The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Saturday, May 25, 2013
  • Sections
    • Home
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Solar
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Wind
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Geothermal
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Bio
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Hydro
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Careers
    • Companies
      • Company Directory
      • Press Releases
      • Products
      • Events Calendar
      • White Papers
    • Webcasts
      • Upcoming Webcasts
      • Featured Webcasts
      • Archived Webcasts
      • Events Calendar
    • White Papers
    • Magazines
      • Renewable Energy World
      • Wind Technology
      • Large Scale Solar
      • Hydro Review
      • HRW - Hydro Review Worldwide
      • Renewable Energy World (North America Edition)
      • Photovoltaics World
    • Awards
  • Account
    • Sign In
    • Register
  • Search
Don't Miss The Great Solar Debate: Where Does the Global Solar Industry Stand? Click Here to Register! ×

Excellence in Renewable Energy Awards Winners: Project of the Year and Readers' Choice

Renewable Energy World Network Editors
February 17, 2012  |  23 Comments

Bioenergy Project of the Year — Savannah River Site, Aiken, S.C.

The growing field of bioenergy faces obstacles that can hinder financing for large-scale projects. But the federal government has caught on to its numerous advantages. The Savannah River Site in Aiken, South Carolina, replaced coal and oil-fired generation by incorporating a biomass-fueled steam cogeneration plant and two smaller biomass-fueled plants. The facilities are expected to have the capacity to convert 325,000 tons of fuel per year, including local forest residue and wood chips, into 20 MW of clean power.

Financing was conducted with a system of “smart contracting,” called an Energy Saving Performance Contract (ESPC), which allows the federal government to pay for contracting once energy savings have been realized. The $795 million DOE ESPC allowed Ameresco to finance, design, construct, operate, maintain and fuel the biomass cogeneration facility, which includes three biomass-fueled renewable energy plants located at the Savannah River Site. The 19-year agreement could save the government $944 million in energy, water, operations and maintenance costs.

The project is the federal government’s largest single source of performance-based renewable energy savings, as 325,000 tons of fuel will be converted into 20 MW of clean power, which is expected to save $34 million in utility costs in the first year alone. 

The project is "the large largest single-source of performance-based renewable energy savings underway in the federal government through the ESPC program," Ameresco said.

Adding to its numerous benefits, since construction began in 2009, the project is estimated to have sustained and created approximately 800 jobs spanning the mechanical, construction, engineering and supplier sectors over the 30 month construction period. The plant will sustain 25 full-time jobs on-site.

Viewing Page 5 of 6

  • Previous Page
  • View All
  • Next Page

23 Comments

Register To Comment
ANONYMOUS
February 24, 2012
I just promote these smaller POU systems and teach Contractors about Thermal. Not much Thermal Electric exists for reasons you point out. Solar PV used to pump water up to higher Tank and then at night letting it fall gravity as a non sunny time use of thermal is used as well, but locations having special needs are for that.

My point listing all those AHJ's was that Solar Thermal is "My" application. Solar Thermal Electric is your App.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
February 24, 2012
No problemo Greg. Need to be specific next time.

However, there's no reason to compare solar hot water with PV, because PV continues to improve in efficiency, an hot water is hot water!
greg chick
greg chick
February 24, 2012
I am talking about Solar Thermal as opposed to Solar PV. Not Electric generation from steam. Solar Thermal is the Heating of Water for Hot Water use. This common Solar Thermal System is defined by the American Society of Plumbing Engineers, International Assoc. Plumbing Officials (ASPE, & IAPMO) as well as The SRCC and SEIA etc. the Sun "Langleys" BTU per. Sq. Ft. absorbed into Water thru an absorber plate. The lost energy is reflection . The "Solar Fraction" is a different number as well. The unglazed Poly Panel having a 10 deg. delta T is extremely efficient they wont get very hot, but amount of sun power actually absorbed is said to be around 80% VS 20% for PV.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
February 24, 2012
Greg, so solar thermal has figured out how to violate basic thermodynamics, doing even better than the ideal Carnot Cycle?! Get that patent going!

So, starting honestly at 1kW/square meter of max sunlight, how many kW does the output shaft of the solar-thermal machine deliver to the generator?
greg chick
greg chick
February 24, 2012
Dear Dr. Solar Thermal is around 80% eff. as used on POU. I see ROI on Nat Gas / Solar a slow process and one of love. LPG is better and Electric rates make Thermal a great deal. As it is now Pool Thermal is often a 1 yr. ROI because Pool Panels are most efficient and cheapest. People in tier 3 or 4 are paying .40 cents per KWH that is easy to beat. On house systems are best, but I will be glad to see shift of power any way I can.
greg chick
greg chick
February 24, 2012
Dear Dr. Solar Thermal is around 80% eff. as used on POU. I see ROI on Nat Gas / Solar a slow process and one of love. LPG is better and Electric rates make Thermal a great deal. As it is now Pool Thermal is often a 1 yr. ROI because Pool Panels are most efficient and cheapest. People in tier 3 or 4 are paying .40 cents per KWH that is easy to beat. On house systems are best, but I will be glad to see shift of power any way I can.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
February 24, 2012
Greg, you're right, there are vast vested interests on the fossil-fuel side, new vested interests on the subsidized 'farm' side, and no reason at all not to encourage local solar PV/hot-water, which is what Calif., Sierra Club & others are now doing.

Solar thermal, by the way is insidious, because for backup power they depend on a gas line, so the facility can run 24/7, as needed. And, thermal conversion is very inefficient anyway, not as good as a top-line coal/gas plant. So transmission loss, waste heat, land consumption, etc. are all making solar thermal silly -- especially as non-thin-film solar PV efficiency continues to rise above the present 20%. And, newer nuke designs will deal with more local 24/7 demands, which truly scares the fossil folks.
greg chick
greg chick
February 24, 2012
I would prefer Solar PV and Thermal on almost any building. in a good to moderate Solar gain region. Farms are a form of centralizing Power and that is not wise as I see it. But Solar PV anywhere is going to help out and get us past this "Ode to Oil" Choral we sing. When it comes to transmission loses the loss is the same if it is Solar or Coal or Nuke etc. and NIMBY is all over, so where to put a Coal plant? how about the one in Page Ariz. hundreds of miles from its use...
What about Palo Verde Nuke Station in the Desert in Az. it's power is not immune to power loss, and what about the Rip Off that SRP is doing to Az. People on that project. Why are we not nit picking these issues? because they are status Quo. So lets sat it like it is Change hurts ?
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
February 24, 2012
Oh no! It's Truthiness Bill! Did I say Thorium, Bill? Let's check...

Actually, I was going to say gas plants too, since they;re even smaller per GWe, and greener than coal by a lot.

In any case, even the solar thermal farms, with gas-burner backup, ain't green either. Local solar is, just as Calif. now advocates.
William Fitch
William Fitch
February 24, 2012
Oops Anonymous > Oops Alex... Aka thorium man...
Look...up in the dirt! Its a bee, its a fly, no, its THORIUM MAN!!

.....Bill
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
February 24, 2012
Hey Joe, the ability of the human mind to rationalize anything is truly amazing, eh?

Gerald -- 10TWHr from those 2400 acres over however many decades also means 1TWHr wasted as transmission loss (heat) and 60TWHR wasted as panel heat & unnatural IR re-radiated back up to GHGs in the atmosphere. So, yes, it might be as bad s a coal plant!

For Comparison, 2400 acres = 10, 2GWe nukes, yielding 2TWHr every month and a half, or 16TWHr per year.

So desert solar is not only wasteful of subsidy, land & power, it's not even 'green' at current cell efficiencies. Those will get better, but there'll still be no reason for solar 'farms', given all the local space available without natural impact.

Say, here's a nice local one -- the day's only half gone and consumption has been met without transmission loss!...
http://tinyurl.com/3znad4b

And, it's not even Spring.
Joseph Wilder
Joseph Wilder
February 24, 2012
I'll bet the jackrabbits, snakes and coyotes are going to love the shade under those panels.
Gerry Wootton
Gerry Wootton
February 24, 2012
@josetony - interesting take. But for a given site, you'd have to know the solar resource and the wind resource in order to make that comparison. That corner of Arizona appears to be down at the bottom end in the wind resource maps -- possibly not even produceable. On the other hand, this is at the very high end for solar resource: Avg. ~5 kWh/m^2/day == ~5 kWh/kWp/day * 290,000 kWp. Lifetime production will be in the order of 10 TWh so 2400 acres compares very well to the equivalent amount of coal mining.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
February 24, 2012
Oops, it's Anonymous again! An anonymous opinion is worth ___ ?

Actually the birds, snakes, bugs, tortoises, etc. might place a bit of value on 2400 acres. And, we might place a value on the ~10% power loss created by simply needing remote transmission. Then too, we could place value on using 20% panels on local building where the load is, thus getting back 10% loss and >5% from the thin-film cells' poorer efficiency. But hey, that's just engineering & efficiency. There's subsidy $ to be made on that acreage!
ANONYMOUS
February 23, 2012
Is the land useable for anything else of more value? if not a judgement on Solar PV in that application is out of place and of no value. True values are like beauty what is ones art is anothers trash. Land "Out there" is not being fought over for anything. Some would call it worthless. Putting it to use is tremendous value. Quit finding "ROI" fault and be glad someone gives a damm.

Greg Chick
jose Nieves
jose Nieves
February 23, 2012
I think that using 2400 acres of land in order to produce 290 MW is kind of disappointing. I guess that you can get more than double MW using wind turbines instead.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
February 23, 2012
2400 acres to get 290-MW for <1/3 a day. That's 121kW/acre for the minority of each day. And, an inevitable transmission loss of about 10%. So the net is less than 40kW for several hours a day, while consuming 2400 acres of natural land, and wasting about 5 times the net power as direct air heating and infrared excitation of GHGs in the air above.

"Green energy'? Not really. Subsidy for the few vaii tax/rate-payers? Yep. Our descendents will love having to clean this wasteful junk up... http://webecoist.com/2009/05/04/10-abandoned-renewable-energy-plants/


Local solar (DG) on existing structures consumes no land, loses little transmission power, creates far less added global warming via unnatural IR and makes a robust grid. Solar 'farms' are so 2000.
greg chick
greg chick
February 22, 2012
Next time I hear "Ode to Oil" on a Public forum I am siting this project as what Lefty Buffet bought into and phooey with Oil, I am a Sun Worshiper!
greg chick
greg chick
February 22, 2012
Next time I hear "Ode to Oil" on a Public forum I am siting this project as what Lefty Buffet bought into and phooey with Oil, I am a Sun Worshiper!
Gerry Wootton
Gerry Wootton
February 22, 2012
It's interesting to see how Young's Creek compares:
$29M/7.5MW = 3.87 $/Wp
20000 MWh/7.5 MWp = 2666 h = 30.4% CF

This illustrates a few things: hydro power of this type is comparably expensive compared to solar and wind. Capacity factor is similar. Issues for hydroelectric projects include seasonal variation of the resource and necessary flows to maintain upstream and downstream water quality. The latter typically imposes limitations on most hydroelectric projects, especially as environmental concerns come to the forefront. Run of river is possibly lower impact than a dam except that it does divert flow from the main watercourse to an alternate path, consequently it's disruptive but in a different way.

This might be considered as a good complement to solar though as peak capacity occurs in different seasons.
ANONYMOUS
February 22, 2012
Warren Buffett is a very smart man. So is President President Obama. The people who come up with convoluted theories as to why large-scale solar projects are a bad thing aren't.
ANONYMOUS
February 21, 2012
I would like to print the entire article but when I select the "print" icon on this site, it only allows for printing the first page (up to the end of Solar Project of the Year).
ANONYMOUS
February 21, 2012
I think it's also important to mention that the Young's Creek Hydro project was built by TEK Construction, Inc. and Strider Construction Co. of Bellingham, Washington.

Add Your Comments

To add your comments you must sign-in or create a free account.

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
REW.com Editors

REW.com Editors

Renewable Energy World's network editors help deliver the most comprehensive news coverage of the renewable energy industries. Based in the U.S. and the UK, the team is comprised of editors from Pennwell Corporation's myriad of publications...
  • About
  • Articles
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Editors' Picks

  • EU Debate Over Climate Change Policy Could Dampen Renewable Energy Growth
  • The Future of Solar in Latin America
  • Fighting Blackouts: Japan Residential PV and Energy Storage Market Flourishing
  • The Economic Case for Divesting from Fossil Fuels
  • Are Run-of-River Hydroelectric Systems Ready to Ride US Currents?
  • Moniz Unanimously Confirmed As New DOE Chief

Most Commented

  • 8
    San Antonio Solar Fans Delay Introduction of SunCredit Program
  • 6
    Renewable Energy Research Initiative Launched in UK
  • 3
    Texas Legislature Passes Commercial and Industrial PACE Bill
  • 3
    French and German Ministers Call for 2030 Renewable Energy Targets

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • REC Solar
  • Alternative Matters
  • Canadian Clean Energy Conferences
  • Renewable Energy Corporation
  • Solar Wholesalers
  • RevoluSun
  • SMA America, LLC
  • The Interstate Renewable Energy Council, Inc.
News
  • Renewable Energy
  • Solar Energy
  • Wind Energy
  • Bioenergy
  • Geothermal Energy
  • Hyrdo Power
  • Blogs
  • Video
  • Finance
Resources
  • Companies
  • Products
  • Careers
  • Events
  • Webcasts
  • White Papers
  • Magazines
  • Press Releases
  • e-Newsletters
Company
  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising & Services
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Site Map
Network Partners - Magazines
  • Hydro Review Magazine
  • Hydro Review Worldwide Magazine
  • Renewable Energy World Magazine
Network Partners - Events
  • Power-Gen 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 Africa
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India
  • HydroVision International
  • HydroVision Brazil
  • HydroVision India
  • HydroVision Russia
© Copyright 1999-2013 RenewableEnergyWorld.com - All rights reserved.
RenewableEnergyWorld.com - World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for news & Information