As solar panels become cheaper, it's more cost-effective to install additional static panels than to use expensive mechanical trackers that follow the sun. Despite the math favoring static arrays since 2016, trackers persist due to industry inertia and 'cozy oligopolies' in the installation sector.
Related Insights
While solar panels are inexpensive, the total system cost to achieve 100% reliable, 24/7 coverage is massive. These "hidden costs"—enormous battery storage, transmission build-outs, and grid complexity—make the final price of a full solution comparable to nuclear. This is why hyperscalers are actively pursuing nuclear for their data centers.
Base's core thesis is that the shift to solar and battery storage is inevitable not because of ESG trends, but because it represents the lowest marginal cost to add power to the grid. This economic argument is more fundamental and compelling than climate narratives alone.
The primary obstacle to US solar deployment isn't technology, but permitting. Allowing 'by-right' development—treating solar projects like cattle ranching on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land—would dramatically accelerate deployment by removing tiresome and expensive regulatory hurdles.
The AI boom is not a universal positive for all energy sources. The need for a resilient, 24/7 power grid for AI data centers increases reliance on stable fossil fuels and battery storage to balance the intermittency of renewables. This dynamic is creating rising costs for pure-play solar and wind producers.
Contrary to political narratives, US red states have been leaders in renewable energy deployment. The motivation is not climate ideology but practical, local benefits: landowner income, energy independence, and reducing local air pollution. This suggests a powerful, non-partisan path for the energy transition.
Charts showing plummeting solar and wind production costs are misleading. These technologies often remain uncompetitive without significant government subsidies. Furthermore, the high cost of grid connection and ensuring system reliability means their true all-in expense is far greater than component costs suggest.
The cost of electricity has two components: making it and moving it. Generation ("making") costs are plummeting due to cheap solar. However, transmission ("moving") costs are rising from aging infrastructure. This indicates the biggest area for innovation is in distribution, not generation.
The economic model for renewable energy is the inverse of fossil fuels. While building wind or solar farms requires significant initial capital investment, their ongoing operational costs are minimal. This suggests that as Europe advances its green transition, its long-term energy cost competitiveness will dramatically improve.
The political challenge of climate action has fundamentally changed. Renewables like solar and wind are no longer expensive sacrifices but the cheapest energy sources available. This aligns short-term economic incentives with long-term environmental goals, making the transition politically and financially viable.
The "cost-plus" regulatory model allows utilities to earn a guaranteed return on capital investments (CAPEX) but no margin on operational expenses (OPEX). This creates a powerful, often inefficient, incentive for utilities to solve every problem by building expensive new infrastructure, even when cheaper operational solutions exist.