Is Solar Power Really Practical?

(CBS)  It's freezing in the Contessa Foods plant in Los Angeles, where workers process, package and ship tons of frozen vegetables, fish and meat each day.

"It's almost like putting 200,000 refrigerators … in one place," said John Blazevich, CEO of Contessa Premium Foods.

And it's powered primarily by the sun. An array of paper-thin solar panels rolled across a roof the size of two football fields has helped cut Contessa's energy use, CBS News correspondent Bill Whitaker reports.

"In half, which is significant for an operation that requires so much energy," Blazevich said. "It can be done and we did it."

Diana Ungerleider put solar panels on her roof last year. They not only got her meter spinning, but, as she says: "it's actually spinning backwards, meaning that the electricity being generated ... is feeding back into the grid."

But her head spins every time she gets an electric bill.

"So, last year you paid $220 for a two-month period?" Whitaker asked.

"Right," Ungerleider said.

"And this year only $14?" Whitaker asked.

"Right," she said. "I've saved, like, I think, over $1,000 in one year."

Known for fun in the sun, California more than all the other states combined, is now putting the sun to work.

At a Napa winery, the sun ripens the grapes and provides all the electricity.

"This is going to become a launching pad," said Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Schwarzenegger recently announced the most ambitious program - Southern California Edison, the region's largest utility, installing solar cells on 65 million square feet of commercial rooftops over the next five years.

"When it's complete, it will produce enough power for 162,000 homes," he said.

Much of this sun worship is pie in the sky, say critics like U.C. Berkeley's Severin Borenstein.

"Solar energy is definitely not the magic bullet for high energy costs," said Borenstein. "Right now, solar photo voltaic power is very, very expensive compared not just to fossil fuels, but compared to the other renewable sources that are out there."

And, as Ungerleider says, that's the biggest downside. She paid $50,000 for her solar power.

But, she says, "my system will probably pay for itself after about 10 years. And after that, it's just free energy."

Solar and green technologies added 15 percent to the $40 million cost of the new Contessa food plant.

"I feel the smart businessman would be justified doing this, 'cause it's going to help them in the long run," Blazevich said. "And it's going to help the planet."

Rising demand for solar technology should bring prices down eventually, but for now it helps to have green in your heart and in your pocket.

[longduck69]

Solar power currently isn''t where it needs to be to be an efficient form of energy. More research should be performed so that we can develop materials that are better able to harness the sun''s energy. We just need more funding. I''m sure Congress will start funding alternative energy resources research soon. Perhaps Congress should release the patents for all of the alternative fuel technology developed and purchased by the oil industry. That would be cool.

[paulbpaul]

The problem with solar is not that it is impossible to get power from it but that it is impractical compared to other energy sources.

Wind, tide and nuclear are all more practical. Powering the entire country from the SW US would not work because of transmission losses. It could be done, but it couldn''t compete with other carbon free power sources.

[cheetah-man7]

I feel quite happy to see more and more stories on the news sites regarding solar and wind power. It''s sad that we are all having a tough time with energy, but sometimes the lessons can only be learned when we reach a crisis. It''s not quite there yet, but we are close to a total meltdown globally when it comes to oil. I wish California every success with their solar power initiative and hope the US government can get on board as well. Lowering the cost of solar panels over time will allow more and more of us to reap the rewards of using natural energy!

[bptdude]

Solar power supplies enough energy to replace all fossil fuels and nuclear used in the world, including in this nation.

If 100 square miles of desert can turn sunshine into al the energy produced by all the power plants in the country, as is known, then we could shutdown all the coal plants and nuclear plants. Does not this have some value besides straight market trade value for just the energy unit?

If we could use another piece of desert to manufacture hydrogen from sunshine, and eliminate all the imported fuel used for cars, trucks, planes, and other transportation, wouldn''t this have a value beyond its straight market value of energy unit?

We live in a world that cries out about burning oil and climate change, but then do not have real value for those things when presented with other solutions.

Does having an abundance of energy, not shortage, of pure clean renewable energy, that could propel an economic growth surge, that we don''t have to pull from other nations, have some sort of value beyond the BTU per dollar that oil presents?

[lovesamerica]

No government subsidies! Also many solar contraptions have a storage battery, so the northeast would be able to benefit to a degree. I have a neighbor that added on a solar roof,on a colonial house...many years ago. I personally could not afford to do it, but people who can really should.

[ausus-2009]

Proponents of solar power might be overoptimistic. They are assuming that everybody lives in a house with a flat or nearly flat roof. This leaves out large parts of the population who live in blocks of apartments where only one person might benefit from solar panels. Where would you put panels on the Empire State Building?

Then there is the problem with location. Those in the northern states have short days and long winter nights when there is little sun for the panels when electricity is most needed, for heating, lighting and drying clothes. Places like the Sacramento valley can have pea soup fogs that can last for days.

For those living in Arizona with a large, flat roof it will be a great idea, but it makes it unfair to people living in other parts of the country if these people would be the only ones able to take up any government subsidies.

[lovesamerica]

Personal and or business solar power makes more sense to me than the big ugly wind towers. The only thing to be remembered as power sources are researched, wildlife MUST be taken into consideration with any choice. Putting 500squaremiles of solar panels would probably destroy alot of desert wildlife and eco systems. Our planet is inter connected with every living creature. Bio fuel is awful for the environment...reasearch, without personal gain needs to be done.

[labrat9999]

Gee I don''t know...ahh...are you sure this is a good idea? I really think if we start drilling holes in Alaska where everybody knows 40 per cent of the oil in the world is, and then we start building nuclear power plants all over the place...well that''s a better idea. And just because we said that (even though we know it will take 10 plus years) it will cause the oil prices to go down. Wonder what nut bag said that? McSame...what a genius.

[ibzjem]

The other real problem is infrastructure. No one wants to build the infrastructure for an alternative energy source. That''s why you can''t buy E85 in most places, let alone fill your hydrogen car. Without the infrastructure, people won''t and can''t buy into new technologies. There have been plenty of opportunities for Corporate America to do so, but they can''t see past end of the fiscal quarter, nor do they want to take the risk or make the change.

[cyberus-2009]

----
Is Solar Power Really Practical?
----

They said electricity would never be really practical because of the cost to run power lines to each house and the cost of wiring houses.
Telegraph then telephone service was never going to be practical due to the thousands of miles of line needed to be strung.
Same for municipal water, sewer, and storm drainage.
And lets not forget the boondoggle that the trans-continental railway was, I mean the cost of supplying water and coal to trains trying to travel all those thousands of miles will make it to expensive.
Point is, nothing new was ever inexpensive and practical.
Problem is, today unless something can show instant profit for a company no one wants to invest in large enough scale manufacturing to reduce the cost. The days of a company (and its stockholders)looking forward 10-20 years is over, profit NOW is the watchword.