HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Environment & Energy » Environment & Energy (Group) » Ivanpah solar plant, buil... » Reply #3

Response to 1965Comet (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 14, 2017, 09:16 AM

3. Welcome to science indeed.

A MW is not a unit of energy. It's a unit of power. Thus "653MW" you report is meaningless.

The Wikipedia reference you give - it's funny how people supporting this failed technology live and breath by Wikipedia and not scientific publications - does give the energy produced by the plant in 2016 in energy units, if not SI units, in MWh.

In 2016, see the table in your Wikipedia reference, shows that the $2.2 billion dollar plant produced, in 2016, 60671 MWh.

Converting this figure to Joules, as anyone familiar with high school science should be able to do, and then dividing the number by the seconds in a year, we can see that the average continuous power of the plant in 2016 was 69.21 MW.

The plant, if it were an experiment, is a costly failure that trashed huge sections of the desert.

I wonder how many engineers could have had their full educations paid for $2.2 billion, how many children could have been vaccinated, how many homeless could have been housed.

The worst part of the deal is that we bet the planetary atmosphere on this sort of thing. The result of a two trillion dollar investment in so called "renewable energy" in the last ten years has resulted in the fastest accumulation of dangerous fossil fuel waste in the planetary atmosphere ever observed.

I really don't need a "welcome to science." I'm in my fourth decade as a working scientist, and I believe that experiments should be well designed.

This one wasn't.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 9 replies Author Time Post
NNadir Feb 2017 OP
1965Comet Feb 2017 #1
LineLineNew Reply Welcome to science indeed.
NNadir Feb 2017 #3
1965Comet Feb 2017 #4
NNadir Feb 2017 #5
1965Comet Feb 2017 #6
NNadir Feb 2017 #9
caraher Feb 2017 #2
hunter Feb 2017 #7
NNadir Feb 2017 #8
Please login to view edit histories.