backtop


Print 112 comment(s) - last by euclidean.. on Jul 12 at 1:07 PM

Cleantech's solar array will be seven times larger than the next closest rival

Portugal announced in April that it was home to one of the world's largest solar arrays. The 150 acre, 11-megawatt (MW) solar plant was built by Catavento and PowerLight Corporation and is capable of powering 8,000 homes in Serpa.

Cleantech America LLC., a San Francisco-based company, plans to build a solar farm that would far eclipse the one built in Portugal. The new 80 MW farm, known as the Kings River Conservation District Community Choice Solar Farm, will be situated on 640 acres of land and is scheduled to be completed by 2011.

"We're pretty confident that solar farms on this scale are going to have an industry-changing impact," said Cleantech CEO Bill Barnes. "We think it's the wave of the future. This scale of project, I think, creates a tipping point for renewable energy."

"We think the impact for it will be similar to the impact of the computer chip," Barnes continued. "So too will economies of scale like the Community Choice farm drive down the cost of solar."

Cleantech estimates that the energy generated by the solar array will be enough to power 20,000 homes.



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: I agree
By Comdrpopnfresh on 7/10/2007 11:33:09 AM , Rating: 2
There used to be a reprocessing company in the US. then the government changed some regulatory fee, and they were ran out of business. No one domestically has taken their place. As for "configuring" current reactors... Reprocessing is a process done to semi-spent fuel. The remaining useful portions are removed and placed into new fuel rods, and even the spent parts can be put into a different reactor where they can re-absorb neutrons and "breed" the fuel used by most.
Everyone likes the idea of simply switching to different energy sources, but solar is inefficient (and introduces hazardous waste and pollution in large quantities), and our current nuclear technology/usage/habits across the globe amounts to ~100 years of uranium left. Add more plants, no reprocessing, and well, it won't make it that long.

If the US really wanted to save money on energy, we would make a new efficient energy grid based upon 220/240V. Higher voltage means less loss in transmitting the electricity, and a new grid would efficiently route spare energy. We could save billions of dollars a year, and more each year as old 60hz/120v appliances are phased out.
But this won't happen for the same reason the switch to metric won't- the public is too lazy and cares more about sitting on a couch eating artery-clogging food while watching dancing with the stars vs going through a bit of change that benefits everyone, especially their own children...


RE: I agree
By FITCamaro on 7/10/2007 12:05:31 PM , Rating: 1
I'm not against a new power grid. The issue is who's going to pay for it. Because you can be damn sure the power companies won't.

Definitely with you on the whole "Dancing with the Stars" thing. It amazes me that people actually watch crap like that. I mean I love watching TV. But I try to watch something a little more intelligent or meaningful than that crap. Sure South Park doesn't count as either, but at least every episode ends with a good point being made. ;)

All I know is when networks are getting so desperate that they'll come up with shows like playing Bingo, that's a bad sign. Whats next?

"This fall on NBC. An amazing series like nothing ever before seen on television. It will blow you away. 'On Time'. A show about people trying to get to work on time. See the action. Enjoy the drama. Revel in the success. Why should you watch it? Because you've got nothing else to fucking do. On Time. Watch it this fall on NBC. Or we'll develop even more retarded shows."


RE: I agree
By TomZ on 7/10/2007 1:13:03 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
If the US really wanted to save money on energy, we would make a new efficient energy grid based upon 220/240V. Higher voltage means less loss in transmitting the electricity, and a new grid would efficiently route spare energy. We could save billions of dollars a year, and more each year as old 60hz/120v appliances are phased out.

You sure about that?

Transmission and distribution losses in the USA were estimated at 7.2% in 1995 [2], and in the UK at 7.4% in 1998. [3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transm...

120VAC only appears at the point of use (customer end) of the power grid. The energy already gets there using high-voltage lines (e.g., 110KV and higher).


RE: I agree
By darkpaw on 7/10/2007 2:48:51 PM , Rating: 2
Yah, transmission is done at the 100Ks of volts level not at 220 or 120 so it really doesn't matter.

It isn't stepped down to 120 until its right outside your house or worse just up the street. The transmission loss over that short of distance is negligible.


RE: I agree
By Comdrpopnfresh on 7/10/2007 9:16:43 PM , Rating: 2
sorry if you misunderstood. I didn't mean transmission- yeh, that is super-high voltage. I meant upon household use. which is more efficient- just look at the psu ratings. the 220v achieves higher efficiencies...


RE: I agree
By TomZ on 7/10/2007 10:54:11 PM , Rating: 2
OK, sounds like you're changing your tune. I'm going to have to ask you for links for that statement now. I do see that some dual-voltage PSUs are 1-3% more efficient running at 240VAC instead of 120VAC, but what about the types of loads that make up the majority of electric use? By that I'm talking about motors and lights (incandescent and fluorescent)? I would be surprised to learn they are more efficient at 240VAC.


RE: I agree
By Comdrpopnfresh on 7/10/2007 11:37:41 PM , Rating: 2
Ohm's law- V=IxR
R must remain constant by this law (for all intents and purposes let's say a light bulb is), therefore V is doubled, and I is halved. I would be current draw. I forgot that man large appliances run on 220 for the efficiency, but extending it to lower appliances would not be bad....


RE: I agree
By TomZ on 7/10/2007 11:45:03 PM , Rating: 2
LOL, nice try. Have a nice day!


RE: I agree
By Chernobyl68 on 7/10/2007 6:32:50 PM , Rating: 2
the electric "grid" is actually hundreds of thousands of volts (KV). regional substations usually step that down to about 12KV, Its not until it gets to your local neighborhood that the voltages is stepped down to 240/120. You're not losing that much.


“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” -- Bill Gates on the Mac ads

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki