World's Largest Solar Power Plant Planned in Arizona

CoStar News ^ | Feb. 29, 2008 | Phillip Majarucon

[Cvengr]

"What kind of elephant did Hannibal use?"

Very tired, cold, mean ones?

[NicknamedBob]

"A solar plant with fixed panels can produce 100% power only one hour a day (during local apparent noon), and can effectively produce usable (80+ maximum) power only from 10:00 (AM) to 14:00 (PM) in the 3 winter months, and from 09:00 to 15:00 during the hottest 3 summer months."

I don't think they plan to use fixed panels. With movable panels, they will be able to track the sun as the Earth rotates, giving a longer maximum power. Also, some energy will be stored as heat, perhaps from the midday maximum, to be used later in the evening.

It is trivilally simple to provide more reflection surface than is required for maximum collection efficiency, but it makes sense to do so to extend the productivity time. Excess or unneeded panels can be cycled through maintenance procedures when they are not immediately required for energy production.

[NicknamedBob]

"Very tired, cold, mean ones?"

With a short shelf life.

[Tammy8]

It is only about 50 miles as the crow flies from Gila Bend to Phoenix, Arizona- I guess that is the intended power demand.

[Robert A Cook PE]

More later.

[SirAllen]

Your math is way off:

> A kilowatt is one thousand watts, (or a billion watts)

Where did you get a billion from, a kilowatt = 1000 watts.

> 4,00 Billion = 4 Trillion

4,000 Billion = 4 Trillion

> 40,000 Million = 4 Trillion (4,000,000,000,000)

40,000 Million = 40 Billion (40,000,000,000)

> 280 megawatts = .28 Kilowatts

280 megawatts = 280,000 Kilowatts

Now see post #63 for the correct analysis of space needed. I know a lot of good conservatives are skeptical about anything green (for good reasons) but this is actually very feasible assuming the costs work out (looks like 10-15 year payoff). However I do question why they paid $14K+ per acre bought, that seems awfully high for Arizona desert, so I do question some of their business sense.

[Robert A Cook PE]

$200 a month for electricity is a massively expensive bill that most people would never be able to afford. A peak use month may see something in the range of $75-$90. Normal bill would be in the $30-40 range. $200 a month is about 4 times more what people are normally paying now. Hardly worth the cost to just to fight a media manufactured myth like “Global Warming”

?

125.00 - 175.00 a month from May through Sept is what southerners pay NOW for electricity.

Figure about 50.00 - 75.00 month the rest of the year, IF they have gas heat and a gas water heater. Otherwise, every month’s bill is higher.

[null and void]

Will a homeless man on a bicycle with a generator be more cost worthy?

Only if you're not the one feeding him...

[Enchante]

It’s almost time to update “The Man With The Golden Gun” — some new super-duper technique to concentrate energy from the sun while Britt Eklund’s successor prances about in a bikini......

[null and void]

Pictures. We want pictures.

Ooooooooooo, Power porn...

[Cvengr]

If it is nearby here, then the land value in hasty acquisition along the transmission line corridor might well exceed the paid cost when the alternative involves increased transmission line distance,ergo line losses, and their capitalized construction costs, especially when no other major customer might be nearby.

http://maps.google.com/maps?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=s&hl=en&q=Design+Manual+%E2%80%93+Standard+330-04,+Volume+1&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl

[null and void]

Wow! You have a probelm for every solution!

[Cyber Liberty]

$200 a month for electricity is a massively expenseive bill that most people would never be able to afford. A peak use month may see something in the range of $75-$90. Normal bill would be in the $30-40 range. $200 a month is about 4 times more what people are normally paying now.

Your numbers are off for AZ. $200 is an average bill here.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Movable reflective panels increase efficiency a great deal - at very high initial and long-term maintenance expense; Every one of these thousand of reflectors is going to need frequent maintenance and replacement of their rotating eqpt and actuators, sensors, and power supplies: motors, hydraulics (?) and cables and sensors spread out through many square miles of parking lot-sized and foundations.

Heat loss and molten metal flow resistance losses through the miles of small bore piping between the collectors and the central “boiler” is not going to be pretty. Probably solvable, but not cheaply or efficiently solvable. Maintenance and replacement of this extremely complex heat-transfer system is going to add to year-year costs NOT in the advertisements by the AGQ extremists pushing this idea. This solar heaters have been built before (Mojave and south France). And never succeeded before either.

Their power is already 40% higher than conventional, and extends only from morning (after pipes heat up) to sunset + 6 hours - so there is NO justification without (artificial, assumed, socialist-promoted) greenhouse gas price drivers.

[listenhillary]

Thank you. I don’t live in Arizona, but I had a rough idea about what monthly electricity bills run there.

[AFreeBird]

[Robert A Cook PE]

I agree (partially) with your corrections) but you need to consider peak power calc’s rather than annual calc’s (a stored thermal energy solar plant generates near-max power roughly 1/3 of a day, 1/4 day in the winter) and is useless the rest of the time: we span only 4 time zones so even local-noon peak can’t yield power all the time. So, in your optimistic calc’s requiring 1/10 of AZ, multiply it by 4 and figure out how to stare that energy. 8<)

Assuming that power can actually be sent that far anyway: transmission losses limit electric power to 500 miles (best) to no more than 900 miles. Doesn’t rule out southern plants in “clearer” states to feed the northern cloudy states, but you need to then multiply by another 4 to 8 factor because of cloud cover and rain and snow outside of the benign deserts.

Good thing is the desert location here, and the stored production. But, for every hour used from stored energy at night/early evening each day, you lose 1 hour gaining that energy the next morning. Cycling the “boiler” as it cools each evening kills steel and piping: we may be lucky for this to run 10-12 years without fatigue failure, rather than 25-40 years for a constantly on thermal plant not undergoing 365 heatup cycles a year.

[marktwain]

I would gladly sell my prime desert solar land for $14,700 an acre. Then I would buy some nice land in Alaska for $3000 an acre and retire.

[marktwain]

Because they will not use much water?

[Cyber Liberty]

While we certainly do have lots of sunny days here in AZ, I can't see this as anything but a money pit.

I'm glad it's Arizona Public Service doing it, and not my power company which is Salt River Project. We have much better rates, so much so that living in an APS neighborhood will knock thousands of dollars off the value of your house. Savvy home-buyers have this question at the top of their list of things to ask a Realtor. I won't even look at a house served by APS becaused the electricity bill is consistently more than 15% higher.