If you can't explain the 'pause', you can't explain the cause...
Energy payback time is now 1 to 2 years. Panels degrade by about 0.7% per year, meaning they add nothing to energy payback time. Batteries are used in 5% of installations now meaning they add nothing to energy payback time. All your assumption are incorrect, as is your conclusion. Energy payback isn't the life of the panels. It's 1 to 2 years.
No, it isn't. These figures are produced by solar advocates and fail to consider the fossil fuels used in the mining of rare earths and the other materials used in production, the fossil fuels used to build the solar panel plants, the cost of starting up fossil fueled plants when the sun doesn't shine, etc. etc.As of this article published July 2011 http://lb.ec2.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/nspe/nxtd/index.php?startid=18The ERR is < 1The only reason why batteries are now used in 5% of installations is BECAUSE THOSE INSTALLATIONS ARE RELYING UPON THE FOSSIL FUELED GRID.
The updated link to the EIKE post:http://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/climategate-anzeige/energieamortisationszeit-von-windkraft-und-solaranlagen/
The $77 billion solar industry is facing a quality crisis just as solar panels are on the verge of widespread adoption. A review of 30,000 installations in Europe by the German solar monitoring firm Meteocontrol found 80 percent were underperforming. --Todd Woody, The New York Times, 29 May 2013http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/29/business/energy-environment/solar-powers-dark-side.html?_r=0