Print 85 comment(s) - last by SPOOFE.. on Dec 3 at 1:57 AM

A map of the planned 250 MW solar power plant, showing preserved land (green) and installation area (blue).  (Source: NRG Solar/SunPower)

The plant will be located roughly halfway between San Francisco and Los Angeles, just south of California's Bay Area.  (Source: Wikipedia)
Plant would take around 15-20 years to break even if electricity was sold at coal power rates

If there's one thing critics and proponents of solar power alike can agree upon, it's that solar power, like any commodity, will go down in price when it is produced at a greater volume.  Recently announced plants, like a 280 mega-watt (MW) installation in the Arizona desert go a long way towards achieving that sort of volume increase.

As does a new 250 MW installation in San Luis Obispo County, California which was formally announced this week.  Construction on the new plant will commence next year and is expected to create 350 construction jobs.

San Luis Obispo is a coastal county that is relatively rural and lightly populated by Californian standards.  It's roughly halfway between Los Angeles and San Francisco, two of the state's biggest cities.

The new plant will be a joint venture between NRG Solar, Inc. and SunPower Corp. -- two veteran solar power firms (SunPower, alone, will have installed over 1.5 GW of solar power by the year's end).  NRG Solar is expected to pitch in $450M USD over the four year launch period.  NRG will own the plant, it is basically contracting SunPower to design, build, and operate the plant.

The plant will begin producing electricity in late 2011.  By 2012 to 2013 it is expected to reach full capacity, as construction completes.  The plant is expected to provide enough power for 100,000 households.

The new plant is named the "California Valley Solar Ranch". 

NRG Solar is seeking government loans from the U.S. Department of Energy to initially finance the construction.  While U.S. President Barack Obama recently handed out $1.85B USD in grants to solar power projects, the new installation likely will not receive any of this money.

Securing a government loan is critical to the NRG and SunPower's plan.  States Howard Wenger, president of the utility and power plants business group at SunPower, "The DOE is playing a critical leadership role in supporting renewable energy that provides economic and environmental benefits, as well as a secure, stable energy supply in the U.S."

The project has been in the works for the last two years.  It is expected to be operational for at least 25 years.

Challenges to the plant's success remain.  Currently environmental activists in California are vigorously resisting large solar and wind installations, which they fear will damage fragile ecosystems.  They have filed lawsuits to try to block similar projects.

The California Valley Solar Ranch project may placate these critics, thanks to the 2,399 acres it sets aside as a wildlife habitat.  The plant and associated facilities are expected to occupy 1,966 acres of land.

Another challenge is the underlying economics.  While the California Public Utilities Commission has agreed to buy 25 years worth of power from the installation, likely at an inflated price, it remains to be seen exactly how much money the plant will make.  Coal power costs around $0.06-$0.08 USD per kilowatt-hour, so if the solar plant's power was sold at an equivalent rate, it would take around 15 to 20 years for the plant to break even.  Thanks to large markups to alternative energy power, though, it should break even much sooner, boosting NRG Solar and SunPower.  Nonetheless, some consumers may be unhappy with paying this kind of markup so that their power can be "greener".

Still, it's common knowledge that you have to invest up front to gain access to new technology.  And with large scale installations like this new one in California and the currently developing one in Arizona, the cost per kilowatt hour of solar power in the U.S. should fall over the next few years.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By MrTeal on 12/1/2010 11:31:23 AM , Rating: 2
Challenges to the plant's success remain. Currently environmental activists in California are vigorously resisting large solar and wind installations, which they fear will damage fragile ecosystems. They have filed lawsuits to try to block similar projects.

Go away already. Please.

RE: Seriously
By AnnihilatorX on 12/1/2010 11:51:14 AM , Rating: 2
Agree, if people look at the map there are more preserved open space than actual solar arrays in the permise. Impact to wildlife will not be great if there is any.

RE: Seriously
By Paj on 12/1/2010 11:56:44 AM , Rating: 3
Gotta say, its pretty stupid for them to be protesting a solar plant. Im all for solar development, but I dont understand what their proposals entail.

RE: Seriously
By rcc on 12/1/2010 5:30:12 PM , Rating: 2
Bottom line is that they object to power generation in any form. It really doesn't matter how it's generated, they think it's bad. Of course some of it is worse in their eyes, like nuclear.

RE: Seriously
By SPOOFE on 12/1/2010 7:33:30 PM , Rating: 3
The truth is that environmental groups are ridiculously splintered. Some are major proponents of nuclear and reprocessing, recognizing the actual, physical boon to the ecosystem it represents. Others have the dogmatic worldview, the belief that Nature is somehow sacred and that "man" is some bastardization, some force or element that is "unnatural" in some way (as if man were the only animal to affect and change his ecosystem!).

The really ugly part is the fact that the looney-toon enviros are completely drowning out the message of the practical guys with their vomit and nonsense.

RE: Seriously
By kattanna on 12/2/2010 11:05:40 AM , Rating: 2
The really ugly part is the fact that the looney-toon enviros are completely drowning out the message of the practical guys with their vomit and nonsense.

you mean like the fanatics of any group?

its long past due for us to start squelching the noise generated by extremists in any group, so the more moderate voices can be heard again

RE: Seriously
By SPOOFE on 12/3/2010 1:53:52 AM , Rating: 2
The pattern follows thusly: For any given fringe movement, there's an incredibly passionate and equally vocal group of people that leads the charge. This is the phase during which the message is polished and honed, the talking points nailed down and disseminated among the faithful. After they've been established as an enduring presence, they need only one major accomplishment (such as Al Gore's Nonsensical Hooplah) to move that fringe closer to the mainstream; counter-arguments to their talking points start to form, but they maintain momentum while the counters are similarly disseminating as their talking points did before.

Eventually, attrition takes it toll, the arguments are swatted down faster than the faithful can vomit new ones, and then there'll be a lull as the whole mess falls to the wayside as a new fringe movement readies to move into the mainstream. Repeat.

RE: Seriously
By maverick85wd on 12/1/2010 1:14:46 PM , Rating: 3
you beat me to it. They don't want nuclear power because it's "bad", they don't want wind because of "the birds" (and some of the more ignorant are convinced they 'slow down' global winds), now they don't want solar. Apparently they just want everyone to live in the stone age. Or at least they think they do, as they walk around with their brand new Macbook Air. How do you think that thing works? I don't see a hand crank.

I consider myself an environmentalist in that I think proper handling of toxic materials is very important. I recycle whenever possible. I'm also glad to see the progress being made by companies like Ford with their ecoboost line of V6 engines that have more power than the V8's they are replacing while using less fuel. And I'm all for investigating the viability of ideas people have to reduce the negative impact we are having on the environment. But sometimes those ideas aren't practical, and at some point enough is enough. I truly feel for the residents of California who are paying outrageous prices for energy and whom rely increasingly, in part, on electricity production that's dependent on the sun (or wind). These plants take up too much time and money with current technology, without even getting into capacity issues. I've seen it said on this site before and I'm sure I'll see it again, but fission reactors are far safer now than they were 50 years ago, and they are the best thing we have until fusion becomes commercially employable.

"People Don't Respect Confidentiality in This Industry" -- Sony Computer Entertainment of America President and CEO Jack Tretton

Latest Headlines

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Yahoo Hacked - Change Your Passwords and Security Info ASAP!
September 23, 2016, 5:45 AM
A is for Apples
September 23, 2016, 5:32 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki