Solar Thermal – Ausra Sold! – More Discussion

February 12, 2010

PhotobucketMore on my coversation with John Hugo on solar thermal, who writes:

Craig: I agree, could not have said it better re: nukes.

Re: the capital intensity of solar thermal, I don’t have a cost estimate on the power block from them and turbine procurement appears to be a problem according to them. But the cost of the mirrors etc. is $99 million for 50 MW pls the power block costs. This compares to $4/watt for PV, or $200 million.

Their system also allows for a gas assist that can run after the sun goes down or during low sun periods. That can add another 25% to capacity and which has the fuel costs of gas, but that’s the same as other gas systems in place now. Better than coal or nukes?

To which I replied:

Dr. Mills, Ausra’s founder, declined to talk (to me, at least) about the cost per Watt, even though I fairly well grilled him on the subject. Perhaps he was just being coy, but according to what he said, the price of steel is incredibly important in making this determination, and that this fluctuates greatly.

Personally, here is what I suspect. An extremely important aspect to keep in mind is that, unlike say wind, the efficiencies of solar thermal are improving every month. As you’ll see in my book’s chapter on the subject (scheduled to be published in March), there are four essentially different technologies here. Dr. Mills declined to say too much about exactly what he’s doing, but it was clear that he was pretty excited by it. The only hint he gave me was that it had to do with bringing a high-temperature (thus high-efficiency, per the principles of thermodynamics) solution to a technology that had previously been thought of as low-temperature.

I’m quite confident that Dr. Mills and his colleagues will be continue to be extremely active in the business; his passion for it is obviously sincere. And I, for one, believe he’s barking up the right tree in terms of a true and comprehensive solution for the world’s energy needs.

By Craig Shields | Posted in Solar Thermal | Tagged , , | Comments (0)

Solar Thermal Leader Ausra — Sold!

February 11, 2010

PhotobucketI’m sure many readers are aware of the incredible development in solar thermal / CSP (concentrated solar power). French energy giant Areva, which has a large nuclear portfolio, bought Ausra, and says it will use the acquisition to become “the world leader in concentrated solar power.” Here is a discussion I just had with my colleague John Hugo:

John writes:

It’s interesting that they were able to sell with little installed base and no real history of operation. The water cooling operation uses quite a bit of water and the dry version still uses water but much less and output is reduced. They have good people but they are not professional salespeople. …. I think it’s a hedge vs. nuclear which I don’t think will cut it due to the storage issue which has not been solved.

But despite recent political support re: nuclear why do it if you can do solar at less cost?

… and I reply

John:

Yes, this is quite a development, for sure. Here’s my take for what it’s worth:

CSP is extremely capital intensive. Projects require huge piles of cash, and happen only when the underwriting company is strong enough to present a meaningful warranty. I happen to know (based on my interview with the company’s founder David Mills) that Ausra was hungry to partner with (or, apparently, sell to) a company that could make all this happen.

Everything else you write about CSP is correct, if perhaps overstated. It DOES use water for cooling, and there IS a storage issue. There’s also a transmission issue, as the power is generated in the desert. But IMO, these are challenges that can be — and are being — overcome. First and most obviously, there is a good correlation between the sun’s shining and human activity. But more importantly, advancements that are being made constantly in smart grid, high voltage DC, and molten salt energy storage, in my mind at least, make CSP the top bet for our energy future.

On the other hand, I believe that there is no future whatsoever for the nuclear industry. I know there are people who disagree (and that I’ll be hearing from them any minute). But to me, no amount of money and the lobbying, subterfuge, and disinformation it buys will get that industry past the incredible dangers, outrageous costs overruns, and decade-long delays that are intrinsic to the very nature of what they do.

With all their financial (and thus political) strength, I don’t doubt that you’ll continue to hear claptrap about supporting nuclear. There is a word for this: corruption; it’s a regrettable but deeply entrenched part of our daily lives — whether we recognize it or not. But having said this, I very much doubt that you’ll live to see another new nuke actually put into operation in the US.

By Craig Shields | Posted in Solar Thermal | Tagged , , , , | Comments (7)

Solar Thermal Pioneer – Dr. David Mills

January 4, 2010

PhotobucketDr. David Mills, founder and chief scientist of solar thermal leader Ausra, was generous enough with his time to help me with the chapter on concentrated solar power in my upcoming book on renewables. I happened to be watching this lecture he gave recently in his homeland (Australia) which I heartily recommend. It is entirely non-technical and accessible to anyone, while providing a worthy history of renewable energy – as well as a solid, well-reasoned direction for the future.

In it, he speaks about the safety and overall viability of nuclear energy, and provides essentially the same one that I always do: we already have a huge fusion reactor with an endless supply of fuel, no problems with operational safety, no million-year hazard associated with storing spent fuel, and no open invitations for terrorists or rogue states to attack, or use the technology to build bombs. It’s called the sun. Best of all, it’s separated from the Earth’s surface by a distance of 93 million miles – which is perfect; it’s far enough away to be safe, while close enough to provide us with more than enough clear power — insofar as we need to harvest only one out of every 6000 photons that is received at the Earth’s surface in order to address all the needs of all 7 billion of us.

This may sound like a flippant answer, but I don’t believe it to be. The cost of reaping this power is coming down every month. If we retain our focus on perfecting a few technologies for capturing that energy; we’ll be there very shortly. I urge readers to learn about solar thermal; I know you’ll share in my optimism.

By Craig Shields | Posted in Solar Thermal | Tagged , , , , | Comments (3)

Molten Salt Energy Storage

November 23, 2009

PhotobucketPeter Buzzard comments on my post “Molten Salt Energy Storage” as follows:

“That was an interesting article. I didn’t know a combined cycle could be made to be that efficient… What about simply heating water with molten salt in a heat exchanger, and running that through a turbine, then recovering left over heat from the condensate? I know that all conventional plants can only convert 30 to 33% of the thermal energy to electric. In fact each of my units produce about 3600MW Thermal but we only generate about 1200MW. Of course these were built between 1971 and 1986, but even the new nukes are only claiming a maximum of 36% efficiency.”

This molten salt technology is actually far simpler that what you’re describing, and the efficiency of the storage itself is huge – up to 99%, according to this report by Sandia Laboratories. Obviously, the process of concentrating the sunlight, generating steam, turning the turbine, etc. is far less efficient, but the issue doesn’t lie with the storage medium/system.

Overall, solar thermal has about 17% total conversion efficiency in terms of incident solar energy to electricity. Of course, the industry is working hard to improve this, but still, a solar thermal farm that would occupy 3% of the Moroccan desert would generate more than enough power for the entire continent of Europe. This really IS the answer, it seems to me.

By Craig Shields | Posted in Solar Thermal | Tagged , , | Comments (0)

Renewables and Natural Ecosystems

November 22, 2009

PhotobucketYesterday’s guest blogger wrote:

The idea of collecting solar energy from the upper surfaces of already constructed buildings seems like the least intrusive and most efficient method to utilized light, in my opinion. It doesn’t shade the natural ecosystem and collects/distributes the energy where humans need it.

This is true. A few additional comments:

Obviously, the migration to renewables will be a blend of public and private projects. It’s good to see solar installations on a piecemeal basis on residential and commercial buildings. But clearly we need a real game-changer, and that has to happen at the utility level. And here, PV is one of many competing alternative energy technologies. As I’ve written often, I advocate large solar thermal farms in the southwestern deserts.

This brings me to my other point: the natural ecosystem. With very few (perhaps no) exceptions, generating renewable energy comes at the price of some level of violence to the local environment. In my conversation with Brian Rutledge of the Audubon Society, I ignored this; I made the mistake of referring to proposed solar thermal sites as “desert wastelands,” and Brian broke in: “They’re deserts, but they’re not wastelands,” he pointed out. Good point; I stand corrected.

I nevertheless contend that paying a certain well-defined ecological price for turning off fossil fuel and nuclear plants is a deal that we simply must make without shame or compunction. If we’re speeding the extinction of a rare desert lizard in the process of reverting the rise of greenhouse gasses and the terrible consequences to every species on earth that are very probably tied to this phenomenon, it strikes me as the bargain of the century. 

I’m not sure how anyone could object to this.  The only proviso here, I would think, would be that that such decisions be made on a fair and measured basis.  We need to study the issue carefully and pull the trigger only when we’re sure we’re doing the least possble damage.

By Craig Shields | Posted in Solar Thermal | Tagged , | Comments (0)

Siemens Buys Solel, Signals Commitment to Solar Thermal

October 17, 2009

PhotobucketI was delighted to see Siemens’ recent acquisition of Israel-based Solel Solar Systems for US$418 million.  To me, this again signals mega-corporations’ commitment to the concentrating solar thermal power (CSP) market. René Umlauft, CEO of Siemen’s Renewable Division remarked in an interview, “The market for solar thermal energy is highly promising, and vigorous growth is expected to continue for Solel.”

The German technology behemoth appears to be pursing a strategy of vertical integration, building or buying companies that provide troughs, collectors, and other components required for solar thermal deployment.

As I’ve often pointed out, solar thermal is not right for every geography; if you’re Iceland, you’re going to have to come up with a different plan if you want renewables. But a huge percentage of the Earth’s population lives in areas that would be conveniently served by large, hot, and otherwise unusable land masses, like the deserts of the southwestern US. Likewise, Siemens recognizes that solar thermal power production is most efficient in the sunbelt, and predicts significant development in the Middle East and Chile.

By Craig Shields | Posted in Solar Thermal | Tagged , , | Comments (0)

Solar Thermal – My Talk with Bruce Allen

September 22, 2009

Photobucket
I just spoke with my friend Bruce Allen, one of the world’s top experts in solar energy. I thought I’d publish a brief excerpt of the transcript of our conversation, insofar as readers may find it interesting.

Craig: Is it just my imagination, or do I see a great deal of media coverage on the subject of solar thermal? It looks like the world is starting to really latch onto this.

Bruce: You betcha! The message is getting through. I gave a lecture the other day at the Southwestern School of Law in Los Angeles on solar, molten salt, all the stuff in my book — it was really well attended. The problem is that there is going to be a crunch, though.

Craig: Yes, I’m concerned that this won’t happen without top-down leadership, since without it, there is no incentive a business environment that lives on artificially cheap energy.

Bruce: Right. California has mandated that 33% of its energy come from renewables by 2020. That came from (California governor Arnold) Schwarzenegger, but the legislature didn’t pass the measure AB32 that addressed this topic, so it’s an executive order only. If (ex-CEO of EBay) Meg Whitman wins next year, she’s likely to rescind it. She’s a moderately conservative Republican, and she’s all about job creation in the private sector. That means we can’t have restrictive legislation that continues to force jobs out of the state.

She has a very well reasoned platform by the way, focused only on three fundamental: jobs, cost-cutting, and education. She’s a sharp cookie; I had breakfast with her the other day.

Craig: Well, I don’t want to sound holier-than-thou, but if I were a responsible public servant, I’d like to think that I’d be looking a little beyond my state borders. For a governor to say I want jobs, but I don’t care about the environment sounds pretty short-sighted and insular. Of course, I’m sure that there are governors of other states whose positions are totally outrageoups. In West Virginia and Kentucky, it’s coal, baby. We mine it, we burn it, you die from it. We’re old money, old politics, and guess what? We really don’t care.

Bruce: Come on Craig, be realistic. Maybe you have a point about West Virginia, but you can’t expect the state of California to commit economic suicide. The states need to harmonize. Nevada and Arizona need to ensure that their restrictions are in keeping with ours so there isn’t a mass exodus of jobs.

Craig: I guess you’re right. But how likely is that? It brings me back to what you and I both see as a defect in the Constitution: states’ rights. Narrow-minded, get me re-elected politics as usual just creates never-ending corruption. That’s how we wound up with corn ethanol – driven by a few powerful senators from the corn-belt who cared not one whit for the good of anyone outside his state.

And if that weren’t bad enough, it’s too bad about falling prices of fossil fuels; that’s not pushing in a positive direction here, is it? What would you say are the basic pressures?

Bruce: The recession has reduced demand, and technology has increased supply – especially of natural gas. We’ve ramped up enormous new supplies with ultra deep-well drilling into the shale down there — the techniques fracture the shale; there are huge new discoveries. With natural gas at $3 per 1000 cubic feet, it’s really hard to justify renewables on a cost basis.

Here’s something else that will throw a huge curve at all this, though. It’s Israel and Iran. The way I see it, (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin) Netanyahu told Obama, “you have until December.” You may wake up one day in December to the news that Israel is taking out Iran – or at least part of it. Wait until you see what happens to world oil prices when that happens.

Craig: Yikes. Good speaking with you, Bruce. Please keep me updated, will you?

Bruce: Of course.

By Craig Shields | Posted in Solar Thermal | Tagged , , | Comments (3)