Translation from English

Friday, May 9, 2014

Arizona Solar Power- Scientific American

This was the lead story of the ones I just posted from Scientific American and for some reason it is hard to read the headline now and I wanted to make sure nobody missed this one.

World’s Largest Solar Array Set to Crank Out 290 Megawatts of Sunshine Power

Megaplants like Agua Caliente in Arizona herald a new efficiency in solar-sourced electricity
Agua Caliente



Image courtesy of NRG
Global climate change is here, and it’s only going to get worse, according to a White House report released on Tuesday. To combat rising sea levels and blistering summers, the Obama administration has been pushing for clean, renewable energy sources that cut down on carbon emissions. Now one of its projects is poised to pan out: Agua Caliente, the largest photovoltaic solar power facility in the world, was completed last week in Arizona.

The plant comprises more than five million solar panels that span the equivalent of two Central Parks in the desert between Yuma and Phoenix. It generates 290 megawatts of power—enough electricity to fuel 230,000 homes in neighboring California at peak capacity. The Agua Caliente Solar Project represents a significant advance in the technology compared with just four years ago, when the largest solar facility in the U.S. generated only 20 megawatts. “Solar has completely arrived as a competitive energy resource,” says Peter Davidson, executive director of the Loan Programs Office at the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE).

The project, which cost a total of $1.8 billion to construct, received a million-dollar loan from the Loan Programs Office. Under its “SunShot” initiative (so-named in the spirit of president John F. Kennedy’s “moon shot” program), the DoE provides guaranteed loans to unproved ventures in solar power in the hopes of promoting innovation and making the technology more cost-effective.* Although Agua Caliente (owned by U.S. energy giant NRG Energy and partner MidAmerican Solar) is now the largest photovoltaic solar facility in the world, it probably will not hold that distinction for long. Other massive solar panel facilities, such as Antelope Valley Solar Ranch One in California’s Mojave Desert, are rapidly springing up across the Southwest. “This series of large plants that are being built really mark the transition from the technology being something experimental to real energy on the grid,” agrees Robert Margolis, a senior analyst at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). Solar power currently accounts for 1 percent of U.S. energy production, but it is the fastest-growing sector of the energy landscape. Margolis says that Agua Caliente proves that investing in solar power on a large scale is an effective way to make it more viable in the current market.

The energy contained in just one hour of sunlight could power the world for a year, if only it could be harnessed. Traditional solar panels made from silicon—the gold standard of semiconducting material—are expensive, however, particularly in comparison with cheap but dirty coal and natural gas. Agua Caliente, which is operated and maintained for NRG by Tempe, Ariz.–based First Solar, uses newer, thin-film panels that that absorb the same amount of sunlight with a fraction of the material, boosting the array’s efficiency.

NRG has a deal with utility company Pacific Gas & Electric to sell them the energy generated by the plant for 25 years. California law mandates that utilities get 33 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2020.

The massive scale of facilities like Agua Caliente enables energy companies to buy the construction materials in bulk, which reduces costs. But there are downsides to this arrangement. The sheer magnitude of such complexes makes them difficult to maintain, and some environmental groups argue that the immense structures displace local wildlife. Many California legislators therefore prefer small-scale plants that can be built closer to the places they supply.

And as with traditional solar power plants, there is still the issue of what to do when the sky is overcast. One of the most interesting things about Agua Caliente, says John Karam, senior director of asset management at NRG Solar (an NRG subsidiary), is how it deals with cloudy days. There are extra panels built into the site, so “when the plant is partially covered by clouds, the control system can actually call upon the portion of the panels that is not impacted” and recruit the extras there to make up the difference.

“The systems are getting smarter,” NREL’s Margolis notes. “One of the next frontiers in research and development is integrating very large quantities of solar into the system by having smarter controls, and also improving the ability to forecast when clouds will come and what the behavior of the system will be so that utilities can prepare.”

Consumers won’t notice much of a difference right away, as utility companies typically draw from a wide array of energy sources, DoE’s Davidson says. “Its like pouring water into a pool: It all gets blended in and then patched out.”

But as solar power becomes cheaper, Davidson predicts that utilities will pass those savings on to consumers. And as the technological advancements emerging from megaplants like Agua Caliente become more widely available, individual solar power adopters may eventually see savings as well.

*Correction (5/9/14): This and the previous sentence have been edited since posting to correct an error. They originally stated that the Department of Energy's SunShot initiative granted the loan rather than the DoE's Loan Programs Office.


Rights & Permissions
Share this Article:

Comments

phalaris May 9, 2014, 1:16 PM
This article, like many concerning renewables leaves one guessing on some crucial facts.
Namely, is the 270MW peak output, or output averaged over a typical year?
Report as Abuse | 
Link to This

Soccerdad May 9, 2014, 1:50 PM
And the even bigger question ... how much does it cost per kwh?
Report as Abuse | 
Link to This

billsweeney565 May 9, 2014, 2:45 PM
Minor typo: a million dollar loan on a $1.8 billion project seemed anomalous. The correct number was $1 Billion (or over half the cost)
From the article:
The project, which cost a total of $1.8 billion to construct, received a million-dollar loan from the DoE
--------
In August 2011, the Department of Energy issued a $967 million loan guarantee to finance the Agua Caliente project, a 290 MW photovoltaic solar generation facility that currently generates enough energy to power 49,600 households annually. The project has been supplying increasing amounts of electricity to the grid since January 2012, and is expected to reach full commercial operations in March 2014. The project features First Solar’s (FSLR) thin-film cadmium-telluride (CdTe) solar modules. All of the power will be sold to Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) under a 25-year Power Purchase Agreement.
Report as Abuse | 
Link to This

billsweeney565 Soccerdad May 9, 2014, 2:56 PM
This is just some WAG numbers but assuming 10 hour days 365 days per year for 30 years the construction cost comes to ($1.8B/(290MW*10*365*30) = $56 per MW = $0.05 per kW. This doesn't count ongoing running costs or maintenance. I expect that the cost to replace a panel is substantially less than the original construction cost so the project should benefit from ongoing efficiency trends in solar panel technology.
Report as Abuse | 
Link to This

AleDukes May 9, 2014, 4:53 PM
LOOKS Like "POLLUTION" to me!!
Report as Abuse | 
Link to This

singing flea AleDukes May 9, 2014, 5:21 PM
"LOOKS Like "POLLUTION" to me!!"
Not much to say here, huh?
Where ignorance is bliss 'tis folly to be wise.
Report as Abuse | 
Link to This

fire1fl AleDukes May 9, 2014, 5:48 PM
Yay, someone finally found a positive use for Arizona!
Report as Abuse | 
Link to This

LaughingBird May 9, 2014, 9:06 PM
Check it out on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agua_Caliente_Solar_Project
Solar projects are rated at the total of the capacity of all of their panels. 290 MW is the sum of the capacity of all the panels. The Wikipedia article lists the performance data over about two years.
The project received $967 million in loan guarantees. I don't know where they got $1 million from...
IMHO - We need more projects like this to reduce the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere to 350 PPM or less.
Report as Abuse | 
Link to This

You must sign in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.
risk free title graphic YES! Send me a free issue of Scientific American with no obligation to continue the subscription. If I like it, I will be billed for the one-year subscription.
cover image Subscribe Now

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please leave a comment-- or suggestions, particularly of topics and places you'd like to see covered