Connect with us

Electrification

The Exponential View of Solar Energy

Published

on

The Exponential View of Solar Energy, and Why the Cost of Solar has Plummeted

The Exponential View of Solar Energy

The human brain is terrible at comprehending exponential growth.

Much like the power of compound interest is a magical force for investors, it is also possible for innovations and technological breakthroughs to build off each other in the physical world, creating a similar compounding effect.

In this chart, we look at how solar technology has surpassed all expectations from an economics perspective, including those initially set by the International Energy Agency (IEA). Then later, we’ll also look at a new set of predictions for solar energy economics over the next 30 years.

Solar Energy: The Technological Overachiever

Back in 2010, the cost of utility-scale solar power ranged between $0.25-$0.37 per kWh. This meant it was at least three times as expensive as fossil fuels, and that solar was highly cost-inefficient at the time.

Going forward, most organizations projected a linear path for whittling down the cost of solar.

The IEA, for example, forecast that the global cost of solar would drop to roughly $0.22 per kWh by 2020. In reality, however, the price dropped to about one-fifth of that at $0.04 per kWh.

YearActual (BNEF Global) - $ per kWh2010 Forecast (IEA) - $ per kWh
2010$0.28$0.36
2020$0.04$0.22
Change-85.7%-38.9%

Almost all industry forecasters, including the IEA itself, missed the exponential factors at play.

Wright’s Law

Ramez Naam, the co-chair for energy and the environment at Singularity University, points out in his blog that the exponential decrease in solar costs stem from Wright’s Law:

For most technologies, every doubling of cumulative scale of production will lead to a fixed percentage decline in cost of the technology.
-Wright’s Law

Professor Naam says this occurs through “learning-by-doing”, and more specifically:

  1. Innovation that improves the technology itself
  2. Innovation that reduces the amount of labor, time, energy, and materials needed to produce the tech

Put another way, the more solar panels we make and the more we install—the better we get at the whole process over time. And once we’re making thousands or millions of panels, the costs come down exponentially, much like with lithium-ion batteries.

The Future of Solar Costs

Over the years, Naam has taken his own stab at forecasting the cost of solar energy into the future, leveraging the idea of Wright’s Law.

Here’s what he sees coming, based on using a 30% learning rate* for solar:
Future cost of solar based on 30% learning rate Wright's Law

*The learning rate is the fixed percentage decline that occurs with every doubling of the scale of production.

Based on these projections, even the costliest of solar installations will be more economical than the cheapest of utility-scale fossil fuel plants. This means solar can basically go anywhere, and make sense from a cost perspective.

Underestimate Solar No More?

For fun, here’s a final look at how IEA projections have constantly underestimated solar installations, which are one of the key factors dictating the “learning rate” under Wright’s Law:

missed iea solar capacity forecasts

With solar energy costs plummeting to record lows and global installations continuing to ramp, it’s possible that solar forecasters may no longer forget about the exponential nature of solar production.

Subscribe to Visual Capitalist
Click for Comments

Electrification

Visualizing the Supply Deficit of Battery Minerals (2024-2034P)

A surplus of key metals is expected to shift to a major deficit within a decade.

Published

on

This graphic represents how key minerals for batteries will shift from a surplus in 2024 to a deficit in 2034.

Visualizing the Supply Deficit of Battery Minerals (2024-2034P)

The world currently produces a surplus of key battery minerals, but this is projected to shift to a significant deficit over the next 10 years.

This graphic illustrates this change, driven primarily by growing battery demand. The data comes exclusively from Benchmark Mineral Intelligence, as of November 2024.

Minerals in a Lithium-Ion Battery Cathode

Minerals make up the bulk of materials used to produce parts within the cell, ensuring the flow of electrical current:

  • Lithium: Acts as the primary charge carrier, enabling energy storage and transfer within the battery.
  • Cobalt: Stabilizes the cathode structure, improving battery lifespan and performance.
  • Nickel: Boosts energy density, allowing batteries to store more energy.
  • Manganese: Enhances thermal stability and safety, reducing overheating risks.

The cells in an average battery with a 60 kilowatt-hour (kWh) capacity—the same size used in a Chevy Bolt—contain roughly 185 kilograms of minerals.

Battery Demand Forecast

Due to the growing demand for these materials, their production and mining have increased exponentially in recent years, led by China. In this scenario, all the metals shown in the graphic currently experience a surplus.

In the long term, however, with the greater adoption of batteries and other renewable energy technologies, projections indicate that all these minerals will enter a deficit.

For example, lithium demand is expected to more than triple by 2034, resulting in a projected deficit of 572,000 tonnes of lithium carbonate equivalent (LCE). According to Benchmark analysis, the lithium industry would need over $40 billion in investment to meet demand by 2030.

MetricLithium (in tonnes LCE)Nickel (in tonnes)Cobalt (in tonnes)Manganese (in tonnes)
2024 Demand1,103,0003,440,000230,000119,000
2024 Surplus88,000117,00024,00011,000
2034 Demand3,758,0006,082,000468,000650,000
2034 Deficit-572,000-839,000-91,000-307,000

Nickel demand, on the other hand, is expected to almost double, leading to a deficit of 839,000 tonnes by 2034. The surge in demand is attributed primarily to the rise of mid- and high-performance electric vehicles (EVs) in Western markets.

Continue Reading

Electrification

Visualizing the EU’s Critical Minerals Gap by 2030

This graphic underscores the scale of the challenge the bloc faces in strengthening its critical mineral supply by 2030.

Published

on

This graphic underscores the scale of the challenge the EU faces in strengthening its critical mineral supply chains under the Critical Raw Material Act.

Visualizing EU’s Critical Minerals Gap by 2030

The European Union’s Critical Raw Material Act sets out several ambitious goals to enhance the resilience of its critical mineral supply chains.

The Act includes non-binding targets for the EU to build sufficient mining capacity so that mines within the bloc can meet 10% of its critical mineral demand.

Additionally, the Act establishes a goal for 40% of demand to be met by processing within the bloc, and 25% through recycling.

Several months after the Act’s passage in May 2024, this graphic highlights the scale of the challenge the EU aims to overcome. This data comes exclusively from Benchmark Mineral Intelligence, as of July 2024. The graphic excludes synthetic graphite.

Securing Europe’s Supply of Critical Materials

With the exception of nickel mining, none of the battery minerals deemed strategic by the EU are on track to meet these goals.

Graphite, the largest mineral component used in batteries, is of particular concern. There is no EU-mined supply of manganese ore or coke, the precursor to synthetic graphite.

By 2030, the European Union is expected to supply 16,000 tonnes of flake graphite locally, compared to the 45,000 tonnes it would need to meet the 10% mining target.

Metal 2030 Demand (tonnes)Mining (F)Processing (F)Recycling (F)Mining Target Processing Target Recycling Target
Lithium459K29K46K25K46K184K115K
Nickel403K42K123K25K40K161K101K
Cobalt94K1K19K6K9K37K23K
Manganese147K0K21K5K15K59K37K
Flake Graphite453K16K17KN/A45K86KN/A

The EU is also expected to mine 29,000 tonnes of LCE (lithium carbonate equivalent) compared to the 46,000 tonnes needed to meet the 10% target.

In terms of mineral processing, the bloc is expected to process 25% of its lithium requirements, 76% of nickel, 51% of cobalt, 36% of manganese, and 20% of flake graphite.

The EU is expected to recycle only 22% of its lithium needs, 25% of nickel, 26% of cobalt, and 14% of manganese. Graphite, meanwhile, is not widely recycled on a commercial scale.

Continue Reading

Subscribe

Popular