Solar Power Destroys Miles and Miles of Desert

[elektra]

Solar is a Luxury, extremely expensive.

Do you really want a 20 year loan to pay for electricity?

Further, the increase is Consumption which Solar is responsible for, uses our natural resources faster, Solar does not conserve.

It is still expensive. But it depends a lot on the region. US southern states are sunny most of the year. It's an ideal zone for solar or solar thermal.

If we compare two current projects Jinping-1 Dam and Ivanpah Solar thermal plant we get the following costs per watt:
Ivanpah : 2.2 billion cost , 377 mw . Cost per watt : 5.83
Jinping 1: 8 billion cost , 2600 mw. Cost per watt : 3.07
Topaz : 2.4 billion cost , 550 mw. Cost per watt: 4.3

Ther isn't a lot of difference. Topaz's cost is about 40% above the jinping dam.
Note : solar thermal is more expensive , but can generate electricity 24/ 7.

Sieren s China Beijing building world s largest dam World DW.DE 04.09.2014
Ivanpah Solar Power Facility - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Topaz Solar Farm - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
World s largest solar farm is up and running in California

The most glaring error I see is Ivanpah, which never worked yet as you have found, it is marketed as if it works and produces Energy, it does not.
Ivanpah also operates on Natural Gas pumped by Diesel fuel, seriously, nice threads here that have been forgotten chronicle the problems.

Solar Thermal only produces 24/7 because it uses Natural Gas.
How much of your post is correct, if I can easily show a gross error, with such ease.

Ivanpah Solar Power Facility Owners Don t Deserve Taxpayer Bailout - Investors.com

The facility opened earlier this year to great praise, naturally, because we've been told over and again that green energy, such as solar power, is the future.

But now its owners — NRG, Web giant Google and BrightSource Energy in Oakland, Calif. — are hoping to secure a $539 million federal grant to help pay off their $1.6 billion federal loan. That shows these moneyed companies have more brass than they do dollars.

It shouldn't be too much to expect the owners to pay back their crony loan with the profits they make from their glorious project.

But maybe that's the problem. They know it's a losing proposition, a toy with Solyndra-esque troubles, and there won't be enough revenue to repay the taxpayers.

Simply put, Ivanpah has not delivered.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, it's produced only a quarter of the power it was promised to generate.

This is the profound flaw with solar power. The sun doesn't always shine, and the electricity that is produced can't be stored for a cloudy day



Read More At Investor's Business Daily: Ivanpah Solar Power Facility Owners Don t Deserve Taxpayer Bailout - Investors.com
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

 

[elektra]

Solar must destroy the Earth to save the Earth?

Deserts are beautiful.

Birds are smarter than people.

 

[CultureCitizen]

The most glaring error I see is Ivanpah, which never worked yet as you have found, it is marketed as if it works and produces Energy, it does not.
Ivanpah also operates on Natural Gas pumped by Diesel fuel, seriously, nice threads here that have been forgotten chronicle the problems.

Indeed, it does use Natural gas. Yet it seems like it is actually producing energy though only about 50% of what it was expected .

Ivanpah Solar Plant Picking Up Steam Breaking Energy - Energy industry news analysis and commentary

 

[elektra]

The most glaring error I see is Ivanpah, which never worked yet as you have found, it is marketed as if it works and produces Energy, it does not.
Ivanpah also operates on Natural Gas pumped by Diesel fuel, seriously, nice threads here that have been forgotten chronicle the problems.

Indeed, it does use Natural gas. Yet it seems like it is actually producing energy though only about 50% of what it was expected .

Ivanpah Solar Plant Picking Up Steam Breaking Energy - Energy industry news analysis and commentary

Ivanpah, with a capacity factor of 30% give or take, thus was suppose to produce around 100 mwh, but at 50% its only producing around 50 mwh, and I believe once you include the line loss, being more than 50 miles from anything it drops another 50%, so we may be getting 25 mwh? At a cost of 2.1$ billion.

 

[Old Rocks]

Well, that is more than we ever got out of the Bush boys buddy, Enron.

 

[elektra]

Well, that is more than we ever got out of the Bush boys buddy, Enron.

Enron, Kenneth Lay, and Bill Clinton.

Last I checked, California, was also Democrat controlled.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Ivanpah, with a capacity factor of 30% give or take, thus was suppose to produce around 100 mwh, but at 50% its only producing around 50 mwh, and I believe once you include the line loss, being more than 50 miles from anything it drops another 50%, so we may be getting 25 mwh? At a cost of 2.1$ billion.

PS10 solar power plant - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

PS10 solar plant . Cost 46 million USD. Capacity 11 mw. Cost per watt 4.18 .
production per year : 23,400 MW.
Aproximate cost per kwh : 24 cents (10 year amorization)
It is still above the average in the US , but good enough to make a proffitable business

 

[hadit]

Well, that is more than we ever got out of the Bush boys buddy, Enron.

BUT BUUUUSSSSSHHHH!!!! alert

 

[elektra]

Ivanpah, with a capacity factor of 30% give or take, thus was suppose to produce around 100 mwh, but at 50% its only producing around 50 mwh, and I believe once you include the line loss, being more than 50 miles from anything it drops another 50%, so we may be getting 25 mwh? At a cost of 2.1$ billion.

PS10 solar power plant - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

PS10 solar plant . Cost 46 million USD. Capacity 11 mw. Cost per watt 4.18 .
production per year : 23,400 MW.
Aproximate cost per kwh : 24 cents (10 year amorization)
It is still above the average in the US , but good enough to make a proffitable business

I guess you have not the technical knowledge of Electricity to include the capacity factor, which is at best 23% of what you you copied and pasted. You pasted the, "nameplate capacity", which in theory is the technical maximum. Solar plants true output is based on the Capacity Factor.

At best its capable of 2 mwh, when the sun shines at its hottest, a few hours a day.

Either way, Spain's Government has declared Solar a complete failure and has thus quit the subsidies. The Spaniards have determined they lost 2 jobs for every Solar job created.

A small country like Spain can not afford the cost of Solar power. Neither can we.

Endless studies and articles attest to the failures in Spain.

Yes, the cost per kwh is at leat 1.00$ if not 10x's that cost once we factor in all the hidden costs that never get accounted for.

 

[CultureCitizen]

I guess you have not the technical knowledge of Electricity to include the capacity factor, which is at best 23% of what you you copied and pasted. You pasted the, "nameplate capacity", which in theory is the technical maximum. Solar plants true output is based on the Capacity Factor.

Oh , I did the math. In ideal conditions the plant will produce energy for 12 hours with a peak at noon
This yields 31.5% as the maximum capacity ( (2/3.14) /2) factor for a solar plant of any kind.
PS10 is very close to this as it has a capacity factor of 24%.
So the anual kwh generation already accounts for this ( my cost per watt figure is what's actually wrong).Else the output would be 96 GW per year which would require 24/7 sunshine.

The cost per kwh is correct , and this paper from abengoa confirms my quick calculation . Their figure is around 22 cents of Euro per kwh which is 24.8 cents of a dollar.

Soluciones al Cambio Clim tico una Visi n Panor mica

"Capacity factor is a measure of how often an electric generator runs for a specific period of time. It indicates how much electricity a generator actually produces relative to the maximum it could produce at continuous full power operation during the same period."
What is a capacity factor - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration EIA

 

[elektra]

I guess you have not the technical knowledge of Electricity to include the capacity factor, which is at best 23% of what you you copied and pasted. You pasted the, "nameplate capacity", which in theory is the technical maximum. Solar plants true output is based on the Capacity Factor.

Oh , I did the math. In ideal conditions the plant will produce energy for 12 hours with a peak at noon
This yields 31.5% as the maximum capacity factor for a solar plant of any kind.
PS10 is very close to this as it has a capacity factor of 24%.
So the anual kwh generation already accounts for this ( my cost per watt figure is what's actually wrong)
The cost per kwh is correct , and this paper from abengoa confirms my quick calculation . Their figure is around 22 cents of Euro per kwh which is 24.8 cents of a dollar.

Soluciones al Cambio Clim tico una Visi n Panor mica

"Capacity factor is a measure of how often an electric generator runs for a specific period of time. It indicates how much electricity a generator actually produces relative to the maximum it could produce at continuous full power operation during the same period."
What is a capacity factor - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration EIA

12 hours while all other Solar plants get at best 7 hours of production? Where do you come up with 12 hours of operation?
33% less than the theoretical maximum is close?

Spain has determined that Solar is too expensive, produces too little, and resulted in negative job growth.

Ivanpah pretty much killed all CSP plants of the future, maybe all Large Scale Solar. When large industrial scale solar failed, as in Ivanpah the politicians realized that they can not have such huge examples of failure, its best to limit the failures to many multi-million dollar failures than a few huge catastrophic multi-billion dollar failures.

As far as your source for facts, I would choose somebody other than the Owner or Builder of said Solar plant, hardly credible or unbiased.

Either way, the Spanish government has determined Solar does not work and have changed their policy, no more support for Solar in Spain.

People have discussed this in detail in these threads.

 

[elektra]

Here, we can see that Solar tariffs and subsidies put the Spanish economy in the whole for 26 billion euro. Very significant for a small country. And this is just the Tariff Deficit, not the cost of building Solar, include the cost of building Solar and we can see that the Spanish economy never would of needed a bailout had they not built Solar. Spain in the same year, 2012 required a 36 billion euro bailout. So we can see had Spain not wasted money on Solar the deficit may not of existed at all. Especially when the Spanish government admits Solar cost 2 jobs for every one job created.

Renewable energy in Spain The cost del sol The Economist

But costs exploded, too. Subsidies to solar energy rose from €190m in 2007 to €3.5 billion in 2012 (an 18-fold increase). Total subsidies to all renewables reached €8.1 billion in 2012, see chart. Since the government was unwilling to pass the full costs on to consumers, the cumulative tariff deficit (the cost of the system minus revenues from consumers) reached €26 billion, having risen by about €5 billion a year.

Spanish bank bailout gets go-ahead - Nov. 28 2012

The European Commission has approved Spain's plans to restructure four of its weakest banks, clearing the way for them to receive nearly €37 billion in fresh capital from the eurozone's bailout fund.

It is a shortsighted policy that is not sustainable, as spain proves.

 

[Judicial review]

What word is desert short for? I say who gives a damn. You'll understand what I mean when you figure out that word.

 

[elektra]

What word is desert short for? I say who gives a damn. You'll understand what I mean when you figure out that word.

As if you posted something so clever we need to think about your post, little high on your horse I say, get back to me when you figure that out, okay.

 

[Judicial review]

What word is desert short for? I say who gives a damn. You'll understand what I mean when you figure out that word.

As if you posted something so clever we need to think about your post, little high on your horse I say, get back to me when you figure that out, okay.

I don't see the need to really give a shit about a worthless piece of desert that is "deserted." I prefer land that is good for investment. I believe we can all agree the desert is wasteland.

 

[elektra]

What word is desert short for? I say who gives a damn. You'll understand what I mean when you figure out that word.

As if you posted something so clever we need to think about your post, little high on your horse I say, get back to me when you figure that out, okay.

I don't see the need to really give a shit about a worthless piece of desert that is "deserted." I prefer land that is good for investment. I believe we can all agree the desert is wasteland.

Believing, knowing, and reality is much different.

If the desert is such a wasteland why is Solar energy dependent on Desert for growth?
If the desert is such a wasteland, why are Wind Turbines dependent on elements found in the Mojave desert?

Certainly Solar in the Desert is not a good investment.

Deserted? Hardly, I think you should actually get a little education about the desert before you dismiss it as useless. We could not build Wind Turbines without the Desert.

 

[Judicial review]

What word is desert short for? I say who gives a damn. You'll understand what I mean when you figure out that word.

As if you posted something so clever we need to think about your post, little high on your horse I say, get back to me when you figure that out, okay.

I don't see the need to really give a shit about a worthless piece of desert that is "deserted." I prefer land that is good for investment. I believe we can all agree the desert is wasteland.

Believing, knowing, and reality is much different.

If the desert is such a wasteland why is Solar energy dependent on Desert for growth?
If the desert is such a wasteland, why are Wind Turbines dependent on elements found in the Mojave desert?

Certainly Solar in the Desert is not a good investment.

Deserted? Hardly, I think you should actually get a little education about the desert before you dismiss it as useless. We could not build Wind Turbines without the Desert.

Just out of curiosity how many people live in the desert? How much investment property is there that's profitable? Keep in mind people aren't solar panels or wind Turbines. Btw... if solar is dependent on the desert for growth wouldn't it be a good investment? You contradicted yourself. better go back and edit.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I think building a city or road in the desert is far more destructive. Should we do that, yes we should!

 

[Judicial review]

I think building a city or road in the desert is far more destructive. Should we do that, yes we should!

if you can get the city access to clean water or water period I'd agree! Better have damn good air conditioners and water fountains everywhere.

 

[elektra]

What word is desert short for? I say who gives a damn. You'll understand what I mean when you figure out that word.

As if you posted something so clever we need to think about your post, little high on your horse I say, get back to me when you figure that out, okay.

I don't see the need to really give a shit about a worthless piece of desert that is "deserted." I prefer land that is good for investment. I believe we can all agree the desert is wasteland.

Believing, knowing, and reality is much different.

If the desert is such a wasteland why is Solar energy dependent on Desert for growth?
If the desert is such a wasteland, why are Wind Turbines dependent on elements found in the Mojave desert?

Certainly Solar in the Desert is not a good investment.

Deserted? Hardly, I think you should actually get a little education about the desert before you dismiss it as useless. We could not build Wind Turbines without the Desert.

Just out of curiosity how many people live in the desert? How much investment property is there that's profitable? Keep in mind people aren't solar panels or wind Turbines. Btw... if solar is dependent on the desert for growth wouldn't it be a good investment? You contradicted yourself. better go back and edit.

How many people live in the desert? I am not sure, in California there are at least 22 million that live in the desert.
I contradicted myself, I never said Solar was a good investment, Solar is a negative investment requiring a constant source of money to be sustainable. Nice try, at twisting my comments.

In Arizona, Cotton is grown in the Desert, hardly a wasteland, as you describe.

How much investment property? Good question, I would say all of Southern California, except for of course the land the Government is giving to the special interest solar power companies.