[yesplease]

All of your points about politics are taken. However, it still does not detract from the fact that this is an economical(at current prices) and scalable solution to the problem at hand.

Yeah... I'm just being a cynic.

Unlike PV technology, we could actually build thousands of square miles of solar thermal energy collectors without breaking the bank or running out of key resources.

Shoot, for the cost of the Iraq war thus far we could've replaced all coal power with solar thermal IIRC.

When embedded into a distributed grid, I don't see why such a solution cannot eventually cover the total energy output currently delivered by petroleum?

Two reasons IMO.
-We don't need, or can afford for that matter, due to current battery costs, the total energy currently delivered by petroleum. We need a small fraction of it for most of it's use, personal transportation.
-Given the long time required for amortization, investors could understandably be worried about the big nano tech boom and big breakthroughs in the cost/kWh ratio of batteries as well as the cost/kWh ratio of solar panels given how expensive Copper is. Since thin film seems to have already taken off as the cheaper alternative, albeit only for bulk purchasers so far, the only thing need to schedule a lot of the grid for recycling IMO is a significant, or a several correspondingly small, breakthroughs in battery cost/kWh.

Peak oil is not about peak energy, it's a peak in liquid fuels used primarily for transportation.

No its n0t u nub,w3,r3 a11 gunn4 d13!11

Gorge, Gorge, Gorge of Olduvai, Watch out for that tree!

[aahala2]

According to EIA reports, there was only one Solar thermal
plant added to the US grid in the last two years. The capacity
was estimated at 64 MW, and from news accounts the cost was
about 240 million. So the cost is high but much lower than
PV.

The costs may or may not come down, but without actually
building more of these, how would you know? If an economic
learning curve is possible, it's only revealed by installation.

[xerces]

Energy storage is one of the key selling points of solar thermal as the article seems to indicate. One reason why PV systems are so expensive is due to the cost of storing the generated electricity in chemically based batteries.

Solar thermal allows for energy storage in the form of heated oil/water/salt within vacuum sealed containers. This is orders of magnitude cheaper and more reliable than battery or nano-capacitor storage technologies.

This solution is just so plain simple that it might actually work.

[yesplease]

This solution is just so plain simple that it might actually work.

It does. There's a plant on the way to Bakersfield, ~100 miles from here, that's been operating for decades IIRC.

[Starvid]

More expensive than the alternatives.

Next please!

[joe1347]

Parabolic solar troughs (concentrated solar power) are projected to produce power at about 13 cents/Kw-Hr. Coal is closer to 5 cents/Kw-Hr (without CO2 sequestration) and unlike solar-thermal can generate power after the sun goes down.

[yesplease]

Parabolic solar troughs (concentrated solar power) are projected to produce power at about 13 cents/Kw-Hr.

According to a 2008 Sandia National Laboratory presentation, costs are projected to drop to 8 to 10 cents per kilowatt hour when capacity exceeds 3,000 MW.

Coal is closer to 5 cents/Kw-Hr (without CO2 sequestration) and unlike solar-thermal can generate power after the sun goes down.

In 1909, H.E. Wilsie added a critical component, a system for storing solar energy for when the sun did not shine. Heat is much easier to store than electricity, a fact that gives CSP a crucial -- maybe the crucial -- advantage over wind and solar photovoltaics.
[...]
The key attribute of CSP is that it generates primary energy in the form of heat, which can be stored 20 to 100 times more cheaply than electricity -- and with far greater efficiency. Commercial projects have already demonstrated that CSP systems can store energy by heating oil or molten salt, which can retain the heat for hours. Ausra and other companies are working on storing the heat directly with water in the tubes, which would significantly lower cost and avoid the need for heat exchangers.

Coal is quite a bit more expensive when externalities are included. It's only cheap if the waste stream can be let into the atmosphere, which results in it's own set of costs, not counting Carbon emissions IIRC.

[yesplease]

That being said, industry doesn't like to turn a cold shoulder to other industry. People dying prematurely from fossil fuel emissions, especially coal, means quite a bit saved in terms of pension and even social security, more money spent on health care, and more Carbon to clean up, and get paid for cleaning up.

[Frank]

Energy storage is one of the key selling points of solar thermal as the article seems to indicate. One reason why PV systems are so expensive is due to the cost of storing the generated electricity in chemically based batteries.

Solar thermal allows for energy storage in the form of heated oil/water/salt within vacuum sealed containers.

Just to correct a possible misperception, energy is only stored temporarily in the working fluid of a CSP system. It is then used to make steam which drives turbines. Energy isn't stored in the traditional sense i.e. for use at some later point in time chosen by someone.

The other unknown (to me at least) is how much market forces are contributing to PV prices. When virtually every panel being made in the world is being sold there's not enough supply to satisfy demand and cause prices to drop. It's true that storage in off-grid type systems is a large component of the cost but the panels themselves have gone up tremendously in the last few years as well. Most PV systems these days are grid-tied w/o batteries and they're still pretty pricey.

[yesplease]

Energy storage is one of the key selling points of solar thermal as the article seems to indicate. One reason why PV systems are so expensive is due to the cost of storing the generated electricity in chemically based batteries.

Solar thermal allows for energy storage in the form of heated oil/water/salt within vacuum sealed containers.

Just to correct a possible misperception, energy is only stored temporarily in the working fluid of a CSP system. It is then used to make steam which drives turbines. Energy isn't stored in the traditional sense i.e. for use at some later point in time chosen by someone.

Heat storage allows a solar thermal plant to produce energy at night or overcast days. The advantage is that the power generation becomes reliable and the utility can sell this higher quality product for higher prices. Also, the utilization of the generator is higher which reduces cost. The general principle is to transfer the heat to a substance which can hold the heat with a high energy density.

That being said, since solar thermal tends to mirror electricity demand via the amount of solar energy received, there isn't much in the way of planned storage since it has to compete with far cheaper off peak sources, as opposed to a conventional CSP plant generation methods that compete with peaker plants that cost much more per kWh.

The PS10 solar power tower stores heat in tanks as pressurized steam at 50 bar and 285C. The steam condenses and flashes back to steam, when pressure is lowered. Storage is for one hour. It is suggested that longer storage is possible, but that has not been proven yet in an existing power plant.

In other words, it's possible, but isn't done due to costs.

[sicophiliac]

Maybe our saving grace will be spiking electricity prices that will eventually start to follow high oil prices? I mean if plug in/electric cars start to come online that will push demand higher vs the already strained supply.. hopefully we could drive up the cost of electricity and make things like solar thermal more economical. Or why not a nice carbon tax on the coal plants to level the playing field. I mean oil prices are up 6 fold in the past 7 years, its not like paying 2-3 times more for electricity is going to kill anybody.

[yesplease]

Maybe our saving grace will be spiking electricity prices that will eventually start to follow high oil prices? I mean if plug in/electric cars start to come online that will push demand higher vs the already strained supply..

Only if we all charge our cars during a one or two hour timer period during peak demand in summer. We have more than enough off-peak load available.

hopefully we could drive up the cost of electricity and make things like solar thermal more economical. Or why not a nice carbon tax on the coal plants to level the playing field. I mean oil prices are up 6 fold in the past 7 years, its not like paying 2-3 times more for electricity is going to kill anybody.

I'm hoping.

[Frank]

Heat storage allows a solar thermal plant to produce energy at night or overcast days. The advantage is that the power generation becomes reliable and the utility can sell this higher quality product for higher prices. Also, the utilization of the generator is higher which reduces cost. The general principle is to transfer the heat to a substance which can hold the heat with a high energy density.

That being said, since solar thermal tends to mirror electricity demand via the amount of solar energy received, there isn't much in the way of planned storage since it has to compete with far cheaper off peak sources, as opposed to a conventional CSP plant generation methods that compete with peaker plants that cost much more per kWh.

The PS10 solar power tower stores heat in tanks as pressurized steam at 50 bar and 285C. The steam condenses and flashes back to steam, when pressure is lowered. Storage is for one hour. It is suggested that longer storage is possible, but that has not been proven yet in an existing power plant.

In other words, it's possible, but isn't done due to costs.

Interesting information - thanks. I don't know why anyone would consider any type of storage in this type of plant: there's no real need and I would imagine that sizing generation equipment for max capability is cheaper than providing storage. As you state, there's cheaper sources for off-peak power and a ready market for whatever they can produce. This is analogous to the grid-tied PV system. There's no real need for batteries except as personal backup in case of localized outages. (Having said this, our PV system is grid-tied and we have batteries. They don't get used much any more but it sure is nice when we do need them!)

[Gerben]

If you can continue to run at peak capacity when the sun is going down (during the late afternoon), you are still at peak prices. And you do not only save on investment on the generator, but also on the required grid capacity expansion.

[Tanada]

If you can continue to run at peak capacity when the sun is going down (during the late afternoon), you are still at peak prices. And you do not only save on investment on the generator, but also on the required grid capacity expansion.

On the other hand the more competing sources you have availible at peak demand the less valuable any individual source becomes and the less money each source can charge in order to sell power. No point in generating it if no-one is buying, so you have to be cost competitive or the market has to be source constrained in order for you to sell.

[vampyregirl]

California based Ausra plans to build a 177 megawatt STE plant for Pacific Gas and Electric. It will be enough to power 120k homes.
STE generators use large mirrors to reflect sunlight onto a water pipe, boiling the water to produce steam to drive turbines. A prototype of the proposed plant has been built.
www.ausra.com
www.popularmechanics.com
For more infromation on this breakthrough technology
Could this new technology eventually make traditional power plants such as coal fired generators obsolete?

[jlw61]

California based Ausra plans to build a 177 megawatt STE plant for Pacific Gas and Electric. It will be enough to power 120k homes.
STE generators use large mirrors to reflect sunlight onto a water pipe, boiling the water to produce steam to drive turbines. A prototype of the proposed plant has been built.
www.ausra.com
www.popularmechanics.com
For more infromation on this breakthrough technology
Could this new technology eventually make traditional power plants such as coal fired generators obsolete?

They work great when the sun shines but nothing at night and cloudy days cut down on their effectiveness. So no, it will not ever replace coal unless we also figure out a way to effectively store large amounts of excess electricity very cheaply.

[IslandCrow]

Myths about Solar Energy

"Solar energy only works in the daytime, and it can't provide the reliable power we need."
Solar thermal power plants can store energy during daylight hours and generate power when it's needed. Ausra's power plants collect the sun's energy as heat; Ausra is developing thermal energy storage systems which can store enough heat to run the power plant for up to 20 hours during dark or cloudy periods....

This and other myths according to the company behind the technology

[joe1347]

Why get cranked up over the fact that the sun goes down at night. Peak usage is clearly during the day when the sun is shining which makes for a perfect fit with solar. When the sun goes down and demand drops, then switch back over to coal, natural gas, hydroelectric, nukes or even some wind. Another appealling aspect of solar thermal is that a large percentage of the installed infrastructure can be shared with a natural gas powered electricity - or more simply. During the day, the sun provides the heat to run the turbines and during the night, you burn natural gas to run the same turbines.

[smallpoxgirl]

There are far better ways to use solar thermal energy. Incorporating passive solar design in homes tops the list. Next in line is solar hot water. The more complicated the design gets, the more expensive and energy intensive it becomes to build and maintain. Corporate types love big these monster projects that they can make big bank off of, but smaller personal systems make way better sense.