THE SUNSHOT GOALS

The SunShot 2030 Goals:

3¢ per Kilowatt Hour for PV and
5¢ per Killowatt Hour for Dispatchable CSP

New Solar Opportunities for a New Decade

In 2011, when solar power comprised less than 0.1% of the U.S. electricity supply, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) launched
the SunShot Initiative with the goal of making solar electricity market-competitive with fuel-based electricity by 2020 without
subsidies. At the time, this meant reducing photovoltaic (PV) and concentrating solar thermal power (CSP) prices by approximately
75% across the residential, commercial, and utility-scale sectors. In 2017, DOE’s Solar Energy Technologies Office (SETO)
announced that the industry had achieved the 2020 cost goal for utility-scale solar of 6¢ per kilowatt hour (kWh)1. Rapid progress
has been made in accelerating achievement of these cost reductions, and SETO sees clear pathways to meeting the remaining 2020
PV cost targets on schedule.2

Enabled by the cost reductions to date, solar-generated electricity has become mainstream. In 2014 and 2015, solar represented
about one-third of new electrical generating capacity installed in the United States Halfway through 2016, solar was supplying 1%
of U.S. electricity demand and growing with an installed capacity of 30 gigawatts.

SunShot 2030 Goals

SunShot Progress and Goals
60¢

52¢
LCOE in cents/kWh (2017 $)*

50¢

40¢
40¢

30¢ 28¢

20¢
16¢

11¢ 2020 Goal

10¢ Achieved
10¢ 8¢
5¢ 6¢ 6¢
4¢ 3¢

0¢ RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL UTILITY

2010 2017 2020 2030 2010 2017 2020 2030 2010 2017 2020 2030
Cost Cost Goal Goal Cost Cost Goal Goal Cost Cost Goal Goal

*Levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) progress and targets are calculated based on average U.S. climate and without
the ITC or state/local incentives. The residential and commercial goals have been adjusted for inflation from 2010–17.

Figure 1. LCOE values and SunShot PV goals for the residential, commercial and utility-scale sectors.

1
The LCOE target is for an area with average climate and without the investment tax credit (ITC) or state or local incentives. For commercial and residential-
scale solar, the 2020 targets are 7¢/kWh and 9¢/kWh, respectively.
2
LCOE values for utility-scale, commercial and residential solar are 7¢/kWh, 13¢/kWh and 18¢/kWh, respectively, in 2016.
SOLAR ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES OFFICE 2

In recognition of the transformative solar progress to date and the potential for further innovation, the solar office is extending its
goals to reduce the average unsubsidized levelized cost of energy (LCOE) of utility-scale PV to 3¢/kWh by 2030, while enabling
greater adoption by addressing grid integration challenges and market barriers. In parallel, SETO is targeting concurrent reductions
for commercial and residential rooftop PV costs to 4¢/kWh and 5¢/kWh by 2030, respectively.

25¢
PEAKER BASELOAD
21¢ (≤ 6 hours of storage) (≥ 12 hours of storage)
20¢ 18.4¢
LCOE in cents/kWh

15¢

10¢ 10.3¢
10¢

5¢
5¢

0¢
2010 2017 2030 2017 2030
CSP Cost CSP Cost CSP Goal CSP Cost CSP Goal
(No storage)
Figure 2. LCOE values and CSP SunShot Goals for baseload and peaker configurations.
CSP with thermal energy storage directly addresses grid integration challenges with the incorporation of thermal energy storage
that allows the solar-generated heat to be stored until it is needed, even well after the sun sets. Reflecting this increased value
of dispatchable solar, the SunShot 2030 targets are 5¢/kWh for baseload CSP (with ≥ 12 hours of storage) and 10¢/kWh for a
peaker configuration (≤ 6 hours of storage) that would be designed to deliver electricity only when it is most highly valued by grid
operators.

Achieving these goals is expected to more than double the projected amount of electricity demand met by solar compared to the
2020 goal alone, further supporting national goals of energy security, low cost electricity, and environmental stewardship.

Seattle, WA
10¢/kWh LCOE 2016
4¢/kWh LCOE 2030 Goal

Solar Resource Across America

Daggett, CA - High
Kansas City, MO Kansas City, MO - Average
7¢/kWh LCOE 2016 Seattle, WA - Low
3¢/kWh LCOE 2030 Goal
Daggett, CA
5¢/kWh LCOE 2016 The amount of power that is produced
2¢/kWh LCOE 2030 Goal
by a PV system depends upon the solar
resource availability (in addition to
other factors like temperature and
snowfall), which is location dependent.
The median solar resource for the
United States is represented by Kansas
City, MO, while the highest solar
* resource is represented by Daggett, CA,
and the lowest solar resource is
represented by Seattle, WA. 

Figure 3. Solar resource across America, showing 2016 LCOE values and 2030 targets for three cities
representing average (Kansas City), high (Daggett) and low (Seattle) solar resource.
3 SOLAR ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES OFFICE

The SunShot 2030 PV LCOE targets are defined for an area having average U.S. climate. For utility-scale PV, 3¢/kWh translates to
2-4¢/kWh across the continental United States due to differences between locations in the amount of sunlight and in temperature,
snow loading and wind speed. Figure 3 illustrates the differences in solar resource across the country, showing the SunShot 2030
LCOE targets for areas of high, moderate, and low solar resource exemplified by Daggett, CA, Kansas City, MO, and Seattle, WA.
At these costs, electricity from utility-scale PV would be among the least expensive options for new power, and it would be below
even the variable cost of most existing electricity generators. The CSP targets would be highly competitive with other dispatchable
power generators and would enable greater overall penetration of solar electricity on the grid. Commercial and residential rooftop
PV applications would also be highly competitive within their respective markets.
Seattle, WA
(10¢)

7¢ 1.2¢
Kansas City, MO
2016 Real LCOE (U.S. Cents/kWh)

1¢

Daggett, CA

1.1¢

Daggett, CA w/ITC 0.7¢ Seattle, WA

3¢
Kansas City, MO

Daggett, CA
Daggett, CA w/ITC

2016 Lower Lower Balance Improve Lifetime: Lower O&M: SunShot

Sustainable of System 30 to 50 years $14 to 2030
Benchmark Module Price: Hardware and and Lower $4/kW-yr
Goal
$0.65 to $0.30/W Soft Costs Degradation Rate:
$0.85 to $0.55/W 0.75% to 0.2% /year

Figure 4. Example modeled pathway toward 3¢/kWh for utility-scale systems.

100 MWDC, one-axis tracking systems with 1,860 kWhAC/kWDC. Includes five-year MACRS, 7% cost of capital and 2.5% inflation.
*The price at which the supply chain recovers the cost of capital.
A Pathway To 5 Cents per kWh for Baseload CSP
10.3¢ 2.3¢
2017 Real LCOE (U.S. Cents/kWh)

.9¢
1.1¢
1¢
5¢

2017 Baseline Low Cost Solar Low Cost Power High Efficiency Low Cost TES SunShot
Field ($50/m2) Block and BOP Power Cycle ($15/kWht), 2030
and Site ($900/kWe) (50% net)* Receiver
Improvement ($120/kWt), CSP Goal
($10/m2) O&M ($40/kWe-yr)

*Assumes a gross to net conversion factor of 0.9

Figure 5. Example modeled pathway toward 5¢/kWh for baseload CSP.

SOLAR ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES OFFICE 4

Although these targets are aggressive, there are multiple realistic pathways toward achieving them; Figures 4 and 5 show potential
routes for PV and CSP systems. All pathways require significant improvements in the categories shown, but greater progress
in one can allow for smaller reductions in others. Reductions in the cost of capital can also be a major lever. However, the
interdependencies and tradeoffs among cost- and performance-improvement factors create numerous technology options. Figure 6
illustrates the multiple pathways for PV module technology enabled by tradeoffs between module cost, efficiency and reliability.
For CSP, there are numerous component capital costs and performance parameters to consider. Figure 7, below, illustrates the
tradeoffs that are available at different sub-system costs, as a function of the major capital cost (installed solar field cost) and the
major performance metric (gross power cycle efficiency). Among all the possibilities for PV and CSP technologies, one common
theme emerges—the need for sustained, multifaceted innovation.

$0.60
All curves represent
3¢/kWh LCOE at a 6% WACC
$0.50 location with
average U.S. climate
Module Price ($/Wdc)

$0.40

2030 Example
$0.30 Scenario
0.5%/yr degradation

$0.20
30 yr life

$0.10
1%/yr degradation, 20 yr life

$0.00
10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
Total-Area Module Efficiency
Figure 6. Curves illustrating numerous module technology pathways to reach the SunShot 2030 utility-
scale PV goal. Every point on each curve corresponds to a 3¢/kWh LCOE. Unless otherwise noted, all scenarios
assume one-axis tracking systems with 1,860 kWh(AC)/kW(DC), five-year MACRS, 7% weighted average cost of capital
(WACC), 2.5% inflation, $0.85/W system cost, $4/kW-year O&M, 0.2%/year degradation and a 50-year system lifetime.

All lines represent 5¢/kWh LCOE in a typical Southwestern U.S. climate

120

100 40 Yr Life
Solar Field Cost ($/m2)

Power Block Costs

80 Achieve $700/kWe
O&M Costs Reduced
60 to $30/kW-yr
Baseline 2030
40 2030 CSP Baseload* Baseload Scenario
Example Scenario
20

0
43% 45% 47% 49% 51% 53%
Net Power Cycle Efficiency

*Baseload power plant is defined as a CSP plant with 12 or more hours of storage
Figure 7. Curves illustrating numerous sub-system costs to reach the SunShot 2030 baseload CSP goal.
5 SOLAR ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES OFFICE

All lines represent 10¢/kWh LCOE in a typical Southwestern U.S. climate

160
140 40 Yr Life
Solar Field Cost ($/m2)

120 Power Block Costs

Achieve $700/kWe
100 O&M Costs Reduced
to $30/kW-yr
80
Baseline 2030
60 Peaker Scenario
40 2030 CSP Peaker*
Example Scenario
20
0
43% 45% 47% 49% 51% 53%
Net Power Cycle Efficiency

*Peaker power plant is defined as a CSP plant with 6 or less hours of storage
Figure 8. Curves illustrating numerous sub-system costs to reach the SunShot 2030 peaker CSP goal.

Solar Synergy
The discussion above focuses on solar technology advancements alone. However, parallel advancements in other aspects of the
electricity system could significantly increase the potential of solar (especially PV)—and enable the broader development of the
entire future clean energy system—while providing added value to electricity consumers and producers.

Combining lower cost storage with PV, as well as grid-integration approaches enabled by the emergence of the smart grid—such as
enhanced grid flexibility, enhanced communications and controls to enable two-way power flow, increased demand response, and
optimized charging of electric vehicles (EVs)—could enable much greater levels of PV deployment, while also facilitating greater
deployment of other variable-generation renewable sources. An electricity system with such flexibility, which is a focus of the
Department’s Grid Modernization Initiative, could accommodate and enhance high penetration of EVs, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles,
and a myriad of other complementary technologies. Rooftop PV, along with complementary technologies, have the potential to
transform distributed power systems, providing customers with increased value, more choices, greater grid reliability, and lower
cost. As an example of the potential for solar coupled with complementary advancements, recent models suggest that achieving the
2030 goals along with low cost storage could enable solar to supply 50% of U.S. electricity by 2050.3

In addition to innovation on the technology and integration fronts, potential market barriers need to be addressed to enable greater
solar adoption. Here SETO will focus on streamlining processes to reduce project time cycles, expanding access to solar, and
accurately representing solar’s value in a more integrated energy system.

While the actual fraction of U.S. electricity needs that will be supplied by solar depends on many factors, including the progress
of other energy technologies and evolving electricity demand, it is clear that the ambitious SunShot 2030 goals will unlock a great
potential for solar power throughout the nation.

3
Modeling by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory using the Regional Energy Deployment System version 2016 with default assumptions from the
2016 Annual Energy Outlook and the Annual Technology Baseline except for solar and storage costs.

For more information, visit:

energy.gov/eere/solar

DOE/EE-1501 • August 2017