Hmm, that is significantly lower cost which definitely makes residential solar look more attractive compared to nuclear &etc, but it still doesn't outcompete utility-scale solar or wind. Speaking of which, this source seems completely one-sided as no comparisons are made with any other methods of electricity generation.

If residential solar cost is falling, what about other solar systems?

Well, of course there's going to be overhead costs at the point of delivery, but saving money for individual households is not the point.

The $ amount in this report is representative of the raw materials, manufacturing, logistics, installation and long-term maintenance required by each method. The point is to do a direct comparison between them (hence "levelized") so that we can judge which is the most effective.

Because material use and manufacturing are included, the $ amount represents environmental impact (at least in part). Based on this report, residential solar is a terrible use of resources. We could put the same resources to better use building more efficient large-scale systems.

So again, we have to solve these problems collectively, not individually.

In this report, everything is reduced to a $ amount so that a direct comparison can be made between methods. The amount is a representation of raw material/manufacturing/logistics/installation/etc, possibly reductive but intended to be all-encompassing. So, we can use that amount to judge where resources can be used most effectively - and the conclusion has to be that residential solar is a misuse of those resources.

The same materials and labor could be put to better use building large-scale systems, which would produce more electricity with less environmental impact from inneficiency.

I'm struggling to find a good source, but Australia also has the highest per capita rooftop solar (residential PV) rate in the world. Australia also leads per capita solar consumption overall, although Netherlands is second so they are doing well there too: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/per-capita-solar?tab=chart&country=ESP~IND~PRT~GBR~NZL~CHN~AUS~USA~JPN~NLD

It's also fucking tiny and doesn't have a sodding great outback.

@hitmyspot @HerbalGamer It becomes a lot less surprising when you consider that Australia has a massive fossil fuel industry, including both coal and natural gas.

Or that they're willing to spend up big on lobbying.

Or that putting forward energy, emissions reduction, and mining tax policies have directly left to the downfall of several prime ministers and opposition leaders.

Or that Rupert Murdoch (of Fox News fame) owns a daily newspaper in every state capital, plus the only national newspaper, plus a 24-hour news channel.

Now, despite all that, there's still a decent amount of solar photovoltaic installed, varying from state to state.

In South Australia, it's a key part of the energy mix.

"South Australia has a well-developed solar photovoltaic (PV) industry. The state currently has over 2 gigawatts of solar PV generating capacity statewide, over one in three households have solar panels, and three large scale solar farms are in operation with a fourth under construction.

"Solar energy contributed to over 20% of electricity generated in the state in 2020–21."

https://www.energymining.sa.gov.au/industry/modern-energy/large-scale-generation-and-storage/solar-energy-in-south-australia#:~:text=The%20state%20currently%20has%20over,the%20state%20in%202020%E2%80%9321.