Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Solar Tower Thread (merged)

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.

Re: Australia's solar tower plan ?

Unread postby strider3700 » Thu 23 Feb 2006, 14:08:22

People are going to have to learn that the days of Massive projects are quickly coming to an end. We won't be building any more 100+ floor buildings, there will be no more dam's that flood as far as the eye can see, there will be no gigawatt sized powerplants.

We simply won't have the energy to attempt these massive centralized projects. Power in the future will be developed locally, either at the site or in a small powerplant run by the community.

When I'm looking for investments I'm looking for small companies that sell directly to households. Solar panels, inverter manufacturers, I'd love to find a small windmill company. Not GE sized 200+ foot tall turbines but small enough to put in your front yard and get a nights worth of lighting out of them.
shame on us, doomed from the start
god have mercy on our dirty little hearts
strider3700
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2865
Joined: Sun 17 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Vancouver Island

Re: Australia's solar tower

Unread postby Jonathan_Hoag » Sat 25 Feb 2006, 13:37:05

dhfenton wrote:My understanding of this is that the technology is very sound; but the cost seems prohibitive.


The technology is not sound, except in the most basic sense of that yes, it can be built, and yes it will produce some electricity.

But with an efficiency of just 2-3% under ideal conditions and given the huge size the plant has to be to get even that efficiency, it is far from being a sound technology.

If you want soalr, you'd be much better off with photovoltaics (expenssive but better efficiency and can be distributed) or concentrated solar thermal (much better efficiency, around 30%)

Concentrated solar thermal would work extremely well in dry, sunny climate wher ethey want to build the solar tower. and actually there was a bit of a bait and switch going on. Originally, German creators of the technology, Schlecih and Bergenmann (www.sbp.de) argued for the solar tower by saying that concentrated solar does not work well in hot but wet climates and geared te development towards those sites.
However, since Enviromission they changed their tune. It is not difficult to see why. Given the low efficiency, having to rely on diffuse light a significant amount of time would decrease output. Plus, because of corrosive effect of humidity operating costs would increase dramatically. But that still does not change the fact that concentrated solar is the much better choice in hot, dry climates like the one in Mildura area.

Perhaps it will resurrect itself if the peak does arrive.


It won't. Other power generation methods are much better.
User avatar
Jonathan_Hoag
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun 30 Jan 2005, 04:00:00

Re: Australia's solar tower plan ?

Unread postby Jonathan_Hoag » Sat 25 Feb 2006, 14:02:14

strider3700 wrote:People are going to have to learn that the days of Massive projects are quickly coming to an end. We won't be building any more 100+ floor buildings, there will be no more dam's that flood as far as the eye can see, there will be no gigawatt sized powerplants.


I hate to disappoint you, but yes, we will continue to build big stuff.
Solar tower is not shit because it is big. It is shit because it is too big for meager output (200 MW). If it was a 2 GW plant it would have been built.
User avatar
Jonathan_Hoag
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun 30 Jan 2005, 04:00:00

Re: Australia's solar tower plan ?

Unread postby ubercynicmeister » Sat 25 Feb 2006, 19:00:34

Hi Jonathon Hoag (you have an unpleasant profession?).

You're right about the "failure" of this project:

Jonathan_Hoag wrote:
strider3700 wrote:People are going to have to learn that the days of Massive projects are quickly coming to an end. We won't be building any more 100+ floor buildings, there will be no more dam's that flood as far as the eye can see, there will be no gigawatt sized powerplants.


I hate to disappoint you, but yes, we will continue to build big stuff.
Solar tower is not shit because it is big. It is shit because it is too big for meager output (200 MW). If it was a 2 GW plant it would have been built.


Yes, exactly - for a massive investment - and let's face it, a 1 km high (0.6 mile) concrete tower in the middle O nowhere would be a huge investment - they would be getting a pitiful return, with electricity priced at 12.3298 cents per kilowatt hour.

Let's assume that they could charge that much (that's the domestic rate and the most expensive) for their entire 200 MW:

200,000 kW x 12.3298 cents = 2,465,960 cents per hour or Aus$24,659.60 per hour.

Number of hours in a year: 24 hours per day x 365.25 days in the year = 1,472,688 hours in a year.

1,472,688 x Aus$24,659.60 = Aus$36,315,897,004.80 income per annum.

That's Aus$36 billion, or about US$26.8 billion per annum. And that's at the highest price that's in the Australian Electricity market...if one remembers that the price can dip as low as merely 2 or 3 cents per kWh, then the above "income " drops considerably: Aus$5,890,752,000 per annum.

That might sound like a lot, but that's only income...it's not profit. The construction loans would have to be paid off. I dunno how much that would come to. Admittedly, the running costs would be very very low, but the whole project would need several billion just to start with, if they are going to build it in the "outback" as they keep stating they are. With such a locale, your income is after you've built every single last bit of infrastructure to get the builders & supplies TO the project site, and the electricity supply lines AWAY from the site, at a very remote location.

Undoubtably, someone will point out that having large columns of fast-rising hot air (such as those emitted from any large concentrations of politicians) is a fine way of generating low-pressure areas, thus generating clouds and rain.

Note: if one were to combine the "solar tower" idea with the "solar collector " idea (using mirrors to concentrate the Sun's light) then they might have a winner.
.
"To Get Rich you have to:

*Get up early;

*Work Hard;

*Strike Oil"

J Paul Getty
User avatar
ubercynicmeister
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 640
Joined: Sun 25 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Hunter Valley, New South Wales, Australia

Re: Australia's solar tower plan ?

Unread postby Aedo » Sun 26 Feb 2006, 21:58:54

ubercynicmeister wrote:Number of hours in a year: 24 hours per day x 365.25 days in the year = 1,472,688 hours in a year.


I thought that in Australia there are only 8,766 hours per year

ubercynicmeister wrote:1,472,688 x Aus$24,659.60 = Aus$36,315,897,004.80 income per annum.


So the maximum potential income is actually 8,766 x Aus$24,659.60 = A$216M pa.

Still makes for a very long payback...
User avatar
Aedo
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 176
Joined: Thu 23 Jun 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Australia's solar tower plan ?

Unread postby rogerhb » Sun 26 Feb 2006, 22:49:32

Aedo wrote:
ubercynicmeister wrote:Number of hours in a year: 24 hours per day x 365.25 days in the year = 1,472,688 hours in a year.


I thought that in Australia there are only 8,766 hours per year


But Australia is so big and has so much sunshine that you can consider that it has 4032 hours in a day :)
"Complex problems have simple, easy to understand, wrong answers." - Henry Louis Mencken
User avatar
rogerhb
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4727
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Smalltown New Zealand

Re: Australia's solar tower plan ?

Unread postby ubercynicmeister » Mon 27 Feb 2006, 18:15:19

Hi Aedo...my apologies...yes, you;re correct.

Aedo wrote:
ubercynicmeister wrote:Number of hours in a year: 24 hours per day x 365.25 days in the year = 1,472,688 hours in a year.


I thought that in Australia there are only 8,766 hours per year

ubercynicmeister wrote:1,472,688 x Aus$24,659.60 = Aus$36,315,897,004.80 income per annum.


Yeah, I dunno...I typed the right figures into the calc...bzzzt...cannot figure out how come I ended up being so darn off (that explains the odd smell)...musta done the usual "keyboard dyslexia" at this end. Many thanks for pointing this out to me.

So the maximum potential income is actually 8,766 x Aus$24,659.60 = A$216M pa.

Still makes for a very long payback...


Indeedy it does. My apologies to all for getting it so darn wrong.
.
"To Get Rich you have to:

*Get up early;

*Work Hard;

*Strike Oil"

J Paul Getty
User avatar
ubercynicmeister
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 640
Joined: Sun 25 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Hunter Valley, New South Wales, Australia

Re: Australia's solar tower plan ?

Unread postby ubercynicmeister » Mon 27 Feb 2006, 18:21:42

rogerhb wrote:
Aedo wrote:
ubercynicmeister wrote:Number of hours in a year: 24 hours per day x 365.25 days in the year = 1,472,688 hours in a year.


I thought that in Australia there are only 8,766 hours per year


But Australia is so big and has so much sunshine that you can consider that it has 4032 hours in a day :)


Well, if one asks anyone in a the modern workplace, the Yuppie Executives all think there are 4032 hours in a day. At least that's what they want thier employees to work.
.
"To Get Rich you have to:

*Get up early;

*Work Hard;

*Strike Oil"

J Paul Getty
User avatar
ubercynicmeister
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 640
Joined: Sun 25 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Hunter Valley, New South Wales, Australia

Re: Australia's solar tower plan ?

Unread postby rogerhb » Mon 27 Feb 2006, 18:25:57

ubercynicmeister wrote:Well, if one asks anyone in a the modern workplace, the Yuppie Executives all think there are 4032 hours in a day. At least that's what they want thier employees to work.


Forget this salary lark, I want an hourly rate!
"Complex problems have simple, easy to understand, wrong answers." - Henry Louis Mencken
User avatar
rogerhb
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4727
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Smalltown New Zealand

Re: Australia's solar tower plan ?

Unread postby ubercynicmeister » Tue 28 Feb 2006, 15:39:26

rogerhb wrote:
ubercynicmeister wrote:Well, if one asks anyone in a the modern workplace, the Yuppie Executives all think there are 4032 hours in a day. At least that's what they want thier employees to work.


Forget this salary lark, I want an hourly rate!


LOL, nice try, but sorry...you are gunna get paid the same if you work for one hour as if you work for 4032 hours...this is called "workplace productivity gains". It also comes under the general heading of "slavery" and "cruel exploitation", but, then, you didn't need me to tell you that.
.
"To Get Rich you have to:

*Get up early;

*Work Hard;

*Strike Oil"

J Paul Getty
User avatar
ubercynicmeister
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 640
Joined: Sun 25 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Hunter Valley, New South Wales, Australia

Really large scale solar becoming available

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Fri 04 Aug 2006, 10:27:22

Well guys,

Here you have an idea of free & cheap SOLAR based electricity (and maybe hydrogen etc) FOR EVER.
No fluffing around photovoltanic crap either...
All of sound mechanical design...

http://www.dailyreckoning.co.uk/article/040820061.html

What do you think about that?
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7342
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Really large scale solar becoming available

Unread postby IslandCrow » Fri 04 Aug 2006, 11:39:35

I liked the idea, when my daughter sent me a write-up about this 3 or so years ago. :)

I noticed that it is still on the drawingboard. I wonder why if it is reported to be cheaper to build than regular power stations.

I also noticed that the report indicated that the size of it was at about the limit of current technology.....maybe people don't want to risk funding something right at the edge of current ability, if it fails it would fail in a great way.

Also building it in the desert would be a good way away from where the population who needs it would be.
We should teach our children the 4-Rs: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle and Rejoice.
User avatar
IslandCrow
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1272
Joined: Mon 12 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Finland

Re: Really large scale solar becoming available

Unread postby Spideykid » Fri 04 Aug 2006, 11:41:17

Nothing new here, I think something like it was built in Spain, only down side how they store the energy for the night time, I like some of the system that use salt to store the excess energy from the day so they can use it during the night.

Plus one has to wonder about the foot print this makes on the land, but I guess that is no worse than the 1000' of stirling engine solar arrays that they are talking about putting in CA.

I guess it's either carbon in the air or using massive amount of land space.
User avatar
Spideykid
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Fri 22 Apr 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Really large scale solar becoming available

Unread postby WisJim » Fri 04 Aug 2006, 13:25:53

The problem with this kind of large system (or any large output energy system) is that it needs to be close to the users of the power, or there can be problems getting the power to the users. In the midwest now, there are windfarms generating lots of cheap electricity in the Dakotas and western Minnesota, but not a good grid connection to the larger cities to the east that want to use this power.

Maybe we will see future industrial sites in the wester states with good wind resources, or where there are long cloudless days for good solar electric output, like the way population centers developed on rivers where there was easy to harness water power in years past.
User avatar
WisJim
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 1286
Joined: Mon 03 Jan 2005, 04:00:00
Location: western Wisconsin

Re: Really large scale solar becoming available

Unread postby Spartan2 » Fri 04 Aug 2006, 18:17:32

To help put things in perspective, world electricity generation in 2004 was 16600 TWh (source) and is projected to grow at a rate of 2% per year. One of these solar towers can produce 1752 GWh/year. So, to produce 1% of the world's electricity in 2004 we would need 95 of these plants.

Assuming that demand grows linearly at 332 TWh per year, we would need 95 of these plants every year just to make half of that growth. That's 95 towers 1 km high surrounded by a collector with a diameter of 7 km and most of them would have to be built in remote areas.
Combined with other renewables, we might be able to close the gap, but this solution alone won't do it.
Spartan2
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed 03 May 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Europa

Re: Really large scale solar becoming available

Unread postby oilfreeandhappy » Sat 05 Aug 2006, 01:53:50

I read about this same concept from a different source:
http://www.pennysleuth.com/issues/08.02.06.html

That's quite a footprint at 25,000 acres. The funnel is made out of plastic pieces. I wonder how it will hold up against heavy winds and very inclement weather.
Earth_Wind_and_Solar
User avatar
oilfreeandhappy
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Sun 29 Jan 2006, 04:00:00
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Re: Really large scale solar becoming available

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Sat 05 Aug 2006, 03:57:35

oilfreeandhappy wrote:I read about this same concept from a different source:
http://www.pennysleuth.com/issues/08.02.06.html

That's quite a footprint at 25,000 acres. The funnel is made out of plastic pieces. I wonder how it will hold up against heavy winds and very inclement weather.


I would gues, it will be some steal/aluminium support structure with plastic "windows" in it.
Something like glass & aluminium skyscrapers.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7342
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Really large scale solar becoming available

Unread postby eric_b » Sat 05 Aug 2006, 09:27:45

This was discussed over a year ago. It's an unproven concept at this point, and there are many reasons to think it may never be viable. I'm not going to enumerate them again, do a search on it.

Likely just a cute investor boondoggle.
User avatar
eric_b
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Fri 14 Jan 2005, 04:00:00
Location: us

Re: Really large scale solar becoming available

Unread postby Spartan2 » Sat 05 Aug 2006, 22:36:48

By that, I mean that a Solar Tower with a tube five times as long isn't five times as powerful. No, it's 4,000 times more powerful.


The solar tower power output is proportional to collector area and tower height. The height of this solar tower is five times that of Manzanares structure and it is 4,000 times more powerful but it also has a collector area 844 times greater.
To substantially increase the power output of the solar tower it is necessary to increase the collector area.

Obviously, the author of this article forgot to take that into consideration.
Spartan2
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed 03 May 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Europa

Re: Really large scale solar becoming available

Unread postby mistel » Sat 05 Aug 2006, 23:35:36

eric_b wrote:
Likely just a cute investor boondoggle.


eric-b has got it right. Both of those sources, "The Daily Reconing" and "The pennysleuth" are financial newsletters published by Agora. I don't believe they are part of a scam, just reporting on new ideas. They have made some really good recommendations in the past, as well as a few dogs.
User avatar
mistel
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 137
Joined: Sun 20 Mar 2005, 04:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests

cron