Solar thermal trough goes live this weekend -- 1st since 1988.

[skids]

It's just a little 1MWp system (pricetag $6.1million) but it's good to see a proven technology improved and re-implemented. The article is fairly in-depth and worth the read.

"This is really interesting because we gained a lot of interest from the power plant side of the company," Canada said. "The people who understand the steam cycle found this much more satisfying than PV. They see a potential that it can get close to cost competitive, and they start seeing that this can fit into their business model."

This attention among the traditional thermal sector employees is largely because this power plant has more in common with coal or natural gas power plants than it does with solar PV technologies. Quite simply, instead of burning a finite commodity like natural gas or coal to power a generator, these plants concentrate the sun's energy to do the job.

<...>

"There has been great interest in this project from developing countries where remote power plants in the 1 to 5 megawatt range are desperately needed," Myles said. "This technology supports the United Nations' model of development of rural areas in regions which have abundant solar resources but lack an adequate transmission grid."

http://renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=44696

[BlueEyedSon]

1. $6 million for 200 homes = $30k each

wonder how that compares to other types of powerplants...?

[papau]

5. Article says twice as expensive- or rather a 5% return instead of 10%-if

- if 10% is what they getting now.

But it takes down demand for oil and coal and does not have their envir cost that is now not a company cost - oil polution/goal health problems are the gov's problem - not the utilities problem - under today's rules.

[skids]

7. Pretty well, actually.

Not counting the external environmental costs, a 1MW natural gas plant, which would be used mainly for peak loading to power air conditioning ("spinning reserve"), the same as this solar plant, costs about $1M, and then of course add the ongoing cost of the fuel (which could rise without much warning.)

A 1MW wind turbine will run about $3M these days, but has different (and a bit less predictable) load curves, but in the area of the same level of capacity loading.

All three types of plants require ongoing maintenence costs, and all three can cost less on a larger scale.

Given that, at the generation point, electricity will sell for something between $0.05 and $0.10 per KWh, the plant should break even pretty quickly.

[KG]

2. but the fuel to run is free, forever.

unless halliburton figures out a way to charge for sunlight. :(

[phantom power]

3. Very interesting. It's an unstaffed, fully automated facility.

By the way, just what the #!$#! is a "fluid-filled vacuum tube?" Vacuum? Or fluid? Choose one.

[jpak]

6. It's a double-walled tube (tube inside a tube)

The outer tube is clear and under vacuum (transmits solar radiation and insulates the inner tube) - the inner tube holds the working fluid (which is heated to produce steam).

[skids]

8. .

[cliss]

4. Thank you skids,

THIS is the kind of news that makes me energized. We need to be doing more, much more of this.