Upload
gw-solar-institute
View
867
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
Portfolio Diversification and the Value of Solar Thermal with Storage
The George Washington University Solar Institute
April 12, 2012
Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
Geographically diverse portfolio of more than 3,000 MW of CSP projects Three lead projects (310 MW) – Power Purchase
Agreements with $5.5 billion in projected revenues Late stage projects represent more than 600 MW
under permitting 25 sites and more than 150,000 acres under
control
Expanded into Photovoltaic activities in early 2009 development pipeline of more than 1,500 MW Primarily in the 5MW to 20 MW capacity proposed
over 40 different sites across the US Several large scale PV projects in the 50 MW to
200MW capacity range Two 75MW projects awarded to SolarReserve in
South Africa in December of 2011
SolarReserve – CSP and PV Solar Projects
Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
SolarReserve’s Global Reach
Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
SolarReserve CSP Solar Energy Plants
640 foot tall tower More than 10,000 heliostats Project Rendering
Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
Location: Tonopah, Nevada
Technology: Concentrated Solar Power with Thermal Energy Storage
Size: 110 MW
Power Contract: NV Energy
Energy Production: 500,000 MW hours annually
Site: ~ 1,600 acres
Transmission: 9.5 miles
Fuel: Sunlight
Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project
Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
Firm, Non-Intermittent Renewable Energy
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
6:00 8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00 22:00
Perc
ent L
oad
Time of Day
Decoupling of power generation and energy collection provides stable and reliable power output
Trough
PV
Molten Salt Power Tower (8 Hours Generation Profile)
Molten Salt Power Tower (16 Hours Generation
Profile)
Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
CSP with molten salt storage contributes value in ways that are unrecognized in most renewable procurement processes
CSP with Storage’s Unrecognized Value
Less environmental impact and societal infrastructure cost
High capacity factor leads to higher utilization of transmission lines
Hedge vs. price volatility in energy and ancillaries Known cost of energy and ancillary services
Enables higher penetration of PV, protecting against ramping constraints Tolerant to curtailment
Can change delivery profile mid-life to adjust to new market conditions Dispatch flexibility
More long-term operational jobs than PV or wind Jobs
Provides VARs, inertia, governor response, etc. Uncompensated benefits of a steam turbine
Avoids long-term dependency on fossil fuels and related emissions
Requires no fossil fuel backup due to high capacity value and reliability
More responsive to the grid’s price signals, delivering greater value to the ratepayer Can make real-time dispatch decisions
Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
Unlike wind and photovoltaics, provides firm, non-intermittent supply power without the use of fossil fuels Can replace conventional dispatchable power supply such as coal, natural gas
and nuclear Allows power delivery profile to be tailored to exactly meet utility requirements
Provides “more valuable” electricity Example: PG&E (California) “super peak” period is from 1PM to 8PM 24 hour supply available
Overall results in more efficient, effective and reliable power supply Inherent thermal energy storage allows for power on demand, even after
dark Typically 10 to 16 hours of storage per project depending on utility
requirements Substantial increase in efficiency and capacity factors – 50% to 80% capacity
factors as compared to PV or wind which typically operates at 25% to 40%.
Advantages of CSP Technology with Storage
Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
Inherent storage (no efficiency loss)
Dispatchable, on-demand generation
No natural gas required for operations or steam consistency
Predictable and efficient steam cycle
Dry cooling can be implemented efficiently
Low-pressure salt system
Molten Salt vs. Direct Steam and Trough
No inherent energy storage Significant efficiency loss
for bolt-on storage Intermittent generator
during transient weather Natural gas required to
“prop up” system – issues of gas cost, emissions, availability of nearby pipeline supply
Receiver must handle water/steam phase change
High pressure system throughout
No inherent energy storage
Significant efficiency loss for bolt-on storage
Intermittent generator Natural gas required for
operations – issues of gas cost, emissions, availability of nearby pipeline supply
Smaller temperature ‘capture range’ with Therminol
Limited economies of scale in core collector geometry
Molten Salt Tower Direct Steam Tower Solar Trough
Best-in-class design with significant
cost/performance upside
Benefits of central tower but hobbled by steam
system limitations
Mature technology but highest cost with limited
improvement upside
Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates CSP with storage will deliver a value of 1.6 - 4.0 ¢ / kWh over other solar generation in Western US
Estimated Value of Storage
Value is higher on smaller grids with higher sensitivity to intermittency, higher natural gas prices, higher renewable penetration, etc.
High-value power resource, eliminating need for conventional power resources
Copyright © 2012 SolarReserve. All Rights Reserved.
Contact Information
www.solarreserve.com
Joel M. Link
Vice President of Development
Corporate Headquarters: 2425 Olympic Blvd. Suite 500 East Santa Monica, CA 90404 Phone: (310) 315-2200 Toll-Free: (866) 622-2778 Fax: (310) 315-2201 European Headquarters (UK): Phone: +44 (0)1242 261 200 Fax: +44 (0)1242 261 900