Ausra: Solar Power Around the Clock, Enough for 90% of U.S. Grid
by Michael Graham Richard, Gatineau, Canada on 03.19.08
Nobody can fault Ausra for lack of ambition. The solar power-plant maker has released a peer-reviewed paper claiming that solar-thermal electricity could power 90% of the US grid, with enough left over for plug-in hybrid cars. "The company estimates that such a changeover would eliminate 40 percent of the country's greenhouse gas emissions with a land footprint of 9,600 square miles, about the size of Vermont".
"How can that be?", you ask. "Isn't solar power only available when the sun shines?"
The way Ausra's technology works is that mobile reflectors concentrate sun light on pipes. Water goes through them and is heated up enough to produce high pressure steam, which then turns a turbine to generate electricity. The twist is that they also store enough hot water to keep going around the clock, or increase production on demand.
There's an animated version of the picture above.
And if the quote about "the size of Vermont" in the intro scared you, know that it would represent "less than 1% of America's deserts, less land than currently in use in the U.S. for coal mines, and a tiny fraction of the land currently in agricultural use."
Ausra says it can generate electricity for 10 cents a kilowatt hour, which is close to the cost of natural gas, and it expects the price to drop even further. The company has received a lot of attention because of its compact linear Fresnel-reflector technology, and because it lined up two big-name VCs early: Vinod Khosla and Kleiner Perkins, where Al Gore is a partner. It's received $43 million in venture capital, and an additional $30 million at least in venture debt. It's planning a $100 million-to-150 million funding round later this year.
You can read Ausra's study here (pdf).
We're definitely excited about solar-thermal. Right now it has higher efficiency than photovoltaic panels (PVs) (20-40% vs 15-22%) and its price is still coming down relatively fast. That's the important thing: To make it cheaper than coal.
We don't know which approach will succeed - Ausra's or another - but we're glad a lot of R&D and competition is going on in the field. That's the best way to move forward.
::Ausra Official Site, ::Solar Company Says Its Tech Can Power 90 Percent of Grid and Cars
See also: ::Torresol to Build 3 Solar Thermal Power Plants in Spain for $1.24 Billion, ::Solar Thermal Power: Not Forgotten, ::Australian Firm Presents Solar Thermal Storage Concept, ::Ontario Gets 407 Megawatts of Solar Power Contracts, Originally Expected 88 Megawatts
wow, this is impressive. seems like a relatively simple idea. one thing I've always hated about pv panels is the chemicals used in the production/dismantling of them. this sounds like it's just mirrors, pipes, water, and turbines.
on the flipside, pv panels are great because they can be used virtually everywhere. I can't see something like this occupying rooftops.
Very nice, this could be competition to Hydro-Electricity and Wind power. I think that wind turbines are very ugly to see and hydro power destroys vast areas of land. So this could be the future.
It isn't lack of good ideas, it is politicians and lobbyists killing them. We all could live in paradise, but we will live in a bladerunner/neuromacer style world, a paradise for few, a hell for all the others.
The simple ideas always turn out to be the ones that work, and this is simple beyond belief. Good luck to them!
Does this type of tech require a reservior for its water supply? Does he water return to its source at a safe temp? does it evaporate?
"Does this type of tech require a reservior for its water supply? Does he water return to its source at a safe temp? does it evaporate?"
Seems like a closed system. I see no reason why it should be open.
Definitely a closed loop system, with minimal losses of water due to leaks.
Its just a matter of time before a small country or state will do something like this, demonstrating that it can be done, and for a reaonable cost.
yeah, I imagine once the steam fires through the turbines it cools into liquid form again and back into the cycle. Running the water underground could capture the natural geothermal cooling properties instead of using artificial coolants.
This is one of my favorite technologies. They always produce peak power during peak demand. As someone said above, it isn't the money, because an investment is just that, an investment in the future. The problem is with the status quo. They would rather wage dirty oil wars and build strip malls than invest in the future.
It is a closed system. Some plants of this type use other fluids than water.
One thing that has impacted the cost of such plants is that the skilled labor for pipefitting for the circulation system is expensive and in short supply.
To really be effective, such a scheme needs to be part of a rational strategy: electrified public transport, smart grid, localized food systems, energy efficient buildings and retrofits, LED lighting, and so on. The Transition Towns strategy, in fine.
The difficulty is that people who see in all this, and are horrified to contemplate, a resurgence of socialism/communism are sitting on most of the boards and committees where the political and financial power is, and will strangle the process if they can.
Nothing new here; this was put out to draw attention back to solar thermal because everything else has been getting hype. This information as been known for decades. Steam power is the basis upon coal, gas, nukes work. The biggest differences have been in the heat storage methods and the concentrator designs.
They almost always involve 2 liquids: heat transfer and water for steam. I do not know why a large system would use water for transfer since it is closed loop and there are better more costly methods (work better therefore paying off in the long run.) It is possible to have roof mounted concentrators that generate temps required; you don't have to use their designs.
Building heating/cooling is #1 not electrical, not cars; we need more attention paid to solar thermal heating. Put the refrigerator/air conditioners into a thermal system and you then cut down 2 big electricity users.
John,
there's niotthing new in the principle - that I think we all know - but the details of the implementation make a difference, and it's cool to see one more company trying to make it work, bring down costs, etc.
Actually seems like a good idea. Photo electric cells will suffer from shortages of key resources required to build them. This seems not to have that problem.
Couple of issues: where would this thing (or things?) be located, and how would the electricity it produced be shipped? If it's built in New Mexico or one of the other western/desert states, then power-line efficiencies will kill it if you try to sell the power in New England.
Another issue is availability of sunlight. Even if it has enough excess capacity to generate electricity all night, that still depends on sunny days, and even deserts have the occasional overcast or sand storm (which can damage the panels presumably) not to mention that the lengths of days vary.
And then there's the simple question of cost. If the company can make it competitive, and if the installation(s) doesn't do much local damage (what will that much new shade do to the local environment? What will that kind of heat island do to local and regional air currents, etc) then it'll attract money and customers. Make it cheap and reliable and buyers will come.
There's a huge problem with Ausra's plan. For starters, it's light on details. *How* are they storing the heat? Heat storage is the bugaboo of solar-thermal, the article says, and everything in the press release and on their website just glosses over it. They don't even say they've solved the problem.
Second, the article in wired and all of Ausra's press releases are 90% speculation and about 5% facts. "We *could* power 90% of the US electricity needs with 1% of the nation's desert!!" exclaims the article. Perhaps they've also invented high-temperature superconducting power lines too, so that they could actually power the eastern seaboard from Nevada. Until someone either puts a desert conveniently close to New York or magically makes electrical resistance disappear, 70% of the US won't be able to use the electricity generated in the desert. You might get away with powering all of the southwest this way, and that wouldn't be such a bad thing, but the promises they make are definitely overstated and largely speculative.
What they should be saying is more along the lines of "We're going to be providing all (or X%) of California's power by Y year" This press release just smells more like a stock scam rather than something tangible.
I concour the 90% is pretty far fetched for a starting tech, if they get funding to power the grid 1 or 5% I'd satisfied (and invest ready). Also, with that level, they could power a small central american country with a Canal....hint hint
This is the link to the recent Scientific American article on the "grand solar plan" for the US, which proposes high-voltage DC transmission lines to get power from PV panels in the southwest to the northeast
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-solar-grand-plan
This is the link to the recent Scientific American article on the "grand solar plan" for the US, which proposes high-voltage DC transmission lines to get power from PV panels in the southwest to the northeast
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-solar-grand-plan
This was the topic of last week's Science Friday on NPR with interviews with someone from Ausra
Listen Here: http://www.sciencefriday.com/program/archives/200803141
The player is in the top left
With HVDC you lose about 15% on the trip from the desert to the East Coast. So not all that much.
Until someone either puts a desert conveniently close to New York or magically makes electrical resistance disappear, 70% of the US won't be able to use the electricity generated in the desert.
I think if a solar-thermal plant were producing very inexpensive electricity that could be used to power homes, cars, and industry, a lot of people would move to be closer to it. Think of it - cheap power draws business, businesses create jobs, people move to where jobs are, voila. I have no idea why Nevada, Arizona, Wyoming, etc. etc. are not all over this - perfect way to attract business and residents.
Well, I have heard of the idea of moving industry, as in server farms, to where the energy is generated. I think that this will work in more places than just deserts as well. I think the desert analogy was used to give scale.
There is so much going on in solar nowadays, I wish some of this stuff would just come out sooner. I just can't wait to see solar really take off.
I totally believe in these numbers and that its possible but good luck doing it because you will going against everybody to try and do it.
What they need to do is offer a small unit one large enough for a house that way individuals who want to can bypass the whole established power grid system and go independent this way you wont be a slave to the power companies either.
Because if we wait for the power co's etc to do it it wont happen.
Cool! Now instead of coal miners we will have mirror technicians! And think of the night time jobs available to janitors to clean the mirrors at night. One things for sure, we're going to need more janitors, and probably pay them a lot more. Perhaps we could hire the homeless to clean the mirrors. (jokes, but jokes that might reflect future realities?)
Peter: which also exasterbates water shortages in that area. Plus, people don't move JUST because of cheap energy, though some companies do.
Josh V. says that wind turbines are ugly. What's wrong with you, Josh. I think they are beautiful. They say the the two most beautiful things to come out of America are the clipper ship and the ax handle. I would add the wind turbine, simple, clean and elegant.
Want waterless solar thermal? Google Infinia. Then Google DC power transmission. Power can be transferred over great distance with less than 5% loss. A student won a contest by suggesting we put horizontal windmills just above freeways. Bluenergy wants to put solar cells on windmills. Blue Energy Canada wants to put underwater current turbines under floating bridges. Finerva wants to put arrays of wave motion converting buoys just offshore. A company in the Netherlands wants to put solar thermal pipes under roadway surfaces. Solar Roadways of Idaho wants to put PV cells under a translucent road surface. The future's so bright...
Isn't it obvious at this point that the technology is there already and just not being used?
The powers that be are heavily invested in fossil fuels, and they will start wars, wreck economies, and steamroll over anyone that gets in the way of them profiting from their investments.
"I think if a solar-thermal plant were producing very inexpensive electricity.... a lot of people would move to be closer to it."
The population in the desert is already exploding way beyond what the local water tables can support. No more grass, water parks or golf courses in Arizona, please. Perhaps the best bet is to locate these farms within commute of a larger existing city for an employee resource.