California's Record-Breaking New Solar Plant Is Already Irrelevant

wayoflife

Administrator
Staff member
For all the money that was spent building this thing ($2.2 Billion), all the pristine virgin land that was leveled to build it (5.5 square miles), all the endangered Desert Tortoise that were killed, displaced and even euthanized and all the birds that have been scorched flying through the intense beam of light, it's amazing that the government subsidized solar thermal plant out in Ivanpah (which only produces enough electricity to power 140,000 homes - Los Angeles has over 1.4 million homes) is already irrelevant....

California's Record-Breaking New Solar Plant Is Already Irrelevant
Ivanpah_Solar_Power_Plant.jpg

Last week, dozens of people, including Google energy chief Rick Needham and Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, trekked out to the California-Nevada border in the middle of the Death Valley to dedicate what is believed to be the world's largest solar thermal facility in the world.

At 392 megawatts, the Ivanpah solar thermal plant will be able to power 140,000 homes — the equivalent of all of Newark (averaging two people per household).

We covered the project when BrightSource, the main developer behind the project, first put up a stunning 3-D tour of the site.

But for all its scale and beauty, in terms of the future of renewables, Ivanpah is already irrelevant.

Solar thermal creates electricity by using mirrors to direct intense amounts of heat at a centralized collector, which is used to heat a substance like water to create steam power. Solar photovoltaic, meanwhile, directly converts solar energy into electricity through semiconductors.

If solar thermal sounds unnecessarily complicated, you're right. Solar photovoltaic has seen explosive growth in the past few years thanks to plummeting material costs, state incentives, and eco-conscious homebuyers putting up panels on their roofs. But solar thermal growth has stalled, and is expected to continue to do so. Ivanpah cost $2.2 billion. Warren Buffett paid the same amount for the world's largest photovoltaic plant just up the road outside Bakersfield. That plant will generate 1.5-times as much power as Ivanpah.

As the New York Times' Diane Cardwell and Matt Wald wrote Friday, Ivanpah probably represents an end, not a beginning.

"When BrightSource and other companies asked [investor] NRG to invest in a second thermal project, said David Crane, NRG’s chief, he responded: 'We’ve got $300 million invested in Ivanpah — let me see that work for a few months and then we’ll decide whether we want to be involved in more.' "

And here's what Lux Energy analyst Matthew Feinstein told them:

“I don’t think that we’re going to see large-scale solar thermal plants popping up, five at a time, every year in the U.S. in the long-term — it’s just not the way it’s going to work... Companies that are supplying these systems have questionable futures. There’s other prospects for renewables and for solar that look a lot better than this particular solution.”

It's not that Ivanpah itself won't be cost-effective. BrightSource locked in a 20-year power purchase agreement with local utilities that includes fixed pricing, and the vast majority of costs were borne up front, according to Shayle Kann, director of GTM Research. That means the Energy Department, which lent the project $1.6 billion, and Google, which put up $168 million, will likely see a decent return.

"So it's not so much an issue for Ivanpah as it is for any future solar thermal project," he told us in an email.

But it's a sign of how fast renewable energy technology is moving these days.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/californias-record-breaking-solar-plant-164035414.html

Gotta love it...
 

SDG

Caught the Bug
Well... at least the raw materials for this plant are available in 'merica...

Most of the stuff for photovoltaic currently available is mined in China so we are just continuing to feed the machine...
 

NFRs2000NYC

Caught the Bug
Because government. :D If the government had a KOH team, they would spend 400 million on it, and never even show up on raceday. :D
 

mrmet1983

New member
I guess it's a step in a good direction just an expensive step with not the best results


I don't always wheel , but when I do I keep it tight......... Stay dirty my friends.
 
Dams won't do shit. All the reservoirs are dried up since we haven't had any rain.

Not entirely correct, Adam. I saw something interesting when I was home last week. Up north where I live, the upper lakes are only a little low. My guess is that the state is/was trying to make a big show for Obama since he supposedly came to Fresno on Friday. They probably took him for a copter ride over Millerton, Pine flat ,and possibly even San Luis, all of which are near empty. But, they wouldn't dare take him where the water is. Shaver,Courtright and Wishon are only a little low. My guess is that they'll make a big show of it to get some government money "for the farmers", but we all know the farmers won't see a dime of it.
Probably the oddest thing of all is Big Creek, one of the streams that feeds Pineflat, is still running about the same level as it was when I went camping nearby Memorial weekend last year.

Sent from my DROID4 using WAYALIFE mobile app
 

gtony12

Caught the Bug
Lets get the toilet water to tap water in motion..... OCWD is doing it.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using WAYALIFE mobile app
 

wayoflife

Administrator
Staff member
Don't get me wrong guys but, some of you make it sound like CA has never seen a drought before. Sure, CA has never seen a single dry year like this in recorded history but the, current water shortage is more a cause of back to back years of subnormal precipitation and one that started back in 2011. That's only 2-3 years. I don't know how old you are but CA suffered a much longer drought that lasted 5 years during 1987 to 1992 (hence the creation of the phrase - "if it's yellow let it mellow and if it's brown, flush it down") and if you look at history books, one that was even a bit longer from 1928 to 1934. To be fair, most of the storage that CA has today was built during that time and the need for water conservation is nothing new to the state. To bring this back on topic, you can only make power from a reservoir if you drain the water.

Of course, if you want to take this to the next level and look at things like tree ring data, none of this or what we've even seen in the 20th century compares to the mega droughts that CA had experienced in the past like one that lasted 50 years spanning 850 to 1090 AD and the one soon after that lasted 180 years spanning 1140 to 1320 AD. :shock:
 

NFRs2000NYC

Caught the Bug
Don't get me wrong guys but, some of you make it sound like CA has never seen a drought before. Sure, CA has never seen a single dry year like this in recorded history but the, current water shortage is more a cause of back to back years of subnormal precipitation and one that started back in 2011. That's only 2-3 years. I don't know how old you are but CA suffered a much longer drought that lasted 5 years during 1987 to 1992 (hence the creation of the phrase - "if it's yellow let it mellow and if it's brown, flush it down") and if you look at history books, one that was even a bit longer from 1928 to 1934. To be fair, most of the storage that CA has today was built during that time and the need for water conservation is nothing new to the state. To bring this back on topic, you can only make power from a reservoir if you drain the water.

Of course, if you want to take this to the next level and look at things like tree ring data, none of this or what we've even seen in the 20th century compares to the mega droughts that CA had experienced in the past like one that lasted 50 years spanning 850 to 1090 AD and the one soon after that lasted 180 years spanning 1140 to 1320 AD. :shock:

All the more reason the 2.2bn would have been more wisely spent on a reverse osmosis plant rather than the worlds largest make up room.
 
Top Bottom