Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Time to settle on one green path
Marketwatch ^ | April 3, 2009 | THOMAS KOSTIGEN'S ETHICS MONITOR

Posted on 04/07/2009 9:54:34 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach

Commentary: Only solar energy can give us what we'll need

SANTA MONICA, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- Some of the smartest minds in the world gathered last week at the Aspen Institute in Colorado to discuss the environment. Bottom line: We are wasting a lot of time, money and effort on ineffective ways to address climate change.

We need better policies and plans -- now. Everyone agreed, from the chief executive of Duke Energy Corp. and the head of the Environmental Protection Agency to the leader of the Evangelical Environmental Network. We're not energy-efficient and the challenges of becoming so are bold and grave.

Billions of dollars will be squandered if the green movement doesn't get its act together and figure out the most effective way to stop global warming. More importantly, time will be lost. Time is the biggest threat to the environment today.

We need to produce somewhere between 28 and 35 terawatts of energy by 2050 to power our growing population and consumption. How are we going to nearly triple our source of energy in less than 50 years?

By midcentury, we'll have to cut carbon emissions 80% or more to prevent the planet from an irreversible warming trend that will have catastrophic ramifications. Such a dramatic reduction is not going to happen if we keep going down the same path. It's not going to happen if we follow some of the paths we fantasize about.

Daniel Nocera, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor and director of its Solar Revolutions Project, points out we could put a windmill on every piece of land on the planet and still not produce enough power for the world.

(Excerpt) Read more at marketwatch.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Science
KEYWORDS: aspeninstitute; brightsource; climatechange; epa; globalwarming; globalwarmingscare; greenenergy; starkravingsocialism; tyranny

1 posted on 04/07/2009 9:54:34 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: xcamel; SunkenCiv; neverdem

Jerks.


2 posted on 04/07/2009 9:55:08 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Thomas M. Kostigen is the author of You Are Here: Exposing the Vital Link Between What We Do and What That Does to Our Planet (HarperOne). www.readyouarehere.com End of Story
3 posted on 04/07/2009 9:59:05 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Hotlink:

http://www.readyouarehere.com/

4 posted on 04/07/2009 10:00:17 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

These are self-righteous jerks with an urge to power. Power to make YOU, one of those who doesn’t see the world through their particular set of beer goggles, relent his ignorance and cussed stubbornness and TOE THE LINE. And these guys don’t have the slightest sense of humor.

They are hard after the power of law, since they know they can’t manage with just the power of persuasion.


5 posted on 04/07/2009 10:00:48 AM PDT by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Some of the smartest minds in the world gathered last week

ineffective ways to address climate change.

Those terms are 100% in conflict.

6 posted on 04/07/2009 10:00:56 AM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

>> Daniel Nocera, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor and director of its Solar Revolutions Project, points out... We could build a nuclear plant every 1.5 days for eternity, and even that wouldn’t be enough to satisfy our energy needs, according to Nocera.

I searched the web page source. That is the only time the word “nuclear” appears, and the statement is such patent bullcorn that I’m shocked it’s coming from the mouth of a grade school teacher, let alone an MIT professor.


7 posted on 04/07/2009 10:04:19 AM PDT by Nervous Tick (Party? I don't have one anymore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine
Bio here:

Thomas M. Kostigen

******************

Thomas Kostigen is the author of You Are Here: Exposing the Vital Link Between What We Do and What That Does to Our Planet and the coauthor of the New York Times bestseller The Green Book. He writes the "Ethics Monitor" column for Dow Jones Market Watch and the Better Planet column and blog for Discover magazine. He is a longtime journalist and former Bloomberg News editor. Kostigen has been writing about global warming, the environment, social issues, and government policies for two decades. He lives in Santa Monica, California.

8 posted on 04/07/2009 10:04:52 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

The One and Only True Green Path: Nukes.

Compact. Reliable. Renewable.

Nuclear Power.


9 posted on 04/07/2009 10:05:11 AM PDT by Little Ray (Do we have a Plan B?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

Check the stock holdings on these A***h***...


10 posted on 04/07/2009 10:06:03 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: joygrace; TigerLikesRooster; rabscuttle385; abb; yankeedame; jpsb; dennisw; dfwgator; Vet_6780; ...

fyi


11 posted on 04/07/2009 10:07:59 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray

>> Nuclear Power.

The utter failure of the greens to embrace nuclear power is all the evidence you’ll ever need that their agenda is not really about energy independence or about climate change or about “saving the planet”.

It’s 100% about subjugating the US and transferring wealth to the UN.


12 posted on 04/07/2009 10:08:10 AM PDT by Nervous Tick (Party? I don't have one anymore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

Most greens are too stupid to have an agenda. The girls are there because it “feels good.” The guys are there because the girls are easy.

Its the Green leadership that’s Evil. And the more you look at them, read what they write, observe what they do, the more you realize it. And its not little “evil” its big “Evil.” They’re as Evil as the Committee for Public Safety was during the Terror. They intend to reduce the number of people to a “sustainable” level.


13 posted on 04/07/2009 10:15:17 AM PDT by Little Ray (Do we have a Plan B?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Bottom line: We are wasting a lot of time, money and effort on ineffective ways to address climate change.

Bottom line: We are wasting a lot of time, money and effort worrying about climate change, period.

We could solve a whole range of real problems by rounding up the enviro-whackos, and grinding them up for dogfood, fertilizer, and cement additive.

14 posted on 04/07/2009 10:31:19 AM PDT by meadsjn (Socialists promote neighbors selling out their neighbors; Free Traitors promote just the opposite.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; IrishCatholic; Normandy; According2RecentPollsAirIsGood; Fiddlstix; ...
 


Beam me to Planet Gore !

15 posted on 04/07/2009 10:34:18 AM PDT by steelyourfaith (What new from the Thief-in-Chief?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

“harness the sun” Ummm, will a troika do or will it require a four-in-hand.


16 posted on 04/07/2009 10:36:47 AM PDT by technically right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Only solar energy can give us what we'll need

I'll have to give my solar array a test tonight to see how it works in the dark.

17 posted on 04/07/2009 11:18:32 AM PDT by theymakemesick (Buraq (buh- rok) Winged creature that carried mohammed on his Night Journey from Mecca to Jerusalem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Down in the Sunshine State, Florida Power and Light has an uprating program going on that will add about 400 MW of nuclear capacity for a cost of about $1.5 billion. They are also adding 75 MW peak (18 MW average) solar thermal power capacity (this is the Sunshine State after all) for a cost of $476 million.

I will leave it as an “exercise for the student” to run the numbers and tell us which one makes more sense.


18 posted on 04/07/2009 11:27:17 AM PDT by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
SANTA MONICA, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- Some of the smartest minds in the world gathered last week at the Aspen Institute in Colorado ...

Dateline "Santa Monica" for a Colorado meeting.

Pretty appropriate as the Communists who infested California in the 1940s and 50s are still alive and well.

19 posted on 04/07/2009 11:37:37 AM PDT by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Ummm, what these guys don't get is we live in a capitalist society - people want to save money.

Maybe some products worth buying? Offer stuff to get my power bill down and I'll buy.

20 posted on 04/07/2009 11:55:56 AM PDT by GOPJ (The Queen gave Obama a signed photograph. What did she give President Bush?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPJ; calcowgirl; chimera; steelyourfaith
Meanwhile there is this from Marketwatch:

Applied Materials slashes value of solar deal

***************************EXCERPT******************

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Shares of Applied Materials Inc. tumbled Tuesday after the chip-tools maker drastically slashed the value of a major solar-power deal as a result of the global market slump.

a $1.9 billion agreement to supply solar-power equipment to an unnamed customer has been cut to roughly $250 million as a result of the economic downturn.

meanwhile we have this clown:

And he wants to use only Solar...nothing else.....

Sure would like to know who canceled the order.

21 posted on 04/07/2009 12:24:22 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: All
Likely candidates:

SoCal Edison Signs Major Solar Deal

***************************EXCERPT************************

Posted date: 2/11/2009

By DEBORAH CROWE

Los Angeles Business Journal Staff

Southern California Edison said Wednesday it signed contracts with Google-backed start-up BrightSource Energy for the supply of 1,300 megawatts of clean solar thermal power. The companies claim the agreement is the world's largest solar deal.

Southern California Edison, a unit of Rosemead-based Edison International, said the 20-year deal calls for Oakland-based BrightSource to build and place in commercial operation seven projects. The deal will require approval from the California Public Utilities Commission.

The agreements are part of Edison’s effort to comply with a state mandate to fight global warming by requiring utilities to produce 20 percent of their power from renewable sources such as wind and solar by 2010. SoCal Edison said this agreement combined with earlier deals will more than meet the mandate.

“These contracts represent a significant addition to our renewable portfolio, which is already the nation’s largest,” Stuart Hemphill, SoCal Edison vice president for Renewable and Alternative Power, said in a statement. “This innovative solar technology helps to further our position as the nation’s largest purchaser of solar energy, as well.”

SoCal Edison claims the full 1,300 megawatts of projects will produce 3.7 billion kilowatt-hours of clean energy and avoid more than two million tons of carbon dioxide emissions annually – the equivalent of removing more than 335,000 cars from the road.

The first Edison-BrightSource solar power plants, to located in the Mojave Natural Preserve community of Ivanpah, could be operating in early 2013 and are expected to produce 286,000 megawatt-hours of renewable electricity per year.

22 posted on 04/07/2009 12:27:39 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: All
And we have this:

Sen. Feinstein Wants to Prohibit Renewable Energy Development in 500,000 Acres of the Mojave Desert

********************EXCERPT**************************

photo: Lin via flickr

With the Department of the Interior making a loud and public commitment to developing renewable energy on public lands, some conflict over what land was too ecologically important was bound to happen sooner or later. In this case, sooner. California's Senator Dianne Feinstein has indicated that she will push legislation to make some 500,000 acres of the Mojave Desert into a national monument, preserving it from wind or solar power development:

Solar Power Plants Could Destroy Desert's Ecosystem
The land in question is referred to as the former Catellus lands, and is located in the southeast corner of the state, in between the Mojave National Preserve and Joshua Tree National Park. The push for the federal purchase of the land was led by The Wildlands Conservancy from 1999-2004, which says that solar power projects planned for the land (currently 14) would harm the area's desert tortoise population and "destroy the entire Mojave Desert ecosystem."

So what do TreeHugger readers think? Keeping in mind that we know all of you value protecting wild spaces, what's the best way to balance the imperative to develop large amounts of renewable energy as quickly as possible and preserving intact ecosystems?

via: Physorg

Renewable Energy
BrightSource to Build 500 Megawatts of Solar-Thermal Power in Mojave Desert
1,300 Megawatts of Solar Thermal Power to be Developed in Mojave Desert by BrightSource Energy
850 MW Solar Thermal Power Plant Seeks California State Approval


23 posted on 04/07/2009 12:32:32 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
From :

BrightSource to Build 500 Megawatts of Solar-Thermal Power in Mojave Desert

*************************EXCERPT*************************

by Michael Graham Richard, Gatineau, Canada on 04. 2.08

The press release (pdf) is dated April 1st, but this is no joke. Because of California law, PG&E needs to get 20% of its electricity from renewable sources (not including big hydro) by 2010, so it has contracted with Brightsource Energy for 3 new solar-thermal power plants in the Mojave desert, one of the best spots for solar power in the world.

"Solar thermal energy is an especially attractive renewable power source because it is available when needed most in California – during the peak mid-day summer period," said Fong Wan, vice president of energy procurement at PG&E. These first three plants will add up to 500 megawatts of capacity, but PG&E has also signed contracts for options on an additional 400 megawatts, which could bring the total to 900 megawatts.

Mojave desert solar thermal power

The first of these solar power plants, sized at 100 MW in Ivanpah, California, could be operating as early as 2011 and is expected to produce 246,000 megawatt hours of renewable electricity per year. BrightSource will build and place in commercial operation each of its plants as quickly as permitting and infrastructure allow.

The next two power plants will be 200 megawatts each.

For more on the subject, see ::Solar Thermal Power: Not Forgotten

::Official Bightsource Energy Press release (pdf), ::PG&E backs 3 solar plants in the Mojave


24 posted on 04/07/2009 12:39:28 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: All
And :

4 Gigawatt Swedish Wind Farm Receives Local Approval


photo: Ian Munroe via flickr

Here's a seriously gigantic renewable energy project that's moving forward, despite hard economic times: What could well turn out to be Europe's largest wind farm has won approval from regional authorities in Norrbotten, Sweden. Should the Swedish government also grant approval (which could take up to 12 months), construction on the $6.9 billion project could start in two and a half years, and be completed in ten:

Article continues: 4 Gigawatt Swedish Wind Farm Receives Local Approval

*************************snip**************************

Located in Taveljso, in the municipality of Piteå, the project site is 175 square miles in size and would contain 1,101 wind turbines.


25 posted on 04/07/2009 12:43:22 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: All
More :

Norwegian Wind Power Could Become Europe's Battery

**************************EXCERPT**************************

by Michael Graham Richard, Gatineau, Canada on 05.28.08

Norway and Wind Power, Sitting in a Tree...
What's the best thing you could buy with oil money right now?

Norway's Oil and Energy Minister, Aaslaug Haga, seems to think that wind turbines is a good bet. The scandinavian country is the 5th biggest exporter of oil in the world, but it also has the longest coastline in Europe and lots of strong wind. A 30-page report vy the Energy Council, comprising business leaders and officials, says: "Norway ought to have access to up to 40 terrawatt hours of renewable energy in 2020-2025, of which about half would come from offshore wind power."

Norway Map image

Turning Oil Into Renewable Energy

Sufficient wind parks -- totalling 5,000 to 8,000 megawatts installed capacity -- would cost between 100 billion Norwegian and 220 billion Norwegian crowns ($43.89 billion) assuming prices of 20-28 million crowns per installed megawatt. The energy would be equivalent to up to about eight nuclear power plants.

That's a lot of money, but that's also the value of about half a year's oil output for Norway. It would be kind of a giant offset scheme.

Wind Power Even When the Wind Doesn't Blow
One thing that makes Norway - like Quebec - particularly well suited for wind power is the presence of hydro. When the wind blows, you can slow down the flow of water and accumulate it behind the dams, and when the wind doesn't blow, you can open up the valves. And since Norway has about half of Europe's reservoir capacity, it could keep producing even with long periods without wind (which is fairly rare offshore).


26 posted on 04/07/2009 12:49:00 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge; calcowgirl; SierraWasp; blam; SunkenCiv; Marine_Uncle; xcamel

Updates.


27 posted on 04/07/2009 12:50:38 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Brightsource

RFK Jr. - advisor, front man


28 posted on 04/07/2009 12:54:40 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Godspeed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: All
More on Solar:

how_lpt_works

*********************EXCERPT*********************

Thousands of mirrors track the sun in two dimensions and reflect the sunlight to a boiler that sits atop a tower. When the concentrated sunlight strikes the boiler’s pipes, it heats the water inside to 550°C – more than 1000° F – creating superheated steam at the temperature necessary to achieve the industry’s highest operating efficiencies. This high-temperature steam is then piped from the boiler to a standard turbine where electricity is generated. From here, transmission lines carry the power to homes and businesses. Nothing is wasted in this process. In order to conserve precious desert water, the steam is air-cooled and piped back into the system in a closed-loop, environmentally-friendly process.

Heliostats

The LPT 550 heliostats consist of two flat-glass mirrors, a support structure, a pylon and a tracking system. The mirrors are mounted onto the pylon and track the sun in two dimensions, reflecting the sunlight onto a boiler atop a tower.

BrightSource’s smaller, flat mirrors are more efficient, simpler to manufacture, and cost less to install than parabolic mirrors used in solar troughs. The heliostats are highly accurate and have over 35 years of longevity with practically zero maintenance with the exception of cleaning.

The ability to follow the sun in two dimensions enables the power system to track a greater percentage of the sun’s energy and achieve a much higher efficiency than other solar thermal technologies. Each heliostat, with a reflecting area of 14.4 m2, is individually installed and controlled with optimization software, resulting in greater flexibility in site configuration, and requiring much less site preparation. The pylons are placed directly into the ground, eliminating the need for concrete pads used with other solar thermal technologies and reducing the system’s environmental impact.

The average 100 megawatt BrightSource Energy solar plant will consist of 50,000 heliostats.


29 posted on 04/07/2009 1:04:17 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Thanks...likely supporting friend of Thomas M. Kostigen


30 posted on 04/07/2009 1:07:01 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

I think Pelosi has money into the wind power of T. Boone Pickens....


31 posted on 04/07/2009 1:08:15 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

and now DoE head Salazar wants to build a huge wind farms off the east coast .. but probably not off Cape Cod , of course.


32 posted on 04/07/2009 1:11:57 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Godspeed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
So, 4 GW capacity with a 30% capacity factor gives a little over 1 GW average, or about what one average-size nuke unit provides. The wind farm takes up 175 sq. miles of real estate, whereas the nuke uses maybe a few hundred acres. So I wonder which one has the greater environmental impact wrt land use?

Plus over 1100 separate generators, each of which has to be managed, tied to the grid, and maintained, versus one unit to manage and connect and maintain. Having been in the regional dispatching center for a power company, I know which one the dispatchers would rather manage.

This whole business is beyond crazy. They're spending godawful amounts of time, money, and trouble scraping up a few MW capacity here and there from these minuscule, unreliable, chaotic sources, when the 800 pound gorilla of an answer is right in front of us.

33 posted on 04/07/2009 1:16:21 PM PDT by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; SunkenCiv
Gamma-Ray Burst Caused Mass Extinction?

We're doomed!

34 posted on 04/07/2009 1:27:01 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: chimera

I think it is a money making scheme by certain elites...but now they can’t decide which one to have the taxpayers support.


35 posted on 04/07/2009 1:28:05 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
"By midcentury, we'll have to cut carbon emissions 80% or more to prevent the planet from an irreversible warming trend that will have catastrophic ramifications."
What a load of sh*t from people who don't even understand no one in the scientific community that are educated on these matters can show any individual research study that proves CO2 has any effect on the trapping of heat.
Meanwhile the oceans continue to cool down absorbing even a greater rate of CO2. What these bozos will start pissing and moaning about next (actually they have been), is that some areas of our oceans are getting more acidic (of course they are absorbing more CO2), and that it is bad for the coral reefs.
These people are assholes. So many appearing to understand the climatic control mechanisms that are cyclic in nature that we have no control over. The Republican Congress had better step up to the plate and be one spokesmen as how things are becoming very dangerous. I understand the few attempts recently in this direction. They must become more forceful and start contacting more less then liberal universities and scientific organizations as how best they can start to counter this crap. Or we all will be pushing ox carts around in about twenty years.
36 posted on 04/07/2009 2:45:27 PM PDT by Marine_Uncle (I still believe Duncan Hunter would have been the best solution... during this interim in time....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
creating superheated steam at the temperature necessary to achieve the industry’s highest operating efficiencies.

From "Primer on supercritical steam"
Dr. Martin Alf and John Kern
Siemens Power Generation

"Thermodynamics govern the ultimate performance of Rankine cycles whether they are used in a coal fired steam power plant or the bottoming cycle of a combined cycle plant. In order to increase the efficiency of those cycles, higher pressure and temperature steam conditions are desired. As a result, many coal fired steam plants being built and planned around the world today utilize "supercritical" steam conditions to achieve higher efficiency. To learn about this subject, EL&P spoke to Dr. Martin Alf and John Kern with Siemens Power Generation."

"Typical steam parameters used in sub-critical reheat steam plants are 2400 psi/1000°F/1000°F while modern supercritical units are operating at steam conditions above 3900 psi/1075°F/1110°F. These more advanced steam conditions result in a net plant efficiency of up to 45 percent, which is a 3.5 percent improvement over a subcritical unit. Higher steam conditions yield higher efficiencies, which means that less coal is used to generate the same amount of electricity, compared to a subcritical unit."


Steam power Plants (Rankine cycle), regardless of how the steam is generated (coal, gas, oil, nuclear, or solar), are all limited in there thermal efficiency by the following equation: Efficiency = 1 - (Tc / Ts)
where "Tc" is the absolute temperature of the low temperature "sink" and "Ts" is the absolute temperature of the heat source. This equation is based on a theoretical thermodynamic cycle (Carnot cycle) and represents the maximum thermal efficiency attainable between the temperature limits as noted above. A real world system such as a steam power plant can only approach this value as a theoretical limit.

Lets use the 1000° Fahrenheit which is 1459.67° Rankine for the source and lets assume 200° F or 659.67° Rankine for the sink temperature. The limiting thermal efficiency is then
1 - (659.67/1459.67) or about 55% of the energy being input into the process is available to do useful work, the balance is rejected to the environment. That is the theoretical best you can do with a thermal process 45% of the heat input has to be dumped through cooling towers or water cooled heat exchangers.

So think about that when you are planning the siting of multiple megawatt solar power plants. Something like one half or more of the power collected will have to be rejected to the local environment. I don't think the Mojave desert has a big supply of cooling water so this whole project may turn out to be pie in the sky.

Regards,
GtG

PS We have a dinky couple megawatt coal fired peaking plant just south of us. It has a 24" water pipe running out to lake Michigan to bring in water for the forced draft cooling towers that evaporate 6500 or so gallons of water every hour to cool the condensers. The vapor cloud creates local weather during the winter.

37 posted on 04/07/2009 4:56:34 PM PDT by Gandalf_The_Gray (I live in my own little world, I like it 'cuz they know me here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Gandalf_The_Gray
I just reread the article...

In order to conserve precious desert water, the steam is air-cooled and piped back into the system in a closed-loop, environmentally-friendly process.

There is not a functioning power plant on the face of the earth that currently uses "air cooled"condensers". The only reason I can think of is that they would be enormous and would require forced draft fans that would eat up a large chunk of the generated power. Current coal fired power stations use about 7% to 10% or more of generated power internal to the plant to run the fans and pumps. (Have you ever seen a 12,000 horse power electric motor? It's as big as a suburban house!)

38 posted on 04/07/2009 5:14:47 PM PDT by Gandalf_The_Gray (I live in my own little world, I like it 'cuz they know me here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Oh yeah?!? Poopie-head. ;’)


39 posted on 04/07/2009 7:06:43 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/____________________ Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
We need better policies and plans -- now.
Okay: #1, dump the phony anthropogenic climate change demagoguery into the dustbin of history, and reclassify its advocacy as hate speech, making that a death penalty offense; #2, build the fence along the Mexican border; #3, stop running open irrigation canals across the altiplano; #4, open the north slope and our continental shelf to drilling, and drop all fuel excise taxes except on imports and exports ($10 or $20 a barrel either way); #5, require clean diesel technology on freight haulers and on diesel passenger cars; #6, eliminate the EPA's dozens of different formulations of gasoline and go back to one, but require zero sulfur content; #7, oh, I just want to go to bed now, #7, impose actual fuel economy requirements, instead of the stupid toothless CAFE BS, and eliminate the so-called Clean Air Act; #8, develop the methane gas hydrates on the ocean floor; #9, fund multiple lines of research into development of ambient temperature superconductors for use in the electrical distribution infrastructure (and then some); #10, fund multiple lines of research into development of fusion reactors for power generation (multiple lines, because no one knows how to do it, and it's not unlikely that it's impossible); #11, bore a downhill hole from the Qattara Depression into the Mediterranean, in order to drain off the supposed meltwater rise in the world sealevel (which hasn't risen these past 150 years) and other activities with a view to eventually refoliating the Sahara.
40 posted on 04/07/2009 7:26:43 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/____________________ Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson