3 ms·

Concentrating Solar-Thermal Power (CSP) is rapidly getting cheaper: from 9.8¢/kWh (2018) to 5.0¢/kWh (2030) [1]. With 14 hours of storage, this can take care of

Concentrating Solar-Thermal Power (CSP) is rapidly getting cheaper: from 9.8¢/kWh (2018) to 5.0¢/kWh (2030) [1]. With 14 hours of storage, this can take care of baseload. [1]https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/articles/2030-solar-cost-targets https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/articles/2030-solar-cost-t... From Endnotes: All costs quoted here exclude benefits from federal or state tax incentives, such as the Investment Tax Credit.

tomohawk 3y ago
Can you point to a single csp installation the produces equivalent power to existing coal plant 24/7? Would it work in the US Midwest or North East?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- gsk22 3y ago
  As far as I understand, most of the Midwest is actually pretty conducive to solar generation. As a cherry picked example, Minneapolis has roughly 200 more annual sunshine hours than Houston. Obviously somewhere like Phoenix blows those numbers out of the water, but solar is still very economical in the Midwest. I see new utility scale solar farms popping up here all the time.
  - HeyLaughingBoy 3y ago
    > Minneapolis has roughly 200 more annual sunshine hours than Houston. That's very interesting because what I recall from about 15 years ago is that Minneapolis was slightly behind Houston in that regard. I wonder if it's just variation within the error band or it's been impacted by climate change? Regardless, here in rural MN I see a lot of new barns/sheds going up with solar panels on the roof whereas 15 years ago they would either have used generators or paid to have AC power run all the way out there.
  - tomohawk 3y ago
    Days in Minneapolis are indeed longer in the summer time, but far shorter in the winter time. Electric heat is quite challenging in the winter, when a plant such as this would be at a fraction of its output. The link in the parent post contains a map that would indicate most suitable location by far for such an installation would be in the South West. However, without an installation with a proven track record, this seems kind of like pie in the sky thinking.
ipaddr 3y ago
We can makeup any number for 2030.. lets go for .5 cents
- dylan604 3y ago
  I feel the same way about corporate sales forecasts where they then come back and say they've "lost" money because they didn't hit some arbitrary goal
jandrese 3y ago
So roughly half the cost 12 years later? Meanwhile the last 10 years of PV solar have seen the price drop to about 1/4 of what they were. And concentrated solar was already more expensive than PV solar. But, I hear you say, what about the cost of storage? Certainly the concentrated solar can get wins by generating steam using the molten sodium for hours after the sun goes down. Over the last 10 years chemical batteries have dropped to about 1/10 of their old price and the trendline still points downwards. Battery production is seriously ramping up as EVs push demand and grid storage becomes a huge issue. Concentrated Solar is still a day late and a dollar short.

tomohawk 3y ago

Can you point to a single csp installation the produces equivalent power to existing coal plant 24/7? Would it work in the US Midwest or North East?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
gsk22 3y ago
As far as I understand, most of the Midwest is actually pretty conducive to solar generation. As a cherry picked example, Minneapolis has roughly 200 more annual sunshine hours than Houston. Obviously somewhere like Phoenix blows those numbers out of the water, but solar is still very economical in the Midwest. I see new utility scale solar farms popping up here all the time.
- HeyLaughingBoy 3y ago
  > Minneapolis has roughly 200 more annual sunshine hours than Houston. That's very interesting because what I recall from about 15 years ago is that Minneapolis was slightly behind Houston in that regard. I wonder if it's just variation within the error band or it's been impacted by climate change? Regardless, here in rural MN I see a lot of new barns/sheds going up with solar panels on the roof whereas 15 years ago they would either have used generators or paid to have AC power run all the way out there.
- tomohawk 3y ago
  Days in Minneapolis are indeed longer in the summer time, but far shorter in the winter time. Electric heat is quite challenging in the winter, when a plant such as this would be at a fraction of its output. The link in the parent post contains a map that would indicate most suitable location by far for such an installation would be in the South West. However, without an installation with a proven track record, this seems kind of like pie in the sky thinking.

ipaddr 3y ago

We can makeup any number for 2030.. lets go for .5 cents

dylan604 3y ago
I feel the same way about corporate sales forecasts where they then come back and say they've "lost" money because they didn't hit some arbitrary goal

jandrese 3y ago

So roughly half the cost 12 years later? Meanwhile the last 10 years of PV solar have seen the price drop to about 1/4 of what they were. And concentrated solar was already more expensive than PV solar. But, I hear you say, what about the cost of storage? Certainly the concentrated solar can get wins by generating steam using the molten sodium for hours after the sun goes down. Over the last 10 years chemical batteries have dropped to about 1/10 of their old price and the trendline still points downwards. Battery production is seriously ramping up as EVs push demand and grid storage becomes a huge issue. Concentrated Solar is still a day late and a dollar short.