Bulk purchase vs Crowdfunding

Hi Kristian,  I’m not completely sure what business model Solar Mosaic is using, but it appears to be a platform that facilitate the crowdfunding. It depends on platform what projects they choose to raise funds for. At the very beginning the platforms are usually willing to accept as many projects as they can, if they are earning from investors. They need funds as well. It takes a good platform to be genuine and transparent about this matter. 

I’ve seen a reasonable amount of projects where crowd is asked to participate for example in solar panels. These panels become YOUR ownership (sometimes placed on “community sites” such as public buildings) and then it is YOU who pays, owns and use these (either through use of energy or a rebate on your energy bill). In this case there is no community benefit when using the solar panels. Only dependence on each other is achieving the quote for minimum purchase. Then it is all individual. Facilitator enjoys their profit as well either trough taking a % from folks making energy or companies they sell energy to. In most cases they take a % from both.

In case of crowdfunding the crowd should as one be a part of something bigger. (by the way kickstarter does not qualify as crowdfunding as it is a donation-type platform just like a charity would be but instead of receiving a promotional key-chain or a sticker you receive a product) Crowd for example could  be a shareholder in a project and have influence on the project and would be involved as a member not as a costumer. This would translate into socially responsible crowd stearing the projects that would benefit many more. The financial benefit would still come to individuals but the is not necessary that these individuals are also consumers of the product. This would work the best for the subjects that are socially important and close to our human nature such as health care, security and so on.

Bringing Solar to the Masses? Really?

Bringing solar to masses I envision is a bit different than described in the article: Bringing Solar to the Masses. I guess “mass” purchases of solar cells do require easier legislation but it is not as massive as it pretends to be.

In the case of Antecy bringing solar to masses this means making solar energy available to communities all over the world to start with. It is my opinion that the greatest progress in the field of solar energy and storage will not be booked so much in the Western-world where all of us are already provided with utilities. So the innovators should start looking at the tremendous potential that is out there, if we only would think a bit more out-of -box.

It is in the regions that are desolate and off-grid that need these application the most. If we are looking into production of energy for communities we should realize that “community” production should reflect much more than just lower energy bills. When a community is producing energy it should be able to consume it as well, as opposite to putting energy back into the grid.

As some maybe don’t know, price of the energy on the grid depends very much on the demand and supply at the moment. When energy is produced by “mass” and put into the energy-grid the energy will drop. When all of the mass does that, energy price can even become negative. This is when the grid is offering money for taking the energy. In future this could be the energy-storage companies. My somewhat limited knowledge of global economics tells me that energy-trading will then become more lucrative and as time passes will more resemble the financial markets. It is also imaginable that prices will be artificially held at a certain level so the consumer will not be aware of the price swings every single day.

My opinion is that community should consume the energy that it produces. This way both energy availability and energy independence could be reached for all communities.