Comments on: $300 Million To Prove That 24-Hour Solar Power Is Not A Dream Any More

By: Matthew Wright

Matthew Wright — Sun, 06 Oct 2013 09:18:00 +0000

Solar Reserve with their 110MW Crescent Dunes plant producing 500GWh per annum will be the standout for efficiency when it is finished at the end of the year. Check out http://zeroemissions.org.au/ for more info or http://solarreserve.com/

By: MorinMoss

MorinMoss — Sat, 05 Oct 2013 22:16:00 +0000

The heading for the 2nd paragraph says “First Solar Thermal Power Plant in the US”.
This is flatly wrong. BrightSource’s Ivanpah plant has edged it out in being grid connected and California has 9 SEGS units built between ’84-’90, all still in operation.

By: JamesWimberley

JamesWimberley — Sat, 05 Oct 2013 00:56:00 +0000

The 24hours in the headline is wrong as Solana will have six hours instead. 24-hour production has been demonstrated by the Gemasolar plant in Spain, but once you´ve beaten the anti-solar talking point, it´s practically iunnnecesary. The demand for electricity at 3 am is next to nothing. What you need to get to is bedtime, around 11 pm.
Te Australian economist John Quiggin points ou that the whole paradigm of ¨baseload¨ generators reflects an inefficiency, not an ideal. Big clunky coal and nuclear plants were designed to run all the time, leaving a surplus of unneeded electricity at night that has to be sold very cheap, A mixture of renewable technologies plus a little gas offers the possibility of a power supply that´s actually better matched to the load curve.

By: Mike Karg

Mike Karg — Fri, 04 Oct 2013 16:04:00 +0000

August 21st 2017… just saying

By: Ivor O'Connor

Ivor O'Connor — Fri, 04 Oct 2013 15:52:00 +0000

It will be interesting to watch this following those intense Arizona storms.