This article is tantamount to heresy in some circles. People should recognise solar for what it does best.. providing affordable onsite power in the middle of sunny days. Somehow it got promoted to powering heavy industry around the clock. Enthusiasts say the world only needs a fraction of available sunlight, say 17 TW out out 173,000 TW. Then again it is technically possible to grow bananas in the Simpson Desert but it is clearly not practical.

With battery improvements no doubt ways can be found to improve solar PV's usefulness, say by helping charge electric cars. That then leaves the problem of those who can't afford the technology (eg the unemployed)and sustained high power applications (eg semitrailer trucks) for which battery power is unsuitable. Solar has a way to go yet but the limitations should be recognised.

Well, there are differences, and between solar voltaic and solar thermal. However, the fatal flaws seem to be in the Author's ability to rationalize, or remain factual?
Solar voltaic certainly has its limitations, albeit, the price is coming way down and the technology continues to improve, with some 150-160 watt solar panels now so thin, they can be mistaken for solar tint in glass!
Anyway, many of the early advocates, were persuaded by various power authorities, [worried about limited capacity,] to put panels on their roofs, and at considerable personal expense, in return for a feed in tariff.
That in many cases was/has been reneged on by incoming administrations!?
An example of solar thermal in California, is situated in a arid desert like region, and simply heats molten salt, which can then provide power, 24/7!
One square kilometre of arid desert land in central Australia, [where the unrelenting sun beats down, over 300 days every year,] if so equipped, would power all of Australia, 24/7!?
Mass production of the solar reflector arrays, would reduce the price to that comparable with the creation of a brand new coal fired power plant!
The difference would be, the fuel for the solar thermal power station is endless and free, while the coal just continues to progressively go up and up!
Yet we continue to prefer coal, with its gold plated delivery system and endless price gouging price hikes.
Other much cheaper alternatives, include thorium, feeding very local micro-grids, and virtually free biogas, which is also available and or produced 24/7!
Rhrosty.

The he said she said of solar means nothing to me, but what does matter is that we have installed two systems, in two location, one on the QLD cost, the other in the QLD bush. Both have not only reduced our power bill, they have actually made money for us and will most likely be paid for in about six years.

Putting aside the science, that works for me.

The other advantage of having solar is that the money we save is amplified as it's tax free dollars, leaving our after tax dollars, which would have been used to pay our power bill, for more enjoyable things.

Percentages mean nothing to me as we spend dollars and every dollar we save on power, is in fact $1.30 we have to spend elsewhere.

Finally, if power prices do rise to say $1 per KW, we will really clean up.

$1 per kwh grid electricity pricing may eventually happen but it will be a night time price. That same day the solar feed-in tariff could be as low as 5.5c meaning the roof jewellery will take years longer to pay off. At least the states that currently have a generous FiT are not talking about taxing solar like Spain.

Vert happy with my solar panels of four years regardless of what you are saying, install some yourself and enjoy not having to look at a very expensive electricity bill, the only time we have a bill is during winter, that also is a lot less than we would be paying normally
All things wear out including human beings, we cannot stop the ravages of time.

I have to say that Viv Forbes come across as a paid flack for big mining.
The coal fired power industry is hurting now from home installed rooftop solar and this article is an attack in the vain hope that it will slow or stop the inroads being made into their profits.
There is of course no comparison between solar thermal and PV solar .
Thermal solar is eminently suitable for industrial power supply especially in Australia, while home PV is already so successful that it is going to kill the old coal fired power stations eventually.
The trumped up failings of PV, i.e. failing in three years , needing to be washed and so on are so ridiculous that it is painful to read.
The last "fault" that they will cause environmental damage due to the huge amount of land required is another false fact. How can panels on roofs require all this land?
As for solar thermal. it can be set up in semi desert areas where the land is useless for other purpose.
I hope that he gets well paid by his backers for this type of article because the cash flow is going to dry up.