Webmaster Forum

Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Controversial Social Issues Discussions concerning controversial social issues. Topics include politics, religion, culture, social and economic issues, etc. Respect required at all times.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Share |
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 10-26-2010, 12:02 AM
Contributing Member
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 08-15-06
Posts: 10,109
iTrader: 11 / 100%
$6 billion California solar power plant is approved

Quote:
The world's largest power plant using heat from the sun to generate electricity, a planned $6 billion project in California, has won approval from Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.

Solar Millennium Llc. of Oakland, Calif., agreed to environmental measures in return for permission to build the Blythe Solar Power Project on public land, the Interior Department said Monday. Blythe will use mirrors to concentrate the sun's energy rather than photovoltaic panels, which convert light directly into electricity.

The project will cover 7,025 acres on a site 216 miles east of Los Angeles, producing up to 1,000 megawatts, the Interior Department said. The facility will use rows of parabolic mirrors to focus the sun's energy onto tubes that will carry heated oil to a boiler, which will send steam to a turbine. A megawatt is enough to power about 800 average U.S. homes, according to the Energy Department.

Salazar earlier approved projects in California proposed by Chevron Corp. and Tessera Solar, a unit of Irish utility NTR Plc. Before Monday's announcement, four solar facilities on public lands in California and a project in Nevada with capacity to generate a total of 1,800 megawatts won approval this month.

The Natural Resources Defense Council supports the project, most of which is near industrial and agricultural lands appropriate for solar development, the New York-based group said in a statement. The council has called on Salazar to develop national guidelines for renewable-energy development on public lands.
http://www.star-telegram.com/2010/10...lar-power.html

Even project like this is won by a headquartered German company Solar Millennium

Where are the products made in USA????? Where are the jobs???????
__________________
"The secret of freedom lies in educating people, whereas the secret of tyranny is in keeping them ignorant."

Robespierre
 
Reply With Quote

Advertisement

Advertisement

  #2 (permalink)  
Old 10-27-2010, 08:29 AM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,755
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Interesting.
The best and most efficient solar cells are made in Germany.
So, I'm wondering if the project was originally going to use cells and that's why a German company was chosen?
 
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 10-27-2010, 08:52 AM
Contributing Member
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 08-15-06
Posts: 10,109
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zap View Post
Interesting.
The best and most efficient solar cells are made in Germany.
So, I'm wondering if the project was originally going to use cells and that's why a German company was chosen?
I believe that the Americans are too much into the fossil fuel business for too long and for many reasons. Now they are behind, that they don't build solar equipment yet and miss a huge opportunity to create massive jobs.

Like we say in Nevada if the state was used at 75% for solar plants, we will be able to power the entire country
__________________
"The secret of freedom lies in educating people, whereas the secret of tyranny is in keeping them ignorant."

Robespierre
 
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 10-27-2010, 09:21 AM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,755
iTrader: 5 / 100%
It's too bad the thinking is like that.

With solar, it's free for the lifetime of our sun. (Once everything is setup). Production continues, year after year.
With oil, you have to continually find new sources and that gets expensive over time.

Last edited by Zap; 10-27-2010 at 09:24 AM.
 
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 10-27-2010, 09:30 AM
TechWizard's Avatar
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 07-27-07
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6,156
iTrader: 2 / 100%
I still propose that instead of attempting to make massive power plants that the better answer would be to do so on a smaller scale, on a per city/town and per house level, this removes the massive difficulties involved in large scale projects, removes the elevated costs and efforts needed in order to transfer and store the power on the larger scale.

Though this takes away from the utilities industry so the chances of such a common sense approach taking form extremely unlikely.
__________________
Get A PC Helper
Virus Malware Removal | Remote Computer Repair
And More...
www.pchelper123.com


 
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 10-27-2010, 09:50 AM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,755
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by thegamerslink View Post
I still propose that instead of attempting to make massive power plants that the better answer would be to do so on a smaller scale, on a per city/town and per house level, this removes the massive difficulties involved in large scale projects, removes the elevated costs and efforts needed in order to transfer and store the power on the larger scale.

Though this takes away from the utilities industry so the chances of such a common sense approach taking form extremely unlikely.
I don't know how it works in your neck of the woods, but we can do that here. The utility has no authority to prevent a private owner from setting up their own solar farm and actually encourages it buy offering to buy excess power (at a really nice price, I might add) from private individuals and by continually raising their rates for the power they provide. The problem for us is that it is prohibitively expensive to get set up. You don't begin seeing a return on your investment for 5 years or more and the equipment is not cheap!
 
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 10-27-2010, 11:50 AM
TechWizard's Avatar
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 07-27-07
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6,156
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Exactly, though in my area down here they are still about twenty years behind the times so I don't think the buy back ability is here yet. But my proposition is that instead of so much government money going into the areas of big farms, putting it to better use and sending it in the direction of the smaller more realistic and feasible methods. A lot more distance per dollar would be had by providing it to the individual and municipalities than going to the monster farms that then have to figure out how to get it to the grid from out in the middle of nowhere. Subsidize the costs, offer training and information to the individual, those that choose to take advantage of the programs then can sell back the excess for those that either can't take advantage, or those that simply refuse to.
__________________
Get A PC Helper
Virus Malware Removal | Remote Computer Repair
And More...
www.pchelper123.com


 
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 10-27-2010, 12:26 PM
Contributing Member
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 08-15-06
Posts: 10,109
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by thegamerslink View Post
I still propose that instead of attempting to make massive power plants that the better answer would be to do so on a smaller scale, on a per city/town and per house level, this removes the massive difficulties involved in large scale projects, removes the elevated costs and efforts needed in order to transfer and store the power on the larger scale.

Though this takes away from the utilities industry so the chances of such a common sense approach taking form extremely unlikely.
It all depends of the solar technology: Mirrors or Cells.

The mirors technology is made for massive plants and can last for a very long time, the cells technology is made for medium, little and individual source of energy. The problem with cells is the short life expectancy, and will drive up the cost.
__________________
"The secret of freedom lies in educating people, whereas the secret of tyranny is in keeping them ignorant."

Robespierre
 
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2010, 07:35 AM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,755
iTrader: 5 / 100%
The price of the cells needs to come down and their efficiency needs to increase before this is feasible for most home owners.
 
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2010, 08:13 AM
rabble's Avatar
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 12-24-08
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,868
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by thegamerslink View Post
I still propose that instead of attempting to make massive power plants that the better answer would be to do so on a smaller scale, on a per city/town and per house level, this removes the massive difficulties involved in large scale projects, removes the elevated costs and efforts needed in order to transfer and store the power on the larger scale.

Though this takes away from the utilities industry so the chances of such a common sense approach taking form extremely unlikely.
I so totally agree with you!
Why should tax payers be making such massive investment in continued
dependence? It makes no sense.
__________________
Without faith you can change nothing.
You will leave the world as you found it.

Rabble Park
 
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 10-28-2010, 08:35 AM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,755
iTrader: 5 / 100%
I can offer a suggestion as to why a scale larger than per house is necessary.
If something goes wrong with my operation, I still require power supplied by the grid and would, therefore, need a power supplier larger than myself to cover the gaps in my own service.
There are also cloudy days and other hinderances to take into account.
 
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 10-30-2010, 05:28 AM
rabble's Avatar
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 12-24-08
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,868
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zap View Post
I can offer a suggestion as to why a scale larger than per house is necessary.
If something goes wrong with my operation, I still require power supplied by the grid and would, therefore, need a power supplier larger than myself to cover the gaps in my own service.
There are also cloudy days and other hinderances to take into account.
Luv the new look!
Excellent point, too.
__________________
Without faith you can change nothing.
You will leave the world as you found it.

Rabble Park
 
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 11-02-2010, 10:44 PM
TechWizard's Avatar
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 07-27-07
Location: Georgia
Posts: 6,156
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zap View Post
I can offer a suggestion as to why a scale larger than per house is necessary.
If something goes wrong with my operation, I still require power supplied by the grid and would, therefore, need a power supplier larger than myself to cover the gaps in my own service.
There are also cloudy days and other hinderances to take into account.
There is a simple answer to the problem you have presented alternative sources of energy The push is to get away from fossil fuels as a main source of energy if I am not mistaken, no real reason that it has to disappear altogether, if the necessity for it is drastically reduced then many of the reasons for wanting to get away from its use goes away, i.e. limited supply, if the demand is low then that is a non-issue, pollution - if it is being used on a much smaller scale that impact is non-impactful...I can go on...but needless to say, it would simply be in place as a back up. The real answer lies in the other alternative sources such as nuclear power, clean coal, hydropower, geothermal, hydrogen, natural gas....again I could continue on but you get the point...

The idea of localized energy production is not to establish a complete and total removal from the grid. It is to generate a majority of your energy needs for yourself, hopefully much of the time over producing so that power can be sent back into the grid to serve those that do not have the capability, that then puts a lower strain on the grid as a whole stabilizing the grid power grid as a whole, the likelyhood that a majority of those producing their own power source loosing all ability to do so at the same time state or countrywide is extremely unlikely, the alternative methods of energy production on the large scale then would have less of a constant drain making it more economical and easier to service the grid as needed.

This also serves to remove dependency from other countries for resources which in turn many times will avert the need for military defense or aggression in order to protect future prospects of survival between countries and provinces throughout the world, this would be an excellent answer in order to help support third world countries as many of the methods would be within a range of economics that makes it much more feasible to deliver a modern atmosphere in even the most inhospitable environments be it through solar, geothermal, wind or other method. The environment of the area could be the deciding factor of which type of alternative energy methods are to be used as their effectiveness is extremely geographically determined.

To put it all in a nice little synapses, instead of attempting massive projects and attempting to find ways to transport the energy made, or store electricity produced you are taking a more common sense approach that is specifically tailored to the environmental conditions of the area, performed on a smaller scale removing the cost over head and side stepping many of the engineering issues that make massive projects so costly and often unfeasible or unrealistic allowing for deployment at a much faster pace.
__________________
Get A PC Helper
Virus Malware Removal | Remote Computer Repair
And More...
www.pchelper123.com



Last edited by TechWizard; 11-02-2010 at 10:48 PM.
 
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 11-03-2010, 06:46 AM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,755
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by thegamerslink View Post
There is a simple answer to the problem you have presented alternative sources of energy The push is to get away from fossil fuels as a main source of energy if I am not mistaken, no real reason that it has to disappear altogether, if the necessity for it is drastically reduced then many of the reasons for wanting to get away from its use goes away, i.e. limited supply, if the demand is low then that is a non-issue, pollution - if it is being used on a much smaller scale that impact is non-impactful...I can go on...but needless to say, it would simply be in place as a back up. The real answer lies in the other alternative sources such as nuclear power, clean coal, hydropower, geothermal, hydrogen, natural gas....again I could continue on but you get the point...
I believe this is still too much in line with our current thinking.
We've failed to consider the consequences of our actions and that is why energy is such an important issue today.
I think we need to produce as much of our own energy as we can on a per house basis, through solar, wind or geothermal.
That localized power can then be supllemented as needed by the existing grid.
And if we move to retrofit the existing grid with more ecological and economical friendly technologies (wind, solar, geothermal, hydro, etc.) we'll be better off for it in the long run.
I wouldn't go with coal or oil or gas because those are all finite. True enough, if demand were reduced, they would last longer, but they still have an end to them. On the other side of that coin, the sun will continue to shine, the wind will continue to blow, the water will continue to move for our entire time we are on this planet. Better to make use of those free and infinite sources than to keep throwing money at trying to find and extract more oil, gas, etc.
 
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 11-04-2010, 11:43 AM
carwell's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Join Date: 02-15-10
Posts: 186
iTrader: 0 / 0%
All of those are very expensive.
A coal powered plant will cost less than $2 bill for the same amount produced. Small distributed plant is off course ideal but building 5 of 1 MW plant cost a lot more than 1 of 5 MW plant. Not to mention safety gears that need to be installed and monitor if everyone is going to connect to the national grid.
Hydro destroy the environment faster than coal, wind blades produce humming sound that drives people crazy, geothermal has a very long lead time and usually ended up built at an unstable location.
To sum it up, the alternative still requires a lot of research and government funding.
 
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 11-04-2010, 06:21 PM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
Latest Blog:
None

 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,755
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by carwell View Post
A coal powered plant will cost less than $2 bill for the same amount produced.
Not when you factor in the cost of all the coal you're going to have to continually shovel into it.
 
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 11-05-2010, 12:51 AM
carwell's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Join Date: 02-15-10
Posts: 186
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zap View Post
Not when you factor in the cost of all the coal you're going to have to continually shovel into it.
Not really, the extra $4 bill can buy coal enough to power 1000 MW coal plant for more than 8 years at the current price of $70 per ton. With the time value of the money you probably double that time. The beauty of coal power plant is that its pretty much proven technology so the development cost are much smaller, proportionally off course.

The other one is the availability factor, coal can get as high as 95% and that pretty standard, with renewables youre lucky to have 70%.

But youre right off course, something needs to be done about the dwindling resources of this place we call earth.

I used to develop coal plant now I'm doing biogas and biomas, and its not as easy as it looks on paper. The only thing that makes this even feasible is the CDM and you know what people think of CDM.
 
Reply With Quote
Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Solar Power? SN3 Tech Talk 50 10-12-2009 06:39 AM


V7N Network
Get exposure! V7N I Love Photography V7N SEO Blog V7N Directory


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:24 AM.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Copyright © 2003 - 2014 Escalate Media




Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.