This cute desert tortoise enjoying the sun and flowers needs to move in order to make way for a new kind of flora in the Mojave desert: very environmentally friendly solar panel trees. Environmental regulations and countless required studies usually stymie the development of large-scale industrial projects, especially in pristine habitats of sensitive critters (and in California in general). However, “the looming expiration of crucial federal financial support for the multi-billion-dollar projects, though, could turn the boom to bust.” State approval of Mojave desert solar power farms is being fast-tracked in order to qualify for federal money, which will disappear due to the stimulus spigot being turned off, and the fact that the country is broke.
The scale of each “suncatcher”, the number going to be installed, and the vast amount of acreage required for each farm is simply astounding. Yet, the presence of federally threatened desert tortoises is not enough to stop the project; they’ll simply be moved somewhere else, and chances of survival are admittedly very low (see below). I wonder if the Central Valley farmers who are suffering from lack of water due to the Delta smelt will get fast track approval to use their barren moonscape farms for these same solar plants? How can the cute tortoises stand in the way of Progress and reducing carbon footprints?
From the Reptile Channel:
Supporters of BrightSource’s project, the Ivanpah Solar Energy Generating System, say the benefits of the project outweigh the potential negative environmental impact. According to BrightSource’s website, the solar thermal power plant will generate 1,000 jobs at the peak of construction and prevent 450,000 tons of carbon dioxide emissions per year.
From the La Times on the “tortoise roundup”:
Federal wildlife biologists said it was needed to make way for construction of BrightSource Energy’s 3,280-acre, 370-megawatt Ivanpah Solar Electric Generation System.
Without the roundup, an estimated 17 federally threatened tortoises — and an unknown number of half-dollar-sized hatchlings — in the 913-acre initial phase of the project would have been squashed by heavy equipment.
A total 36 adult tortoises are believed to inhabit the project site. “We can never say we got them all out of there — these are cryptic creatures,” said Roy Murray of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service desert tortoise recovery office.
Under a plan approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, as many tortoises as possible will be captured, weighed, measured, photographed, blood tested, fitted with radio transmitters and housed in quarantine pens with artificial burrows.
The tortoises will remain in the pens until they can be transported and released in natural settings elsewhere in the region determined to be free of disease and predators — a process expected to take several months.
Tortoise translocation is still an experimental strategy with a dismal track record. In previous efforts, transported tortoises have shown a tendency to wander, sometimes for miles, often back toward the habitat in which they were found. The stress of handling and adapting to unfamiliar terrain renders the reptiles vulnerable to potentially lethal threats: predation by dogs, ravens and coyotes; respiratory disease, dehydration and being hit by vehicles.
Here is more information about the absolutely stunning scale of these solar farms:
Resembling a giant mirrored satellite receiver, each Suncatcher stands 40 feet tall and 38 feet wide with a Stirling engine suspended on an arm over the center of the dish. As the dish tracks the sun, its mirrors concentrate sunlight on the hydrogen gas-filled heat engine. As the superheated gas expands, it drives pistons, which generates 25 kilowatts of electricity.
Now imagine planting 26,540 Suncatchers on 4,613 acres of federal land for the Calico project.
This is the result of AB32, the global warming law California still has on the books (Prop 23), which mandates the state receive an increasing percentage of electricity from renewable sources and a 25% reduction in emissions by 2020. Thousands of acres of these Suncatchers are required to meet those goals, regardless of whatever threatened species get in the way.
All ‘green’ endeavors get a free pass on environmental damage. Look at the number of bats and birds killed by wind=farms. If conventional power companies had half the effect on wildlife there would be continual law suits. But its OK to kill animals even endangered species with _green_ power as they are ‘dying for the common good’.
And as this shows the greens could not care less about wild-life anyway – its the conventional power companies that they want to stop.
In the Socialist workers paradise of Victoria, a 10km long freeway through grasslands will wipe out 50 endangered species according to our loopy left, BUT, an un-needed and unwanted water pipeline reserve 120km long and 50 metres wide through forest and farming land will have no ecological impact whatsoever. As Harry Who said “Amazing”
Ask in wind turbine country why the Sage Hen is not listed…
Instead of paving the desert why not put them on top of the already developed areas of the southwest? Must not be enough money involved.
This just drives me up the wall. If they mean well then it dosen’t matter what they do to anyone else. Just don’t ask them to take the medicine the give to others.
But why does California want more solar power stations? they already have two large scale ones built in the 1980’s with taxpayers money neither of which worked terribly well. I don’t know whether either is still in service: they proved to be failures from the start.
But I do know they were then, and for all I know still are used, as textbook examples of the limitations and economics of solar power.
There is nothing new under the sun and the technology today is no better than it was back then. Nor is it any cheaper.
And note they are using Stirling engines but with hydrogen? presumably they cannot afford helium. But given the temperatures and pressures CO2 or even N2 or even better still steam would do better. Unless of course they want to avoid the increased capital cost in terms of the engine itself to handle that: so I imagine they intend to build on the cheap, and damn the warranty. I’ll bet it runs out just before the engines fail, five years or so anyone?
So what this boondoggle is all about I do not know.
Ripping off taxpayers I suppose.
Kindest Regards
Just wait until the bills for that solar plant trickle through the economy. The plant makes economic sense to the developer only because of all the funny-money that flows into his coffers, from tax credits through accelerated depreciation to stimulus funds. Take away the subsidies and you’ll see power from that plant (at the fence) costing in the range of 40-cents per kwh, which is what Spain wound up paying to get takers without subsidies. Compare that with 4 to 5-cent wholesale conventional power (at the hub) in the U.S. Then add in the 8 or so cents currently in your California electric bill for fixed transmission and distribution costs and you’ll eventually see your bill rise from its current 12 to 13-cents to somewhere in the neighborhood of 48-cents per kwh on that blessed day when we go “all solar”.
The enormous footprint required for solar plants and the horrendous capital costs involved are the result of really pathetic “energy density”. That inherently low energy density precludes the possibility of the kinds of “economy of scale” that have made fossil and nuclear fueled power plants commercially viable.
I was an alternate energy developer for 20 years. I know the numbers and the technologies very well. Before any readers begin to “take me on” over my assessment, please look into the rudimentary concept of “capacity factor”. When solar capital costs are reluctantly quoted, proponents invariably cite dollars per kw of installed PEAK capacity rather than average USABLE capacity. Since the sun rises and sets, most solar plants are lucky to get 25 kw of average power from a plant with 100 kw capacity installed. In that case, the capacity factor is 25% and the actual capital cost per kw is four times the quoted figure. Those solar plants that do better than that capacity factor, such as the “tower of power” solar plants, do so by supplementing the solar component with a fossil-fired boiler that burns more fuel than a conventional gas-fired, combined cycle turbine would have burned to produce the same power at a fraction of the capital cost.
James Sexton says:
October 29, 2010 at 4:43 pm
Not strange at all. The hydrogen is the working gas in the Stirling engine, I think it’s used because of its low density – not much heat will bring the gas to a high temperature and hence high pressure. Helium is also frequently used. I’d wonder a bit about the risk of metal embrittlement from the hydrogen, that’s one concern at atomic energy plants. Burn off the hydrogen? How well does a refrigerator refrigerate without freon or similar working fluid?
Speaking of which, Seabrook Station in New Hampshire looks like it take some 50 acres (not counting the Atlantic Ocean, used for cooling) and generates 1,250 MW.
This boondoggle is 3,280 acres for 370 MW (only when the Sun is shining). Which site has the bigger environmental impact?
These things work.
Between 1984 and 1991, Luz designed, developed, built, financed, and operated nine Solar Electricity Generating Stations (SEGS) in California’s Mojave Desert generating a total of 354 megawatts.
The Luz plants have generated more than 11,000 gigawatt-hours and produced more than 1.7 billion dollars of revenue over the past 22 years. These plants are still generating electricity to the Southern California Edison grid and operating profitably. No other company has come close to the Luz solar thermal industry track record.
354 Megawatts during the time of day they’re most needed.
http://www.brightsourceenergy.com/bsii/history
I’d say these units are just about paid off, now, and SoCal Edison is “Freerolling.” No Coal, no natural gas, no muss, no fuss. Looks pretty good to me.
Claude Harvey
October 29, 2010 at 8:46 pm
I am wondering if you would have any idea what the operating cost of this facility would be? To me, those units look very expensive and maintenance heavy, for only 25Kw each. Mirrors don’t do very well in the desert, one good sand blasting from a dust storm will make them useless. On top of that is all of the drive mechanics. And they want to put up 15000 of these things?
I am pretty sure that the greenies know it is a boondoggle. That is why they are backing it. If a plan is feasible then they resist it with a vengeance. It is pretty obvious that they do not want the so called energy problem to be solved.
Re: Kum Dollison says:
October 29, 2010 at 9:26 pm
Re:Kum Dollison says:
October 29, 2010 at 9:26 pm
“These things work.”
I never said they didn’t work. I said the economics is lousy. The LUZ plants built in the early 80’s benefited from a 25% federal tax credit and a 25% California tax credit, accelerated five-year depreciation and, probably, a few R&D tax credits thrown into the pot. Even with 60% of the investment coming from “free money” those plants made no sense without hyper-inflated power sales agreements with So. Cal. Edison that were forced on the utility by the California PUC.
Those LUZ plants, incidentally, are examples of using fossil fuel to turn a sow’s ear into a silk purse. There’s good reason why no more such plants were built in the U.S. until recently when the federal “honey pot” was resurrected to subsidize them from the public till.
I’m well aware there is good money to be made touting the company line for “alternate energy”, but this site invites “truth for its own sake” and I hereby speak the truth about solar electric power production.
I just took a look at the project website. What is described looks nothing like the mass of GUDs each with a Stirling engine. Instead it appears to be the standard field of mirrors focusing light on a tower of power design. Which is still a waist of real estate. Imagine the amount of power one could generate on that amount of land using the atom!
DesertYote says:
October 29, 2010 at 9:43 pm
“I am wondering if you would have any idea what the operating cost of this facility would be?”
I could guess, but I have no hard figures. When you consider that every one of those 15,000 mirrors is equipped with positioning motors directed by a sun-tracking-system it doesn’t take a lot of imagination to conclude “relatively high”.
Wind power, which is much simpler, is experiencing O&M costs approaching 50% of the total wholesale cost of conventional power at the trading hubs according to the I.E.E.E. report of industry averages (they get a lot more for their wind power than average wholesale). Those gearboxes and prop feathering mechanisms are eating their lunch with maintenance and repair expenses. Take away the subsidies and wind doesn’t cut it either. The Germans are reputedly getting few takers for unsubsidized off-shore wind power at 20-cents per kwh.
Are we overlooking the Uranium “MINE?” And, the Uranium “Storage?” And, are we overlooking the fact that you don’t have to dig up, and transport a depleting resource (coal) that will only get more expensive as it depletes?
I would love to see the initial investment on the older Luz plants, and see how they’re faring now as a return on investment. I figure they’re probably bringing in $120 Million/yr, or more, with no cost for fossil fuels, scrubbing, shipping, storage, air quality problems, etc. I have a hunch they’re turning out to be not as bad a deal as they may have, initially, appeared.
So why can’t the tortoises live under the solar cells? This technology increases shading and decreases evaporative losses, and have to be washed occasionally. More water and fewer evaporative losses mean more desert productivity. A few plants in the right place and the tortoise population should go up. Why have the solar energy end of the green movement lost the basic grasp of ecology. Or are the guys that clean the mirrors afraid of cacti, tumble weed and ankle high tortoises. I’ve spoken to a few people in the industry about this and the risk of weed problems in the desert. The tortoise sounds like a perfect solution.
There would be no endangered species if we were allowed to farm them. Tortoise tastes great I’m told.
Isn’t it time for someone to pull a Greenie Ecoterror lawsuit to halt this whole procedure for at least several years like the Enviro whackies do in old growth forests when they can find an endangered species in the area. Don’t get me wrong I want to keep old growth forests and contiguous forests for animal migration.
How wonderful. Electricity that most won’t begin to be able to pay the costs of. And only when the sun is shining.
I am sure that the people made peasants by this idiocy will find other sources of light at night. Torches accompanied by pitchforks come to mind.
All these wonderful alternative energy projects are further proof that Count Ponzi is the true patron saint of the political class. Unfortunately they’re such a complete collection of dullards that they have never mastered the Count’s key insight, which is that his schemes only work if you can take the money and run before the pyramid expands too much to be sustainable when there aren’t enough new suckers to keep paying off the old suckers. When you try to use Ponzi’s principles on public entitlement programs where you can’t run from the expanding commitments the only possible end is guaranteed complete collapse of the system.
It is fairly obvious that these solar plants and wind farms are not sustainable without large and continuing injections of OPM, and that we are already nearing the point where the supply of new suckers is dwindling fast.
So much for concern over biodiversity. Eco-fascists are nothing more than a stinking bunch of [self snip]ing hypocrites.
Andrew says:
October 29, 2010 at 5:24 pm
A good dust storm will decrease the efficiency of the whole system for days, if not weeks, until the are all cleaned.
Won’t a series of dust storms permanently damage the mirrors an reduce efficiency?
But….but…..isn’t the whole point of this so that my grandchildren will be able to see the desert tortoise in its native habitat? Moving them, and possibly killing them with this ‘kindness’ defeats the whole purpose. Maybe Mr Hansen can argue against this development as he often uses the welfare of his grandchildren as an argument for reducing CO2.
If they leave the tortoises there to revel in the shade and increased water from cleaning the mirrors, won’t that also change the habitat that they have adapted to survive in. More greenery and water may not only disturb their ecosystem sufficiently for them to die out anyway but may also bring in other critters that will enjoy a hard-crust tortoise for lunch.
James Sexton 4:43pm; A. Jones, 8:23; Ric Werme, 9:04pm:
According to the book “Stirling Engines”, by G.T. Reader and C. Cooper, the Stirling engine becomes more efficient the lighter the gas used within the engine spaces, hence hydrogen. Mind you, you have to make the engine out of something the hydrogen won’t leak through.
Regarding Michael says:
October 29, 2010 at 3:58 pm
Thanks Michael, this must account for the high degree of belief in ailien abduction among the tortoise population.
DirkH quoted the following:
“Even though the future of the stirling engine may sound crazy today, we never know what tomorrow may bring.”
You might be interested to know that UK company Baxi are now marketing a Micro CHP domestic boiler employing a Stirling engine:
http://www.baxi.co.uk/products/2137.htm
CO2 obsessed people do not care about the environment.