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

ROSEMEAD, CA, USA -- A Stirling engine is commonly referred to as an "external combustion engine" in contrast to the "internal combustion engines" found in most vehicles. Combine a Stirling engine with solar as the source of heat, and you have a highly efficient means of converting solar power into usable energy.

That is what Stirling Energy Systems has been perfecting for the past 20 years.

On Aug. 8, 2005, President Bush toured the DOE's National Solar Thermal Test Facility at the Sandia National Laboratories complex, situated on Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque, N.M., where he signed the energy bill.

Now they are ready to go big-time, with an agreement signed Tuesday with Edison International (NYSE:EIX) a subsidiary of Southern California Edison (SCE), the nation's leading purchaser of renewable energy.

On Tuesday they announced an agreement that could result in construction of a massive, 4,500-acre solar generating station in Southern California. This comes to around seven square miles, with a perimeter of nearly 30 miles. The completed power station would be the world's largest solar facility, capable of producing more electricity than all other currently-operating U.S. solar projects combined.

This signing was a day after President George W. Bush visited their Sandia National Laboratories installation where they have six prototypes in operation, having chosen this location as his backdrop for the signing of the Energy bill.

Signed Tuesday, the 20-year power purchase agreement, which is subject to California Public Utilities Commission approval, calls for development of 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.

According to the California Energy Commission, there are 966 power plants in California that generate more than 0.1 MW. Of those, a 500 MW plant would be in the top 3% for size.

The agreement includes an option to expand the project to 850 MW.

Initially, Stirling would build a one-MW test facility using 40 of the company’s 37-foot-diameter dish assemblies. (Each dish generates 25 kilowatts.) This phase is slated to be completed in the first quarter of 2007. One of the 40-unit arrays capable of a 1 MW output, will be dubbed a "solar power group" and will be the basis of modular calculations for future installations.

Subsequently, the 20,000-dish array is to be constructed near Victorville, California, during a four-year period, starting in early 2008. If Edison opts for the additional 350 MW installation, that will take two more years, and will bring the total number of panels to 34,000.

“At a time of rising fossil-fuel costs and increased concern about greenhouse-gas emissions, the Stirling project would provide enough clean power to serve 278,000 homes for an entire year,” said SCE Chairman John Bryson. “Edison is committed to facilitating development of new, environmentally sensitive, renewable energy technologies to meet the growing demand for electricity here and throughout the U.S.”

“We are especially pleased about the financial benefits of this agreement for our customers and the state,” said Alan Fohrer, SCE chief executive officer. “The contract requires no state subsidy and provides favorable pricing for ratepayers because tests have shown the Stirling dish technology can produce electricity at significantly lower costs than other solar technologies.”

Gil Alexander, spokesperson for Southern California Edison said, "We operate in a competitive marketplace. While [for confidentiality reasons] we cannot give out precise dollar amounts for how much these installations will cost, we believe the final agreement is very beneficial to our customers. We do not need any subsidies to make this work."

Pioneering Stirling-solar to be Commercially Viable

Although Stirling dish technology has been successfully tested for 20 years, the SCE-Stirling project represents its first major application in the commercial electricity-generation field. Experimental models of the Stirling dish technology have undergone more than 26,000 hours of successful solar operation. A six-dish model Stirling power project is currently operating at the Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

However, this isn't the first commercial application of Stirling engine technology. For instance, Swedish submarines use Stirling engines for propulsion. (ref)

How It Works

The Stirling dish technology converts thermal energy to electricity by using a mirror array to focus the sun’s rays on the receiver end of a Stirling engine. Each panel tracks azimuth and elevation to keep the sun’s rays focused at greatest intensity possible.

The internal side of the receiver then heats hydrogen gas which expands. The pressure created by the expanding gas drives a piston, crankshaft, and drive-shaft assembly much like those found in internal combustion engines but without igniting the gas. The drive shaft turns a small electricity generator. The entire energy-conversion process takes place within a canister the size of an oil barrel. The process requires no water and the engine is emission-free.

Comparison to Other Solar Technologies

Tests conducted by SCE and the Sandia National Laboratories have shown that the Stirling dish technology is almost twice as efficient as other solar technologies. These include parabolic troughs which use the sun’s heat to create steam that drives turbines similar to those found in conventional power plants, and photovoltaic cells which convert sunlight directly into electricity by means of semiconducting materials like those found in computer chips.

Additional Applications

While the number of potential applications for this technology is huge, in the near term Stirling Energy Systems will be keeping their focus on these utility installations.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; News/Current Events; Technical
KEYWORDS: edison; johnbryson; sce; solarpower; stirling; stirlingengine
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-125 next last
To: Arkie2

Stirling + solar = read later bump. Should be interesting.


81 posted on 08/13/2005 12:06:26 PM PDT by Kevin OMalley (No, not Freeper#95235, Freeper #1165: Charter member, What Was My Login Club.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arkie2
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

Stirling engines are fun to build. They are so simple you can build one from a tin can! I've built several small stirling engines and am thinking of building one to power a generator to replace my gas generator. They are great engines and we should develop them to their full potential.
.
82 posted on 08/13/2005 12:07:42 PM PDT by mugs99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: mugs99

Thanks for the link! I put it on my favorites and will check it out later. I have a grandson who would love this.


83 posted on 08/13/2005 12:13:01 PM PDT by Arkie2 (No, I never voted for Bill Clinton. I don't plan on voting Republican again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: bobbdobbs
"H2 + O2 probablly releases more energy, ounce for ounce than any C based chain (I'd have to look it up for sure, but that's what I remember.)"

Nope. The carbon-oxygen bonds formed release more energy.

"Which is why NASA uses H2 + O2 in many of their upper stage rockets (minimize weight, maximize energy.)"

Nope again. The reason NASA uses H2 + O2 is to maximize "specific impulse" (i.e. "thrust").

84 posted on 08/13/2005 2:41:23 PM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

I don't think these Stirling engines are designed to fit on top of the roof, are they? I think they are probably big setups that take their own large space.


85 posted on 08/13/2005 2:52:17 PM PDT by krb (ad hominem arguments are for stupid people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: krb

Dear krb,

That's a good point. I guess they're kind of heavy and bulky, from the descriptions given so far.


sitetest


86 posted on 08/13/2005 2:58:47 PM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
More thoughts - it is not directly a matter of the weight of the engine, but of the cross section of the cylinder.

The Sterling cannot generate the substained high pressures during the power cycle that the internal combustion engine can with its exploding petro. So it takes a bigger cylinder to get a given amount of torque. All else being equal (such as the quality of the metal used), bigger cylinders weigh more. Sterling engines also need heating and cooling radiators to exchange the heat between the internal gas and the outside sources of hot and cold, and a fly wheel to keep moving. These all add to its weight and size.

Internal combustion engines have another advantage - they provide rapid changes in power output (acceleration !!) by varying the amount of fuel injected on each stroke. To do this with a Sterling, you'd need to convert its nearly constant power output to electricity, store that in capacitors or batteries, and use that to drive electric motors. All this adds up to more weight.

So of these two, if you want the maximum power per pound of engine, use internal combustion. If you want the maximum power per pound of fuel, use Sterling.

If you want the maximum power per combined weight of fuel and engine (a common case for anything mobile) then it depends in good part on how often one can refuel.

I should warn the gentle reader - I am no professional engine designer. I just made up the above comments by thinking about this subject while taking a nap and doing a little Google searching. I could be wildly off the mark.

87 posted on 08/13/2005 3:18:11 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (To err is human; to moo is bovine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Arkie2
Not a word about all the new jobs this will create as well, mirror polishing, plumbers, magnetic engine tuners, etc, etc.

Actually, this could be a boon to the area, drive from Las Vegas to Searchlight to SoCal - lots of potential power plant area. I did stop by the demo plant last time we went by, cool stuff, would love to have a job there.

Wonder if salt ponds would give a better yield and provide some additional power at nite owing to thermal mass? They seem to work well in the Mideast.
88 posted on 08/13/2005 6:49:11 PM PDT by ASOC (Insert clever tagline here: _______)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #89 Removed by Moderator

To: bobbdobbs

Wow. This thread has had a long shelf life and it served its purpose! I've learned a lot about stirling engines and had a lot of fun. Couldn't ask for more than that!


90 posted on 08/13/2005 7:20:21 PM PDT by Arkie2 (No, I never voted for Bill Clinton. I don't plan on voting Republican again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Arkie2
Kamen is working on developing a very small Stirling setup that would be cheap enough for a small third world village to purchase. They could simply use any fuel to burn and local water to produce thier own electricity, and more importantly, distilled drinking water.

As a source of stable electricity for the poorest people in the world, it would be an important step. But as a source of clean water for those same people, it is a giant step.

I hope he can succeed.

91 posted on 08/13/2005 7:36:04 PM PDT by Anitius Severinus Boethius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Arkie2

I remember reading about similar uses of Stirling engine technology about twenty years ago. At that time it was thought that we might be able to have individual home units, freeing us from the "power" companies. (yes, that is a double entendre)

As I recall, Kali. found an obscure regulation originally intended to regulate steam boilers, and used it to quash the Sterling generator as being a "high pressure vessel".

The demo unit wound up moldering away at the Stanford's "alternative energy research park".

I guess as long as the power companies keep control of the tech. it is OK to develop, but if it went private it would be regulated out of existence. So much for "free enterprise"!


92 posted on 08/13/2005 7:49:11 PM PDT by Richard-SIA ("The natural progress of things is for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield" JEFFERSON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Red Zone

No, just microwave. ;-)

Not nearly the problem the eco-nuts made it out to be in order to scuttle it a few years ago.

There are ways to focus the beam, and automatically end the transmission if it wanders off target.

The eco-nuts are not really interested in clean power, they really just want to kill off modern man and tech,, except for themselves and their own use of course!


93 posted on 08/13/2005 7:54:19 PM PDT by Richard-SIA ("The natural progress of things is for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield" JEFFERSON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow

I was hoping to see the two "free" piston version.

It ran at 60 cycles a second, and the pistons acted as a generator.

No crankshaft at all, so it made electricity but had no other output.


94 posted on 08/13/2005 8:06:23 PM PDT by Richard-SIA ("The natural progress of things is for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield" JEFFERSON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Iris7

GOOD job; Solar power satellites...IF people 'want' to do it.

Which they havent for 30 years.

Gee I thought AMERICANS weren't afraid to 'think big'...or did that end with Apollo? -sigh-

SPACE is the RIGHT place for solar.


95 posted on 08/13/2005 8:11:35 PM PDT by FYREDEUS (FYREDEUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: krb

Not as long as the "power" companies and their accomplices in Gov. Org. who depend on you to pay their "energy tax's" have any say on it!


96 posted on 08/13/2005 8:13:31 PM PDT by Richard-SIA ("The natural progress of things is for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield" JEFFERSON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

The "Nevada Test Site" is MILES of secured but nearly abandoned desert landscape.
It is just plain STUPID that it is not being used for ANY kind of solar power generation!


97 posted on 08/13/2005 8:16:43 PM PDT by Richard-SIA ("The natural progress of things is for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield" JEFFERSON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: The Red Zone

Not if you use masers...

Of course maybe those might also be 'dual use' adaptable for shooting down incoming North Korean or Chi-Com missiles?

The Neo-Luddite lefties certainly wouldnt want anything useful like that; 'Ronnie Ray-guns' 'Star Wars' missile defence was badddddd science and all doncha know ;-)


98 posted on 08/13/2005 8:21:14 PM PDT by FYREDEUS (FYREDEUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jack of all Trades

One would hope so. We could use some innovation in energy, particularly in the use of hydrocarbon fuel itself and its production. Wouldn't be a bad trend in nuclear either. We've had relatively decent innovation in wind power, largely by private entrepreneurs in small companies, though some big boys jumped in once the samll guys took the risk, as normally happens.


99 posted on 08/13/2005 8:25:35 PM PDT by AmericanVictory (Should we be more like them, or they like us?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Edward Watson

A nice idea...but Earth/Luna orbit SPS are only 'uneconomical' to launch because we foolishly [as we've just seen again] buy into National AEROnautical and Space ADMINISTRATION paradigms of WIMPY and expensive ROCKET launchers.

Build Freeman Dyson's "Super Orion" [Daedalus modified to be eco-friendly].

EIGHT MILLION METRIC TONNES [about two orders of magnitude more than everything humanity has heretofore put into space combined] at 35 CENTS/POUND to orbit in 2005 dollars.

Put a CITY into orbit not a 'shuttle'.

Thousands of engineers and spacejacks with everything for initial stage of full space industrialization/colonization; permanent lunar base kit with miners, processors, mass drivers, construction-shack for SPS and Lagrange 4/5 O'Neill colonies with mass catchers, etc...basically the whole package that's been languishing since the Bicentennial...sent up in ONE Orion launch.

Of course we'd have to thumb our noses at neo-Luddite neo-Malthusian antihumans and tear up those silly little partial test ban and UN space treaties that you can be sure the Red Chinese wont let get in their way...but wouldnt it be worth it to advance humanity a century beyond where the lefties will let us be AND give America a REAL 'Project for a New American Century' as well as unlimited energy potential?


100 posted on 08/13/2005 8:50:02 PM PDT by FYREDEUS (FYREDEUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-125 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