Spanish solar tower could eventually power an entire city

Just last month we witnessed a gigantic skyscraper / solar tower hybrid that generates a whopping 390-kilowatts of energy, but even that looks like child's play compared to the 40-story solar power plant that resides in Spain. The expansive system consists of a towering concrete building, a field of 600 (and growing) sun-tracking mirrors that are each 120-square meters in size, and a receiver that converts concentrated solar energy from the heliostats into steam that eventually drives the turbines. Currently, only one field of mirrors is up and running, but even that produces enough power to energize 6,000 homes, and the creators are hoping to see the entire population of Seville (600,000 folks) taken care of solely from sunlight. So if you're eager to see what's likely the greenest solar power plant currently operating, be sure to slip on some shades, tag the read link, and peep the video.

[Via Wired]

[Craig @ May 4th 2007 4:42PM]

Wow. If only more of our leaders had the courage to push for infrastructure investments like this.

[Kamran Rizvi @ Jun 18th 2007 6:40PM]

Just out of curiousity, is it working as the day one or the power supply gone down or slowed down?

[Todd @ May 4th 2007 4:42PM]

We have tens of millions of acres of land here in Texas, scorched by the Sun nine months a year - why aren't there any if these towers here? At 15 cents a kilowatt wouldn't it just be pure profit to build these things?

[Brien Mizell @ May 4th 2007 4:55PM]

For additional income they could people go into the tower and give them about 30 seconds of the concentrated sun for a quick sun tan. thats about 6€ per pop.

[jng06 @ May 4th 2007 5:06PM]

"It was like being in a sauna and for the last stages the metal rungs of the ladders were scalding."

That's got to be the hottest technology in all of Spain...

Why no link love to the bbc? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6616651.stm\


- Josh
http://www.StateofBrain.com

[juan @ May 4th 2007 5:13PM]

You sure know much about Spain

[DJ @ May 4th 2007 5:08PM]

This would never be allowed in the US. There would be groups that protested against it because some partially endangered species of bird mught be blinded by the intense rays of focused light if they flew through it.

[skefds @ May 4th 2007 5:08PM]

nope, im sorry...I can't find anything in either of the two linked articels stating 390KW. The BBC site does state 11MW though, thats a little diffferent don't you think??

[ScOObyDoo @ May 4th 2007 5:09PM]

Yeah, except that THIS solar tower provides 11MW. That IS "whopping" considering it uses nothing more than the sun. Generating 11MW from solar kind of invalidates your "not commercially competitive" remark.

[juan @ May 4th 2007 5:12PM]

Well, but this spanish facility generates 11 Megawatts (read the bbc link)

[bgdc @ May 4th 2007 5:15PM]

Consider this version of a solar tower then - it simply collects heat and uses the heat to drive the turbines:

http://www.wentworth.nsw.gov.au/solartower/

No mirrors, no pointing of sun, no bright light.

[ScOObyDoo @ May 4th 2007 5:17PM]

Yeah, except it doesn't exist yet. It's all "proposed".

[E-Rock @ May 4th 2007 5:28PM]

Without any details on contruction or operational costs, or even an undetailed cost per kW it's hard to compare this to other technologies.

NIMBY effects aside you'd think they'd be putting a few of these up in the US SouthWest.

They also failed to cover how they're storing energy for cloudy days or nighttime. Interesting article, but incomplete.

[TIMMAH! @ May 4th 2007 5:29PM]

"nope, im sorry...I can't find anything in either of the two linked articels stating 390KW. The BBC site does state 11MW though, thats a little diffferent don't you think??"

Yeah, but that's Spanish megawatts though... :-)

[TIMMAH! @ May 4th 2007 5:31PM]

And I'm really disappointed that no-one has said, "1.2 gigawatts!! Great Scott!!!" yet...

[wabguard-email @ May 4th 2007 11:31PM]

Its actually 1.21 JigaWatts....
:)



http://www.deloreanmotorcar.com/ec/jigawatts.htm

[Gerlinger, A @ May 4th 2007 5:40PM]

Anyone care to take me up on a $100 bet on how long it takes before some psycho sorority girl climbs the tower in a bathing suit and a bottle of tanning lotion? I give it 2 weeks.

[Stephan @ May 4th 2007 6:16PM]

Well that is great an all but what are the people of Sevilla going to do during the night, use flashlights? The biggest problem with has to do with storing the energy for the nighttime, and those darn cloudy days, part of that might figure into the price/kw equation.

Further reading shows 11MW=6,000 homes so for 600,000 homes it would need to somehow generate 1,100MW almost 1.2 gigawatts!

[jdclarke @ May 5th 2007 8:32AM]

It's Spain, not the USA. :)

[flamsmark @ May 4th 2007 8:48PM]

In the UK, we store power (mostly from coal and nuclear stations) by pumping water up hill, then having it run a turbine when it comes back down. The power production in the UK is only seasonally variable, but we use these gravitational stores to adjust for demand.

[hemmy @ May 4th 2007 6:24PM]

The area generates about 11MW because it's not even complete. They're adding new fields of mirrors (perhaps more towers?).

11MW on pure solar with -0- emissions is not a bad thing. (Well, maybe bad for big-oil) :)

[chay @ May 4th 2007 6:28PM]

skefds obviously can't read properly yet. The 390 Kw figure refers to the tower reported last month not this one. The clue is in the page you get if you click the words "390-kilowatts of energy".

But thanks for the valuable input.

[Josh L. @ May 4th 2007 6:29PM]

The first post is correct, you just can't get enough energy... yet. Currently, no matter what method, we only use the infrared(usually to reflect the heat, I guess, not absorb it like with the proposed project). We are already able to synthesize special microscopic crystals that are able to absorb the part of the light spectrum that they are colored, and let the rest of the light pass through.

The idea is, if you can synthesize enough different layers, and stack them up, you could increase the amount of energy absorbed per mirror(I guess it won't be a mirror if it absorbs the light though), but the problem is there are still too many defects when synthesizing the crystals, but it's being worked on, and it is just a matter of time. if every one of those mirrors is converted, the amount of power could be almost doubled.

I don't know much more of any other uses, or exactly what they mean by absorbed, or how the "absorbed" energy will be converted to electricity. Also, does this mean they reflect absolutely no lights? because there could be a lot of uses for that too.

[SjG @ May 4th 2007 6:32PM]

We used to have one of these out in Daggett, California, called Solar One. It cost too much to keep all the mirrors operational, supposedly. Although this paper just says the plant itself used too much power.

[SjG @ May 4th 2007 6:33PM]

Argh. Link got lost. Trying again... http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1983asme.confS....B

[Admiral Ackbar @ May 4th 2007 6:34PM]

Actually 11MW isn't that whopping. Take Seabrook Nuclear Power Station. It generates 1.2 Gigawatts (enough for 900,000 households in New England); and here's whats really amazing about it. It does it at night as well!

[hordak @ May 4th 2007 7:11PM]

http://www.solucar.es/

Its definately 11MW, it also says it will generate 23GWh per year.

[Anthony @ May 4th 2007 7:28PM]

Maybe I'm crazy but can't we figure out how to make something like this work w/o creating a huge blinding light?

Seems to me that my solar water heater's just black absorbing light. I know it's a different technology but still- who wants to live next to a gigantic, phallic disco ball?

[Marc-O @ May 5th 2007 4:44PM]

"who wants to live next to a gigantic, phallic disco ball?"

I don't know, would you rather live next door to a coal or nuclear powerplant ?

[Anthony @ May 5th 2007 4:49PM]

Marc-O: Coal & nuclear aren't our only options besides solar.

I live about 7 blocks from a bioenergy plant. Not bad & I know where our local farm waste goes.

[Methos @ May 4th 2007 9:03PM]

Didn't I see this two years ago in the movie Sahara?

[crypt @ May 4th 2007 10:11PM]

The deep dark secret about solar power that the green people don't want you to know about: It only works during the day and it doesn't work well when it's cloudy. So you can't use it all the time and there's no good way to save large amounts of electricity for later. But don't let those facts stop you from adopting it on a major scale for your country.

[Genome @ May 30th 2007 6:41PM]

Well solar power at the moment isn't efficient, but you could use any excess power to electrolyze some water to get hydrogen. Store that hydrogen to power cars/fuel cells maybe?

[TwhiT @ May 4th 2007 10:18PM]

I stopped watching after he said that it costs 3 times as much as their normal power supply.....3 TIMES!!.....screw that

[Max Mitchell @ May 5th 2007 5:11AM]

ScOObyDoo @ May 4th 2007 5:17PM

Yeah, except it doesn't exist yet. It's all "proposed".

Did you even read the article? Some of it has already been built, it currently powers 6000 homes with more to come! So not all proposed. And I would know! I went there last year! My Exchange students dad worked here! Never realised how cool that was until now!

[Liosandro @ May 5th 2007 6:16AM]

1) Feasibility. The technology involved is relatively low. Every country in the world can do that. This is a plus.
2) Costs. The first nuclear plant was was hugely expensive, mining and treating the uranium is likely to be more expensive than cleaning some mirrors. Just wait for diffusion and you will see a dramatic drop of the cost-per-Kw. And the sun is not likely to end as the fossil...
3) Solar energy hasn't enough density to be efficiently converted in electrical energy? That means that all the people using black pipes on the rooftops to warm the water, solar panels, and so on are wasting energy? The fact is in front of your eyes. Not enough density? You simply use mirrors concentrate the solar radiation to get the right amount. You just need space on the ground and clear sky... Deserts perhaps?

[Kent Beuchert @ May 5th 2007 11:00AM]

"11MW on pure solar with -0- emissions is not a bad thing. (Well, maybe bad for big-oil) :)"
Why in the world would this be bad for big oil? The world doen't use very much oil to make electricity. I'm amazed at how much public ignoranace there is about energy. Plenty of strong opinions, very little actual knowledge. These are the folks who actually believe that wind power is making a difference.
The Enviromeission solar tower is a better design and far simplerand the output capacity far greater. Am RFP by El Paso Electric was responded to by Enviromission
to provide 200 megawatts (unlike crappy wind, producing RELIABLE power 24/7). This
technology is cheaper than wind, and its output is not garbage electricity like wind power, either - it's output will be worth at least three times the kWhr rates that wind operators are getting. Notice that wind is receiving massive subsidies so it can produce crap that nobody wants. I note that the TERC reported statistic s showinf wind power operating at an insignificant 2.5% during peak demand. When it gets hot or cold and demand peaks, the wind seldom blows. Thus is the death knell
of wind power. Only the ignorant public still believe wind power has any real value. Wind power costs over $6 million per MW, nuclear less than $1 million per MW, and nuclear fuel costs are less than the royalties wind pays the landowners!!! Wind truly sucks.

[apeguero @ May 5th 2007 2:16PM]

First "SteamPunk" power plant? Cool!

[James Barker @ May 6th 2007 11:17PM]

Interesting idea. I'm graduating this month with an BS in mechanical engineering and going on to masters studies in the fluids and energy group at UW. The most basic driving factor for power production efficiency is the temperature gradient (for the layman, the amount of temperature difference divided by the distance) you can generate. Conventional means of solar power, it seems, have never been able to provide the kind of temperature gradient that this system produces. Still, its commercial viability is questionable. The cost of repair, maintenance, construction are all high relative to its MWattage.

[waLLy @ May 7th 2007 5:59PM]

He did. He was referring to a different proposal that another commenter posted.

[TNP @ May 17th 2007 8:49PM]

Pranksters Guide to Seville

Bring Popcorn. Lots and lots of popcorn.

[TNP @ May 17th 2007 8:49PM]

Pranksters Guide to Seville

Bring Popcorn. Lots and lots of popcorn.

[Nick Ridge @ May 30th 2007 7:31PM]

Here's some whopping solar and they've been operational for years:

http://www.solel.com/products/pgeneration/ls2/kramerjunction/

[Luis @ Jun 5th 2007 6:53AM]

The largest operational solar power plant is putting out 11MW today, not far, in Serpa Portugal.

http://www.powerlight.com/success/pdf/Serpa_Fact_Sheet_A4.pdf

The area is semi-arid and the installations seems to have gone almost unnoticed by the local population.

[Benny @ Jun 8th 2007 12:58AM]

What annoys me about some of these negative dicks is that they sit back behind their pseudo degrees and pick sh1t at those who are having a go. To those who say it wont work at night, BIG DEAL. Who said it had to be the total solution. It at least it helps in some small way.
If we listened to those who bagged the first airplanes we wouldn't have the great planes we have today.
There must be a starting point in which to evolve into something better.

To those pride filled gooses who flag their electrical degrees as some sort of excuse to beat down those who are having a go, I have zero respect for you and your cereal packet degree.

[Erick @ Jul 8th 2007 9:25PM]

11MW is awesome, that makes it a contender for peak power. I'm wondering , has anyone in this
forum flown over one of these, say, in the California dessert ? Nice link previously posted of
this site.

http://www.solel.com/products/pgeneration/ls2/kramerjunction/

If so is it blinding ? Just curious.

I love the idea of grabbing power from the sun :)

[engadget @ Jul 10th 2007 12:21PM]

Modeled in Google Earth:
http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/884819/an//page//vc/1