U.S. Concentrating Solar Power

Transcription

1 U.S. Concentrating Solar Power World Bank October 29, 2009 Chuck Kutscher National Renewable Energy Laboratory

2 CSP: The Other Solar Energy Parabolic trough Linear Fresnel Power tower Dish-Stirling

3 Parabolic Troughs

4 354 MW Luz Solar Electric Generating Systems (SEGS)

5 On-Peak Capacity (%) Insolation (kwh/m^2/day) SEGS Historic Plant Capacity Value On-Peak Performance For 5 Parabolic Trough Plants 120% 100% 80% 60% Over 100% capacity with fossil backup Averaged 80% on-peak capacity factor from solar 40% 4 20% 2 0% Solar Contribution Boiler Contribution Direct Normal Radiation 0 SCE Summer On-Peak Weekdays: Jun - Sep 12 noon - 6 pm Source: KJC Operating Company

6 Site filtering example - USA Solar > 6.75 kwh/m 2 /day Land Exclusions Slope & Area Exclusions

7 Best Sites Only 6X U.S. electric capacity!

8 Hours of sunshine or average wind power (Watts/m 2 ) Solar and Wind Resources Are Often Complementary Data from SE Iowa Hours of sunshine/month Average wind power/month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

9

10 State RPS Requirement Arizona 15% by 2025 California 20% by 2010 Colorado 20% by 2020, 4% Solar Nevada 20% by 2015, 5% Solar New Mexico Texas 20% by ,880MW (~4.2%) by 2015

11 MW Saguaro Parabolic Trough Plant Renewable Energy

12 New 64 MWe Acciona Solar Parabolic Trough Plant

13 but the BIG ATTRACTION: STORAGE!

14 Thermal inertia avoids rapid power changes Comparison of power output from large CSP and PV plants located within 50 km of each other. Mehos, et al., IEEE Power & Energy Magazine, May/June 2009.

15 APS Lo ad (MWe) Net Sol ar O utpu t (MWe) Parabolic Trough Output Profile Summer Day 7, , , , , , , :00 6:00 12:00 18:00 0:00 APS Load MWe Solar Output Solar with TES

16 CSP Power Plant with Thermal Storage Hot Tank HX Cold Tank

17 CSP Power Plant with Thermal Storage Hot Tank HX Cold Tank

18 Planned 280 MW Solana Plant with 6 hrs Storage 1500 construction jobs over two years 85 permanent jobs Artist Rendition Renewable Energy

19 Nominal LCOE ($/kwh) Real LCOE (2005$/kwh) CSP Costs Assumes: - Trough Technology w ith 6 hours of TES - IPP Financing; 30-year PPA - California Property Tax exemption - Includes scale-up, R&D, learning effects - Barstow, California site Technology Cost in 2007 ~$0.16/kWh (nominal) 2015 Goal ~$0.10/kWh Cost Reductions anticipated via R&D Deployment Plant Size Cumulative New Capacity by 2015 (MW) Source: WGA Solar Task Force Summary Report, includes 30% federal Investment Tax Credit

20 Real Levelized Cost of Energy (2006 $/kwh) Parabolic Trough Potential Cost Reductions % 35% 45% 55% 65% 75% Annual Capacity Factor Baseline 100 MWe 2-Tank Indirect Molten-salt 500C Power Park 4x200 Baseline Plus Advanced Solar Tech Scale-up to 200 MWe Power Park w/ 3X Learning

21 Solar Plants and Announced Projects Plant or State Capacity (MW) Technologies SEGS I thru IX 354 Trough Nevada Solar One 64 Trough Kimberlina pilot 5 Linear Fresnel (Ausra) Sierra pilot 5 Power Tower (esolar) Utility-scale PV 32 Three sites in CO and NV Utility-scale PV 3500 Sites in CA, NM, NV, TX, CO, others California 6390 Trough, Tower, Fresnel, Dish/Stirling Nevada 484 Trough Arizona 1147 Trough, Dish/Stirling New Mexico 92 Tower Texas 27 Dish/Stirling Florida 75 Trough/NGCC Total ~ 12,000 NSee

22 Solar Applications for BLM-Managed Land Over 50 different companies have filed 97,000 MW of applications 40% trough; 20% tower; 20% PV; 20% other

23 Long Distance Transmission: Europe Concentrating Solar Power for the Mediterranean Region, German Aerospace Center (DLR), 2005

24 Long Distance Transmission: U.S. Seattle 500 km km Salt Lake 1500 km Chicago 3000 km Boston 1000 km Dallas 3000 km Miami

25 CSP integration Challenges Cost higher than coal, natural gas, or wind Economics favor large installations (high capital cost) Land use & impact 5-10 acres required per MWe Land typically cleared and graded Impact minimized by locating plants on previously disturbed lands Water consumption 2.2 to 3.0 m 3 per MWh for wet-cooled plant Air-cooled plants use 90% less water, but cost more and run at lower efficiency during hot days Dish/Engine systems use water for mirror cleaning only Transmission required

26 Water Use per Land Area National Renewable Energy Laboratory Sources: CSP: Reducing Water Consumption of CSP Electricity Generation, Report to Congress Crops: Blaney, Monthly Consumptive use of Water by Irrigated Crops & Natural Vegetation, Golf : Watson et al., The Economic Contributions of Colorado s Golf Industry: Environmental Aspects.

27 Water Usage of Solar Technologies Reference: Concentrating Solar Power Commercial Application Study: Reducing Water Consumption of CSP Electricity Generation, Report to Congress, U.S. DOE, 2009 Values representative; specific usage varies by plant.

28 Water Usage Hybrid air/water cooling systems can reduce water use 80% with modest performance and cost penalties

29 Land Use/Habitat

30 NREL CSP Research Capabilities Sky VSHOT Testing of Concentrators Optical Efficiency Testing on 2-Axis Tracker Field Assessment of Receivers Receiver Test Laboratory Distant Observer Test Optical Materials Development

31 Cumulative Installed Capacity (GW) Modeling and Analysis Tools Solar Advisor Model (SAM) 2000 Storage 1800 Conc. Solar 1600 Wind Geothermal Regional Electricity Deployment System Model (REEDS) Hydro Nuclear Gas-CC-CCS Gas-CC Gas-CT Oil-gas-steam Coal-CCS Coal-IGCC Coal-new Coal-w/scrub Coal-no scrub

32 Visit us online at National Renewable Energy Laboratory Operated for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy by Midwest Research Institute Battelle

33 the POWER of csp

34