Cutting Costs from Utility-Scale Solar Production

01.21.09Rob Lamkin, CEO, Cool Earth Solar
Article Viewed 5453 Times
4 Comments

print email blog

Interested in this topic? Need more information? Energy Central has created a complete information service focused only on Solar. There is no better way to stay informed. Get more information on Solar today!
Solar is poised to become the major player in solving the energy crisis, once the solar industry brings down the costs for utility-scale power production. The stakes for solar -- indeed, for all renewables that are competing in the utility-scale arena -- are huge, as are the goals.

We need only look at the goals of various renewable portfolio standards (RPS) in the United States to see this. As of September 2008, more than 30 states have "state-mandated" RPS goals of obtaining from 10 to over 25 percent of their electricity from renewable sources. The deadlines range from less than two years to nearly 17 years from now (Figure 1). For states to meet these goals in the mandated timeframes, the solar industry must think "gigawatts" for its power plants, not "kilowatts," and it needs to employ technologies that will make utility-scale solar cost-competitive with fossil fuels.

At such a large scale, there are two prime hurdles to the widespread adoption of solar power. The first hurdle is the solar industry's reliance on costly or rare materials for its systems; the second is the expense involved in siting a plant. Although these challenges are relevant to other sectors of the power industry, they are particularly onerous for the solar industry.

It's a Material World

Financial outlay for materials is one issue that casts a shadow over solar's large-scale prospects. Most solar technologies still depend primarily on materials that are heavy, expensive to produce or not readily available. For example, consider steel and aluminum: many commercial solar solutions need up to 1,000 pounds of steel for support structures, tubes, towers and so on, and approximately 100 pounds of aluminum for systems such as solar mirrors, support structures and heat sinks. Increased worldwide demand for steel has sent prices soaring over the past year, while aluminum stands at $1.20 per pound as of this writing. Solar designs that minimize the use of these materials will have a competitive advantage.

The price of solar cells -- the devices that transform sunlight into electricity -- is also a consideration when looking for ways to save money. Solar cells are generally the most expensive components of solar energy systems. The average installed cost of conventional, one-sun flat plate solar technologies is about $8 per watt. New technologies are being developed that could cut these costs drastically. For instance, multi-junction (III-V) cells capture more solar energy than ordinary "one sun" silicon-based solar cells and are over 40 percent more efficient. Thin film is another option solar technologies are exploring. As for the ordinary silicon-based cell, some technologies are beginning to use thinner silicon wafers for their cells: using less of this expensive element can only improve cost-competitiveness.

Some solar designs use concentrated photovoltaic (CPV) technologies that leverage lenses or reflectors to concentrate sunlight onto highly efficient solar cells, such as multi-junction cells; this dramatically slashes (sometimes hundreds of times over) the amount of traditional solar cell area needed to produce electricity and cuts overall system costs. CPV systems are typically priced around $4 per watt, compared to the $8 per watt of silicon flat panels.

Staying Grounded

Rooftop solar systems alone can't meet the energy challenges set out by state RPS. For instance, 100,000 rooftops, each topped with a typical 2-kilowatt residential solar-power system, would deliver a total of 200 megawatts -- about as much as one large utility-scale solar plant. We must rely on megawatt- and gigawatt-scale solar power plants instead, and deal cost-effectively with siting issues. Most of the proposed utility-scale solar power plants today are looking to build in areas rich in "solar resources," such as the U.S. Southwest (Figure 2). In fact, the Bureau of Land Management has received more than 130 proposals from solar companies to build on a total of nearly one million acres of public land.

A number of siting issues can drive up costs. First, there is construction. For most solar technologies, sites must be leveled and scraped -- a direct result of the heavy systems that need to be put in place and supported. Any solar technology that minimizes the extensive renovation and destruction of the landscape will diminish costs and the impact on the environment. Solar system designs that forgo the use of heavy materials can avoid large foundations and footings. Some solar technologies are moving in this direction with lightweight solar collectors supported by poles and wires.

Another siting consideration is water. In desert areas much coveted for solar power production, water is a scarce -- and expensive -- commodity. Some solar installations, such as solar power towers and solar parabolic troughs, use upwards of 750 gallons to produce a single megawatt-hour (MWh), surpassing the water use of coal plants (about 670 gallons per MWh). Solar technology that is thrifty with water will generally be effective in lowering overheads while also preserving a precious resource. For instance, dish Stirling, solar flat panel photovoltaic (PV) and solar concentrating PV technologies all consume less than 5 gallons of water per MWh.

Finally, just as in real estate, the solar industry must think "location, location, location." Siting plants closer to load centers curtails the need for additional transmission infrastructure and the additional construction expense of installing transmission lines. However, public pressure and perception can narrow choices of possible plant locations. NIMBY (Not in My Back Yard) adherents will often push for power plants that (on one hand) are distanced from populated areas and (on the other hand) avoid sensitive ecological areas. Solar technologies that are environmentally friendly will likely face less opposition to siting proposals.

All Renewables Have a Place on the Stage Of course, solar is not the only option for fulfilling state RPS requirements. The targets are so large that all renewable utility-scale technologies need to step up in a big way. Solar has the advantage in that the sun reaches all corners of the globe.

Conversely, there are only so many places where the wind blows, the tides rise and the rivers run under conditions favorable for generating utility-scale electricity at a reasonable price. In some regions, many of the best locations for harnessing such renewable power have already been developed.

But solar's star is still ascendant. There are approaches, technologies and designs that, once put in place, can curb plant construction and siting costs as well as material costs. The result: clean, renewable, large-scale energy that major utilities will be able to obtain at prices commensurate with those of fossil fuels.

 
For information on purchasing reprints of this article, contact Tim Tobeck ttobeck@energycentral.com.
Copyright 2010 CyberTech, Inc.

We know you have something to say!

There is an immediate need for articles on the hot topics in the Power Industry! EnergyPulse, like no other publication, also provides a means for our readers to immediately interact with experts like you.

Contribute Today!

Please view our Author Guidelines and send submissions to the editor.
 

Reader's Comments

Date Comment
Paul Stevens
1.28.09
So, "Solar is poised to become the major player in solving the energy crisis..." All that is required is to reduce the cost of the solar cells, find suitable land in dessert areas that are close to major population centers and large supplies of water. I think I have correctly summarized what you have written.

I apologize for being facetious Rob, but this is not news. And you haven't addressed the real problem with solar, the high cost of storage. Unless everybody finally agrees that solar is strictly a source of peaking electicity generation, which it is suited for in areas with high air conditioning needs. Until the storage issue is addressed, solar is strictly a niche product.

Malcolm Rawlingson
1.31.09
Well Rob I have to admire your optimism - full marks for that. But as far as I can tell the Sun does not shine at night - not even in the desert. So unless you can also store massive amounts of electricity as well as overcome the formidable problems you note above solar can never compete with large scale nuclear.

They produce electricity both day and night with no need to store it.

I am writing from Canada. There is three feet of snow piled on every square inch of my lot and it is dark out. I have a really hard time believing that solar energy has any future in Northern climates. Who would clear the snow and ice from thousands of acres of solar panels? It is a hard enough job finding someone to plough my driveway or clear the roads and you are trying to convince me that we would be able to clear square MILES of solar panels. Dream on.

I think you have been out in the Sun too long.

Malcolm

David Knowles
2.2.09
The State mandates for RPS reminds me of the ill-fated electric industry "deregulation" fiasco. Our politicians have demonstrated time and again that they don't have the expertise in technical matters. The incoming speaker of the house in Texas said he thought deregulation was bringing benefits to the citizens. The facts are that Texans have among the highest electricity rates in the nation.

Len Gould
2.3.09
Malcolm: Given the several reputable references I have provided to you and other readers on past threads refuting your claims against solar thermal ("So unless you can also store massive amounts of electricity" is particular evidence of stubornness. Solar thermal plants in good locations can achieve 83% capacity simply by storing heat from an increase of collectors from 1x to 3x) I must conclude you persist in providing miss-information to accomplish some particular agenda.

Here's the links again.

Assessment of Parabolic Trough and Power Tower Solar Technology - Cost and Performance Forecasts - Sargent & Lundy LLC Engineering Group Chicago, Illinois

[QUOTE]For the more technically aggressive low-cost case, S&L found the National Laboratories’ “SunLab” methodology and analysis to be credible. The projections by SunLab, developed in conjunction with industry, are considered by S&L to represent a “best-case analysis” in which the technology is optimized and a high deployment rate is achieved. The two sets of estimates, by SunLab and S&L, provide a band within which the costs can be expected to fall. The figure and table below highlight these results, with initial electricity costs in the range of 10 to 12.6 ¢/kWh and eventually achieving costs in the range of 3.5 to 6.2 ¢/kWh. The specific values will depend on total capacity of various technologies deployed and the extent of R&D program success. In the technically aggressive cases for troughs / towers, the S&L analysis found that cost reductions were due to volume production (26%/28%), plant scale-up (20%/48%), and technological advance (54%/24%).[/QUOTE]

Given Sargent & Lundy Engineering's worst case scenario provides peak time solar electricity at $0.062/kwh by only building 2.8 GW and doing a few minor and definitely achievable R&D improvements, plus transmission, and a clear path is provided to offering 83% capacity factor using cheap sand and gravel tanks for thermal storage with 3x collector area and no additional central plant, which should make the installation no more expensive PER KWH if only the industry can get to 2.8 GW installed, I don;t see what we are waiting for.

It also appears to me that the more agressive forecasts of NREL / SunLab of $0.035 / kwh if we can get to 8.2 GW insalled quite quickly is entirely within reach.

Clean Power from Deserts - The DESERTEC Concept for Energy, Water and Climate Security - Club of Rome

Do you agree or disagree with this article? Send in your own article.

Add your comments:

Please log in to leave a comment!
back to top

Receive Energy Central eNews & Updates








Contribute Your Work

It's easy to contribute articles, article proposals, commentary and analysis and be published online through Energy Central!

Sound interesting? Contact the editor for more information.


Sponsored Content