What’s the real impact of robot-maintained solar: cheaper electricity for all, or higher profits for a few?

What a silly framing. “What’s the real impact of mechanized laundry? cleaner clothes for all or higher profits for a few?” Reducing the labor inputs required to meet human needs is progress.

Lower subsidy or PPA pricing needed to build solar farms. Profits increase only temporarily

Agree with another commenter – this is stupid framing. Sometimes you need to get your head out of your ass and Ocham’s Razor this shit.

Cleaning solar panels means they produce more electricity, leading to greater output spread across the same fixed costs to install the resources. That means lower costs for ratepayers, because the cost per unit of energy can be sold lower to utility or other market offtakers. It also assumes that the cost to clean the panels exceeds the value of the increased output, and that’s the real question here.

In a practical sense, automating asset maintenance will more likely show up as profits for the asset owner than lower prices for consumers.

For example, 2/3 of power produced in the US is sold via competitive electricity markets within ISO/RTO footprints. If you look closely at these markets, you’ll find that they use a “single clearing price” rule for their energy markets. And if you look at historic market data, solar is rarely the marginal unit to set that market clearing price aka locational marginal price (LMPs).

So in the case above, a more economically sound solar asset benefits its owners and investors, not the folks who consume its electrons.

But saying there aren’t markets or circumstances where consumers may benefit some, the energy industry is very full of exception cases. But there are often administrative things that would get in the way of consumer benefits