Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

62 MW Solar PV Project Quietly Moves Forward

By Jesse Broehl, Editor, RenewableEnergyAccess.com
November 18, 2005   |   11 Comments

Do you like this news?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
The 62 MW project will be unprecedented in size -- more than six times larger than the Bavaria Solarpark in Muhlhausen, Germany, the largest project operational today.
11 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 11
November 17, 2005
I still think that everyone would have saved money if they'd used a different techology. $0.32/kWh is really expensive and just silly. I wish that So Cal Edison would have announced the cost/kWh of those two stearling engine projects they've commisioned. It would be interested to compare the costs to this project.
Comment
2 of 11
November 17, 2005
It's basically because the utility gets paid a massive subsidy by the german gov't right? The feed-in tariffs are huge as I recall. Aren't they something like $0.54/hWh? While it's great that the german gov't has backed renewables very aggressively I don't see how this approach is sustainable. As long as solar is niche this will work but as it grows there now way that they can support such massive subsidies. BTW, are the rate payers subsidizing it? If so how much per hWh?
Comment
3 of 11
November 17, 2005
Tripp, you raise a great question. I believe the answer is in the economics. By my admittedly very rough calculations the plant will generate 310MWh/day and generate revenue of nearly US$42million/year. This would crate a payback scenario of just under six years (excluding operating costs). With relatively cheap financing, this project will be cash flow positive from day one. In other words, with these kinds of incentives you can turn sunshine into gold and if you can do that on a small scale, why not do it on a large scale. Mosolar is better than nosolar.
Comment
4 of 11
November 17, 2005
Why are the europeans squandering most of the global output of PV panels for these utility scale solar projects? This seems really inefficient and expensive. Wanting solar to play a part in the energy mix is great but it seems to me that PV is not the most desirable way to go about it. Why not use CSP technology or stearling engines like the ones being built in so cal? Those projects dwarf the one (and other announced on this site) mentioned here. The efficiencies are also higher. Am I missing something here?
Comment
5 of 11
November 18, 2005
In regards to the comment about the long term sustainability of rebates and incentives, I have to disagree. Virtually every conventional extractive energy system today is very highly subsidized, and has been for litterally decades. Some of those subsidies are blattantly direct (taxes, nuclear supports, etc) while many are indirect (protecting the Persian Gulf, keeping sea lanes open for tankers, the Alaskan Oil Pipeline, there are littlerally too many to list...). Subsidies are most definitely sustainable once significant capital flows begin to manifest themselves in the political ecosystem.

In terms of pursuing an alternate technology, I don't disagree. Although CSP is a more complex technology than PV, from an economic standpoint it makes a lot of sense for peaking power.
Comment
6 of 11
November 19, 2005
Tripp is confusing the feed-in mechanisms in Germany and other countries with plain government subsidies. A subsidy is paid with general tax-payers money directly to a private investment. Besides the tax money used another downside is that this kind of subsidies never last long enough to establish an industry.

So some clever folks came up with feed-in tariffs which are
1) for a long time guaranteed to give investors sufficient market predictability.
2) a levy on the electricity price everyone pays - this way the usage of ´polluting´ electricity helps to shift investment to clean technologies.
3) The rates are set by law with a % decline per year to reflect cost reductions due to technology improvements and economies of scale. Additionally the rate schemes are reviewed every few years to adjust to new market circumstances

It's kind of complicated, but works extremely well. Other market based mechanisms, like quota, have been less effective and did also cost more per kWh.
Comment
7 of 11
November 19, 2005
Solar electricity is the only form of energy that is a physical process. There are no moving parts (unless a small fan inside inverter). This equates to longer life and low maintenance costs.

CSP technology is mechanical and the entire process is much more complex. This will surely lead to additional maintenance costs.

Ten years from now we will have a much clearer idea of the true costs per kWhr comparing the different technologies. Peak power generation will continue to become more valuable as natural gas prices increase further.
Comment
8 of 11
November 20, 2005
Michael Chownyk solarenegy@rogers.com
One of the benifits of a large scale photovoltaic grid is the fact that it still can produce some electricity in diffuse light ie. light cloud cover. The CSP technology does not. Also the european Govenments are obviously smarter and more reactive to the needs of the planet. The greater the demand for PV the better!
Comment
9 of 11
November 22, 2005
As the amount of sunshine hours cannot be determined PV will also fluctuate and this makes it difficult to integrate it to the structure of power stations. Mark Culpepper wrongly argues that „In terms of pursuing an alternate technology, I don't disagree. Although CSP is a more complex technology than PV, from an economic standpoint it makes a lot of sense for peaking power." CPS works very efficiently in various parts of the world. There is no data that would prove that diffuse sunlight is not directed onto the collectors by the mirrors. One Hungarian research team published an innovation last year recognized by WIPO under number 2005/071037 A1. It seems that PV and wind energy systems are only supported by manufacturers. Will fossil based steam power stations be closed? Reducing their capacity CPS can also reduce the emission of harmful substances.
Comment
10 of 11
November 22, 2005
I agree with Tripp Bishop and everybody else who believe that CSP is the ideal solution. It was invented in the United States 25 years ago but due to cheap oil the „molten salt" produced an expensive electric energy. Today PV and wind energy is more common as governments indirectly subsidize manufacturers from taxpayers money. The biggest advantage of CSP against the other two is that it can be directly linked to steam based electricity producing systems so the network can be easily changed in sunless and windless weather conditions with no loss in electric capacity which is not possible with PV and wind energy. The problem is twofold with the questions of price and technology. Sunny periods do not exceed 4000 hours even in countries rich in sunshine. PV only produces electricity during sunshine.
Comment
11 of 11
October 9, 2006
Why always OR-OR? Give me AND-AND. CSP is a centralized option which will fall in the hands of nuclear addicts if they can't find their way and uranium price is skyrocketing (as it does already). PV is an extremely good option for the built environment in Europe (and the States etc.), where the kWh are directly consumed without losses. Both options have their right of existence, and please STOP fighting each other, it doesn't lead us anywhere because we need both. Feed-in tariffs for Germany, see: http://www.sfv.de/lokal/mails/sj/verguetu.htm.
Financial "load" for a household for the TOTAL sustainable subsidy structure in BRD is only EUROct 0,54/kWh, while measuring costs are twice as much, EUROct 1,00/kWh. See graph:
http://www.unendlich-viel-energie.de/index.php?id=113#

info@polderpv.nl (Netherlands, on the brink of collapse in renewables...)
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Advertise With Us

Brightergy European Wind Energy Association GoGreenSolar.com Green Power Conferences ONTILITY Solar Training Renewables Academy AG (RENAC) Westinghouse Solar
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters