Yes, it floats on water, and has a Fresnel lens from the local high school projectionist club, but what about typhoons and lesser gales? No mention of that. Somehow, this bullet point from the Overview page doesn’t seem reassuring:
Floating the system on water reduces the need for expensive supporting structures to protect it from high winds. The lenses submerge in winds above 60km/hr and the water also cools the cells which increases their efficiency.
I see deep water horizons in the future.
Sunengy, Australia partners with Tata Power to build the first floating solar plant in India
Indian trial of a unique Australian solar system will move it towards full production
0.28 scale aluminium prototype
Australian solar power company Sunengy Pty Limited has entered into a partnership with India’s largest integrated private power utility, Tata Power that will allow it build a pilot plant for its low-cost, floating-on-water, solar technology in India by the end of this year.
Sunengy Chairman and Executive Director of Business Development, Peter Wakeman, said that Tata Power, a flagship company of Tata Group, has partnered with Sunengy for its interest in its patented Liquid Solar Array (LSA) technology. Mr Wakeman said the deal was significant for the future use of solar globally because it allows Sunengy to demonstrate the practicality of its technology in one of the world’s most promising solar power markets.
The LSA was invented by Phil Connor, Sunengy Executive Director and Chief Technology Officer and a passionate advocate for solar power for 45 years. Mr Connor said that when located on and combined with hydroelectric dams, LSA provides the breakthroughs of reduced cost and ‘on demand’ 24/7 availability that are necessary for solar power to become widely used. The LSA uses traditional Concentrated Photovoltaic (CPV) technology – a lens and a small area of solar cells that tracks the sun throughout the day, like a sunflower. Floating the LSA on water reduces the need for expensive supporting structures to protect it from high winds. The lenses submerge in bad weather and the water also cools the cells which increases their efficiency and life-span. According to Mr Connor, hydropower supplies 87 percent of the world’s renewable energy and 16 percent of the world’s power but is limited by its water resource. He said an LSA installation could match the power output of a typical hydro dam using less than 10 percent of its surface area and supply an additional six to eight hours of power per day. Modelling by Sunengy shows, for example, that a 240 MW LSA system could increase annual energy generation at the Portuguese hydro plant, Alqueva, by 230%. “LSA effectively turns a dam into a very large battery, offering free solar storage and opportunity for improved water resource management,” Mr Connor said. “LSA needs no heavy materials or huge land acquisitions and is effectively cyclone proof,” he said. “If India uses just one percent of its 30,000 square kilometers of captured water with our system, we can generate power equivalent to 15 large coal-fired power stations.”
Mr Banmali Agrawala, Executive Director, Tata Power said “In our quest to deliver sustainable energy, Tata Power is consistently investing in clean and eco-friendly technologies. We have partnered with Sunengy, Australia for a pilot plant in India, which is concentrated photovoltaic solar technology that floats on water. This nascent technology will be demonstrated in the natural environment; it utilises the water surface for mounting and does not compete with land that can be used for other purposes.”
Mr Wakeman said that the primary market for LSA is the provision of industrial scale electricity via hydropower facilities. Other markets include mining sites as well as villages and remote communities reliant on diesel power generators.
Construction of the pilot plant in India will commence in August 2011. Sunengy plans to establish a larger LSA system in the NSW Hunter Valley in mid 2012 before going into full production.
mike restin says:
March 31, 2011 at 9:03 am
My daddy would have said “It’s like overdrive on a jackass…..it’s a good idea but it just doesn’t work”
A cattle prod powered by a solar panel
I’m not clear on how this is supposed to work? A solar battery? a little diagram of the workings would have been nice.
Sunergy. Cute but no cigar. This is patently unworkable if it is to generate electricity. The ease with which the system can short out in salt water would make this a maintenance hell. It would be much more trouble than its worth. I would not want to be the person expected to inspect these arrays for leaks and shorts, particularly as the panels appear to be mounted in large arrays.
It does not matter if the panels are free-floating or set in to larger arrays of connectors, the anchoring and storm-action will devastate these really quickly. One boat through the middle or even a corner and they will be toast.
There is still the fact that this is a truly ancillary source of energy which could never begin to be part of a stable energy supply. Wind and solar are only useful for displacing some energy demand, normally from stable coal or nuclear, when they are productive (windy or sunny days), but they simply cannot and will not ever be able to supply the stable energy needed for modern civilization. The sun still sets on this floating strategy.
You cannot create a stable energy supply from unstable energy sources.
What to promote a renewable energy product? First realize it must work on this planet, with these people and the resources we have at hand. To those tossing about “Big Energy Blah Blah Blah”, these green gadgets that require an enclosed system to function longer than a BIC lighter at an Eagles concert do what for those of us living the in the real world exactly? The mantra needs to be “Our renewable is actually doable.” So please no dumping on us realists. We have enough on our plates making all that’s actually used every day both possible for and available to everyone.
How about putting a sterling engine on one of these things?
Charles Higley says:
March 31, 2011 at 11:40 am
The ease with which the system can short out in salt water would make this a maintenance hell.
…as those who rode the Ocean Ranger drilling semisubmersible to the bottom of the stormy Grand Banks of Newfoundland 29 years ago can attest…
anothor solution looking for a way to use solar in their name … complete BS engineering that works in the lab and will fail in the real world like most of the folks working in those labs …
Hrmmm… They propose this for freshwater, but that still means a lot of sealing on the electrical components (and water, even fresh water, is close to the universal solvent. Ask any boatowner).
This system would be very labor intensive to maintain.
I’m also wondering about the aiming mechinisim for sun tracking; even reservoirs have waves and chop on most days, so that would impart a motion to even a large platform. (for proof, try standing on any pontoon dock).
My guess; this thing might work, for a short while, but it will be very problematic, generate a lot less than claimed, and be a maintenance nightmare. I think it would soon be re-tasked as an artificial reef. 🙂
All the comments about oceans etc. are irrelevant to this. It’s on the backed-up lakes behind dams.
The bottom line will once more be the bottom line: (capital costs amortized over useful life + maintenance and replacement parts + operating costs) / output = cost per unit of energy generated. Excluding subsidies.
The advantage this system would have is being close to transmission lines, already in place for the dams.
Take a look at their much acclaimed patent AU2004243336, which you can download here: http://pericles.ipaustralia.gov.au/aub/aub_pages_1.process_simple_search?p_application_no=2004243336&p_procedure=paint_simple_search
Not only are the systems described in the patent significantly different from the one discussed in this posting (don’t know how to post pictures, but downlaod the ‘drawings’ from the above link), but the current one also has features described as undesirable in the patent (see page 3, line 13: “is not passively robust”, p5 l25: “need for any bearings or joints”).
But they have recognized the issue of algae growth and else and are proposing this (p13, line 19ff) (my emphasis in bold):
To avoid the build up of algae and other organic contaminants on critical surfaces, the water of the pond preferably contains a suitable component or additive to suppress growth of algae. It is preferred that this component or additive be common sodium chloride (at ‘Dead Sea’ levels), other salt or transparent chemical additive which kills algae used alone or in combination. … Other preferred additives to suppress to suppress algae growth include copper based algaecides, chlorination, and ozone or ultraviolet treatment of the water. …
Alternatively, algae and bacteria can be suppressed by raising the temperature of the pond sufficiently high to kill such organisms preiodically
etc.
This sounds like a proposal to contaminate the drinking water supply of India at a truly grand scale!
How much energy is consumed, end to end, in the production of these things? All that plastic requires energy and feedstocks from fossil fuels. The copper windings in the servo motors. The factories which produce all the parts and finished products. The shipping, installation, and maintenance. When all these factors are taken into account do these nifty little gimcracks actually produce more power during their service life than they initially consume? I tend to doubt they do but absent a detailed analysis I really can’t say and neither can anyone else.
I own several boats and live on the shore of a 20,000 acre reservior created by a dam with hydroelectric power generation at the gates. The head at the dam is about 200 feet so it’s no small amount of power. Subtropical latitude and relatively warm dry climate with plenty of sunshine. This is ostensibly the ideal proposed environment for these solar thingamabobs.
In my boat owning experience the sun causes more damage than water does. The UV plays hell on materials over the years especially fabrics and plastics. It’s rain falling from above not lake water coming from below that causes more problems although a continuously submerged lower unit does eventually suffer damage from water infiltration but I expect the bearing seals around the servo shafts on these solar gimcracks isn’t subjected to anywhere near the stress of a propellor bearing and the drive train behind it can probably be made of plastic that won’t be harmed by water unlike the metal gears in a boat motor outdrive.
You don’t mention the worst problem – algae. Boats with gel coated FRP hulls (the usual for artificial inland lakes) that are constantly afloat usually have their lower hulls painted with an algaecide-containing paint. Otherwise they quickly grow beards of algae that reduce hull performance and eventually eat through the gel coat and destroy the FRP. Low performance aluminum hull boats (like one of mine, a pontoon boat) can stay afloat without harm and the beard gets a good trimming whenever the boat is underway at cruise speed for very long. I have a four-stroke Honda outboard on it that I can raise all the way out of the water to eliminate the problem of having a constantly submerged lower unit. My FRP boats don’t stay floating long enough for algae to grow on the hulls – been there, done that – one time cleaning just 3 weeks of algae growth off the bottom of a gel coat FRP hull was enough to teach me a lesson.
While its certainly true that even smaller inland lakes get substantial wave action it isn’t often from winds as there are typically no long straight paths for the wind to build them up as these artificial reservoirs are usually backed up rivers that take a winding course through the valleys. Boat wakes are usually larger, much more frequent, and much more destructive than wind driven waves. But as anyone knows who’s been around many marinas on inland lakes there’s an easy fix for both wind driven waves and boat wakes – a floating, anchored breakwater placed between the waves and that which is to be protected. Breakwaters are not at all expensive or high tech and are often made entirely of concrete with evacuated centers so they float. They are rugged and virtually maintenance free.
PeterF says:
April 1, 2011 at 3:49 am
“Take a look at their much acclaimed patent AU2004243336, which you can download
“To avoid the build up of algae and other organic contaminants on critical surfaces, the water of the pond preferably contains a suitable component or additive to suppress growth of algae.” ”
Great find. A green technology that requires killing off life in sweetwater reservoirs to save the planet. (And still be a maintenance nightmare)
And how do they want to get rid of Algae with sodium chloride? Maybe it’ll kill sweetwater algae but before you count to three the first spores of some saltwater creature will be in their lake, ready to thrive. They’ll need something way more poisonous.
@ArizonaCJ (con’t)
I’m not sure how many “critical surfaces” on these things need algae protection. In my experience algae doesn’t grow on any plastic surfaces that aren’t constantly submerged. The carpet on the swim platform of a houseboat I used to own is an exception as it was only about 12″ out of the water and boat wakes big enough to wet it, combined with the water retention of the carpet fabric, was enough to make algae a royal pain the keister. I tried periodically spraying it with an algaecide but it washed out too quickly and the only way to get it out was with a pressure washer delicately adjusted to the point where the pressure was just enough to get rid of the algae but not enough to rip the carpet. No one in their right mind should have carpeted a swim platform but that’s how the boat came from the manufacturer. That should have been made out of aluminum with an anti-skid self-draining ridge pattern so people don’t slip and fall on it and no water can hang around long enough for algae to grow. But I digress.
On the lake where I live the expanse of water nearest the dam, the main basin, is prime recreational area for power boats, sail boats, wind surfers, and fishing. Having it taken up by acres and acres of solar power collectors would cause such a fit amongst the recreational users that it would never happen.
How much extra could it be to put like a windshield wiper/washer on a car over the fresnal lens and the PV panel? Algae isn’t the only concern. There are going to be mineral deposits from evaporated water that build up quickly as well as just dust, dirt, pollen, soot, and other crap floating around in the air. Windshield wipers, solvent reservoirs, and sprayers meant to last for years in the sun and weather conveniently (for PV panels) powered by 12vdc and truly massively produced already for automobiles should make that the perfect solution. I still wonder about whether they return more than they consume.
Alternatively you can just put walkways in there and cheap labor to go around caring for them. The parts are small enough so with a little clever design engineering for ease of maintenance these could last for years with minimal maintenance expense.
Better yet put in rails instead of walkways and design the individual units so a robot can run out along the rails servicing the silly things.
I kind of like the last maintenance solution the best given my background in factory automation at Dell. We set a whole new standard there for manufacturing efficiency back in the 1990’s. This solar platform is perfect for it.
Another concern I have is that a fresnel lense doesn’t change the cost/performance of PV very much or everyone would be doing it already. Forget the maintenance and difficulty issue of floating these. I’d put a few in my backyard with a solenoid on it to switch my air conditioner’s power back and forth from the grid to the solar. When the sun is blazing in a clear sky is when I consume the most power and it’s like that for most people. A hobbyist can cobble together sun tracking fresnels with PV panels using off the shelf parts. Maintenance would only fractionally increase routine lawn care so that’s no concern. If that made economic sense even in mass production everyone would be doing it already.
So in the end I’m gonna call bullsh!t on the floating fresnel/PV scheme. If it doesn’t make economic sense on land it won’t on water either.
A hobbyist could cobble one of these do it today with off the shelf parts. estigations for personal use (I’d love to get my electricity cheaper and with the same 24/7 reliability than the power company provides it) I just can’t make the numbers work.
DirkH says:
And how do they want to get rid of Algae with sodium chloride? Maybe it’ll kill sweetwater algae but before you count to three the first spores of some saltwater creature will be in their lake, ready to thrive. They’ll need something way more poisonous.
Didn’t they say “Dead Sea” levels?
The sea is called “dead” because its high salinity prevents macroscopic aquatic organisms, such as fish and aquatic plants, from living in it, though minuscule quantities of bacteria and microbial fungi are present. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea)
Seems quite environmentally conscious to me. (/sarc)
Willis: “Tata Group should run, not walk, the other way.”
This is on the assumption that Tata actually cares whether it works or not. Remember this is the corporation that has Pachauri in upper management.
It’s no accident that “ta ta” is Brit casual for ” ‘bye, now.”
“”””” John Kehr says:
March 31, 2011 at 12:56 am
Clearly a lot of readers missed the fact that these are to be put in man-made lakes behind hydroelectric dams and not on the ocean.
Waves, salt, whales and large ships should not be a problem. Wind should not be a problem as andthing dragging in the water (power line) would anchor it. “””””
Wishful thinking at best.
The San Luis Reservoir (totally man-made lake; even anthropogenic too,) in snta Claraa California, has killed more than its share of boaters who evidently like you believed that wind and waves will not be a problem.
On the other hand, among the cognoscenti, it is well known that when those big fans that line the ridge around San Luis Reservoir, start turning; that is the word to the wise, to get your arse off the lake immediately; no matter how big a boat oyu are in.
That warning does NOT apply to wind surfers; who flock to the place, when the word goes out; “hey the wind is not going to be the problem toaday; so lets go surfing.”
Stephan says: “Most data before 1995 is still showing below 0C anomaly…”
You’re seeing the impacts of the eruption of El Chichon in 1982, which counteracted the 1982/83 El Nino, and the eruption of Mount Pinatubo in 1991.
You continued, “…in fact it looks like a death flat line…”
Looks can be deceiving.
You wrote, “…so again we have another baseline problem there.”
There’s no “baseline problem”. The base years make no difference to the data, just one’s perception of the data. We can replot GISS LOTI data with the same base years as the TLT anomaly graph. It doesn’t change the trends or the year-to-year variability. (But we can’t change the base years of the TLT data to the 1951-1980 period used by GISS since there’s no satellite-based TLT data prior to 1979.)
Someone asked for an Aussie poster to respond as so as an Aussie and Chairman of Sunengy, I hope I qualify. There are a few drops of positivity above but they’re being drowned in a negative feeding frenzy, most based on mis-perception. What I will do is try to cover as many queries as I can and hopefully impart some optimism, though it is much easier for many to vent negativity.
LSA is not designed for the open ocean, saltwater or fast moving currents.
It is designed for freshwater, in particular hydropower and village dams.
Wave attenuation is not at all difficult to deal with in these environments and no waves can form within the array because there is not enough open surface area. We are working with marine engineers to dampen waves from up to 2 kilometers of fetch.
Being in water enhances some elements of maintenance especially automated self cleaning of lens and glass
Each LSA unit will weigh around 17kg and can easily be removed and replaced or upgraded (if required) via a specifically designed maintenance craft.
It is not difficult to prevent birds perching on the top of the lenses and polypropylene mesh will prevent wildlife and debris from settling on top of the CPV canister.
Algae will form on the bottom of the rafting, it will not form on the bottom of the CPV canister as the heat sink is designed to reach 30 degrees Celsius which will kill any algae there. Lenses are packaged so water will not get in the grooves and they will not be in the water long enough to have algae grow, but the are hydrophobic coatings that can be used if required. The patent document referred to was written in 2004 and we have progressed since then.
Many hydro dams are not river fed but for those that are, generally the topography allows for the installation to be protected from floating debris, the wave attenuation perimeter is also a barrier.
Let’s say we are covering 10% of a dam of that area only 60% is in shadow, that moves while tracking the sun, then depending on the depth of water there will be different effects on marine life. I hope you can gives us enough credibility to assume we will have the necessary environmental impact studies done before we start installing units.
We are not using any toxic materials or lubricants.
Sealing from water damage is a matter of good engineering practice and the areas to be sealed are quite small.
A small band of founders and investors have funded the development (commenced in 2001) prior to Tata Power’s involvement. It took 2 1/2 years of technical and commercial R&D to secure the deal with Tata Power and no Indian govt funds have been used. The Indian govt is offering incentives for renewable energy but it is for power generation, not R&D. We have had 2 small grants from the Australian govt and get some tax rebates for R&D.
I have a marine trade background and have owned motor and sail boats but most of my working career has been in business, except for most of the 80’s, when I worked on a full time volunteer basis for a registered Australian charity. Phil Connor, LSA inventor has had a passion for solar power since 1964 and for the past 20 years has worked for the Australian Federal govt’s premier research organisation, CSIRO. We like to think we’re not that stupid. I met Phil while he was working for the same charity, so I would also like to state that ripping people or govts off, is not in our nature, though there are plenty of spin doctors out there.
We have in Australia the “Tall Poppy Syndrome”, it’s a malady of frustration, so let’s knock the successful indiscriminately. I’m not sure if any of you have personal knowledge of the Tata Power, but my 2 1/2 years dealing with their upper and middle management has been filled with integrity and vision for a cleaner future.
Tata Power own 3 large hydro dams in Maharashtra, we can generate 450MW output matching the hydro facilities there and use less than 4% of the dams’ surface area. The bigger picture is India has 30,000 square kilometers of captive water and by using only 1% of this, LSA could produce 15GW of power for at least 2,000 hours per year. India has good water and sunshine and hundreds of millions of people living in poverty and without electricity. Power for water reticulation, refrigeration, irrigation and things like aquaculture and cottage industry will help bring these people away from subsistence living and more able to make some choices in their lives. An early choice most parents make is to have their children better educated and this snowball will help eliminate poverty in the world.
If we are to help alleviate poverty in the world through “empowering” marginalised communities we need to look to industry for solutions. Ultimately it will be the industrious people of the world not the governments (or the “knockers”) that will make this happen. This is the vision and aim of Sunengy, hopefully our partnership with Tata Power will help make it a reality.
The reality is if we want the world to be sustainable for life as we know it, we must bring people out of poverty and this doesn’t mean giving up too much of what we have, but maybe a little; I hope the proclaimed realists can see it this way. Kind regards Peter Wakeman, Chairman and Executive Director Sunengy Australia.
Sorry I forgot…..
The technologies we have developed for tracking and in our CPV canister gives us a focal tolerance of +/- 2 degrees which is fine for us. Remember we are an inherently low cost system that does not need to magnify the sun 500-1,000 times, so our pointing accuracy is not as critical as with the high efficiency land based CPV technologies. The proof I guess will become more evident later this year. Thanks for reading, Peter Wakeman.
George E. Smith says:
April 1, 2011 at 1:37 pm
Don’t generalize. The artificial reservoir I’m on has lots of boats on it that can go out in bad weather on the ocean. There is no speed limit and there are boats on it 24/7 running, in marinas, and on private docks. Running around over minimum planing speed at night can get you in trouble if you get caught (I think) but even minimum planing speed at night is only a suggestion. This is Texas and we don’t need no stinkin’ government telling us what’s safe and what ain’t.
Hmmm. I am suddenly reminded of something. The Red Green Show.