Odd solar power?

[brent217]

http://www.tanjug.rs/videodet-e.aspx?galID=56515

Are these real? Can they store solar power for months in a cost effective manner?

[santafe2]

Re: Odd solar power?

http://www.tanjug.rs/videodet-e.aspx?galID=56515

Are these real? Can they store solar power for months in a cost effective manner?

While I know nothing about this particular system, these are a type of thermal concentrator. While there appears to be heat/energy transfer, no storage is evident in the video. If one listens to the 2nd video we hear from the inventor something like problem financia. I'm sure this is more like problem physicia or at a minimum problem researchia.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Odd solar power?

While I know nothing about this particular system, these are a type of thermal concentrator. While there appears to be heat/energy transfer, no storage is evident in the video. If one listens to the 2nd video we hear from the inventor something like problem financia. I'm sure this is more like problem physicia or at a minimum problem researchia.

Here's the patent application. Even if your German's not up to snuff, you can still look at the figures. I don't think there's enough detail to understand exactly how any of this is working, or exactly how it's different from existing solar->steam electrical generation systems, save for supposedly operating at higher temperatures (900C) and therefore with some increased efficiency. And so they built a pilot plant. This is a normal first step before achieving financing for a true utility-scale power project. If the numbers add up, and someone out there is still in the market to build utility-scale solar->steam plants, then someone will finance it.

The storage issue is entirely separate. There are a bunch of ways to do grid energy storage (and why would you build something like this and not attach it to a grid?)

Regardless, his claims about power storage are not outside the realm of the possible. The Unites States plant at the National Solar Thermal Test Facility claims only 1% loss a year in using molten salt and aiming for temperatures greater than 650C. That's 5% better over twice the time than this Serbian doctor is claiming, although he claims to get things hotter.

The thing is, I suppose, that I'm sure it's possible. You're just not going to generate any cheap (less than 12¢ per kWh) electricity that way in the same manner you can burning natural gas. Nevertheless, research into alternatives is fine. But this is no silver bullet. Not yet.

And you should always ask yourself the following question:
Who in their right mind would build a utility scale solar plant in Serbia? There's no desert, but plenty of clouds, rain and trees. It's not quite the ideal location for something like this.

[Ghent12]

Re: Odd solar power?

Techniques for storing energy (in the form of heat) are not really problematic except for the cost. That is the prohibitive problem, however, and probably will be for hundreds of years. Seemingly only a massive reduction in the availability of fossil fuel products relative to energy demand will make such energy storage systems feasible. That makes perfect sense since fossil fuels are nature-made high-density energy storage already. Energy storage outside of that, or trying to short-circuit natural energy storage via solar and wind, is a waste of resources and will seemingly always be far more politically viable than economically viable.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Odd solar power?

Techniques for storing energy (in the form of heat) are not really problematic except for the cost. That is the prohibitive problem, however, and probably will be for hundreds of years. Seemingly only a massive reduction in the availability of fossil fuel products relative to energy demand will make such energy storage systems feasible. That makes perfect sense since fossil fuels are nature-made high-density energy storage already. Energy storage outside of that, or trying to short-circuit natural energy storage via solar and wind, is a waste of resources and will seemingly always be far more politically viable than economically viable.

Well, that all depends. If you're on a sunny island paying 60¢/kWh for power off a grid run on shipped-in diesel, it's plenty economically viable. The same goes if you're trying to power a base you drop somewhere with no infrastructure but plenty of light. Afghanistan comes to mind. Cost is only relative to what one is willing to pay. $300 jeans aren't economically viable either. But I'll be damned if they don't sell. And don't tell me politics causes that one.

That's the funny thing about economics. Start defining economically viable as instrumentally rational consumers choosing the product with the lowest price, and you'll kill half of the US economy in one stroke. Hell, even the bankers that bankroll that rational consumer garbage flowing out of the Chicago School blow money on $10,000 suits and yachts and other frivolous nonsense that's not economically viable in that way for no damned rational reason. They just all do it. I don't see why energy should be any different than any other sector.

[lektrode]

Re: Odd solar power?

Well, that all depends. If you're on a sunny island paying 60¢/kWh for power off a grid run on shipped-in diesel, it's plenty economically viable. ....

hell, its more than plenty viable at .44/kwh
the only problem is when the utilities and politicians decide to make it as difficult as possible
while passing rules/regs that essentially enable the less-than-affluent to subsidize those that can readily afford it.

[BadJuju]

Re: Odd solar power?

hell, its more than plenty viable at .44/kwh
the only problem is when the utilities and politicians decide to make it as difficult as possible
while passing rules/regs that essentially enable the less-than-affluent to subsidize those that can readily afford it.

The fossil fuel industry receives something like $300 billion in subsidies across the world. The subsidies that renewable energy receives is paltry in comparison. We need real investment in the renewable energy market and the destruction of the subsidies that fossil fuels receive. Never mind the fact that the real cost of fossil fuels, like their impact on health, is ignored entirely. I am sure if we factored in all of the 'hidden' costs of fossil fuels and the subsidies they receive, they would be much more costly than they are now.

[c1ue]

Re: Odd solar power?

The fossil fuel industry receives something like $300 billion in subsidies across the world.

This is both true and false. The number is true, but the false part is that the subsidies in any way play into profitability.

The subsidies exist primarily to reduce the end user cost for fossil fuels as well as encourage development of supplies and infrastructure.

If you actually divide out the amount of subsidies into the amount of energy produced, the actual per unit subsidy is nearly nonexistent. Doing to same for any alternative energy at present yields a subsidy impact 100x to 10000x greater.

Certainly some of this is due to the smaller scale of alternative energy, but by no means all or even most of it.

The reality is that alternative energy for the most part is fundamentally expensive and inefficient.

[santafe2]

Re: Odd solar power?

The reality is that alternative energy for the most part is fundamentally expensive and inefficient.

Seems like a buggywhip vs. auto argument.

[bpwoods]

Re: Odd solar power?

When you have a continuously functioning (24/365) facility supplying several hundred thousand homes during cold winters and hot summers, then you know that they may have something. Other than that they are just PR scams - seeking to get some foolish Gov to provide funding using cash looted from sheeple taxpayers. "When You Meet the Buddah on the Road - KILL HIM!"

[c1ue]

Re: Odd solar power?

Seems like a buggywhip vs. auto argument.

As you're employed by solar, it is no surprise you're a fan of it.

The reality, however, is that the auto had many fundamental advantages over the horse/horse carriage.

Among them:

1) Cars don't go wild and throw/roll over their riders
2) Cars don't need someone to maintain them every day, even when not in use
3) Gasoline stores well, unlike hay
4) Gasoline has energy density far and above that of horse fuel (hay)
5) Cars can be built quickly - no need to wait for a maturing generation should a sudden demand/need for more transport arise
6) Cars don't get diseases

Looking at the above with respect to solar power - where exactly is the advantage of solar?

Economy of scale: no advantage - in fact many disadvantages due to both rare earth inputs and manufacturing capital equipment cost
Energy density: better than hay. Much, much worse than gasoline
Buildout: better than horses, albeit very expensive, but much much poorer than any other form of fossil fuel electricity generation. China couldn't build out 2-500 megawatt solar PV plant every week even if they wanted to, and even if the cost was similar.
Storage: Solar PV doesn't store well at all. There are ways, but they generally involve just as environmentally destructive avenues as new dams or fancy chemical compounds.

Solar has a role, but the technology as it stands both today and for the foreseeable future is not one which can be relied on as a primary source.

[jiimbergin]

Re: Odd solar power?

This is both true and false. The number is true, but the false part is that the subsidies in any way play into profitability.

The subsidies exist primarily to reduce the end user cost for fossil fuels as well as encourage development of supplies and infrastructure.

If you actually divide out the amount of subsidies into the amount of energy produced, the actual per unit subsidy is nearly nonexistent. Doing to same for any alternative energy at present yields a subsidy impact 100x to 10000x greater.

Certainly some of this is due to the smaller scale of alternative energy, but by no means all or even most of it.

The reality is that alternative energy for the most part is fundamentally expensive and inefficient.

Welcome back C1ue. I hope your absence was not because of some sickness or other problem with you or your family.

[c1ue]

Re: Odd solar power?

Welcome back C1ue. I hope your absence was not because of some sickness or other problem with you or your family.

No health or family issues, but I do have to concentrate to try and make a living sometime

And as I noted elsewhere - what I'm getting out of iTulip has diluted to such an extent due to the Select/unwashed divide that it is not clear it is worth spending daily time here.

No hard feelings - EJ and iTulip must do whatever they must in order to make a living.

[lektrode]

Re: Odd solar power?

No health or family issues, but I do have to concentrate to try and make a living sometime

And as I noted elsewhere - what I'm getting out of iTulip has diluted to such an extent due to the Select/unwashed divide that it is not clear it is worth spending daily time here.

No hard feelings - EJ and iTulip must do whatever they must in order to make a living.

well i for one, are glad to see you back mr c1ue... about to start in on your uruguay trip.

hopefully things are going well with the parking app?

and would still like to hear about JB's cruise....

[santafe2]

Re: Odd solar power?

Solar has a role, but the technology as it stands both today and for the foreseeable future is not one which can be relied on as a primary source.

Fair enough. When I'm talking my book, I'll own it. While still expensive compared to coal and NG, it kicks diesel to the curb where that is the primary alternative to PV, (islands mostly). Energy density is not such a serious issue for solar but energy storage is still huge. Until it can stand alone 24x7 at a reasonable cost, it can't act as a primary source of energy.