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

Skip to comments.

World's largest solar installation to use Stirling engine technology
Free Energy News ^ | Aug 05 | Sterling D. Allan

Posted on 08/13/2005 3:42:35 AM PDT by Arkie2

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-125 next last
I'm interested in comments on the use of the stirling engine as part of this solar array. The stirling is a very old technology, very efficient and under utilized. I'm wondering if this isn't the perfect marriage of 2 technologies that might finally make solar, on a large scale, viable
1 posted on 08/13/2005 3:42:36 AM PDT by Arkie2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Arkie2

Solar bump!


2 posted on 08/13/2005 3:53:40 AM PDT by GBA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arkie2
a 500-megawatt (MW) solar project 70 miles northeast of Los Angeles using innovative Stirling-engine/solar-dish technology. This is enough power to run approximately half a million homes.

At a kilowatt each, as soon as someone turns on the air conditioner or irons some clothes...

3 posted on 08/13/2005 3:58:07 AM PDT by The Red Zone (Florida, the sun-shame state, and Illinois the chicken injun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arkie2

Stirling engine, an external combustion reciprocating engine having an enclosed working fluid that is alternately compressed and expanded to operate a piston, thus converting heat from a variety of sources into mechanical energy. A Stirling engine can use any type of fuel as well as solar energy and heat from the waters of a hot spring. The engine was invented in 1816 by a Scottish minister, Robert Stirling, before the gasoline and diesel engines appeared. Stirling engines are unique heat engines because their theoretical efficiency is nearly equal to their theoretical maximum efficiency, known as the Carnot cycle efficiency.


4 posted on 08/13/2005 3:58:11 AM PDT by Arkie2 (No, I never voted for Bill Clinton. I don't plan on voting Republican again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arkie2

Bump for later... I love Stirling engine stories.


5 posted on 08/13/2005 3:59:57 AM PDT by BushCountry (They say the world has become too complex for simple answers. They are wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Red Zone

The same comment applies to any type power plant of course. What's interesting here is that someone is using the stirling engine for power production. It's far superior to the internal combustion engine in terms of efficiency but hasn't seen many modern applications outside of some very limited uses such as in submarines.


6 posted on 08/13/2005 4:01:27 AM PDT by Arkie2 (No, I never voted for Bill Clinton. I don't plan on voting Republican again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Arkie2

Bump


7 posted on 08/13/2005 4:06:10 AM PDT by enots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arkie2

self-ping


8 posted on 08/13/2005 4:08:09 AM PDT by Free Vulcan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arkie2
I make no comment on "solar power". Perhaps this installation will be an honest assessment of the technology. Perhaps not.

After all, there are no political axes to grind, oh, no!.

The Stirling cycle engine very recently has become a viable automotive engine. An English group claims 80% thermal efficiency in their automotive design. They say they have the weight, size, and cost under control. This is probably wishful thinking. If it is all true, though, it means that Prius sized cars can triple their fuel economy.

Also a Stirling can burn anything - liquid, solid, or gas - if designed and built for exotic fuels.

This is the last unexploited technology available for use. Conservation and nuclear is the only way left to cut fossil energy use further. After the Sterling car engine no "three times more efficient" technology is within sight.

Satellite solar power, if people want to do it. Big job.

9 posted on 08/13/2005 4:12:00 AM PDT by Iris7 ("A pig's gotta fly." - Porco Rosso)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iris7
Satellite solar power, if people want to do it.

Nuke-a-bird technology?

10 posted on 08/13/2005 4:20:41 AM PDT by The Red Zone (Florida, the sun-shame state, and Illinois the chicken injun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Arkie2

37' diameter dish is almost exactly 100 m^2 in area. At roughly 1KW peak solar power/m^2, the conversion efficiency is about 25%. Pretty good for solar. Calling this a 500MW generator is a little dishonest though IMHO. Power is what matters. 500MW at what rate, and for how long? I could strap a drill motor to a bicycle and call myself a 500MW generator. It wouold probably take me a lifetime to do it though.

I think they could market this better as peak shaving power for industry. Maybe even get some corporate investment, rather than saddling residential consumers with the cost. How much solar power is available during the residintial use peak of say 6:00pm to 11:00 pm? Ans. not much.

Stirling is interesting because it's efficient and versatile. Any source of heat can be used: solar, fossil fuel, wood, etc. I think they're used in submarines in some capacity. IIRC there are some technical challenges with durability. Something aout maintaining a seal across the working piston with a large delta T across it maybe,

My knowledge of thermo is a little rough, but I would bet that massing a large number of reflectors of a collector, and then utilizing steam power would be more efficient.

Perhaps $60+/bbl oil will bring a new surge in American innovation.


11 posted on 08/13/2005 4:24:44 AM PDT by Jack of all Trades
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iris7

I'm more interested in the use of the stirling engine here than the solar power aspect. The stirling is just so damn efficient it's a shame it's not used in more applications.


12 posted on 08/13/2005 4:26:44 AM PDT by Arkie2 (No, I never voted for Bill Clinton. I don't plan on voting Republican again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Iris7

I am for any generation that will generate during the peak hours. Here in Texas with the wind generation the wind blowing at night during the off peak hours, I am up to my chin with excess generation and know where to put it.


13 posted on 08/13/2005 4:28:21 AM PDT by hadaclueonce (shoot low, they are riding Shetlands.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jack of all Trades

I believe the article specifically mentioned that the stirling is more efficient than steam and the article also mentioned better efficiency than solar arrays which converted heat to steam for power production.


14 posted on 08/13/2005 4:29:05 AM PDT by Arkie2 (No, I never voted for Bill Clinton. I don't plan on voting Republican again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Arkie2

Interesting potential. Isn't capitalism and America grand? Give us $66/barrel crude oil and we'll devise a way to do it better and, most importantly, cheaper!

Good post. Needs some pics and illustrations though. They can be seen here >http://www.sandia.gov/news-center/news-releases/2004/renew-energy-batt/Stirling.html


15 posted on 08/13/2005 4:59:22 AM PDT by chief_bigfoot ("isn't THAT amazing?" - Ron Popiel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

So, if the Stirling engine was invented in 1816, then why did it take 211 (!) years for somebody to realize the economic viability of the thing?


16 posted on 08/13/2005 5:26:56 AM PDT by Bazooka (Just say what you think. They hate our guts anyway.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Jack of all Trades
"Perhaps $60+/bbl oil will bring a new surge in American innovation."

Ding, ding, ding!!! We have a winner!!!

This has always been and will always be the true answer. All forms of "alternative" energy sources are options once they become economically viable on the open market.

This is true of course unless and until the leftists take over governmental control and declare that equal access to "cheap" energy is a Constitutional right.
17 posted on 08/13/2005 5:30:22 AM PDT by hotshu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: chief_bigfoot

New means of electrical generation aren't going to have a direct impact on oil use though. Most electricity is derived from coal, nuclear, or natural gas. I mean if we could generate enough electricity to make electric vehicles practical, that would be an offset, but right now they're a solution in search of a problem. A means of distributed power generation might make it practical, but as always, fuel is needed.

If somebody married a Stirling engine to a hybrid vehicle, THAT would be interesting.

Are you in the energy field?


18 posted on 08/13/2005 5:33:28 AM PDT by Jack of all Trades
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Bazooka

I think it's closer to 189 years. When it gets up to 200 we'll start realizing its viability.


19 posted on 08/13/2005 5:37:57 AM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl; Carry_Okie; SierraWasp

ping


20 posted on 08/13/2005 5:39:48 AM PDT by FOG724 (RINOS - they are not better than the leftists, they ARE the leftists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-125 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