Green Peace Leader Rags on Solar Power

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Wobs

Thank you, you've just demonstrated that you haven't grasped what I was saying.

Read post 162 again:
Green Peace Leader Rags on Solar Power

You might see that it was the different perspectives that I was illustrating. Something that you claim is obvious, and yet fail to grasp, and only focus on view points that are postive towards solar technology.

Read the post again, and then look at how the latest versions of solar concentrating power are described in your links, and look at how the older versions were described. That's the issue, not specific whether the new version have all the same old problems. Its the fact that your links only show a positive spin on the technology, and not mention the issues that the older versions actually had. Its this omition that is of concern, that looking back at past experiences, we can see how hopes have been dashed in the past, and therefore we should be cautious of new promises.

In addition, one of the reasons that the older versions failed was money. Taxes, and the failure of expected fuel price rises contributed to its demise. http://www.nrel.gov/csp/troughnet/pdfs/sand91_7014.pdf page 11
"....along with a variety of other problems proved to be overwelming for LUZ."

So your fuel price rises are not guaranteed. Like any business there's a risk of course.

Also, page 48 we have "Moreover, there is often a false confidence that the renewable energy technologies will be available if and when they are called upon to play a larger roll in our energy economy"

Why do you think I've been trying to discuss the technology's limitations? While there have been issues that have been ironed out, others haven't, or have only been reduced. It would seem positive, or even productive to discuss what they might be.

Nothing is guaranteed. Everythng has limitations. That's life. The writing is on the wall and most people can see it. In the context of energy and environment, the world is living on borrowed time. Game over.

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Wobs

Thank you, you've just demonstrated that you haven't grasped what I was saying.

Read post 162 again:
Green Peace Leader Rags on Solar Power

You might see that it was the different perspectives that I was illustrating. Something that you claim is obvious, and yet fail to grasp, and only focus on view points that are postive towards solar technology.

Read the post again, and then look at how the latest versions of solar concentrating power are described in your links, and look at how the older versions were described. That's the issue, not specific whether the new version have all the same old problems. Its the fact that your links only show a positive spin on the technology, and not mention the issues that the older versions actually had. Its this omition that is of concern, that looking back at past experiences, we can see how hopes have been dashed in the past, and therefore we should be cautious of new promises.

In addition, one of the reasons that the older versions failed was money. Taxes, and the failure of expected fuel price rises contributed to its demise. http://www.nrel.gov/csp/troughnet/pdfs/sand91_7014.pdf page 11
"....along with a variety of other problems proved to be overwelming for LUZ."

So your fuel price rises are not guaranteed. Like any business there's a risk of course.

Also, page 48 we have "Moreover, there is often a false confidence that the renewable energy technologies will be available if and when they are called upon to play a larger roll in our energy economy"

Why do you think I've been trying to discuss the technology's limitations? While there have been issues that have been ironed out, others haven't, or have only been reduced. It would seem positive, or even productive to discuss what they might be.

You are just repeating the same argument. As I indicated, nothing is guaranteed. Everything has limitations. I have already indicated technologies of all kinds have positives and negatives.That's life and it wont stop the technologies evolving further and improving, just because of that. The writing is on the wall and most people can see it. In the context of energy and environment, the world is living on borrowed time. Game over.

Have you checked the global energy outlook lately ? Oil prices ? predictions of $200 a barrel, we are well on the way to that already. Peak Oil. Fewer countries are exporting oil each year. The Arab nations are keeping more oil in the ground to help prop up prices maximize profits. The evidence is clear that reserves appear to have been overstated. What oil there is remaining is getting more difficult and costly to extract and more environmentally detrimental to extract. Other fossil fuel prices are rising.

Sand91_7014.pdf page 11 as you mentioned talks about 1990 financial environment in regard to profit levels of SEGS. A few things have changed since then. Technology has improved, Oil prices have tripled ( from around $40 a barrel to over $120 per barrel ), other fossil fuel prices have risen significantly. Experts say there is no going back to old prices this time around. China and India have transformed their economies and global demand for oil and resources is said to have a long period of growth ahead. Climate change is more serious an issue then ever before. Carbon tariffs are looming over the next few years. Mandated renewable energy targets are also driving demand for renewable energy solutions. The environment is now set for renewable technology to take a more prominent role in the energy mix. The cost dynamics have changed in favor of renewables of varying kinds, Solar Thermal being one of the more promising. It's a whole new ball game now. Today, Solar Thermal cost projections show a declining cost outlook over the next 10 years, where as fossil fuel cost projections show an increasing cost outlook.


Page 13 also talks about constraints to barriers of taxation, regulation and policy in 1991. Yet today all these dynamics have changed in favor of renewable energy. It also remarks about fairly average management back then, in terms of not managing growth opportunities effectively, which is not surprising with it being relatively new technology and many unknowns back then. The technology is far better understood today. It's a completely new ball game now, which is why big projects are being built and planned. Further more, big name companies, with deep pockets are getting behind these technologies.


We should indeed be cautious about twiddling our fingers and inaction. Fortunately the reality is that the world is more aggressively looking at alternative renewable energy technology , than just contemplating the possibilities.

I still believe NREL has got is spot on in the context of the longer term.

[Wobs]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

You are just repeating the same argument. As I indicated, nothing is guaranteed. Everything has limitations. I have already indicated technologies of all kinds have positives and negatives.That's life and it wont stop the technologies evolving further and improving, just because of that. The writing is on the wall and most people can see it. In the context of energy and environment, the world is living on borrowed time. Game over.

Have you checked the global energy outlook lately ? Oil prices ? predictions of $200 a barrel, we are well on the way to that already. Peak Oil. Fewer countries are exporting oil each year. The Arab nations are keeping more oil in the ground to help prop up prices maximize profits. The evidence is clear that reserves appear to have been overstated. What oil there is remaining is getting more difficult and costly to extract and more environmentally detrimental to extract. Other fossil fuel prices are rising.

Sand91_7014.pdf page 11 as you mentioned talks about 1990 financial environment in regard to profit levels of SEGS. A few things have changed since then. Technology has improved, Oil prices have tripled ( from around $40 a barrel to over $120 per barrel ), other fossil fuel prices have risen significantly. Experts say there is no going back to old prices this time around. China and India have transformed their economies and global demand for oil and resources is said to have a long period of growth ahead. Climate change is more serious an issue then ever before. Carbon tariffs are looming over the next few years. Mandated renewable energy targets are also driving demand for renewable energy solutions. The environment is now set for renewable technology to take a more prominent role in the energy mix. The cost dynamics have changed in favor of renewables of varying kinds, Solar Thermal being one of the more promising. It's a whole new ball game now.


Page 13 also talks about constraints to barriers of taxation, regulation and policy in 1991. Yet today all these dynamics have changed in favor of renewable energy. It also remarks about fairly average management back then, in terms of not managing growth opportunities effectively, which is not surprising with it being relatively new technology and many unknowns back then. The technology is far better understood today. It's a completely new ball game now, which is why big projects are being built and planned. Further more, big name companies, with deep pockets are getting behind these technologies.


We should indeed be cautious about twiddling our fingers and inaction. Fortunately the reality is that the world is more aggressively looking at alternative renewable energy technology , than just contemplating the possibilities.

I still believe NREL has got is spot on in the context of the longer term.

I put:

In addition, one of the reasons that the older versions failed was money. Taxes, and the failure of expected fuel price rises contributed to its demise. http://www.nrel.gov/csp/troughnet/pdfs/sand91_7014.pdf page 11
"....along with a variety of other problems proved to be overwelming for LUZ."

Also, page 48 we have "Moreover, there is often a false confidence that the renewable energy technologies will be available if and when they are called upon to play a larger roll in our energy economy"

I've repeatedly tried to explain my position, and you just don't get it. I'm well aware the issue with taxes has changed, that oil prices have recently risen. But you seem to think that all costs will continue to change as they have been recently, and that its pointless to discuss any other other issues. I struggle to think of a more narrow minded view.

I'll say it again. None so blind.

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Wobs

I've repeatedly tried to explain my position, and you just don't get it. I'm well aware the issue with taxes has changed, that oil prices have recently risen. But you seem to think that all costs will continue to change as they have been recently. I struggle to think of a more narrow minded view.

I'll say it again. None so blind.

Yes you have been repetitive and your arguments fall down. Current projections have sited that they expect Solar Thermal to be competing with coal by 2015 on kwh consumer pricing. You seem not to realize that it's not what I think, but what experts are saying around the world. I'm just re-iterating what global economists are saying about fossil fuel prices. The days of cheap fossil fuels are over. It's clear you simply don't like the message and that's shaping your argument.

People far more prominent and qualified about these matters than myself, are expressing these views about the global economic climate and energy prices. These are not my views, I'm just conveying now commonly held views about global energy prices. With all the other factors mentioned, it's a no brainer that renewables like Solar Thermal are set to grow more rapidly over the next 10 years and beyond.

re; Barriers to Commercialization of large scale solar electricity - report
http://www.nrel.gov/csp/troughnet/pdfs/sand91_7014.pdf

It's very clear from the report Sand91_7014.pdf, that the vast majority of problems were not technical, but as its is indicated in the article itself, related to government policy, tax credits, management and the overall restrictive regulatory environment at the time with which Solar Thermal technology had to contend with.

The report even indicates that the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (or PURPA) placed limits and restrictions and all sorts of red tape on these early Solar Thermal prototype power plants built by LUZ International. The plants had a 30 MW restriction imposed by PURPA. The report is damning toward PURPA in its negative impact on the success of the Solar Thermal prototype plants.

Originally Posted by Sand91_7014.pdf

Perhaps the most serious impact was the fact that the small size of the plant resulted in needless excess cost.

Originally Posted by Sand91_7014.pdf

Significant amounts of potential solar electricity were "dumped" in order to remain below the 30 MW limit.

This limit imposed by the regulator.

Eventually LUZ lobbied Washington to get the limit lifted to 80 MW and performed substantially better in operating cost economies. Even the sales taxes between fossil fuelled plants and Solar Thermal were a joke with huge discrepancies on an 80 MW plant comparison showing in 30 year present dollar value terms, the Solar Thermal plant even with annual property tax exemptions still paying nearly 1 million dollars more in sales tax than the gas fire equivalent plant and without annual property tax exemptions Solar Thermal, paid about 20 million dollars more than the gas fired plant

This report Sand91_7014.pdf in fact does your argument no good at all and in fact makes your case appear far weaker, than I had ever thought might be the case.

[Wobs]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

Yes you have been repetitive and your arguments fall down. Current projections have sited that they expect Solar Thermal to be competing with coal by 2015 on kwh consumer pricing. You seem not to realize that it's not what I think, but what experts are saying around the world. I'm just re-iterating what global economists are saying about fossil fuel prices. The days of cheap fossil fuels are over. It's clear you simply don't like the message and that's shaping your argument.

Still waiting to see how my arguments fall, as I'm waiting to see you address them.

You cite "experts", but they're the ones who have a vested interest in its expansion, as I've repeatedly pointed out. Also, economists are known for getting things wrong on a regular basis, so I'd say it is most valid to discuss issues outside what they are saying.

People far more prominent and qualified about these matters than myself, are expressing these views about the global economic climate and energy prices. These are not my views, I'm just conveying now commonly held views about global energy prices. With all the other factors mentioned, it's a no brainer that renewables like Solar Thermal are set to grow more rapidly over the next 10 years and beyond.

I'd also like to point out that economists were saying much the same in the 80s and 90s. The solar experts have their own biase of course.

re; Barriers to Commercialization of large scale solar electricity - report
http://www.nrel.gov/csp/troughnet/pdfs/sand91_7014.pdf

It's very clear from the report Sand91_7014.pdf, that the vast majority of problems were not technical, but as its is indicated in the article itself, related to government policy, tax credits, management and the overall restrictive regulatory environment at the time with which Solar Thermal technology had to contend with.

As you'll see in previous posts, I didn't say that tax was a current barrier. But what NREL do not mention are technical issues that others have mentioned. Issues that lead to the earlier plants being shutdown. Thus its perfectly valid to try to look beyond what you've been told by said experts.

The report even indicates that the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (or PURPA) placed limits and restrictions and all sorts of red tape on these early Solar Thermal prototype power plants built by LUZ International. The plants had a 30 MW restriction imposed by PURPA. The report is damning toward PURPA in its negative impact on the success of the Solar Thermal prototype plants.

Indeed, I didn't say otherwise.

Eventually LUZ lobbied Washington to get the limit lifted to 80 MW and performed substantially better in operating cost economies. Even the sales taxes between fossil fuelled plants and Solar Thermal were a joke with huge discrepancies on an 80 MW plant comparison showing in 30 year present dollar value terms, the Solar Thermal plant even with annual property tax exemptions still paying nearly 1 million dollars more in sales tax than the gas fire equivalent plant and without annual property tax exemptions Solar Thermal, paid about 20 million dollars more than the gas fired plant

This report Sand91_7014.pdf in fact does your argument no good at all and in fact makes your case appear far weaker, than I had ever thought might be the case.

The report focuses on issues such as taxes, but I've highlighted hints at other issues.

Read through my recent posts again and try to show that you know what I'm saying please.

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Wobs

Still waiting to see how my arguments fall, as I'm waiting to see you address them.

Originally Posted by Wobs

You cite "experts", but they're the ones who have a vested interest in its expansion, as I've repeatedly pointed out. Also, economists are known for getting things wrong on a regular basis, so I'd say it is most valid to discuss issues outside what they are saying.


I'd also like to point out that economists were saying much the same in the 80s and 90s. The solar experts have their own biase of course.

Expert economists that have nothing to do with Solar Thermal industry are remarking about energy prices and the outlook. They are also reflecting fact as oil prices are 3 times what they were in 1991 being the period around which the report sand91_7014.pdf pertains and at that time $40 a barrel was considered high and its now over $120 a barrel.

Originally Posted by Wobs

As you'll see in previous posts, I didn't say that tax was a current barrier. But what NREL do not mention are technical issues that others have mentioned. Issues that lead to the earlier plants being shutdown. Thus its perfectly valid to try to look beyond what you've been told by said experts.

Yes but you made reference to the report sand91_7014.pdf which by nature and name is not intended to look at technical issues. The issues it raises though show clearly that Solar Thermal technology had government policy working against it. The article does not relate to any technical issues you may have raised, that we have been made well aware of, but it's clear that technical issues were not the primary reason for the apparent lower degree of success, than may have been the case if government was more fair in terms of leveling the playing field. By all means look beyond what I have read about, but I still think it's clear based on the evidence, that the case is extremely strong for Solar Thermal energy. To me the evidence and proof is overwhelming that Solar Thermal energy stands to play a significant role in our future.

Originally Posted by Wobs

The report focuses on issues such as taxes, but I've highlighted hints at other issues. Read through my recent posts again and try to show that you know what I'm saying please.

I won't be reading your posts again. I don't believe any points you have raised are show stopping issues. You have raised issues and as I have already indicated all technologies have technical issues, but overall I believe it's very clear that Solar Thermal has a strong future along with Solar PV and Wind energy. Renewable energy in general has a strong future not only for the reasons already outlined but also because governments are mandating clean energy targets. That is my opinion and the opinion of others but of course not everyone, but each to their own opinion.

[Wobs]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

Expert economists that have nothing to do with Solar Thermal industry are remarking about energy prices and the outlook. They are also reflecting fact as oil prices are 3 times what they were in 1991 being the period around which the report sand91_7014.pdf pertains and at that time $40 a barrel was considered high and its now over $120 a barrel.

So that they've been wrong with alarmingly frequency doesn't bother you?

Yes but you made reference to the report sand91_7014.pdf which by nature and name is not intended to look at technical issues. The issues it raises though show clearly that Solar Thermal technology had government policy working against it. The article does not relate to any technical issues you may have raised, that we have been made well aware of, but it's clear that technical issues were not the primary reason for the apparent lower degree of success, than may have been the case if government was more fair in terms of leveling the playing field. By all means look beyond what I have read about, but I still think it's clear based on the evidence, that the case is extremely strong for Solar Thermal energy. To me the evidence and proof is overwhelming that Solar Thermal energy stands to play a significant role in our future.

I made it clear that they said:

"....along with a variety of other problems proved to be overwelming for LUZ."

Also, page 48 we have "Moreover, there is often a false confidence that the renewable energy technologies will be available if and when they are called upon to play a larger roll in our energy economy"

The fact that they simply say "variety of other problems", would seem a good reason to look into other courses, given that they admit that it wasn't just tax reasons, and I've already cited a source that indicates technical issues that look to be relevant to all CSP technology.

I won't be reading your posts again. I don't believe any points you have raised are show stopping issues. You have raised issues and as I have already indicated all technologies have technical issues, but overall I believe it's very clear that Solar Thermal has a strong future along with Solar PV and Wind energy. Renewable energy in general has a strong future not only for the reasons already outlined but also because governments are mandating clean energy targets. That is my opinion and the opinion of others but of course not everyone, but each to their own opinion.

As someone who lives down wind of three major coal power stations, I'm all in favour of finding alternatives, but I also like practical solutions without the dogma. You're refusal to discuss limitations of CSP is disappointing, and I can't understand why you won't.

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Wobs

So that they've been wrong with alarmingly frequency doesn't bother you?

The fact that they simply say "variety of other problems", would seem a good reason to look into other courses, given that they admit that it wasn't just tax reasons, and I've already cited a source that indicates technical issues that look to be relevant to all CSP technology.

As someone who lives down wind of three major coal power stations, I'm all in favour of finding alternatives, but I also like practical solutions without the dogma. You're refusal to discuss limitations of CSP is disappointing, and I can't understand why you won't.

Be disappointed if you so choose. As I've said before and I will say it again, all technologies have technical issues. What matters is what's happening today and all available evidence today shows that there are big plans for Solar Thermal energy and all indications show Solar Thermal energy to have great potential. I'm not going to spend my time debating about points ad infinitum, when I have already indicated to you that regardless of any negatives you have raised, my view remains, that Solar Thermal technology has huge potential. I have not seen any points that would convince me nor I suspect most anyone else, that solar thermal will not have significant potential. Despite any problems that may exist, the evidence today is overwhelming that in the course of time, Solar Thermal energy will be huge as will Solar PV.

[Wobs]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

Be disappointed if you so choose. As I've said before and I will say it again, all technologies have technical issues. What matters is what's happening today and all available evidence today shows that there are big plans for Solar Thermal energy and all indications show Solar Thermal energy to have great potential. I'm not going to spend my time debating about points ad infinitum, when I have already indicated to you that regardless of any negatives you have raised, my view remains, that Solar Thermal technology has huge potential. I have not seen any points that would convince me nor I suspect most anyone else, that solar thermal will not have significant potential. Despite any problems that may exist, the evidence today is overwhelming that in the course of time, Solar Thermal energy will be huge as will Solar PV.

There is not a single piece of technology that has a huge potential where one should not discuss its limitations. It would be prudent to not blindly support any technology that is in it's infancy.

If we were around when they were building large coal power stations, would you have said "I won't discuss their limitations as they have such a huge potential"? Of course you wouldn't.

Also, how can you be unconvinced about its limitations when you won't even discuss them?

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Wobs

There is not a single piece of technology that has a huge potential where one should not discuss its limitations. It would be prudent to not blindly support any technology that is in it's infancy.

If we were around when they were building large coal power stations, would you have said "I won't discuss their limitations as they have such a huge potential"? Of course you wouldn't.

Also, how can you be unconvinced about its limitations when you won't even discuss them?

Discussing anything here, has little bearing on what's happening out there in the real world and or on whatever potential exists for any technology. However near every indicator outside of this forum, shows Solar Thermal energy to have fantastic potential for the near and longer term future. I'm simply reporting what's happing in industry in the real world today, rather than talking about what you think might be the case.

Of course it's your right to remain in denial of what's happening, if you so choose. Personally I prefer to acknowledge what's happening in the real world. Your perception of limitations, is not stopping what's happening in the real world. The real world indicators suggest that any perceived limitations, are not likely to impede the technical progress and implementation of Solar Thermal energy. In this context of real world indicators, the potential of Solar Thermal energy appears huge and as said before, Solar Thermal and Solar PV look to have a hugely significant role to play in our future energy mix. The proof of anything is when it actually happens and it's happening all be it still in early stages of development. Your arguments of limitations are just not convincing.