Print This Post
Dramatic Solar Thermal Endorsement
Xcel ditching 2 coal plants, going to solar
PUC approves plan to help meet 2020 goal
By Gargi Chakrabarty, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Judy Walgren © The Rocky/2004
Xcel’s Cherokee plant operates in Denver. Xcel plans to close two coal-powered plants to meet a mandate to provide 20 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2020.
Related Links
More Energy
- Panel gives OK to nine rules guiding energy companies
- Oil, gas rules get initial OK
- Forest Oil Corp. to buy oil, gas assets in South
Story Tools
Share
State regulators gave the go-ahead to Xcel Energy’s plans for a green makeover: shutting down two coal-fired power plants in the state and building one of the world’s largest utility-scale solar power plants.
After days of deliberations, the Colorado Public Utilities Commission approved Xcel’s voluntary decision to shutter electricity generating stations in Denver and Grand Junction - making it the first utility in the nation to do so in order to reduce pollution emissions.
The commission also approved the utility’s request for a 200-megawatt solar plant using concentrated solar technology that not only helps generate electricity from the sun, but also allows energy to be stored for later use.
The commission approved, too, Xcel’s request to add 850 megawatts of wind energy to its system.
“That’s great news,” said Harriet Moyer Aptekar, development manager of Ausra, a Silicon Valley company supported by venture firm Kleiner Perkins and Sun Microsystems co-founder Vinod Khosla. “We will be very interested when Xcel seeks bids and we’ll be competing for it.”
Spanish company Abengoa Solar, with U.S. headquarters in Lakewood, BrightSourceEnergy and Ausra are among the solar companies that have established a presence in Colorado to tap into its growing market. Abengoa, which is building a 280-megawatt solar plant in Arizona, has indicated it will compete for Xcel’s project.
The proposed solar and wind projects would catapult the utility into compliance with state laws that require larger utilities to receive 20 percent of their electricity from solar, wind or biomass sources by 2020.
Commission spokesman Terry Bote said a written decision likely will be issued by mid-September, clearing the way for Xcel to proceed with its plan.
“Based on the approved framework, Xcel Energy will then solicit bids consistent with the approved plan and submit its recommended choices to the PUC,” he said. “An independent evaluator will also review the bids and make recommendations.”
Xcel spokesman Mark Stutz said he couldn’t say how soon the utility would seek bids for the solar and wind projects.
“We are generally pleased, however, that the commission essentially has agreed with our final plan concerning additional wind and solar power, and our plans to close two of our power plants,” Stutz said. “The additional wind and solar provides benefits to the environment, and we look forward to those additions to our system by 2015.
“Gov. (Bill) Ritter last year called for a 20 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emission by 2020,” he added. “The plant closures will help us reduce our carbon emissions and put us well on the way toward meeting the governor’s goal.”
In November, Xcel offered to shut down two coal-fired plants, the Arapahoe at 2601 S. Platte River Drive, and the Cameo in Grand Junction.
To replace the 229 megawatts the plants provide, Xcel initially said it would build a 480-megawatt natural gas-fired plant at the Arapahoe site but later withdrew its proposal in the face of criticism.
The Cameo plant is scheduled to close by December 2010, while units at the Arapahoe will be shut down in 2012.
Tags: peak oil energy investments
Print This Post
16 responses so far ↓
1 paultaut // Aug 21, 2008 at 11:57 am
I see a big problem here. There seems to be a time line discrepancy.
Xcel expects to have the Wind and solar in place by 2015 but expects to shutter both coal fired plants by 2012. That is 229 megawatts go offline for 3 years, before the wind/solar kick in.
Please tell me what I am missing?
2 Ed Painter // Aug 21, 2008 at 1:01 pm
229 megawatts go offline for three years and solar only works when sun shining, plus wind power on average is much less than the maximum designed output. Coal plants run 24/7. I ask the same question, what am I missing here?
3 KV // Aug 21, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Electricity demands are not constant during the day. Solar provides peak daily use as long as sun shines, wind provides back up for the night as long as wind blows, and other gas, coal and nuclear complete the picture as each have peak capability. I wonder if anybody has stats on peak load as % of average.
4 Cris X // Aug 21, 2008 at 1:36 pm
By using molten salt heat storage (mixture of sodium and potassium nitrate) solar plants can produce electricity 24/7.
5 paultaut // Aug 21, 2008 at 3:15 pm
229 megs offline for 3 years, who shuts down for that long?
Molten salt heat storage?
Whats the Environmental impact, what is the shelf life? Does it breakdown into non-toxic components?
And where can I find out more about this?
6 Jim Kingsdale // Aug 21, 2008 at 4:53 pm
There is a lot of information on solar thermal technology on the Ausra website - just google Ausra.
7 Jim Kingsdale // Aug 21, 2008 at 4:54 pm
There is also information on this website. Click on “concentrating solar”.
8 Isaac // Aug 21, 2008 at 8:07 pm
We’re going to be paying alot more for electricity- one way or another. We’d need to be hearing of 10 or 20 such stories a day to indicate the nation takes the issue seriously, and can mount a response in a timely manner. Sometimes I almost wish for central planning.
9 jkingsdale // Aug 21, 2008 at 8:50 pm
I’m not so sure electricity costs will rise that much. Ausra says they’ll be able to produce for 10 c/kw, maybe 8. Not so bad and with volume production and tech. improvements in solar thermal over time I’d guess those costs will come down. It’s actually coal and gas that are getting expensive. It will be interesting to see what the new water injection geothermal costs will be - could be a pleasant surprise.
10 paultaut // Aug 21, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Boone’s water rights? Hmmm, now I get it.
11 paultaut // Aug 22, 2008 at 7:25 am
I just posted a reply to a an Alpha article on Solar stocks, read it if you can find it. If not I’ll post it here some time later.
12 Isaac // Aug 22, 2008 at 9:49 am
Jim, I agree that electrical production from CSP will be competitive. But throw in grid costs, smart metering costs, the costs of “clean” coal, “safe” nucs, more expensive gas and oil than we’ve had in the past 50 years, and the increased demand for electricity as we shift to electrified transportation, all adds up to much more expensive electricity. Perhaps the biggest factor is the lag we will experience in bringing new capacity on line, whether it be for reasons of incompetent planning, obstruction by environmentalist or MIMBY’ ers, or our inability to afford new technologies due to our increasingly poor budgetary position. On the bright side, higher electric rates will give further fuel for CSP, geothermal, etc. etc.
13 Robert Essian // Aug 22, 2008 at 11:05 am
I listened to an expert on the electrical grid and his message was that the off peak period that will be used by most of us while we charge our batteries (at night) will cause no additional strain on our system and the cost would actually be cheaper (off peak rates).
He went onto say that our rates would go up in the future anyways because they had to replace so much of our grid because of natural life issues and growing demand.
I wish I had the article but I can’t find it among my volumes of research.
I say lets coordinate this thing and do it right so we are not tearing down and reworking our national system to maximize savings by duplication or some such thing…I’m no expert but lets have a NATIONAL PLAN that makes sense. We all know that things get replaced only to have them torn down because we have a new plan.
Excel Energy are forward thinkers and I’m proud of them. I cannot believe they would install a system without a back up relay for down periods. They are in the business to supply energy so I image that’s what they will do.
14 Robert Essian // Aug 22, 2008 at 12:35 pm
For the record and I have spent endless hours learning from all of you as well as many other concerned citizens, not to mention reading everything I can get my hands on.
First, with a heart felt thank you I say I believe each and every one of you care more about our Nations (World) future than on personal gain. I look forward to this part of my day as much as anything.
Secondly what’s wrong with making some money while we’re at it.
Third, so Jim don’t get mad at me, will the last person leaving the building please turn of the lights…Jim a great thing you have going here I hope you enjoy it as much as we do.
15 Cris X // Aug 22, 2008 at 1:18 pm
@ paultaut; just google molten salt heat storage, there’s a lot of information out there. Something interesting… SQM is the biggest producer of these salts. Maybe we will soon drive cars on SQM Li batteries that we’ll recharge on solar electricity produced with SQM salts.
16 paultaut // Aug 23, 2008 at 2:08 am
Saw/read, went to Ausra site saw setup.
Please, read the section on Concentrating Solar near the top. The maintenance of the Solar panels involves a water truck cleaning the Surfaces weekly. I figure that to make solar a major alternative enrgy source. Millions of panels that would eventually have to be cleaned to ensure peak performance. Cleaning them on an annual basis would probably involve millions of gallons of water most of which would probably evaporate due to the climate in the areas I envision that these panels will be installed.
Where will the water come from? T. Boone will sell it to them. Water rights, smart boy.
Cleaning with anything else will probably be a fossil fuel developed chemical. Remember that water is being regarded as the new Oil of the 21st century. Heck, there are states currently in courts fighting over access to water tables that extend beyond the borders of each respective state.
Had the Vegas building continued unabated, Lake Mead was expected to dry up within the next 5 years.
Leave a Comment