Priligy online now, save money

OCT 28

Recent Comment

"And just when we thought solar power is the answer to energy problems ..."

View all Comments

Solar Projects Battling for Water

cali-solar-water
Construction of renewable energy projects has revealed some serious environmental issues that will have to be dealt with as we speed toward a clean energy future.  We recently wrote about the conflict between land conservation efforts and good choice canadian online pharmacy viagra renewable energy projects in deserts out west.  Land that is ideal for solar energy production is also pristine land in need of protection.

In California, a similar conflict is arising between solar projects and water conservation.  Solar farms demand a lot of water, a resource that is stretched very thin in the arid areas where they're being developed.  A large solar farm can use upwards of 500 million gallons of water a year for cooling purposes and there are currently 35 big projects slated for development in California desert.

A "dry cooling" technique exists that uses 90 percent less water than "wet cooling," but it's more expensive and reduces the efficiency of the only for you viagra online cheap solar plant.  Even so, some plants are giving in and going the dry route.

Solar plants are fighting with state regulators to get the water they need.  Some are succeeding, while others are failing.  Just with land conservation, there doesn't seem to be one right side here.  Ideally, a new technique for cooling will be developed that doesn't require large amounts of water or a dip in efficiency.

via Green Inc.

Hits: 17473
Comments (44)Add Comment
0
Am I missing something here?
written by Smotsie, October 28, 2009
So, there is a problem with solar needing cooling... but can't the energy extracted from cooling the panels be used? I have often thought a combined PV heat panel makes sense as long as the electric side is fully insulated from the water side, and the some of the PV energy used to drive the http://roguelephant.com/cheap-levitra-without-prescription water side.
If anyone makes this I aceept royalties in any currency!
That is why nuclear is the clear cut winnder, Low-rated comment [Show]
0
The contrast in needs
written by David, October 28, 2009
The contrast is that you idealy need water nearby, but economicly you can't put solar panels anywhere but desert, where the water leading to cloud formation is drained by the very air, else your not making full use of the panels.
There was development into storing water onsight for cooling the photovaultaics, and at night actualy using the panels as inverse solar panels, radiating the heat from the water via the panel, ready for reuse.
the issue with this is you have to pump negative efficiecy volumes of water around to stop the water evaporating and causing major pressure issues within an enclosed system.
Heavy cooling elements are only plausible in peak tempratures in the hottest sights, and cost far more than water.

Practical aplications of soultion aside, he cause of the issue is photovaulteic optimisation in the first place, a raw photovaulteic plane actualy skims only the recommended site united healthcare viagra 100% aligned 'photons' [light particles] from the air, the heat output caused by cramming [forcing light to rebound through a photovaulteic plane multiple times] is undetectable, but you only use about a ten thousandth of the light, which is inefficient and non aplicable.

The one soultion I have heard of, though Ive never seen any kind of a write up or any evidence of reaserch, is rematrixing light.
the idea being that you take light from the exposed layer, and, without wasting light or space efficiency, below cycle all the light through a micro mirror array that filters the light to a very uniform wave and www.slic.de direction, whilst supressing the doppler effect (cause of heat), this light is then put into photovaulteics, and can either use about one tenth of the light, with no heat, or cramm all the refined light, and still only produce thousandths of the full heat potential.

However I don't know if its possible, and it would invariably be very expensive!

woe is us, if only saving the world were as easy and profitable as the fuel burning that got us here!
0
Oh yeah
written by David, October 28, 2009
I should probably add that its also extremely expensive to make the very inefficient unidirectional photovaultaics.
0
...
written by Richard, October 29, 2009
I sure hope that they get this issue resolved and come to a compromise as soon as possible.
0
Not talking about photovoltaics.
written by Rom, October 29, 2009
Everyone seems to be thinking about photovoltaics needing water for cooling. They don't. You just need water to keep them clean. Solar thermal plants use large amounts of water to generate steam and turn turbines. That type is the problem. There have been advances in technology that should allow phasing out these types of plants.

Stirling Energy have designed a solar thermal system that is more advanced and efficient than any other so far. It needs no water to cool and the sterling engine does not produce emissions. IT sounds fake but it's not. It's a new twist on a design dating back to 1816. Have a read on their web page.

http://www.stirlingenergy.com/index.htm
0
cooling or cleaning?
written by Kat M, October 29, 2009
Rom - the article directly contradicts you. "A large solar farm can use upwards of 500 million gallons of water a year for cooling purposes..."

They probably need water for cleaning, too - but that's not what this article is about.
0
...
written by MD, October 29, 2009
Why not use eco friendly waterless radiator fluid?

Have a series of below ground thermal wells and radiators to cool the coolant.
0
c'mon people...
written by JM, October 29, 2009
Rom-
Thank you for pointing out what should have been obvious to most people. We're not talking about water for photovoltaics, as water cooling is not required for PV. We're talking about solar THERMAL projects (as shown in the picture), which use mirrors to concentrate solar energy to heat water to run turbines and levitra dosage create electricity.

Kat-
You're wrong. The article does not contradict Rom. The article IS unclear, however. It should have specifically noted that it was talking about solar thermal projects and not PV.
0
Energy is from the temperature difference
written by Carl Hage, October 29, 2009
Q: can't the energy extracted from cooling the panels be used?

The energy extracted is based on the www.toscanalifesciences.info temperature difference, and also the efficiency is proportional to the difference. Not all of the heat energy can be converted (~60% theoretical max for steam), so the remainder must be moved away. [See "Heat Engine" in wikipedia.] That's the reason power plants have cooling towers or are built next to a lake/river.

For each kW of electric energy generated, a kW of extra unconverted heat must be carried away in order to maintain the temperature difference needed to extract power.

Evaporating water is the cheapest way to get rid of excess heat-- otherwise, you need large (thus relatively expensive) radiators.
0
Don't distort this!
written by Susan Kraemer, October 29, 2009
1. Nuclear and coal plants use far more water, and they foul it.

2. The water to be used at the Abengoa Mojave project solar thermal for pg&e is negligible amt and is less than was used when Alfalfa was farmed there, and since it is already brackish water it is not depriving you and me of water.

pg 45 of their environmental application:

http://www.energy.ca.gov/sitingcases/abengoa/documents/applicant/afc/volume_01/5.17_Water_Resources/5.17_Water_Resources_final.pdf

...as I wrote up here:
http://cleantechnica.com/2009/10/27/abengoa-solar-to-supply-pge-from-250-mw-in-mojave-desert/

0
...
written by steve, October 30, 2009
Megan one complaint about your article, you and almost every other environmental writer has latched onto the word pristine to describe the roguelephant.com desert. In reality very little of it is actually that and it conjures up images that we are somehow trying to glass over the Grand Canyon or some other great monument. Most of the desert that is being considered has been used for mining, off road riding, power lines and a hundred other uses. I would really like to see some original reporting instead of the normal sheep like reporting most all of you do.
As far as the Stirling Dishes, to say they are the most efficient is highly misleading. They take almost twice the amount of land as some other forms of solar thermal. They do nothing to solve the problem of energy storage and are almost certainly underestimating the amount of maintenance costs it will take to run them.
Susan you are distorting the facts also. Coal and www.velikibrat.us Nuclear do not take far more water, nor do they foul it, at least not anymore than any other steam power plant, including solar thermal. It is true a 250 MW coal plant will use far more water than a 250 MW solar plant but that is only because it will produce far more electricity. They are also far easier to place near sites with adequate water. It is misleading to say that the cheap prescription levitra plant will use less water than it did when it was an alfalfa farm. Really there is very little alfalfa being grown now at Harper Lake. You are correct that the water is not great but it could be treated for residential use. On the up side the land is far from pristine.
Now I know most of my post so far has been pretty negative but I am very excited about all the solar thermal projects that are being planned. Water use is a huge issue and it is not certain how well dry cooling will work. There is another option called hybrid cooling that is basically an air cooled condenser (dry cooling) that has the ability to use evaporative cooling to assist during extremely hot times. Problem is it is still expensive and needs demineralized water for evaporation. If dry cooling is able to prove cost effective then all of the water worries will basically be a non issue if not then we are going to have problems ever using solar thermal for more than a tiny amount of our energy needs.
0
Desperate want of clarification
written by David, October 30, 2009
Now I'm pretty hot on how Pv works, and I'm vaugely certain of how solar water heating works, and theres a debate right about now in the comments on weather the article is about Pv farms, or solar thermal farms.
If it is Pv, you can stick with everything in my massive last post, if its solar thermal, you should probs ignore me and ask Rom...
I do know that Pv does require cooling to prevent damage to the silicon that, even with over adequate cooling, is the main cause of deteriation of Pv cell efficiency over time.

furthermore the other comment debate seems to be asking weather solar is realy the way to go, to which I have to say, its not the topic on hand, there are benifits to using solar, whats why were using solar, the issue here is water!
0
@ Susan Kraemer
written by Rocketman, October 31, 2009
You state that nuclear power generators foul their cooling water. This is a complete nonsense. The cooling water is completely separated from the radioactive cores and the only transfer which takes place is heat.

People like you discredit your cause.
0
...
written by Tim Plemmons, November 01, 2009
To Rocketman straight from epa website. I don't believe the cialis without prescriptions poster specified radioactive waste.

Nuclear Energy produces water pollutants such as heavy metals and salts. These water pollutants, as well as the higher temperature of the water discharged from the power plant, can negatively affect water quality and aquatic life. Also waste generated from uranium mining operations and rainwater runoff can contaminate groundwater and low price levitra www.tevaka.com surface water resources with heavy metals and traces of radioactive uranium.
0
@Mr Plemmons
written by Rocketman, November 01, 2009
Nuclear energy cooling systems do not produce heavy metal contaminants. This is an absolute nonsense. You are confusing coal fired plants, which do produce significant heavy metal contaminants (as well as tons of radioactive gases).

Mining of all kinds results in environmental damage. Mining is necessary for your precious green consumer electronic devices too.

The production of silicon semiconductors creates damaging pollution too. The ground water aquifers in Santa Clara are evidence of this.
0
The Direct Way to Deal with GHG emissions
written by Paul Bernal, November 01, 2009
In the run up to the Copenhagen climate change conference, it is vital the following information be disseminated to the public as well as to our political leaders.
 
A widely cited 2006 report by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, Livestock's Long Shadow, estimates that 18 percent of annual worldwide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are attributable to livestock….however recent analysis by Goodland and Anhang co-authors of "Livestock and Climate Change" in the latest issue of World Watch magazine found that livestock and their byproducts actually account for at least 32.6 billion tons of carbon dioxide per year, or 51 percent of annual worldwide GHG emissions!
 
http://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/Livestock and Climate Change.pdf
 
The main sources of GHGs from animal agriculture are: (1) Deforestation of the rainforests to grow feed for livestock. (2) Methane from manure waste. – Methane is 72 times more potent as a global warming gas than CO2 (3) Refrigeration and transport of meat around the world. (4) Raising, processing and slaughtering of the animal.
 
Meat production also uses a massive amount of water and other resources which would be better used to feed the world’s hungry and provide water to those in need.
 
Based on their research, Goodland and Anhang conclude that replacing livestock products with soy-based and other alternatives would be the best strategy for reversing climate change. They say "This approach would have far more rapid effects on GHG emissions and their atmospheric concentrations-and thus on the rate the climate is warming-than actions to replace fossil fuels with renewable energy."
0
...
written by solargroupies, November 01, 2009
"Water is the new oil."
0
no!
written by solid wood furniture, November 02, 2009
One day, water is going to be very expensive and rare. Big problem!
0
...
written by Richard, November 02, 2009
I think that if we don't straighten things out, water would really be a new oil.
0
...
written by Richard, November 03, 2009
well, at any rate, there'll be a lot of water if we don't stop and think about turning to earth-healthier ways and alternative sources of energy. The ice caps are melting, so, there. Lots and lots of water.
0
I can see how water can be a problem, but not a huge set back.
written by VeruTEK Green Technologies, November 03, 2009
Both in the sense of cleaning and best way to take levitra cooling. However I don't see how there should be a shortage of water considering the resources available to them. There is also other forms of cooling. I am quite positive this is not the only one.

Still it is ironic that water us the www.filmusa.org problem that faces Solar Panel farms.
0
...
written by Roger Brown, November 03, 2009

“I can see how water can be a problem, but not a huge set back. Both in the sense of cleaning and cooling. However I don't see how there should be a shortage of water considering the resources available to them. There is also other forms of cooling. I am quite positive this is not the only one.”

Water use is definitely a problem. Water for power cooling (coal, natural gas, nuclear) is the one of the largest consumers of water, second only to agricultural irrigation. Water cooled power plants in the dessert will not scale up to a large fraction our total generation. Air cooling can be used but capital costs are higher and efficiency is lower. Unfortunately under the very hot midday temperature prevailing in the dessert the efficiency penalty may be very substantial. One can imagine a hybrid system where PV or possibly solar Stirling systems which do not require water provide generation during peak insolation while steam generation using stored thermal energy provides generation at cooler times of the day when air cooling is more efficiency.

“2. The water to be used at the Abengoa Mojave project solar thermal for pg&e is negligible amt and is less than was used when Alfalfa was farmed there, and since it is already brackish water it is not depriving you and me of water.”

What matters is water consumption per kWh delivered. The fact that one relatively small CSP power plant is not making a significant dent in water supplies does not mean that this technology is scalable. Air cooling is required if CSP is going to scale up to significant fraction of the total electricity supply.

0
More effective solar plant less water Less land cheeper
written by Carrie, November 03, 2009
A more effective soler plant and even a cost effective way to have small off grid home energy plants
Use a Binary solar cycle plants. Moderately hot (heated to above 68 degrees Fahrenheit) water is passed through a heat exchanger, where its heat is transferred to a liquid (such as isobutene or R134a boiling point of -15f) that boils at a lower temperature than water. When that fluid is heated it turns to steam, which spins the turbines Moderately hot water can be recycled in a closed loop system running through a simple solar water heater, made with a glass cover a parabolic mirror or mylar. Using a pump to cycle the water or gravity Adding a salt core would increase efficient even more. Or a well placed mirror to heat a salt core in in a heat exchanger. Similar to the moderate temp geothermal plants at chena hot springs, with out the drilling.
0
Is there a small binary thermal solution?
written by Harriet, November 03, 2009
Carrie,
I've only seen this article, and it's a big plant, and the temps are much higher than you said. Where are you getting your info?

http://www.gizmag.com/raser-low-temperature-binary-geothermal-plant-goes-online/11612/
0
...
written by gico, November 04, 2009
Is this page still alive? I read it every day, but in last two or three months, the number of posts has drastically decreased.
0
...
written by ds, November 04, 2009
the best way is to build a saltwater pipeline to the site and use vacuum evaporation for cooling and destilled water.
you'd get cattle grazing between the mirrors.
plant some forest.
some lakes to estinguish bush-fires
and of course a nice pond with fountain.
:-)
0
...
written by Pete, November 04, 2009
ds's idea of using salt water is great. 500 mil.G/year is only about 30 RR tankcars a day. Use an electric engine pulling a couple of boxcars full of batteries that get charged at the solar farm. Install a group of rankin cycle generators on the main turbine's exhaust. Use the seawater to chill the rankin engines, which need 125 deg. temperature difference to work, then send it through the main turbine. You should be able to recover about 80% of the desalinated water and sell the salt as carbon neutral organic sea salt for locavores.
0
...
written by Richard, November 05, 2009
hey, nice idea. that way we get something else to sell. Good job!
0
No facts to support the story!
written by Steven F, November 05, 2009
I did a news search for information and found nothing indicating serious problems with power plants finding cooling water. In fact the first article I found was about a proposed power plant that plans to use air cooling instead of water cooling. In fact it has been illegal for some time for power plants in California to use drinking water (California Water Code Section 13550). The only water that can be used for cooling in California is waste water which is not fit for human consumption.

The only real problem that I found in the news search is that it is taking too long for the state to issue permits for building the plants. According to PG&E Corp. (PCG) Chief Executive Peter Darbee "The biggest issue is the roadblocks of government, and they are incomprehensible. It's taking eight years to bring a clean, renewable project to market. The government has to get out of the way and http://meivending.com/buy-levitra-where start helping, rather than standing in the way."
0
Seawater Greenhouse
written by Derrick Gibson, November 05, 2009
http://saharaforestproject.com/

ds idea above is remarkable similar to the seawater greenhouse concept, that was first explored back in the 1990s and is now the driving force behind the Sahara Forest project and a few other demonstration efforts.
0
...
written by Roger Brown, November 05, 2009
"I did a news search for information and found nothing indicating serious problems with power plants finding cooling water. In fact the first article I found was about a proposed power plant that plans to use air cooling instead of water cooling.In fact it has been illegal for some time for power plants in California to use drinking water (California Water Code Section 13550)."

So which is it? Is air cooling a slam dunk from a capital cost and performance point of view so that cooling water is not needed, or is there a sufficient supply of water to support a large expansion of CSP in the American southwest? The fact that you are arguing both sides of the issue at once indicates that you are indulging in wishful thinking rather than logical thinking.

There is no doubt that air cooling works; At a cost. Air cooling will work for coal fired plants too, but water is preferred since the utilities get more bang for their buck out of water cooling.

The water use issues are real. Here is a excerpt from the Electric Power Institute's paper entitled "Advanced Water-Conserving Cooling Technologies Development and Demonstration (http://mydocs.epri.com/docs/pu...018028.pdf)"

"Pressures to reduce overall water withdrawal and consumption are no longer limited to arid parts of the world such as the Western United States. More temperate climates are experiencing water constraints due to population growth, precipitation fluctuations, and changing demand patterns. These pressures and associated operating challenges are expected to grow significantly as utilities seek to permit and build new generation facilities to meet growing electricity demand.

The electric power industry requires reliable access to large amounts of water, primarily for cooling. Growing demand for electric power, coupled with growing water demand in agricultural, municipal, residential, commercial, and industrial sectors, could strain water supplies in the future. Facing increasing pressures to improve water conservation and the best place drug generic cialis reduce water consumption at power generation stations, the electricity industry is investigating new and innovative technologies. These technologies may be plantand location-specific.

Power plant water use is under intense scrutiny as public and regulatory concerns increase around water availability. To reduce company exposure to future water- related risks, this work will:

• Develop planning and evaluation tools to analyze water impacts for new plant siting

• Develop innovative, cost-efficient technologies to increase power plant water use efficiency and reduce total water use

• Provide solutions for operating plants facing evolving water constraints, including availability and thermal discharge

• Analyze the effects of advanced cooling technologies on overall plant costs, performance, reliability and safety
"

I am not opposed to CSP plants or claiming that they are worthless, but I am in favor of realistic estimates of cost.

0
Solar Thermal & water for cooling
written by John, November 05, 2009
The picture shown is for a concentrated solar thermal power plant. These use liquid salts as the medium to be heated allowing them to be heated to a much higher temperature (this also allows for underground storage for night power generation). Forgive me if I'm thick, but can't the water that is heated to super-heated steam to drive the turbines be kept in a closed system? Why is there a need to "use" water - the water could be super-heated by the molten salts, drive the turbines, cool down in an enclosed pondage (maybe scavenging waste heat as it goes) and be re-used again and best price on levitra again. Why the need for 'new' fresh water?
0
...
written by Carrie, November 05, 2009
how many more years is it going to be researched moderate binary geothermal already works well but we still only have 1 in the country, it is using water that is 165f almost half the boiling point passed through a heat transfer to heat R-134a boiling point
-15F to spin the turbine. Same thing can be done using a soler water heater and skip the expensive drilling.
chena hot springs geothermal uses water at 165f not boiling
0
...
written by Roger Brown, November 05, 2009
"Forgive me if I'm thick, but can't the water that is heated to super-heated steam to drive the turbines be kept in a closed system?"

The steam is kept in a closed system. External water is used to re-condense the steam after it has passed through the turbine. This function can also be fulfilled by radiative fins in an air cooled system, but the capital costs are higher and the overall generator efficiency is reduced.
0
Principal Scientist
written by Dr. Stephen Paley, November 09, 2009
Some of the comments concernning this article have uncovered half of an important relationship that applies to most energy sources being considered for the future:

Large scale application of most energy sources, at some point(s) in their process, require large (but varying) quantities of fresh water.

A useful paramenter is the "total quantity of fresh water required per unit of energy produced," but only for a plant of specified energy production or "size." However, other characteristics such as "amount and type of pollution generated per unit of energy produced" are, today, just as important and must also be weighted.)

It is a fact, however, that most energy sources are not expandable unless fresh water resources to support them are available. This relationship can also be considered reciprocal since energy is required to "manufacture" (and/or to transport) additional fresh water; e.g., fresh water produced by large scale reverse osmosis, etc.

Finally, besides energy and fresh water, the third fundamental requirement for human survival is food. And agriculture, as practiced today is, directly and indirectly, both energy and water intensive.

Another constraint, according to USDA is that the amount of fresh water available for farming, from both rainfall over fertile regions and surface sources, is declining because of climate change and generic levitra india these trends are predicted to accelerate over the next two decades.
A partially compensating option will hopefully, be to desalinate ocean water and ship it inland to where crops are grown -- however, both these processes require energy.

In summary, most processes of energy production and fresh water production (or availability) must be stair-stepped, incrementally. And failure to take a system view of the interdependecies of energy and fresh water production/availability for any reason will lead to disaster.

One reason for lack of a systems approach is that it is not the responsibility of the company deploying a solar (or any other energy source) to plan for availability of water -- much less balance the need for water required for the company's energy production versus other needs. Another reason is that many of our public decsision-makers are neither technically trained nor system-oriented.

As an example, I have nothing against nuclear; we are going to need all of the energy we can muster. But I despair at suggeastions for expansion of nuclear without comment as to where the river of fresh water to support each new power reactor will comw from.

If we are to survive the technologies we adopt for fundamental human needs must be: sustainable -- i.e. have the ability to continue with undiminished output independent of resource depletion and climate change-- environmentally benigh; and, ideally (since we live in a market-driven economy) be more productive and more profitable than the technologies they are intended to replace.

Several co-operating small, high tech companies have achieved these characteristics in technologies they have developed in the fields of energy, water prouction and sustainable agriculture.

Stephen Paley, Ph.D.
Principal Scientist
Agricultural Management Systems
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
0
Principal Scientist
written by Dr. Stephen Paley, November 09, 2009
Some of the comments concerning this article have uncovered half of an important relationship that applies to most energy sources being considered for the future:

Large scale application of most energy sources, at some point(s) in their process, require large (but varying) quantities of fresh water.

A useful parameter is the "total quantity of fresh water required per unit of energy produced," but only for a plant of specified energy production or "size." However, other characteristics such as "amount and type of pollution generated per unit of energy produced" are, today, just as important and must also be weighted.)

It is a fact, however, that most energy sources are not expandable unless fresh water resources to support them are available. This relationship can also be considered reciprocal since energy is required to "manufacture" (and/or to transport) additional fresh water; e.g., fresh water produced by large scale reverse osmosis, etc.

Finally, besides energy and fresh water, the third fundamental requirement for human survival is food. And agriculture, as practiced today is, directly and indirectly, both energy and water intensive.

Another constraint, according to USDA is that the amount of fresh water available for farming, from both rainfall over fertile regions and surface sources, is declining because of climate change and these trends are predicted to accelerate over the next two decades.
A partially compensating option will hopefully, be to desalinate ocean water and ship it inland to where crops are grown -- however, both these processes require energy.

In summary, most processes of energy production and fresh water production (or availability) must be stair-stepped, incrementally. And failure to take a system view of the interdependencies of energy and fresh water production/availability for any reason will lead to disaster.

One reason for lack of a systems approach is that it is not the responsibility of the company deploying a solar (or any other energy source) to plan for availability of water -- much less balance the need for water required for the company's energy production versus other needs. Another reason is that many of our public decision-makers are neither technically trained nor system-oriented.

As an example, I have nothing against nuclear; we are going to need all of the energy we can muster. But I despair at suggestions for expansion of nuclear without comment as to where the river of fresh water to support each new power reactor will come from.

If we are to survive the technologies we adopt for fundamental human needs must be: sustainable -- i.e. have the ability to continue with undiminished output independent of resource depletion and climate change-- environmentally benign; and, ideally (since we live in a market-driven economy) be more productive and more profitable than the technologies they are intended to replace.

Several co-operating small, high tech companies have achieved these characteristics in technologies they have developed in the fields of energy, water production and sustainable agriculture.

Stephen Paley, Ph.D.
Principal Scientist
Agricultural Management Systems
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
0
Geothermals
written by Green Ninja, November 09, 2009
Maybe this is just evidence that we should focus more time and energy into geothermal projects rather than solar thermal. Creating one for of renewable energy that's only going to require a strain on an the most important, and already depleting, natural resource we need as humans to survive seems contradictory to say the least.
0
...
written by Roger Brown, November 09, 2009
"Solar Systems in Australia eliminates the need for cooling water."

No one disputes that solar PV generation (concentrated or otherwise) eliminates the need for cooling water. But PV may be more expensive than steam generation and it eliminates the possibility of thermal energy storage for load shifting.
0
mr
written by mark spencer, November 10, 2009
Logically sea-water should be used as a coolant,as plenty of energy will be generated to pump this inland and how to order viagra over internet then fresh water will be a by product ,for use in desert irrigation to grow crops,biofuels,
reafforestation and co2 sinks. The salt produced can be used as a heat store for use after sunset, and salt water can be electrolysed to generate Hydrogen for fuel storage and transportation and a chemical industry from the other products.Their are plenty of huge hot desert areas around the world,such as the Sahara,Sahell, Southern USA and central Australia. The projects should easliy self fund and the energy from CSP's can be used to smelt the glass and metals required for the collectors/reflectors,etc required. The profits from energy,food,co2 sinks,jobs and new markets thus generated, will then boost the world economy.
0
There are no free lunches
written by steve, November 10, 2009
Mark I keep reading about how we can solve all of our water problems by using ocean water for cooling and we will magically get all of this fresh water as a byproduct. In fact by using ocean water for cooling the only thing you will get is saltier water as a byproduct. There are very few acceptable solar sites near the ocean. Most good solar sites are well above sea level or far inland and the cost to pump the water to the site would quickly exceed the output of the plant.
About the only place I can think you might have a chance of economically using ocean water for cooling would be around the Salton Sea in California. They have talked for years about the possibility of running water from the Gulf of California to help replenish the water in the Salton Sea. As it is below sea level you would not have to pump the water. You could use it in single pass cooling system. Problem is there would be huge obstacles dealing with two countries and I have no idea if the areas near the Salton Sea are actually suited for solar.
Now you could use the heat from the solar plants to desalinate water but then you would not be producing electricity. I know it sound great that we can solve all of our problems using the free energy of the sun but we are a very long way from it.
0
...
written by Derrick, November 11, 2009
We should have listened to Nikola Tesla. Maybe one magnet pushing another will help make electricity and viagra discounts slove one problem in hopes to not create another. Its simple natural force that drives the shaft that makes a spark. Someone has already developed a magnetic wheel on a small scale that produces electricity I just wonder is politics his holding this guy down from mass producing the product.
0
uhhhh recycle the water
written by Brian, November 12, 2009
If its for cooling...cool the unit in question in an enclosed area with an evaporator which can recycle the water smilies/tongue.gif but maybe thats just too easy
0
...
written by Mariah, April 26, 2012
And just when we thought solar power is the answer to energy problems of the whole world we gotta deal with another big problem smilies/grin.gif

Write comment

security code
Write the displayed characters


busy
 

Are you an EcoGeek?

We've got to keep 7 billion people happy without destroying our planet. It's the biggest challenge we've ever faced....but we're taking it on. Are you with us?




The Most Popular Articles