payment for the excessive electricity prices.
You have been an acolyte of solar panels and batteries for years. Good luck to you for making money from the taxpayer. I salute you.
I’m not that kind of asshole.

Alexy Scherbakoff
Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
February 27, 2026 9:53 pm

Oh no. I’ve noticed a minus one on my comment. Must be someone getting money from the government.

Denis
Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
February 27, 2026 10:34 pm

I fixed the minus 1.

Reply to  Denis
February 28, 2026 5:12 am

It’s up to plus 5 now.

Reply to  Alexy Scherbakoff
February 27, 2026 10:48 pm

You can get a return after 2 years if you live in SA. Within three years where the retail price is a bit lower.

My point is there are millions of households wanting batteries because they make economic sense for a grid that is no longer an economic asset.

The fundamental factor is that solar has negative benefit of scale. The grid assets that they are trying to replace had massive benefit of scale and justified the grid because power stations were located at coal mines and the grid transmitted electricity from the mine to load centres.

Sunlight arrives on every roof in Australia every day. Most places never get less than 2 hours of full sunshine equivalent over 48 hours. So battery storage is not prohibitively expensive. In fact it would be lower cost for households in SA to go completely off grid than pay retail price. Payback spins out to around 9 years to go off grid if the price stops increasing. Less time if the price keeps going up.

John Pickens
Reply to  RickWill
February 27, 2026 11:36 pm

The only reason you can get a positive financial return on your solar/battery installation is because solar mandates are dramatically increasing the cost of grid delivered electricity. It is a solution to a problem which was created by the proposed “solution”.

Graeme4
Reply to  RickWill
February 28, 2026 2:42 am

I believe that it’s worthwhile mentioning the significant federal govt subsidies in Australia for both home solar and batteries, especially batteries.

Reply to  Graeme4
February 28, 2026 5:14 am

I wonder how long those batteries will last.

Reply to  Graeme4
February 28, 2026 6:59 am

That’s true. Here’s an AI overview of the situation in Australia.

“Without any government subsidies, the return on investment (ROI) for a combined rooftop solar and battery storage system in Australia is currently estimated between 8 and 15 years. 

While solar panels alone typically pay for themselves within 3 to 6 years, the high upfront cost of batteries significantly extends the total payback period when no rebates are applied. 
http://www.solarmarket.com.au

Estimated Payback Periods (No Subsidies)
The timeframe varies based on your location, energy usage, and the size of the system:

Solar Panels (Standalone): 3–6 years without subsidies, though most Australian systems currently benefit from federal STC rebates that reduce this further.

Battery Storage (Standalone): 8–15 years. Modern lithium batteries often have a 10-year warranty, meaning the system may only just break even within its guaranteed lifespan without financial assistance.

Combined System: 8–12 years. High-usage households (e.g., those with electric vehicles or high evening air conditioning use) generally see faster returns. 

Current Market Costs (February 2026)
Without subsidies, you would be paying the full “gross” cost of the equipment and installation: 
Component Typical Capacity Estimated Gross Cost (No Rebates)
Solar PV System 6.6 kW $5,500 – $9,000
Battery Storage 10 kWh $9,000 – $15,000
Combined Total N/A $14,500 – $24,000+

Key Factors Affecting ROI
Electricity Prices: High retail prices (currently 35¢–50¢/kWh in some states) improve ROI because every unit of solar power you store and use saves you the full retail rate.

Feed-in Tariffs (FiTs): As FiTs have dropped to historic lows (3¢–10¢/kWh), the financial incentive has shifted from selling power to the grid to storing it for self-consumption.

Virtual Power Plants (VPPs): Even without government subsidies, joining a VPP can earn you an additional $200–$500 per year, potentially shaving 12–18 months off your payback period.

System Sizing: “Right-sizing” is critical; a battery that is too large for your evening needs will take much longer to pay for itself.” 

However, Sodium-ion batteries are already in mass production by CATL, and other companies are developing their own models. I think it’s feasible that roof-top solar and battery storage will eventually become a viable option without government subsidies.

Graeme4
Reply to  Vincent
February 28, 2026 11:19 pm

A very good summary, but I didn’t see the Opportunity Cost mentioned. This can add an extra one quarter to one third cost, and thus seriously impact the business case. In my case, I will pay off my solar in less than nine years, but there is no way I could recover a battery’s cost with power cost savings within its short lifetime.

John Pickens
Reply to  Vincent
March 1, 2026 5:45 am

Key Factors Affecting ROI
Electricity Prices: High retail prices (currently 35¢–50¢/kWh in some states) improve ROI because every unit of solar power you store and use saves you the full retail rate.”

Thank you for confirming my earlier comment

Beta Blocker
Reply to  RickWill
February 28, 2026 6:49 am

RickWill: “South Australian households can now get zero cost grid energy for 3 hours but the baseload cost is now $97/MWh. In 2003, base load power was $23/MWh. That low price made motor vehicle manufacturing in Australia viable. There is no viable heavy industry in Australia now.”

We await a response from Nick Stokes asserting that this hasn’t actually happened in Australia; and that heavy industry is still viable in Australia if only most of the legacy coal plants can be replaced by grid-scale wind and solar.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Beta Blocker
February 28, 2026 9:39 am

It’s ok, whilst running down its own coal plants, according to the IEA, Australia is generously exporting as much coal as it possibly can to ensure other countries have reliable sources of power – 46 of the 95 coal mining for export projects underway in the world are in Australia.

February 28, 2026 9:06 am

Another drawback to rooftop solar (specifically rooftop, not in the yard) that I never see addressed is how it can hinder firefighting operations. It’s something that really should be considered.

George Kaplan
March 1, 2026 4:28 am

The simple fact is that “rooftop solar” only is economically viable when the State steps in and makes the Distributor pay “retail” for mid-day solar “surpluses”.?

That’s not entirely true. Any combination of taxpayer subsidies to bring the cost of purchase down, exceedingly high usage charges, or exceeding good export rates, all enable solar to be profitable, or at least cost neutral. Mandating distributor purchase of solar is only one of several options.

John Pickens
Reply to  George Kaplan
March 1, 2026 5:49 am

And none of this addresses the fact that the net energy production of these solar/battery installations is negative. Why are we doing this, again?