February 19, 2008
|
20 Comments
On a perfect New Mexico winter day -- with the sky almost 10 percent brighter than usual -- Sandia National Laboratories and Stirling Energy Systems (SES) set a new solar-to-grid system conversion efficiency record by achieving a 31.25 percent net efficiency rate. The old 1984 record of 29.4 percent was toppled Jan. 31 on SES's "Serial #3" solar dish Stirling system at Sandia's National Solar Thermal Test Facility.
The conversion efficiency is calculated by measuring the net energy delivered to the grid and dividing it by the solar energy hitting the dish mirrors. Auxiliary loads, such as water pumps, computers and tracking motors, are accounted for in the net power measurement.
"Gaining two whole points of conversion efficiency in this type of system is phenomenal," says Bruce Osborn, SES president and CEO. "This is a significant advancement that takes our dish engine systems well beyond the capacities of any other solar dish collectors and one step closer to commercializing an affordable system."
Serial #3 was erected in May 2005 as part of a prototype six-dish model power plant at the Sandia Solar Thermal Test Facility that produces up to 150 kilowatts (kW) of grid-ready electrical power during the day. Each dish unit consists of 82 mirrors formed in a dish shape to focus the light to an intense beam.
The solar dish generates electricity by focusing the sun's rays onto a receiver, which transmits the heat energy to a Stirling engine. The engine is a sealed system filled with hydrogen. As the gas heats and cools, its pressure rises and falls. The change in pressure drives the pistons inside the engine, producing mechanical power, which in turn drives a generator and makes electricity.
Lead Sandia project engineer Chuck Andraka says that several technical advancements to the systems made jointly by SES and Sandia led to the record-breaking solar-to-grid conversion efficiency. SES owns the dishes and all the hardware. Sandia, a National Nuclear Security Administration laboratory, provides technical and analytical support to SES in a relationship that dates back more than 10 years.
Andraka says the first and probably most important advancement was improved optics. The Stirling dishes are made with a low iron glass with a silver backing that make them highly reflective — focusing as much as 94 percent of the incident sunlight to the engine package, where prior efforts reflected about 91 percent. The mirror facets, patented by Sandia and Paneltec Corp. of Lafayette, CO, are highly accurate and have minimal imperfections in shape.
Both improvements allow for the loss-control aperture to be reduced to seven inches in diameter — meaning light is highly concentrated as it enters the receiver.
Other advancements to the solar dish-engine system that helped Sandia and SES beat the energy conversion record were a new, more effective radiator that also costs less to build and a new high-efficiency generator.
While all the enhancements led to a better system, one aspect made it happen on a beautiful New Mexico winter day — the weather.
"It was a ‘perfect storm' of sorts," Andraka says. "We set the record on Jan. 31, a very cold and extremely bright day, a day eight percent brighter than normal."
The temperature, which hovered around freezing, allowed the cold portion of the engine to operate at about 23°C, and the brightness means more energy was produced while most parasitic loads and losses are constant. The test ran for two and a half hours, and a 60-minute running average was used to evaluate the power and efficiency data, in order to eliminate transient effects. During the testing phase, the system produced 26.75 kW net electrical power.
Osborn says that SES is working to commercialize the record-performing system and has signed power purchase agreements with Southern California Edison (SCE) and San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) for up to 1,750 megawatts (MW) of power, representing the world's two largest solar power contracts. Collectively, these contracts require up to 70,000 solar dish engine units.
"This exciting record shows that using these dishes will be a cost-effective and environmentally friendly way of producing power," Osborn says. "SES is actively engaged in the commercialization of the system, called the ‘SunCatcher,' including continuing to prepare it for mass production, completing project site development and preconstruction activities, and establishing partnerships with substantial manufacturing and industrial organizations to develop a cost-effective manufacturing process and supply chain. The demonstrated high efficiency means more energy is generated for the given investment, lowering the cost of the energy delivered."
InfiniaCorp looks like for rest of us.
Their stirling dish engine costs 20,000 a piece for 3.5 kw system
http://www.infiniacorp.com/main.php
They raised 50 million $ recently.
http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/02/11/clean-energy-startup-infinia-raises-50-million-to-crank-up-manufacturing
Can anyone calculate the economies of 20 grand a peice for 3.5 kwh system?
Thanks,
Ram
I can answer the question about cost of the SES system. I'm the first shareholder in SES in 1996. As I remember costs are contingent on mass production. SES is working diligently on lining up its supply chain and is very close to mass production. Targets are 10's of thousands units per year or 2500 MW per year. They need these rates of production to meet demand for current and new power supply agreements they are bidding on. They expect to meet these rates by 2010/12. At these production rates target installed SES dish is less then $25k each or under $1 per installed kilowatt. That beats any solar device I know of.
As to maintenance for the SES system, yes its a cost but a small one. Dishes are designed to be self cleaning and will require a wash about once a year. Engine maintenance is needed only every 100,000 on-sun hours. This has been proven by a Sandia sponsored reliability program.
Demetri
Whats most exciting about the SES "Sun Catcher's" is target cost per kilowatt hour is less then the MPR(market price reference) for a gas fired power plant.
Remember SES is twice as efficient as PV and three times as efficient as CIGS and that means 1/2 to 1/3 the equipment, the cost and the land needed as compared to PV or CIGS. Add to that land prep is minimal as compared to PV, trough or power tower.
Demetri
To John Groweg.... Another interesting heat storage medium is one of the eutetic salts. Glaubers salt which is sodium sulphate decahydrate comes to mind. The decahydrate is the key. At around 30 degrees, it turn liquid and absorbs 'latent heat' just as melting ice does. Of course it gives out this large amount of heat when it "freezes" also around 30 degrees.
I'd like to see how this system would perform at the south pole in the middle of summer. The coldness of the cold side is critical to the efficiency of a heat engine, the altitude of the south pole gets it above much of the atmosphere and since it is a focusing system, the mirrors are at 90 degrees to the suns rays anyway.
A "stirling" effort Sandia the news keeps getting better, another good use for hydrogen!
Mike H. HYDROGENHEADS
Unfortunatly SES does not disclose the cost of a dish system. About a year ago, I had made an estimate of $75000 per 25KW dish or $3 per KW. I don't remember how I came to this number though so don't quote me.
This cost is still way too high for mass replacement of other poluting technologies.
The real key is not efficiency, it is the cost per KW. This probably means that this is not the most efficient system that wins but of course it's probably one of the most efficient systems.
We still have to solve cost-effectively the energy storage problem for nights and bad wheather.
For the night, I came up with this idea (I don't know if someone else had this idea yet) that the world could build tropical ring grids around the world so that countries in the sun would distribute energy to countries in the dark in a rotating fashion.
We also need to consume less energy at night through better insulation and other measures to use more energy during the day (the oposite of what electrical companies try to do today because they can't reduce energy production at night very easilly).
In the comparison between photovoltaic panels and active systems such as SES, a couple of theings to consider are the amount of maintenance and the availability of the land to be used simultaneously for something else. An SES system will need constant maintenance, with its many moving parts and finicky requirements. The constant use of service vehicles would have a large impact on the land, rendering it nearly useless for anything besides power generation. Photovoltaic panels, on the other hand, can be mostly left alone. The land would still be available for wild animals and plants, or for grazing or even for growing crops. If I were to bet, I'd put my money on photovoltaics.
What's the cost? Along with others, that's my main question.
On energy storage, I think people are looking too far - the current systems follow demand, surely if variable cost electricity (to the consumer) is available then there will be a huge amount of consumption that will be willing to follow supply. Obvious examples are big energy users like HVAC, washing machines even some food preparation activities. As long as there is (electronic) access to the current price systems can be set to run when price is low. The capacity of good demand control, with minimal hardware (switches) far outstrips the inefficiences and expense of electrical storage.
One advantage of solar is that it produces in the daytime when activity is highest.
Cost per kWhr is an important measure. To achieve a sustainable future this probably will need to increase. This provides economic drivers for the rapid changes that are needed to move from fossil hydrocarbon sources.
The link between coal oil and ecomomic growth is because these were the energy production technologies of the last few hundred years. Replacing this obsolete technology will provide the energy supply required to maintain an effective modern economy.
Energy costs as a proportion of GDP are presently 2% to 5%, but have been falling consistently for 50 years. A doubling of delivered (not the at power station or well head) energy costs could be easily accomodated. It won't decrease but increase employment and GDP. The changes are just another sectoral shift in the development of the economy. Newer technology and efficiency improvements driven by higher energy costs will then allow energy intensity to continue its downward trend.
To add your comments you must sign-in or create a free account.
March 2, 2008