Take your PV and shove it

Holy camolee! That's great news!

I've been told I'm pessimistic, so here goes.......I wish the Parent Company was of U.S. domicile. Is it expected that we have to rely on the intelligence of other countries for technology of this scale? I'm not asking to be facetious.

I googled, but couldn't find info, if this is the largest solar park to be constructed in U.S. territory??????

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SSimon @ Jul 26 2007, 10:02 AM) [snapback]485514[/snapback]</div>

Apparently, yes. But if any OTHER country needs consulting on how best to import billions of barrels of oil - we can sell THAT info back to them, or maybe just barter.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ Jul 26 2007, 10:53 AM) [snapback]485449[/snapback]</div>

Chaching!

How about just putting solar parabolics in all of the desert regions and paying the state and the taxpayers a leasing fee, just like they get in Alaska for the oil. It's not like there's a dearth of desert.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jul 26 2007, 12:56 PM) [snapback]485561[/snapback]</div>

Desserts are ecosystems, nonetheless. Sunshine is an important element to the viability of this habitat for the inhabitants. We can't steal all of it and expect the ecosystem to remain healthy.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SSimon @ Jul 26 2007, 01:01 PM) [snapback]485567[/snapback]</div>

Destroying deserts vs destroying the entire earth. Pick your poison. It's like Iraq. There's not good answer.

 

I find this a bit frustrating. We have been building SEGS (Solar Energy Gathering Station) power stations in the mohave desert for 20 years. I personally worked on the control systems for SEGS 7 and 9, way back in <mumble> 1990 or so. Admittedly, SEGS 7 & 9 were only about 80MW plants, but they've been in service for about 15 years with no notice, interest, or fanfare.

Again, the tech was here 20 years ago, and no one would build the plants. Kind of like the EV1 / RAV4 EV crap - they tell us that we don't have the tech, but IT'S A LIE.

We've had SEGS tech for 20 years, yet state senators are telling us that the only way to meet CO2 reduction goals is new nuclear power plants? Am I in a freaking insane asylum?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jul 26 2007, 03:47 PM) [snapback]485672[/snapback]</div>

The alterations we impose on a seemingly isolated ecosystem have consequences that extend well beyond that seemingly isolated ecosystem. Destruction of wetlands and the resulting flooding of neighboring areas come to mind. To witness this cause and affect you can look no further than Louisiana for a great example. Besides, the Global Warming that you're concerned with is the very result of the same poor planning and lack of foresight. It's time we evolve from this short term mind send and start thinking about the possible affects for our future. In the case of destroying deserts, desertification comes to mind. The plant material that's instrumental in securing the sand in one place won't be present without any sun.

 

I think the largest solar farm in the US is located at White Sands, NM. It is part of Fort Bliss, TX. It will be 1GW, 10 SQ Miles.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ Jul 26 2007, 07:34 PM) [snapback]485899[/snapback]</div>

Thankfully, California seems to be smart about that. My frustration comes from the new agenda of using global warming to "green wash" nuclear - a technology which produces on of the most horrific byproducts we've yet come up with.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ Jul 26 2007, 07:34 PM) [snapback]485899[/snapback]</div>

I do understand the difference between base and peak load capacity, but I'm fairly certain that most of our problems are peak load capacity problems. Additionally, it tends to be the oldest, dirtiest plants that are used to generate at peak times - newer, cleaner, combined cycle plants need to warm up, and are less responsive to peak demand. Peak load generation is also more valuable - more $$ to make the plant return investment.

The SEGS stations are profitable, but they have a slightly lower profit margin than LNG turbine plants, and a much lower margin than coal or nuclear. My agravation is that there is a tech out there which meets the need we currently have (peak capacity), and is completely carbon neutral in operation, but no one would build it for 20 years because they would make 2-3 cents less per share.

I say build the hell out of them - build them until peak power becomes cheap power, and tell everyone to wash clothes at noon instead of after six. When our current off peak becomes the place we need generation, start looking into ways of storing and recovering energy. I'm partial to Oak Ridge Lab's HIPES (Hydrogen Intermediate and Peak Electrical System), though I think their plan is proposed exactly back-asswards. Use electrolysis to store peak solar generated power as Hydrogen and Oxygen and their Hydrogen/Oxygen/Water steam cycle generation during off-peak generating times.

Use the tech to make clean generation viable, not to make nuclear plants more profitable.