The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
Indeed, but electricity generating solarthermal, where some fluid medium is heated by mirrors and drives a turbine, is a bit more complex, with a few more cost and maintenance risk factors, and very much at its infacy... Pilot plants of this type exist and operate since the nineties, but claims that the price could soon be reduced to market levels also exist since the nineties, yet nothing has been built for 15 years. Presently, some new plants are built in Spain and the USA, so we'll see whether those ambitions in economics can be realised. Until then, it needs feed-in tariffs, too.
Should your diarybe understood as a critic of solar PV
MfM quite clearly states that he thinks solarthemal is the way to go in the exploitation of solar energy, and criticises PV. (And I challenge those criticisms as unfounded and based on mistaken assumptions.)
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
In terms of physics and engineering, I don't see where the difference would lay.
(Obviously in the heating system, but that doesn't have any need for mechanical parts, so low maintenance, and probably simpler than combustion chamber anyway)
It's not running on steam, which could mean a myriad little technical differences.
In many, if not most, cases, solar thermal plants do run on steam, the mineral oil or molten salt medium is solely for heat transfer. Which is why one of the advantages of solar thermal over PV is that it can share a turbine with a natural gas fired plant. Where there is sufficient insolation and empty space near natural gas fired plants, that should be a boon as natural gas prices rise and solar thermal equipment costs drop.
I'd say lots of extended piping (if the system is such) subject to daily heat expansion could potentially be high maintenance, as can be motors adjusting movable mirrors (if the system is such).
There are actually multiple configurations. Solar troughs are highly expensive, but also highly efficient.
Solarmundo fresnel collectors drive down the equipment cost by using flat plate glass collectors that are rotated on an axis. There's a system of 6 of these that are concentrated on a single pipe. This is inefficient, but much less expensive, because you don't have to produce curved glass panels.
Finally, the solar power tower concept uses a field of flat plates rotated to concentrate heat on a single focal point. That means no piping, and superheating at the focal point.
My money is on the solarmundo fresnel collectors, because capital cost matters much more than efficiency when the fuel is free.
What I see is that solar thermal is a natural complement to natural gas fired plants where the insolation exists. They can share a turbine, and that drive down the initial construction cost, plus the ability to switch over to natural gas in order to heat steam provides a natural backup. In that case, the point is that the solar thermal installation allows for the conservation of natural gas, not replacing it.
And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg
by Oui - Dec 9 6 comments
by Oui - Dec 5 9 comments
by gmoke - Nov 28
by Oui - Dec 94 comments
by Oui - Dec 96 comments
by Oui - Dec 815 comments
by Oui - Dec 620 comments
by Oui - Dec 612 comments
by Oui - Dec 59 comments
by Oui - Dec 44 comments
by Oui - Dec 21 comment
by Oui - Dec 178 comments
by Oui - Dec 16 comments
by gmoke - Nov 303 comments
by Oui - Nov 3012 comments
by gmoke - Nov 28
by Oui - Nov 2838 comments
by Oui - Nov 2713 comments
by Oui - Nov 2511 comments
by Oui - Nov 243 comments
by Oui - Nov 221 comment
by Oui - Nov 22
by Oui - Nov 2119 comments