First Solar and NRG Energy Open Largest (21 MW) Solar PV Power Plant in California

[OKIsItJustMe]

http://investor.firstsolar.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=201491&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1368252

First Solar and NRG Energy Open Largest Solar PV Power Plant in California

Blythe Photovoltaic Solar Project Generates Renewable, Clean Electricity for Southern California Edison

PRINCETON, N.J., Dec 21, 2009 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- First Solar, Inc. (Nasdaq: FSLR) and NRG Energy, Inc. (NYSE: NRG) today announced the start of commercial operation for the largest photovoltaic (PV) solar project in California. First Solar developed and built the 21-megawatt (MW) power plant in Blythe, Calif., which was acquired last month by NRG through its wholly owned subsidiary NRG Solar. Electricity generated by the solar facility is being sold to Southern California Edison (SCE) under a 20-year power purchase agreement.

Located in Riverside County about 200 miles east of Los Angeles, the Blythe plant is the largest thin film PV project in the United States and is five times the size of the next largest PV project in California. NRG estimates that at peak capacity, the project can supply the power needs of almost 17,000 homes while helping California meet its renewable energy goals. Approximately 175 people built Blythe during its three-month construction and installation period.

"It is no surprise that America's largest thin film solar project was built right here in California, where my Administration has successfully created a climate where green businesses can thrive," said California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. "It is forward-thinking businesses such as First Solar that will help California reach its nation-leading greenhouse gas reduction and Renewable Portfolio Standard goals, as well as create the new green jobs that will help spur our economic recovery."

"Solar is the great untapped resource in California, and we are pleased to be part of this significant milestone for solar development in our state," said Marc Ulrich, SCE vice president, Renewables and Alternative Power. "Bringing this power to the grid helps SCE maintain its position as the nation's leading utility for renewable energy."

…

[msongs]

1. solar needs to be on rooftops, not in the hands of our corporate enemies. SCE discourages

home solar because it would rather control everything.

Msongs
with a solar roof system working as I type

[OKIsItJustMe]

2. Rooftop solar is just fine

If you own your own roof, and it’s oriented properly, and it’s not shaded by trees…

The typical apartment dweller (for example) cannot install “rooftop solar.”

There will continue to be a place for power utilities.

[kristopher]

5. Large facilities like this are economically justified.

It is less expensive when you have the space to put them in a large array. In New Jersey the utility is very aggressive at supporting rooftop solar because there is little available land.

The economics work for the utilities at this point because the power goes to meet peak daytime demand - a class of power that is the most expensive to deliver because it is the least used.

Projects like this helped spur innovation and investment in new solar technologies like thin film. Now with those new technologies we are seeing rapid adoption of rooftop solar on commercial buildings. This demand is, in turn, driving another wave of investment that will soon bring the price down to the point where it makes sense for homeowners to choose solar even without subsidies.

Since your grid electricity is price averaged and you don't face the penalty of peak rate charges, with the solar panels you are paying a *lot* more for the power than what is available from the grid. That puts such systems in the category of a luxury.

With a bit more patience the actions of that greedy utility will work to bring the price down to where such home systems are no longer a luxury.

[TheMadMonk]

3. and another 999 will allow for one big coal fired plant to be turned off.

Or more accurately, allow for one not to be turned on. World wide production of PV systems is not even capable of keeping up with demand increases, let alone effect a reduction in existing fossil fuel powered electricity generation.

I lived for 6 months in a PV powered house, and yes it's a doable proposition. Provided one is willing to accept some rather draconian lifestyle restrictions, or one has huge quantities of money to throw at a solar solution.

[OKIsItJustMe]

4. You’re right. It’s hopeless

I guess we should tear that plant down. Right? Because, after all, 1% isn’t 100%… and anything short of 100% just doesn’t count.

In my experience, records are made and broken. Today, this is the largest PV plant in California. How long do you think that record will stand?

[TheMadMonk]

7. No it's not hopeless. However it is highly disingenuous to quote...

...a seemingly large number (21 million watt hours) without puting it into context. 21 MW is one percent of a large conventional generating plant (My whoopsie with the 999). And roughly one thirty thousandth of the total generating cpacity of the United States.

Photovoltaics, Solar thermal, wind, and wave/tide will have their place, and in developing nations may well take up the brunt of the load.

However, given what I know of the way people and corporations behave in the United States, I truly do not believe that these technologies have much chance of taking over the load there in an acceptable timeframe. Not without a fundamental shift in thinking and/or draconian regulation to put an end to an entire culture built around consuming at the maximum possible rate. Given a large increase in capacity at a price comparable to that of coal, I strongly suspect that rather than allowing that extra capacity to replace fossil fuel powered generators, people and corporations will instead find ways to use most of it up.

[OKIsItJustMe]

10. “… taking over the load there in an acceptable timeframe…”

So… what do you believe would be a reasonable course of action?

Personally, I like the idea of deploying renewable energy to the extent we are currently able to. This will generate demand, which will lead manufacturers to expand their operations (allowing us to deploy these technologies at a faster pace.)

Will we be able to replace fossil fuels, “in an acceptable time frame?” Maybe not, but if we don’t make the effort, we know for certain that we won’t succeed.

[TheMadMonk]

11. I think you already know my answer: Accelerator driven nukes. nt

[BeFree]

6. heh

when you consider that a new coal plant would cost 500 million to supply only so many houses and emit so much pollution, and that every house tapped onto the plant will pay for the construction and coal that goes into it, but until now zero for the pollution, the idea that we can't or shouldn't reduce polluting plants is fucking downright ridiculous. Plain utter madness.

We can do it, but we don't, and we are killing our environment by not doing it.

Fucking insane.

[TheMadMonk]

8. Exactly where do you get "we can't or shouldn't" out of my post?

Of course we bloody well should.

However, it is my belief that without a monumental paradigm shift in a society/culture built around the concept of consuming at the maximum possible rate it bloody well won't happen with solar/wind power in a timeframe consistent with minimising the impact of global climate change, let alone reversing the damage already done.

[joshcryer]

9. The key point I believe is that the markets can't bring it to fruition without intervention.

Taxing CO2, banning it, something dramatic.