Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Two Large Solar Plants Planned in California
The New York Times ^ | August 14, 2008 | Matthew L. Wald

Posted on 08/15/2008 4:58:41 PM PDT by Iron Munro

Companies will build two solar power plants in California that together will put out more than 12 times as much electricity as the largest such plant today, the latest indication that solar energy is starting to achieve significant scale.

The plants will cover 12.5 square miles of central California with solar panels, and in the middle of a sunny day will generate about 800 megawatts of power, roughly equal to the size of a large coal-burning power plant or a small nuclear plant. A megawatt is enough power to run a large Wal-Mart store.

Though the California installations will generate 800 megawatts at times when the sun is shining brightly, they will operate for fewer hours of the year than a coal or nuclear plant would and so will produce a third or less as much total electricity.

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


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: energy; nuclear; optisolar; pge; powerplant; solar; solarpower; sunpower
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-57 next last
Bookmark this one to show to those who think we can easily replace fossil fuel and nuclear powered plants with solar.

Installations like this are not economically competitive with other technology and require subsidies, tax breaks and government mandates to use alternative power.

And what (if any) impact will we see from intercepting so much solar energy before it striked the ground?

1 posted on 08/15/2008 4:58:41 PM PDT by Iron Munro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro
The plants will cover 12.5 square miles of central California with solar panels
Thats about the size of anwar if I and thats it the middle of the tundra. yet 12 acres of inhabitable real estate is now going to waste.
2 posted on 08/15/2008 5:00:54 PM PDT by TheRedSoxWinThePennant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheRedSoxWinThePennant

Not to worry. Does anyone think the leftist environuts won’t stall this 12 sq mile array with environmental impact studies of its effect on some presently undiscovered spider or frog.

Then will come the lawsuits.

If we’re lucky, It may get off the ground in the year that the mythical Capt. Kirk got his starship launched into space.


3 posted on 08/15/2008 5:04:31 PM PDT by wildbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

“The shining city” NOT on a hill.


4 posted on 08/15/2008 5:12:01 PM PDT by Mark (Don't argue with my posts. I typed while under sniper fire..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro
Yep. Wrong approach. As noted in other plants, I like the Aussie liquid sulfur and mirrors approach, which doesn't rely on photovoltaics to generate power... good old fashioned heat exchangers, steam, and electricity, which everyone understands.
5 posted on 08/15/2008 5:15:36 PM PDT by GAB-1955 (Kicking and Screaming into the Kingdom of Heaven!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro
How about one of these.


6 posted on 08/15/2008 5:18:31 PM PDT by Wiggins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

also....notice how the actual cost is not even known yet. The economies of scale will probably mean huge cost over runs and higher electric rates. Just like wind, these plants are great at producing power for PART of the day, but unless you build batteries the size of Mount Everest, you will still need good old nukes, coal, or nat gas plants to produce when the sun ain’t shining, or the wind ain’t blowin. No amount of gov’t subsidies of enviro wacko lunacy can change that fact.


7 posted on 08/15/2008 5:23:47 PM PDT by milwguy (........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marron; wolfpat; Ernest_at_the_Beach
The plants will cover 12.5 square miles of central California with solar panels

That's a pretty big footprint.

8 posted on 08/15/2008 5:28:35 PM PDT by raybbr (You think it's bad now - wait till the anchor babies start to vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

Not to mention the amount of actual land it takes to build one. 12.5 square miles, did I read that right? To build a truly large installation that would generate what we actually need in this country would require huge amounts of land that should be used in growing crops and trees for timber. What a waste. Even the dessert would be a waste because if we build nuke desalinization plants we could irrigate most of the dessert and grow crops there. Drill, drill here, drill now and build nukes. F*** the left wing idiots who want to ruin our country and turn us into slaves.


9 posted on 08/15/2008 5:31:57 PM PDT by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raybbr

Thanks. I was hoping for further confirmation on that point. Even to me, the 9 square miles thing sounded exagerated. Now I see it wasn’t exagerated a bit.


10 posted on 08/15/2008 5:32:00 PM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TheRedSoxWinThePennant
Thats about the size of anwar

You might want to check your math on that one:

1 sq. mile = 640 acres.

12.5 sq. miles = 8,000 acres

ANWR = 8,000,000 acres = 12,500 sq miles.

11 posted on 08/15/2008 5:35:07 PM PDT by Michael.SF. ("They're not Americans. They're liberals! "-- Ann Coulter, May 15, 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro
A megawatt is enough power to run a large Wal-Mart store.

Is this NYT's way of dumbing it down for the hay seed hicks?

12 posted on 08/15/2008 5:35:53 PM PDT by chaos_5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

What is the output on a cloudy day.......I love it. CA without power....bring on the clowns....clouds.


13 posted on 08/15/2008 5:37:29 PM PDT by captnorb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Nevada Solar One lies some 20 miles south of Las Vegas and is one of two prototype plants to utilise the technology that recently opened in the US. Another 10 such plants are in advanced stages of planning in California, Arizona and Nevada.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/03/07/eanevada107.xml


14 posted on 08/15/2008 5:37:56 PM PDT by anglian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: milwguy
also....notice how the actual cost is not even known yet.

If the feds have any part in it the cost will double halfway through the project and then triple by the end.

15 posted on 08/15/2008 5:41:26 PM PDT by raybbr (You think it's bad now - wait till the anchor babies start to vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TheRedSoxWinThePennant

Correction to my post above. The 8,000,00 acres is just the designated “wilderness section” section of ANWR. The entire ANWR reserve is actually much larger, more then double that size.


16 posted on 08/15/2008 5:42:21 PM PDT by Michael.SF. ("They're not Americans. They're liberals! "-- Ann Coulter, May 15, 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

12.5 square miles, about twice the footprint of ANWR drilling. Are the Greenies in an uproar?


17 posted on 08/15/2008 5:43:47 PM PDT by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Michael.SF.; TheRedSoxWinThePennant
12.5 sq. miles = 8,000 acres

That's the total area of ANWR. I think he was thinking of the footprint for oil and gas drilling and production, or about 2,000 acres in ANWR. The difference (12.5 sq. miles vs. 2,000 acres) for fossil energy extraction is stunning! And, yes that surface area is disturbed, but you don't put the solar panels over the entire surface.

18 posted on 08/15/2008 5:45:43 PM PDT by CedarDave (What do Obama and Osama have in common? Both have friends who bombed the Pentagon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: captnorb
What is the output on a cloudy day.......

Hey, don't rain on the solar parade!

Though the California installations will generate 800 megawatts at times when the sun is shining brightly, they will operate for fewer hours of the year than a coal or nuclear plant would and so will produce a third or less as much total electricity.

19 posted on 08/15/2008 5:50:48 PM PDT by OCC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: captnorb

Also, since this is Central Cali, don’t forget about all those Tule fogs.


20 posted on 08/15/2008 5:53:44 PM PDT by who_would_fardels_bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-57 next last

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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