Google plans new mirror for cheaper solar power

[OKIsItJustMe]

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE58867I20090909

Google plans new mirror for cheaper solar power

Wed Sep 9, 2009 7:36pm EDT

By Poornima Gupta

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Google Inc (GOOG.O: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) is disappointed with the lack of breakthrough investment ideas in the green technology sector but the company is working to develop its own new mirror technology that could reduce the cost of building solar thermal plants by a quarter or more.

"We've been looking at very unusual materials for the mirrors both for the reflective surface as well as the substrate that the mirror is mounted on," the company's green energy czar Bill Weihl told Reuters Global Climate and Alternative Energy Summit in San Francisco on Wednesday.

…

Another technology that Google is working on is gas turbines that would run on solar power rather than natural gas, an idea that has the potential of further cutting the cost of electricity, Weihl said.

"In two to three years we could be demonstrating a significant scale pilot system that would generate a lot of power and would be clearly mass manufacturable at a cost that would give us a levelized cost of electricity that would be in the 5 cents or sub 5 cents a kilowatt hour range," Weihl said.

…

[TiredOldMan]

1. I sure hope it works. If solar could actually cost close to other

forms of power it would solve a whole bunch of problems.

[OKIsItJustMe]

2. How close?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4h9FLvj2ZJM

[joshcryer]

3. My impression is that those lenses are made with petroleum based plastic.

I couldn't understand what the guy was saying about the kind of plastic it was (due to his accent). But "cheapest" tends to be "petroleum based."

[OKIsItJustMe]

5. The use of petroleum in plastic doesn't bother me at all

The use of fossil fuels used in making plastic is minor compared to the amount used in power generation.

Here's a thought experiment: Take all of the plastic used in those reflectors, and liquify it. What's the resulting volume?

[joshcryer]

6. True, that.

Perhaps it as a silly objection. Would be nice if these Fresnel lenses were made with organic plastic, though.

[OKIsItJustMe]

10. That will come, once hydrocarbons become expensive enough

That will make “organic plastics” (relatively) less expensive.

[joshcryer]

4. We'll get there eventually.

Just takes a decade or two!

[NNadir]

7. "...disappointed with the lack of breakthrough..."?!?!?

They must not read the E&E forum. We've had a "breakthrough" announcement a week here for years and years and years and years and years and years and years and years...

All these breakthroughs have led to the solar revolution that we've been experiences for years and years and years and years and years and years...

As we all know, http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/alternate/page/renew_energy_consump/table1.html">83.436 = 0.091 an equation that is indeed, a "breakthrough."

[madokie]

8. You could tell 'em couldn't you

except of course if they did read the E/E forum they'd have you on ignore so they wouldn't see it :-)

[joshcryer]

9. I believe the exponential growth trend (megawatts produced by PV) will continue.

Do you think it won't?

[OKIsItJustMe]

11. Well, clearly, it cannot continue indefinitely…

(Put a kernel of rice on the first square of the chessboard, then 2 on the next, 4 on the next and so on…)

The question is what the limits are, and I don't think we’re very close to them.

[NNadir]

12. What "exponential" growth are you talking about?

Let me give you a little math: It is a lot easy to double your money when you have 2 cents, much harder than when you have two billion dollars and have to double that.

I've been hearing about the "exponential growth" of renewable energy for years and years and years and years and years and years and years here.

In fact, I mocked this "exponetialism" about two years ago here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x114856">Curve Fitting the Wind.

In the past two years since I wrote this post, the mathematics remains pretty much the same.

The slope of the following quasi linear function has not changed much though:

[joshcryer]

13. PV megawatts produces doubles every two years.

I assume you could say I'm fitting it to some curve, but I would posit that if it doesn't double in a two year time span, then the prediction is wrong.

I wouldn't refit the trend! I hope you're not accusing me of that!

Note that CO2 production is also on an exponential trend. If emissions are not stopped, in 17 years we will have emitted as much CO2 as we have *from the start of the industrial revolution until this very day*. 17 years.