I'm not a fan of concentrated solar power.  Too many bird deaths, and now
it appears they miscalculated the efficiencies as well.  Distributed solar
is the way to go.

On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 10:36 PM, archer75--- via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

> If you are only talking about return on investment, then that's generally
> true in the U.S., but the success and durability of such plants in
> producing electricity seems to be well proven.
>
> Spain has been in dire straits economically, and it has elected a
> conservative president. I suspect these are the reasons it isn't
> underwriting such projects.
>
> My understanding is that such plants usually yield an efficiency of around
> 30%. An investor who bought in based on 60% efficiency probably wasn't
> doing his homework.
>
> I think it's generally recognized that having multiple sources of domestic
> energy is of value to any nation. The government financed TVA dams and
> others certainly were when large amounts of additional electricity were
> needed before and during WW-2.
>
> Gerry
>
>
>
>
> G Mann wrote:
> > Ohh? Really?
> >
> > Show me the return on investment capital from product [energy] generated
> > and sold.
> >
> > Lots of money spent.. very low return on investment.. so much so.. Spain
> > has put a stop on further underwriting of projects, last I heard.
> >
> > If your point is, plants were built. Then yes.. they exist. The link
> lists
> > them, nicely.
> >
> > My point is, those plants are not making design capacity or efficency,
> > which was used to attract investors money.. a lot of it. It lacks
> delivery
> > as advertised.. for what ever reason.
> >
> > Show me instead, quarterly profit reports for each of those plants, and
> > capital investment return to the investors.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 5:21 PM, archer75--- via Mercedes <
> > mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The situation doesn't seem to be quite like you describe it, Grant:
> > >
> > >
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_solar_power#Parabolic_trough
> > >
> > > G Mann wrote:
> > >
> > > > The solar focused mirror failure rate is very high.
> > > >
> > > > I know of two other large array projects which are equally poor at
> > > > producing energy, yet equally successful at taking investor money..
> > > >
> > > > Private investment or Government subsidy are defined only by the
> speed
> > > with
> > > > which investor money is vaporized.
> > > >
> > > > Practical application yields return on investment. Pie in the sky
> claims
> > > do
> > > > not... Billions are now lost, along with the time to build these
> monsters
> > > > and ultimately to dismantle them.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Rich Thomas via Mercedes <
> > > > mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I AM WRONG -- it's not gummint money, to my astoundment!
> > > > >
> > > > > --R
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 6/18/15 5:48 PM, Rich Thomas via Mercedes wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> There was an article
> > > > >>
> > >
> http://www.wsj.com/articles/high-tech-solar-projects-fail-to-deliver-1434138485
> > > > >> a coupla days ago about some huge project in Kollyfawnya, solar
> > > thermal
> > > > >> set-up, that is only producing 40% of the design output due to
> > > unforeseen
> > > > >> issues.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> " The $2.2 billion Ivanpah solar power project in California’s
> Mojave
> > > > >> Desert is supposed to be generating more than a million
> > > megawatt-hours of
> > > > >> electricity each year. But 15 months after starting up, the plant
> is
> > > > >> producing just 40% of that, according to data from the U.S. Energy
> > > > >> Department."
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Seems like a $2.2B 60% failure was not a very good "investment."
> Maybe
> > > > >> could have started off a bit smaller and only pissed away a bil or
> > > two?
> > > > >> But it's only gummint money, so who's counting...
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --R
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On 6/18/15 5:14 PM, Mitch Haley via Mercedes wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> MG via Mercedes wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> BIG oops! 5kw. Though the 5mw system would be very nice to have
> if
> > > it
> > > > >>>> was the same price. Then again I probably don't have the room
> for
> > > it. I
> > > > >>>> have only 42 acres.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Well, let's see. 5 square meters per kW, so about 25,000 square
> > > meters
> > > > >>> for 5 MW.
> > > > >>> Around 4000 square meters per acre, looks like you could easily
> fit
> > > 5MW
> > > > >>> on ten acres. I wonder if you could get-r-done for $15 million?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> _______________________________________
> > > > >>> http://www.okiebenz.com
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > > > >>> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >> _______________________________________
> > > > >> http://www.okiebenz.com
> > > > >>
> > > > >> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> > > > >>
> > > > >> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > > > >> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________
> > > > > http://www.okiebenz.com
> > > > >
> > > > > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> > > > >
> > > > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > > > > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________
> > > > http://www.okiebenz.com
> > > >
> > > > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> > > >
> > > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > > > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----
> > > > No virus found in this message.
> > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > > > Version: 2015.0.5961 / Virus Database: 4365/10047 - Release Date:
> > > 06/18/15
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > arche...@embarqmail.com <arche...@embarqmail.com>
> > >
> > > _______________________________________
> > > http://www.okiebenz.com
> > >
> > > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> > >
> > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________
> > http://www.okiebenz.com
> >
> > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >
> > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> >
> >
> >
> > -----
> > No virus found in this message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 2015.0.5961 / Virus Database: 4365/10047 - Release Date:
> 06/18/15
>
>
> --
> arche...@embarqmail.com <arche...@embarqmail.com>
>
> _______________________________________
> http://www.okiebenz.com
>
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>
>
_______________________________________
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Reply via email to