"..will begin mass-production.."

This is the KEY. I wanted a flat screen TV years ago, but I couldn't afford $1000's of dollars for one TV.

Suppose the Japanese had gone Republican about it, "higher cost - no flat screen TV mass production".

TV's >26" would still be $1000s and for the one(1%) percent.

Mass production will yield similar price reductions in: alternative fuels, EVs, pollution controls(remember "impossible" catalytic converter costs?), etc.

Now I enjoy several flat screen TVs($100s each) - with high definition.

Too bad, in the short term, it's cheaper business to buy some US politicians than improve consumer products.

Panasonic recently started the manufacture high quality lower cost batteries in China and will be very competitive worldwide.

Storage units (batteries) cost for home systems will come down quickly with mass production and future more efficient technologies.

Electrified vehicles will benefit from lower battery cost.

Does anyone remember how many billions in support the japanese government gave to their battery industry back when Lithium ion was being developed for consumer products? Somehow, they are able to do this and not have the political self-destruction that the US seems incapable of avoiding. What is it about the US citizen that makes them want to destroy those things that might actually help them. It has to be a masochism of some type. Perhaps we should just supply the occasional whipping to those that enjoy that type of thing. Then the rest of us who don't, wouldn't have to share in the pain they seem to need and demand through making the our society one of pain infliction.

"In Germany and other European countries, governments are cutting purchase prices for solar power in order to rein in the expansion of solar power generation, which led to increases in energy prices, Panasonic noted."

It is absolutely stupid to repeatedly note false reasoning for the climbing prices of electric power in Germany. It is NOT solar power that is responsible for these price increases. On the contrary, solar power has contributed to lower prices. The crux is, that the price advantages are withheld from the general public through price fixing at the "Leipziger Strombörse". The utility companies are forced by German law to prioritize solar power. With tremendous portions of solar power displacing more and more of the utilities conventionally produced power, the utilities are slowly but surely sliding into a pinch. Their own creation of value is receding and forcing them to lobbying ever more vehemently at governments doorsteps. Big businesses profit from the lower prices and from the exemption of grid fares which places a double burden on the general public. The greedy are paying next to nothing for electric power in Germany and the broad public is paying through the nose.
THESE ARE THE ONLY AND TRUE REASONS FOR HIGH PRICES FOR ELECTRIC POWER IN GERMANY AND NOT SOALR POWER.

@Davemart - Solar (and most renewables) isn't about going 100% with that single tech.

All that said - your 30% estimate of the worst month compared to the best month is a bit off. Head over to PVwatts and plug-in New York and you find that 1 kW of PV generates 110-120 kWh / month from Mar-Sept and 65-70 kWh / month in Nov-Dec with the other months in between. Total production is around 1200 kWh / year.

That's a factor of 2 difference, not 3.

Let's say you have the goal of maximizing output you can tilt the panels up a bit more than the default of 40* to 55* and squeeze out a couple more kWh in Nov-Jan, but that comes at the expense of summer output and overall production drops to around 1150 kWh / year.

In Phoenix 1 kW of PV facing south at 45* will keep you at a minimum of around 120 kWh / month and a total of 1600 kWh / year which comes close to your goal of "flat" production with only a very small effect on annual production. Of course in Phoenix they want the bump in summer production to deal with the heat.

Anyway - home storage systems could be great for reducing one's load on the grid. With a PV system, one could easily get 2 cycles out of the system - charge at super-off peak time (midnight-5am) discharge in the morning at 7-8am as coffee and breakfast cooks but before the sun comes up fully, charge again after PV starts kicking in, then discharge as the sun goes down.

Hi Dave R:
I doubt the figures I used were out - trhey are NASA sourced.
I actually gave the figure for New York as 27.5% in December as opposed to June.
You do not source your figures, but apparently are looking at 3 month periods instead of highest to lowest months.

The point is that the reason solar is so daft at high laitude where the winters are cold is that you have to meet massive peaks in the winter with very expensive peaking power, that's how yoatman for instance manages to come up with the strange notion that it is all the fault of expensive coal and gas, when in fact the true costs have been shoved on them by mandates for solar and wind uptake.

Your suggestion that using one source which yuou can't control, solar, by substituting another you also can't control, for instance wind, also does not nold any water.

That is not just theory.
We have had week or more cold, still periods in the last couple of winters near the solstice when both wind and solar would have been near zero.

That means lots of backup,which is not amortised efficiently.
And that is a good recipe for high energy bills, and for making the poor seriously cold, and in fact killing substantial numbers of them.

In fact at 50,000 'excess winter deaths' in the UK alone in a year, and that correlating with energy prices, it's a good way of killing vastly more people than even Greenpeace's fantasies about the dangers of nuclear.

Since running an advanced society including light transport can be done on about 1.5kw per capita with pretty minimal additional fossil fuel import, and based on the Finnish reactor costs that means about $7,500 per person spread over 20-30 years, the whole idea of throwing money away on renewables which cannot possibly replace fossil fuels seems mad.

Here is the substantiation for my figure of 1.5kw per capita, and it's moderate cost using nuclear:
http://2050-calculator-tool.decc.gov.uk/pathways/D0141111111111110114111003424340114304202304430420111/costs_in_context

Solar is fine off-grid in the tropics, but has limmited real use elsewhere.

@ facebook user: Yes, but less than you may think according to NASA. Since NASA LaRC is developing a theory to describe the F&P effect and a dozen companies are building residential CHP products - we may need less storage to level intermittent PV and wind.

Interesting to note German sources claim 50% midday grid energy (22gW) is coming from solar. That is likely a peak, peak number and not continuous. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/may/28/solar-power-world-record-germany

But we do have new alternatives coming on line that will help by providing abundant clean/green energy as described by NASA:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42hrCRx1JJY

By "make hydrogen" above, I must emphasize that H2 must be made from excess renewable energy via electrolysis, and NOT from NG steam reformation! NG should really be saved for desperate situations when the stored H2 is depleted.

What you all are forgetting is Potatoes! Yes, potatoes! They have electricity built right in them. All you need to do is wire together about, oh, 500 of them and you can power your house all night long! Completely off the grid and without relying on a home battery management system.

Mind you, this is all in theory but with substantial backing I believe I can make my dreams come true of a potato-filled world in between my retreats to a nudist resort in the Bahamas.

Any interested and deep-pocketed parties can contact me by email along with their bank account transfer data. Thank you.