The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > A potential breakthrough in harnessing the Sun’s energy > Comments

A potential breakthrough in harnessing the Sun’s energy : Comments

By David Biello, published 13/5/2009

New solar thermal technology overcomes a major challenge - how to store the sun’s heat for use at night or on a rainy day.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
The problem is the rainy week not the rainy day. In that case you probably have to have all these gas fired generators on standby chewing up financing costs even if they are not burning fuel. Another problem is the disproportionate drop in the strength of the winter sun as you move further from the equator. Some say there is an even better way to meet solar energy's best role of meeting summer peak demand and that is by building homes and offices so they don't need air conditioning. Many people think we already have enough transmission lines in the outback without adding any more.

Therefore I wonder if the second surge in solar thermal will fizzle like the first episode. I think it has a niche role not a dominant one and some other form of low carbon but ultra reliable energy is needed.
Posted by Taswegian, Wednesday, 13 May 2009 9:51:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*We used to burn coal and natural gas - now we can use the sun to make steam*

What about using the sun to directly drive air conditioners? It
still annoys me that when its 40deg plus outside, nobody has come
up with a solution for this one and its air conditioners that use
alot of peak load power on hot days.
Posted by Yabby, Wednesday, 13 May 2009 10:29:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Costs were studiously avoided in thes artical.

Why do I get the feeling that we are going to pay more than half the cost of building these monstrosities, then pay twice as much for our power?

I get so sick of all these pies too high in the sky for me to reach.
Posted by Hasbeen, Wednesday, 13 May 2009 10:37:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
quote from article<<The sun bathes the Earth with an average of 6 kilowatt-hours of power per square metre over the course of a day>>

ok so at a guess..the billions of squaremeters that comprise the earth..produce more energy in one day...[THAN ALL THE FOSSIL FUELS USED IN A YEAR]

cant we see the con about..manmade global warming..is simply revealed by the simple facts..used to justify building a 'renewable'economy based on a tax ...based on the lie of carbon e-mission's being a polutant?

see the sun reveals it is doing the warming

see that if a few solar energy collectors can replace all mans energy polutions...[the petro/coal-polutions are essentially of NULL AFFECT[excess heat energy simply escapes into space]...just like it allways has

remember when we had global cooling [only a few decades ago;..when we had clouds of polution keeping the heat out...we were getting global COOLING

ever since the clean air act..[MORE heat gets in because the clouds arnt REFLECTing it away]...why can we realise we are being conned

EVERYDAY..the sun puts in more energy..than a year of coal/petro based energy usage..ITS ABOUT GETTING IN THE NEW BUBBLE[and the new global tax]

yes its a great idea catching the energy from the sun..[but the premise that heralds its excuse is faulse]..

they seek to give us a new tax..so industry can create ever more polutions..[and they can charge us double for energy..on top of the tax]...wake up people

this was planned for for generations..[the new tax on carbon]
but its still based on a lie
Posted by one under god, Wednesday, 13 May 2009 11:06:42 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There are a number of problems with all forms of alternative energy and thermal power is no different. No matter what anyone thinks, fossil fuels will run out and we can't keep pumping coal gas into the atmosphere without adverse effects on the planet, so we have to find solutions.

I met a bloke in sth east Tasmania who has a Stirling engine generating system which is powered by a small solar furnace, he's one of those old engine fanatics and set it up as a joke. But it worked so well he uses it to power his house along with his wind generator and solar cells. I did read they were going to build a big one in West NSW, but haven't heard about it for a year or so.

The biggest problem is the elite desperately want to keep power generation in the hands of corporations, who rely upon single point generation and distribution, requiring huge amounts of infrastructure and wastage. What we need is combinations of energy generations suited for each individual location. Small towns can generate power by various methods and use the excess to power local industry cheaper and more reliable than single point origin, long distance wired systems.

Already we've seen what single point control does when much of Sydney shut down, the time will come when the entire grid collapses, then we will see real problems.
Posted by stormbay, Wednesday, 13 May 2009 11:19:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Systems with parabolic mirror array which heats central tubes containing oil or salts or whatever are hardly new. So have the developers got it to the point where these systems may actually be of use? If so we would have to see a lot more detail in the article about output over time and how much energy was stored for use at night or on cloudy days and so on. As other commentators have noted, the article avoids any mention of costs - a sure sign that this form of energy is prohibitively expensive. As is now widely known a lot of alternative energy projects - particularly wind turbuines - are little more than expensive symbols put up to make it look as if the government is doing something. Let us not reject the idea but - rather than "oh wow" over another expensive project - call for more of the details that actually matter.
Posted by Curmudgeon, Wednesday, 13 May 2009 11:49:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Isn't it amazing how all the knockers come out of the woodwoek, any time an article such as this appears. Taswegian for instance. They are not going to build these power stations in areas where there is likely to be a week of cloudy weather. Hasbeen, if you read the article in its entirety you will see a price of 13 cents per Kilowatt-hour mentioned. One-under-god, one of these days our resources of coal will run out.

The carbon sequestering programs that successive Australian governments seem to be wedded to won't be worth a hill of beans when that happens. It is a pity that our great treasurer didn't give a bit more attention to infrastructure which addresses the alternative energy problems.

David
Posted by VK3AUU, Wednesday, 13 May 2009 11:49:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I thought this was On Line Opinion, David, not On Line Agreement, with no questioning or contradictory comments and a dash of censorship - my bad. (sorry to be sarcastic, but complaining that there are "knockers" just seems trite)

"They are not going to build these power stations in areas where there is likely to be a week of cloudy weather." what, so this is a special class of power generation for rare places on the planet, that should sell well. Can I set up a company, government funded of course, to find places where there is never a week of cloud cover.

I think we should continue to look for solutions to power generation, for future Australians, but at the moment we have lots of time, and coal to burn so to speak - and we will of course. If no reasonable solution presents itself, we will not shut down our society or our children's futures to go with some half working system.

Some say we should ramp up the pollution so that we deflect more of the sun's energy with micro particles and thus cool the earth, others say differently.
Posted by rpg, Wednesday, 13 May 2009 12:12:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A follow-up from an earlier comment on costs.

This type of power is in the ballpark for electricity prices.

The government funding is for new solar plants that produce coal plant scale power - say 500 to 2000MW. Abengoa Solar, a leading solar power company currently constructing solar plants worldwide, put the cost of a 300MW plant at 1.2 billion euros in 2007. In 2009, the Arizona state government announced a 200MW plant for 1 billion US dollars.

References and background on actual electricity costs <a href="http://greenmodesustainabilitydevelopments.blogspot.com/2009/05/big-solar-for-oz.html">here</a>.
Posted by Simon D, Wednesday, 13 May 2009 1:34:10 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Researchers at the German Aerospace Center have estimated that 16,000 square kilometres of solar thermal power plants in North Africa - paired with a new infrastructure of high-voltage, direct-current transmission lines - could provide enough electricity for all of Europe"

Wow! only 16,000 square km! Pity that such an enormous structure has never been built in the history of humankind. How much metal would this require? What are the embodied energy costs? How are you going to keep all those mirrors clean?

Engineers do these calculations and then open their mouths without thinking. This is the mentality of people born into an energy-abundant world who do not really comprehend the scale of what they are proposing. Since we are now in an age of energy decline this sort of project is simply impossible.
Posted by michael_in_adelaide, Wednesday, 13 May 2009 5:14:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Gazing into my crystal ball, I predict the following headlines...

"Green protests after endangered eagle flies into solar oven. 'Tragic, but delicious', says Chief Engineer."

"Dozens maimed by exploding superheated salts. Nuclear Energy Association sends condolences."

"Use of fertilisers for solar heating causes massive food shortages. 'Stop the death rays!', says NASA head."
Posted by Jon J, Wednesday, 13 May 2009 5:41:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The Euro dreamers who think an underwater cable to a massive solar plant in North Africa is a good idea should take a reality check. First they should ask why the 2008 Dakar car rally was cancelled
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Dakar_Rally
Second they should ask why things went back to front in the Basslink cable joining Tasmania to the mainland. Bulk hydro power was supposed to be exported for just a smidgin of coal fired electricity imported. Well it seemed like a good idea at the time.

If they build the Europe to North Africa project the Moroccans will end up just occasionally warming their toes on electricity made from British coal. That's because the cable will be sabotaged on a regular basis and the coal will still be cheaper than solar.
Posted by Taswegian, Wednesday, 13 May 2009 6:14:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dave. The knockers will attack any re-newables right up until their house is powered by them. You cannot blame them for being deluded as there is significant effort going into misinformation.
Stormbay has it right: Corporations are desperately trying to keep centralised power generation and the "energy market" going.
Energy retailing is currently a loss making activity. Most of the players are overseas investors who do not want to have to replace their ancient infrastructure that they paid so much for. Once the government restrictions on price increases lapse, they will start getting their profits.
Most of this infrastructure is about cross subsidising. Households pay for the cheap energy of Alcoa, Holden, Ford, and most other heavy industry. Of course the taxpayers actually paid for most of the infrastructure that was privatised decades ago. What the corporate scrooge politicians don't realise is that it is more important to have real energy infrastructure than 6 profitable banks that require billions in propping up. The cost is similar. I'd rather my taxes went to new solar arrays in north western Victoria (Taswegan, we'll never build them in your neck of the woods. Deserts generally don't have cloudy weeks!)
Folks the analysis has been done and the moneys are starting to flow. All we ask is that Australia is not held back by the oligarchs and cynics. We've given up on actually being innovative world leaders, but can I'm hoping we can drop the dark ages mentality.
BTW. Anyone who suggests nuclear has a big issue: without military funding it is *way* too expensive. No one has actually cleaned one up yet so the hidden cost's are *unknown*. The knowns are already too expensive now. (Except for possible future tech which are not as advanced as solar) Coupled with it's other problems and nuclear just doesn't cut it. Solar thermal, geothermal, wave, tide, wind and local (every house) solar on a modern network is the solution. Recreating the current 20th century model is not going to work going forward.
Posted by Ozandy, Thursday, 14 May 2009 12:13:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ozandy,
I think you're pretty close to the money.
What a number of people seem to miss is the suggestion that the energy crisis will only be solved by niche market technology as there are several different types of solar technology and for different sites the need for one such a large installation is merely theoretical.The solution will eventually be a mix and corporations will exist as exotic switch controllers.

All
My frustration with some of the comments is that they still think in terms of magic bullet 'one size fits no-one' mentality. No one is saying least of all the article that one technology is the answer.
The article talks about at least 4 different technologies and mentions different sites needing different application(s). Nor does there need to be a concentrated humongous wind farm there are at least 5 different technologies there. Then battery storage is improving all the time. To implement all these different technologies there will be a myriad of commercial ops. and squillions of jobs.
Neither will it cause a crash of society as we know it.

Taswegain
Perhaps hydro will be used in some places. Nor does the array cables need to be in hostile territory anymore than Oil is today. Besides Africa is a big place Morocco is not the only option
Posted by examinator, Thursday, 14 May 2009 12:44:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Reducing the use of fossil fuels is a gradual process, the end goal being their replacement. It seems very likely that solar energy will become increasingly important in this process, particularly in countries which are largely dependent on use of fossil fuels and have no real alternative for generating electricity. However, technology has some way to go before this happens.

The need is for base load power – available 24 x 7 x 365 at prices which are competitive with electricity generated from fossil fuel. Solar can achieve this, but only once the problem of storage has been overcome: Storage of heat and storage of electricity. Or there is significant improvement in the efficiency of photovoltaic cells. Can we discount the latter in the short to medium term? Probably.

That leaves us with the storage problems to solve and as Mr Bielow notes, significant improvements are being made in the storage of heat. These need to progress a lot further before capital and operating costs will reduce generating costs to a level that is competitive with coal. The price of rushing into solar, at least in Australia, is paying more for electricity.

The storage of electricity in the grid itself and improved management of the grid is not an adequate solution to overcoming the problems associated with reduced solar power generation due to lack of sunlight. Better ways of storage are needed and work on this problem has long been underway and at last is showing promising signs. CSIRO is undertaking work on a supercapacitor-battery hybrid which has exciting possibilities and may prove very important. But they are not there yet.

Present costs of generating electricity per MWh are coal $40, wind $60, nuclear $65, geothermal $65, solar-thermal $80, and Solar-voltaic $105. It should be noted that coal emit CO2 and will therefore be required to purchase emission permits which would increase generating costs of about $70/MWh. At least it would, if Government charged coal users for emission licences – something it will not do since they correctly believe to do so would threaten the future of the coal industry.
Posted by Mike Pope, Sunday, 17 May 2009 3:45:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mike Pope .... coninued

The next best alternatives in Australia are wind and geothermal. Wind makes a useful contribution but like solar can not supply base load power. Geothermal can produce base load power, produces very little at present but has the potential to meet national needs. Solar-thermal is simply too expensive at present but, as technology improves, the price will come down and may become competitive with alternatives to fossil fuels.

The advantage of solar technology (probably fleeting) is that it is better understood and applied than is geothermal but, once better developed and applied, geothermal will make life difficult for solar-thermal even if storage problems are dealt with quicker. They are not a problem for geothermal, at present the only renewable source of base load.

Mr Bielow raises a number of interesting issues. He notes that transmission of electricity is most efficiently handled as DC, not the AC system now in use. He feels that existing fossil fuelled power stations could and should reduce fossil fuel consumption by using seam produced from solar energy as a supplement. He is right on both issues. But both have yet to occur and seem unlikely to do so anytime soon.
Posted by Mike Pope, Sunday, 17 May 2009 3:49:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As others have said, whenever these reviews of solar technology are published, all kinds of weird objections surface and the whole idea of a blog like this descends into a mish mash.

Bielow's story was a good summary. True he doesn't get detailed about costs and that's partly because they are not firmed, or they a commercial in confidence.

I know David Mills pretty well and can vouch for the fact that he does not do things that do not make financial sense. He left Australia and established AUSRA in California because he was entrusted with large investment dollars. Since he left, AUSRA have taken a different tack and decided to reduce the size of plants and service an industrial market rather than the grid, although I understand they will still build the 177MW plant for PG&E. The point is that this company like Abengoa and others are in the business of building solar thermal plants. Nothing more nothing less. They find themselves in places on the planet where governments smooth the way.

If such plants are built in the sun belt to supply electricity to the north then so be it, HVDC cabling is not rocket science and fully operational. To talk about sabotage is just irrelevant.

The Australian situation? The government is sidelining. As Mills said to me last October, all they (AUSRA, and Abengoa and others) need is a form of loan guarantee from government gives the imnprimatur the the industry needs - just watch it grow. The government isn't taking so much of a risk.
Posted by renew, Monday, 18 May 2009 11:56:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As the other "knockers" have mentioned, this is not a huge break through, but it is a significant improvement. The technology we are looking for will take decades of engineering and production improvements, as has occurred for existing generation equipment, motor cars etc.

I think we may very well get there in the end, but I get irritated whenever a small advance is trumpeted as the "the solution has been found, and we should soon scrap all fossil fuels".
Posted by Shadow Minister, Wednesday, 20 May 2009 12:50:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
dear/shadow..[the break-through's..have long been suppressed]

items like the joe/fuel-cell are proven teqnologies..[in the 30's there was a simple carburetor..that made water into hydrogen,..made from bakalite,..with anodes and cathods..[even a float to regulate water level...it turned water into its combustable parts..read popular mechanics..[but..that would take away the whole petro economy]

i feel none the less..we could pay a tax on the teqnology..or rent it..[to underwrite the current gross/income..as a guarenteed return to the investors in those indusytries..[in return for converting the cars from petro to hydrogen]..

ie make the damm carbureta's and we will lease them,..the lease-fees goes to compensate the industry..that from fear/greed has put the whole globe at risk

ditto the coal-industry..[re magnetic engines driving the electricity genorators]...ie magnets's..used to generate powwer..instead of coal,

the price will be/could be legislated to a reasonable return for say 15 years..then gradually reduce to its real free-energy[plus]price.., as our generators are powered by magnetic drive instead of steam

ITS ALL PROVEN TEQNOLOGY..

people have died/been bankrupted,ridiculed/murdered to bring these and many more alternatives to the people..go read the suppressed patents..[but because its free..industry has killed to suppress it from the CONsumer...

we can no longer avoid the inevitable of keping this consumer based cash cow..ignorant about free enmergy..[solar and wind is huge to keep the current mega monopoly in control

the proposed cash-grab of carbon tax[via humongous lies ,deciets and deceptions..to the allready over burdoned pay as you earn[or buy]..tax-payers..must not be allowed its fulfillment[

how much these elite people want to control and how much money is enough?..[if and when society eventually bleeds dry]..what then when their wealth evaprates[inflates] into nothing[soon inflation will create ever more millionare peons[when a few million barly buys a loaf of bread

we need to wake up and see monopoly of power is absolute..ans seemingly headed for a bad end..[if it cant be reasoned with..[it must be nationalised..[ditto,..medicine,law..education

why sickness and energy are given to multinational big businness for ever more gross peoffits..is an absurdity..[only allowed because the media serves the same vile cartel of elites..thinking to rule the world with fear and lies
Posted by one under god, Wednesday, 20 May 2009 2:57:02 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This sort of technology seems to be exactly the sort of thing Australia should be investing in, rather than flushing money away on dodgy carbon trading for no useful return.

Some years back, I did some work for a company planning a solar convection tower to be built near Mildura - does anyone know what's become of that project?

One would think it would have been a showcase project.
Posted by Clownfish, Wednesday, 20 May 2009 3:45:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy