The story behind Ausra and its solar thermal electricity plan.
We recently wrote extensively about a major solar deal between Florida's FPL Group and a California company, Ausra.
An article in the latest edition of Business Week tells the intriguing story of Ausra, originally an Australian company, and the "crazy-ass" plan developed by the maverick scientists behind it, John O'Donnell and David Mills.
Ausra recently moved to California after striking an investment deal with renowned venture capitalist a major alternative energy player, Vinod Khosla.
The article says "the big question is
not whether solar thermal plants work, but how much the electricity
will cost."
Right now, the price for existing mirror and steam turbine
systems is about half that of photovoltaic (PV)
panels, which use sheets of semiconductors to convert sunlight to
electricity. But that's still nearly twice as much as a new coal plant.
Ausra believes it has solved the biggest problem solar power has faced previously - its high cost.
But skeptics say the company still faces major engineering
challenges to make its technology commerically viable.
Click here to read the article.
- David Adams
It is not possible to overstate the importance of this project. This represents a significant investment by two major utilities to drive down the cost of solar power. This overcomes the chicken and the egg problem of scaling up solar projects. The following round can narrow the price gap more.
We also don't count the other costs of
coal: it is the dirtiest source of power, it destroys massive amounts of land, it is the most dangerous source of power as measured by people killed in accidents and then there is global
warming...
Posted by: Karl Nurse | October 10, 2007 at 08:30 PM
Solar energy is still to expensive for the average homeowner. I have looked into it for my home and even with rebates it would still take 10 to 15 years to make up the difference between the power I pay now and the cost for the solar equipment. That assumes zero maintenance costs, which we know is not possible. This just is not going to happen any time soon.
Posted by: Ronnie | October 11, 2007 at 09:24 AM
"It is not possible to overstate the importance of this project. This represents a significant investment by two major utilities to drive down the cost of solar power."
Thermal solar is potentially the cheapest form of solar-based electricity generation. Ausra needs ten years of plant operation and some severe weather events at their sites to actually demonstrate their claims of costs. So far they have 1 MW of capacity up and running.
However, the quoted costs come to $5000 per kilowatt of installed peak capacity. Solar is typically available 30% of the time in sunny southern climates, giving an actual cost of $16,600 per kilowatt of generation 24 hours a day.
How does that compare with other sources of electricity?
Nuclear plant expansions average $2100 per kilowatt.
Coal averages $1200 per kilowatt.
Natural gas fired generators average $600 per kilowatt.
I'd rather spend this chunk of ratepayers' money on expanding nuclear generation in Florida.
Posted by: paminator | October 14, 2007 at 12:44 PM