> We could drive energy prices down to nothing.
Not when you're paying people to coat their properties in solar panels. As you noted, that would cost plenty.
Solar panels also degrade over time. By the time the "free" electricity has paid for the installation, you'll need to replace it.
Payback time in Scotland is 6-ish years. Same seems to be true in Massachusetts. Solar Panels have a lifespan of around 25 years. Inverters may need to be replaced sooner than that, but still last at least a decade.
So it pays for itself 3-4 times over.
There is no way that is true unless those solar panels are very subsidized. The energy needed to make a PV is 2x what that panel would harvest over its entire lifetime in Scotland for example. Scotland is a terrible place for PV. The numbers you give are probably accurate for central Mexico though. Also, the mean lifetime of a PV panel is 20 years.
We spend billions every year in gas subsidies. We spend billions every year in food subsidies. For energy independence and the carbon reduction alone, this is a worthwhile investment even if the upfront costs are substantial.
Your information appears to be 20 years out of date.
How often do you think solar panels need to be replaced?
>>By the time the "free" electricity has paid for the installation, you'll need to replace it.
You are going to have to back this up with credible citations. Otherwise it sounds like skepticism from 2008.