Sorry, but Moore's Law doesn't apply to solar panels: "It took 25 years for commercial solar panels to double their efficiency to today's 10% or so, and no "transformations" appear to be in the offing."

Jenkins: Green Energy's Mr. Fixit - WSJ.com

The latest data also indicate that the average Chevy Volt buyer has an annual income of $175,000. I will not examine the political viability of an industry premised on taxing average Americans to subsidize cars for wealthy Americans.

...I will also refrain from contradicting a meme by one of your administration's supporters in the media, who claims a solar-based "energy transformation" is at hand due to the operation of "Moore's Law."

Solar-panel prices have come down sharply, it's true, but the reason is not big efficiency gains. Under Moore's Law, computer chips doubled their capacity every 18 months. It took 25 years for commercial solar panels to double their efficiency to today's 10% or so, and no "transformations" appear to be in the offing. Solyndra went bankrupt because its panels, with 12% efficiency, couldn't be delivered at a competitive price.

The solar-panel price collapse has two causes: Chinese overproduction and decisions by governments around the world that it no longer is politically feasible to subsidize the industry. Listen to the words of Chairman Michael Ahearn of First Solar Inc. on a conference call last week: "Declining subsidy pool . . . Shrinking subsidy programs . . . European countries reducing their subsidies . . . No significant new state-level solar programs . . . Moving downward in terms of subsidies . . . A much lower subsidy level . . . Solar industries feeding mostly off of legacy subsidies in California."

...

I will not point out that Americans are made poorer by all this, or that many of the beneficiaries of solar subsidies are large campaign donors, or that the biggest danger now is political pressure for more subsidies to cover up the failure of those already offered.