>The comparison is between the cost of new installations
That may be, but that isn't what the headline says. It simply says that solar is cheaper than coal, which of course is not the case right now.
That may be, but that isn't what the headline says. It simply says that solar is cheaper than coal, which of course is not the case right now.
But conversely, all coal is not cheaper than all solar!
That applies globally and in India.
The point is that solar costs are declining every year, by 10% p.a. In many sunny places it is already at parity or below (eg Arizona, Mexico, Rajasthan and Gujarat in India, Mexico). We have already seen several bids this year at US¢ 3/Kwh ($30/MWh). $20/MWh is in sight - that would be well under the cheapest coal.
This link is useful summary http://cleantechnica.com/2016/04/15/why-energy-experts-are-s...
(And none of this accounts for the massive unpriced carbon + health externality of coal plants).
Coal is staying at best flat + whatever the fuel cost.
$30/MWh seems to be very very cheap. That is half the price of the lowest bid in India. Is there a source for that number?
Austin July 2015 - $57.10 per MWh. See [2]
Nevada July 2015 - $38.7 per MWh. See [3]
Mexico April 2016 - $35.44 per MWh. See [4]
[1] http://cleantechnica.com/2014/11/29/dubai-shatters-solar-tar...
[2] http://cleantechnica.com/2015/07/02/worlds-cheapest-solar-po...
[3] http://www.pv-magazine.com/news/details/beitrag/buffett-stri...
[4] http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Solar-Stuns-in-M...
Seven Words Found Insufficient for Expressing Nuance
Headlines "Easy Targets" for Quibbling