This is an interesting video about the economics of on-grid solar. Is it the best way to invest your money? Probably not, but it's also not a net loser for people who decide to go for grid-tied solar.
I saw this ad for Rayton Solar and while I felt it was scammy I was curious and did some research. This article explains why this company is such a scam.
While I've always thought roof top-solar pared to a household's or building's commercial load makes a lot of sense, I'm very cynical about utility-scale solar. Selling back excess power to grid is better then solar-controllers discarding it (as off grid houses do).
I think utility scale solar is mostly a nuisance to utility operators, putting mostly low-value power into the grid that is offset by running fossil power plants at a less efficient, lower speed. Even at peak times, utility solar has to be backed up by fossil-fired spinning reserve.
But my views are changing slightly on utility solar. Here's why. Solar farms have a practical lifespan of 20-30 years, and while they may be ugly, they are a light use of the land. Solar panels can crushed and hauled off to the landfill at end of their lifespan, with the aluminum frames, copper wire, and steel frames recovered as scrap. Once solar panels removed to the land, the parcels can be rededicated for purposes of agriculture or wildlife conservation.
In other words, utility solar conserves large parcels of lands for future generations, by only lightly developing the land. So it's not totally terrible idea. But a better investment is in roof-top solar, where solar can offset actual load on the grid, rather then feeding in low-value power into the grid.
