<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>pulvinar</author><text>If it&amp;#x27;s a marketing gimmick, they&amp;#x27;re fooling a lot large power companies:&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Solar and battery storage to make up 81% of new U.S. electric-generating capacity in 2024&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.eia.gov&amp;#x2F;todayinenergy&amp;#x2F;detail.php?id=61424&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.eia.gov&amp;#x2F;todayinenergy&amp;#x2F;detail.php?id=61424&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain><item><author>oceanplexian</author><text>It’s only cheap if the land is free, transmission costs are free, and your power needs are intermittent. None of those are true in reality.&lt;p&gt;The “solar is the cheapest form of energy” is a marketing gimmick. If it were true free market forces would already gone 100% solar because the purpose of energy companies is to make money.</text></item><item><author>hn_throwaway_99</author><text>But even if we reduce installation and labor costs (and as other comments have mentioned, weight may not be the biggest factor here), my understanding is that solar is already the cheapest energy source per kW by a pretty significant margin. The problem with getting it to replace carbon-based fuel sources is all the other issues GP comment mentioned re storage, grid, etc.&lt;p&gt;That said, it&amp;#x27;s not like one thing is dependent on the other, so good to see efficiency increasing regardless.</text></item><item><author>mensetmanusman</author><text>No, we have not. Half of the current cost is due to installation and labor, so any weight reductions will have a huge impact on cost. Perovskite solar cells have the opportunity to have a 10 X weight reduction.</text></item><item><author>szvsw</author><text>&amp;gt; “Gaining 1 or 2 percent more efficiency is huge. These may sound like very tiny increases, but at scale these small improvements create a lot of value in terms of economics, sustainability, and value to society.”&lt;p&gt;It’s so easy to forget this and the massive scale and its relevance at the massive scale of the systems we need to (and are, to some extent) roll out. It also seems promising when these breakthroughs are happening in R&amp;amp;D groups of industry players trying to dogfood it rather than in labs.&lt;p&gt;At the same time though, it’s starting to feel to me, to some extent, like we have &lt;i&gt;kind of&lt;/i&gt; solved solar? It’s everything else around it that needs to advance, particularly grid infra, batteries and electrifying the general class of difficult-to-electrify problems (steel, concrete, freight). I might be totally off-base and blinkered with that assessment.&lt;p&gt;Edit: I guess I should try to clarify my feeling after reading some of the responses below: it feels like solar tech is not really the limiting factor in renewable scaling, and that advances in solar efficiencies won’t &lt;i&gt;drastically&amp;#x2F;meaningfully&lt;/i&gt; simplify the other challenges&amp;#x2F;limiting factors we currently face (grid infra&amp;#x2F;batteries, electrification of mfg, duck curve, etc). Children point out that space and cost savings from efficiency gains in solar may still be significant at grid scale though! Still, this is very cool progress to read about!</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Engineer&apos;s solar panels are breaking efficiency records</title><url>https://spectrum.ieee.org/solar-panels-breaking-efficiency-records</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>bruce511</author><text>While land isn&amp;#x27;t free, solar doesn&amp;#x27;t need land, it needs sun. By which I mean there&amp;#x27;s an awful lot of free rooftop space available, and a lot of space which would benefit from a roof (like car parks at the mall).&lt;p&gt;So it&amp;#x27;s not competing for land against say buildings or agriculture.&lt;p&gt;Now sure, the owner of the roof may want some rent etc, but that really doesn&amp;#x27;t alter the cost of the energy, it just spreads the benefit.</text><parent_chain><item><author>oceanplexian</author><text>It’s only cheap if the land is free, transmission costs are free, and your power needs are intermittent. None of those are true in reality.&lt;p&gt;The “solar is the cheapest form of energy” is a marketing gimmick. If it were true free market forces would already gone 100% solar because the purpose of energy companies is to make money.</text></item><item><author>hn_throwaway_99</author><text>But even if we reduce installation and labor costs (and as other comments have mentioned, weight may not be the biggest factor here), my understanding is that solar is already the cheapest energy source per kW by a pretty significant margin. The problem with getting it to replace carbon-based fuel sources is all the other issues GP comment mentioned re storage, grid, etc.&lt;p&gt;That said, it&amp;#x27;s not like one thing is dependent on the other, so good to see efficiency increasing regardless.</text></item><item><author>mensetmanusman</author><text>No, we have not. Half of the current cost is due to installation and labor, so any weight reductions will have a huge impact on cost. Perovskite solar cells have the opportunity to have a 10 X weight reduction.</text></item><item><author>szvsw</author><text>&amp;gt; “Gaining 1 or 2 percent more efficiency is huge. These may sound like very tiny increases, but at scale these small improvements create a lot of value in terms of economics, sustainability, and value to society.”&lt;p&gt;It’s so easy to forget this and the massive scale and its relevance at the massive scale of the systems we need to (and are, to some extent) roll out. It also seems promising when these breakthroughs are happening in R&amp;amp;D groups of industry players trying to dogfood it rather than in labs.&lt;p&gt;At the same time though, it’s starting to feel to me, to some extent, like we have &lt;i&gt;kind of&lt;/i&gt; solved solar? It’s everything else around it that needs to advance, particularly grid infra, batteries and electrifying the general class of difficult-to-electrify problems (steel, concrete, freight). I might be totally off-base and blinkered with that assessment.&lt;p&gt;Edit: I guess I should try to clarify my feeling after reading some of the responses below: it feels like solar tech is not really the limiting factor in renewable scaling, and that advances in solar efficiencies won’t &lt;i&gt;drastically&amp;#x2F;meaningfully&lt;/i&gt; simplify the other challenges&amp;#x2F;limiting factors we currently face (grid infra&amp;#x2F;batteries, electrification of mfg, duck curve, etc). Children point out that space and cost savings from efficiency gains in solar may still be significant at grid scale though! Still, this is very cool progress to read about!</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Engineer&apos;s solar panels are breaking efficiency records</title><url>https://spectrum.ieee.org/solar-panels-breaking-efficiency-records</url></story>