Failing Ivanpah solar power plant gets temporary repreive, but is producing 'prohibitively expensive' electricity

Last week we reported that the Ivanpah solar power plant might be forced to close if it didn’t get a break from the California Public Utilities Commission. According to this article in the Press Enterprise, it got the break:

California electric utility regulators on Thursday, March 17, approved a deal between Pacific Gas & Electric and the owners of Ivanpah solar plant that gives plant operators more time to increase electricity production.

The plant’s owners have agreed to pay PG&E an undisclosed sum in exchange for getting time to improve the plant’s electricity output. The deal followed realizations that the plant is failing to meet its production obligations to the utility.

In return, PG&E won’t declare that its power purchase agreement with the plant owners is in default.

The California Public Utilities Commission unanimously approved the deal during a meeting in San Francisco – despite objections by the Office of Ratepayer Advocates over concerns about the cost of electricity from the plant.

The deal, called a forbearance agreement, sets a July 31 deadline for the plant get its production up, and has a mechanism to extend that deadline by an additional six months, according to a CPUC report.

Last year, its second year of operations, the plant produced 624,500 megawatt hours of solar power, according to numbers from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. That is about two-thirds of its annual production goal that was made public by the U.S. Department of Energy.

Remember that number when the other third is added ~ 1,000,000 MWh
Elevated from a comment by Peter Lang at Dr. Judith Curry’s website, with some graphics inserted by me from the references cited, this set of calculations from the readily available information about Ivanpah suggests that it could never be profitable.


Ivanpah, will cost about $19/W of average power delivered (data from their presentation below)

ivanpah-reort-cover

http://www.ecc-conference.org/past-conferences/2012/BrightSource_ECC_Presentation_combined.pdf.

Nameplate capacity = 370 MW.

Expected average energy generation per year = 1,000,000 MWh.

This means average power output is 114 MW (about 1/10th of a new nuclear plant).

Capacity factor is 31%.

Cost = US $2.2 billion = $19/Watt average power delivered.

This is around 3x the cost of some recent nuclear power plant builds that most environmentalists have accused of being prohibitively expensive.

The heliostats used in the project weigh in at 30,000 tonnes. That’s 262 tons of heliostats per MW electric average. That’s just for the heliostats, not even the foundations, not to mention the tower and power block.

The power plant area that had to be bulldozed over is 20x larger than a nuclear reactor of equivalent average (real) capacity.

Lastly, nuclear is safer than any other electricity generation technology, including wind and solar:

deaths-by-energy-generation-typehttp://nextbigfuture.com/2012/06/deaths-by-energy-source-in-forbes.html

That’s a huge waste of money. All that money we are wasting damages our economy, people’s standard of living and people’s wellbeing.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
177 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Unmentionable
March 21, 2016 7:54 pm

If this plant were operating in 1985, in the USSR, the whole western world would be mercilessly hammering it as a resounding example of commie ideological obsession and economic self-vandalism, and may even have extrapolated a posit that the bankruptcy of the USSR was a foregone conclusion.
And we’d have been right, but fortunately this is in California, so it’s all good.

March 21, 2016 8:00 pm

“Ethanol from corn or other agricultural source doesn’t make a lot of sense in terms of energy production.”
So what? Not all energy is created equal. Ethanol can be used for transportation fuel. In terms of energy production, you should eat the corn and walk. Worse yet , feed it to a horse and ride it.

Andyj
March 22, 2016 4:22 am

Ask any Egyptologist who studies mummies what is most striking about the dead… The lack of cancer.
$19/MW I wish I could supply electricity for that. $2BN outlay and free fuel for life. That’s CHEAP!!
Nukes burn fuel rods that are at least as expensive as platinum by weight. The only reason we went down the solid bar/uranium 238 route was to produce nuclear bombs. Its a dead end, chemically unstable end game that pollutes EVERYTHING it touches.
If you don’t believe me and seek a high paying job, (however short term your life will be. Go to Fukushima.

David
March 22, 2016 5:36 am

It is all those birds flying into the beams that is disrupting the efficiency of the plant. Once the windmills and future solar plant kill all the birds the sky is the limit. Plus those pesky birds exhale evil CO2.

Darin Knaus
March 22, 2016 5:46 am

I am a wholehearted global warming skeptic. But I wanted to point out that pretty much all sectors of the US energy industry are subsidized by the federal government:
https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22858.pdf
including nuclear and fossil. Things cost more the first time that you try them, and it takes a lot of capital to try somethingona large scale like this. If we are going to develop new energy technologies there will need to be failures along the way. In my opinion the problem is not that we are trying things like Ivanpah, but that we are not spending more on things like new nuclear technology at the same time.

Reply to  Darin Knaus
March 22, 2016 11:11 am

Darin you would be wrong because you are basing assumptions on a misleading report. The commercial nuclear industry is not subsidized. It pays lots of taxes and fees, ect.
For example, there are fees paid to the NRC. These fees go the general fund. Congress budgets money to run the NRC.
Most of DOE’s budget is for nuclear weapon site cleanup. It has nothing to do with commercial nuclear power.
To be fair Ivanpah pays taxes too. If it runs long enough, it will be a good investment by the government.

March 23, 2016 7:58 am

Solar Power And Inverted Logic: http://wp.me/p6EO97-RS
Carbon Emissions Highest Since Demise of Dinosaurs: http://wp.me/p6EO97-Rk