Concentrating Solar Powermydocs.epri.com/docs/SEIG/NREL.pdf• Storage provides – higher value...
Transcript of Concentrating Solar Powermydocs.epri.com/docs/SEIG/NREL.pdf• Storage provides – higher value...
Concentrating Solar Power
Mark Mehos, Chuck KutscherNational Renewable Energy Laboratory
www.nrel.gov/csp
September 19, 2007
CSP Technologies and Market Sectors
• Dispatchable Generation
• Non-Dispatchable Generation
• Dispatchable Generation– Parabolic trough– Power tower
• Non-Dispatchable Generation– Dish/Engine
0 6 12 18 24
Value of Dispatchable Power? Meeting Utility Power Demands
Generation w/ Thermal
Storage
• Storage provides– higher value
because power production can match utility needs
– lower costs because storage is cheaper than incremental turbine costs
Solar ResourceHourly Load
Parabolic Trough Output Profile Parabolic Trough Output Profile Summer Day Summer Day
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
0:00 6:00 12:00 18:00 0:00
APS
Loa
d (M
We)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Net
Sol
ar O
utpu
t (M
We)
APS Load MWe Solar Output Solar with TES
July 8, 2002 - Actual system load, modeled solar output based on actual DNI
Parabolic Trough Output Profile Parabolic Trough Output Profile Summer Day Summer Day
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
0:00 6:00 12:00 18:00 0:00
APS
Loa
d (M
We)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Net
Sol
ar O
utpu
t (M
We)
APS Load MWe Solar Output Solar with TES
December 11, 2002 - Actual system load, modeled solar output based on actual DNI
CSP Costs and Targets• Current Costs
– Highly dependent on plant size, financing, incentives– $.12-$.16/kwh nominal LCOE
• Goals – CSP Proposed Baseload Initiative:– intermediate power at 8-10 cents/kWh (nominal LCOE)
by 2015 (5-year acceleration of current plan), and– baseload power at about 6-8 cents/kWh (nominal LCOE)
by 2020 (including systems with 60-75% capacity factor)
Parabolic Trough Technology Advances
– Advanced Selective Coatings • Thermal emittance of 0.07 @ 400C• Absorptance of 95%• Transmittance of 96%
– Advanced Concentrator Designs• Increased size (EuroTrough)• Improved mirror reflectivity (95% + 96% cleanliness)
– Molten-Salt Heat Transfer Fluids and Thermal Storage• Molten-Salt (Hitec) HTF at 500ºC• Single tank thermocline TES system
Parabolic Trough Potential Cost Reductions
0.05
0.060.07
0.08
0.090.10
0.11
0.120.13
0.14
25% 35% 45% 55% 65% 75%
Annual Capacity Factor
Real
Lev
eliz
ed C
ost o
f Ene
rgy
(200
6 $/
kWh)
Baseline 100 MWe 2-Tank Indirect Baseline Plus Advanced Solar Tech
Molten-salt Thermocline @ 500C Scale-up to 200 MWePower Park 4x200 Power Park w/ 3X Learning
How Does CSP Stack Up?
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.10
0.11
0.12
0.13
0.14
0.15
25% 35% 45% 55% 65% 75% 85%
Annual Capacity Factor
Real
Lev
eliz
ed C
ost o
f Ene
rgy
(200
6 $/
kWh)
Baseline 2:Tank Indirect Molten-salt Thermocline @ 500CPower Park 4x200 Power Park w/ 3X LearningConventional Gas Combined Cycle Pulverized CoalSequestered Gas Combined Cycle Sequestered Coal IGCCNew Nuclear Power
U.S. Market Analysis Focused Initially on the Southwest Region
Southwest Solar Resources (With all Filters) Result: 7,000 GW (7X U.S. capacity)!
Source: Western Governors’ Association study
Southwest Solar Energy Potential
The table and map represent land that has no primary use today, exclude land with slope > 1%, and do not count sensitive lands. Solar Energy Resource ≥
6.75Capacity assumes 5 acres/MWGeneration assumes 27% annual capacity factor
Land AreaSolar
Capacity
Solar Generation
CapacityState (mi2) (MW) GWh
AZ 19,279 2,467,663 5,836,517CA 6,853 877,204 2,074,763CO 2,124 271,903 643,105NV 5,589 715,438 1,692,154NM 15,156 1,939,970 4,588,417TX 1,162 148,729 351,774UT 3,564 456,147 1,078,879
Total 53,727 6,877,055 16,265,611
3000 km
3000 km
1500 km Chicago Boston
Miami
Dallas
600 km
1500 km
500 km
1000 km
Salt Lake
Seattle
3000 km
3000 km
1500 km Chicago Boston
Miami
Dallas
600 km
1500 km
500 km
1000 km
Salt Lake
Seattle
Long distance HVDC tie would add roughly 1.5 cents/kwh to cost of CSP
Deployment of 80 GW of CSP
European Transmission Studies
“Concentrating Solar Power for the Mediterranean Region,” German Aerospace Center (DLR), 2005
Operating Central Station Systems
• The Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) at Kramer Junction, CA (SEGS III-VII)
– Five 30MW hybrid trough plants for a total of 150MW Capacity
– Commissioned 1986-1988
– Performance has increased with time
• Four additional SEGS plants located in two locations (Daggett, Harper Lake) for combined total of nine plants and 354 MW capacity
Solar Thermal Capacity
0
100
200
300
400
500
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
YEAR
Cap
acity
in M
W
Annual Electricity Generation GWhr
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
YEAR
Gen
erat
ion
(GW
h) in
Solar Electric Generation Stations (SEGS) Deployment and power production 1985 – 2002.
SEGS Deployment & Production
1-MW Arizona Trough Plant – near Tucson, AZ
64 MWe Solargenix Parabolic Trough Plant
50 MW AndaSol-1 Parabolic Trough Plant w/ 7-hr Storage
Andalucia, Spain
Solucar PS10 Power Tower Sevilla, Spain
Solucar 50 MW Trough ProjectSevilla, Spain
First of 5 x 50MW parabolic trough plants under construction by Solucar
CSP Projects – mid 2007Utility/State Capacity
(MW)Technology - Status
Arizona Public Service (APS)
1 Trough – completed and in operation 2006 (Acciona)
Nevada Power 64 Trough – completed and in operation June 2007 (Acciona)
Southern Cal Edison
500-850 Dish – signed power purchase agreement (SES)
San Diego Gas & Electric
300-900 Dish – signed power purchase agreement (SES)
Pacific Gas & Electric
550 Trough – signed power purchase agreement (Solel)
Pacific Gas & Electric
500 Tower – MOU signed (Bright Source)
SW Utility joint venture (APS)
Est. 250 TBD – multiple expressions of interest submitted
New Mexico Utility Joint Venture
50-500 TBD – initial stages
U.S. projects: enabled by 30% investment tax credit and State renewable portfolio standards
State RPS RequirementArizona 15% by 2025 California 20% by 2010 Colorado 20% by 2020Nevada 20% by 2015, 5%
SolarNew Mexico 20% by 2015Texas 5,880MW (~4.2%) by
2015
CSP Projects – InternationalCountry/Company Capacity (MW) Technology -Status
Spain: Solar Millenium 4 x 50MW with storage
Trough – Andosol 1 &2 under construction.
Spain: Abengoa/Solucar 5 x 50MW Trough – 1st plant under construction
Spain: Abengoa/Solucar 11MW &20MW Power Tower (saturated steam) – PS10 operational. PS20 under construction
Spain: SENER 17MW Power Tower (molten salt) – contract terms under discussion
Spain: various TBD Projects under various stages of development due to tariff for 500MWs of CSP capacity. Cap likely to be raised to 1000MWs.
Algeria: Abener 150MW Integrated Solar Combined Cycle System (ISCCS) – 25MW Solar Capacity
Egypt: TBD 140MW ISCCS – 25MW Solar Capacity, negotiations in progress
Mexico: TBD TBD ISCCS – RFP issued
Morocco: TBD 230MW ISCCS – 35 MW Solar Capacity
Israel: Solel 2 x 125MW Trough – Northern Negev. Waiting approval from Interior Ministry
Australia: SHP 15MW,th Linear Fresnel – under construction for integration into feed water heaters in existing coal plant
Greece: TBD TBD Tariff for CSP recently enacted. Similar in design to Spanish feed-in tariff
Questions?
Mark Mehos National Renewable Energy Laboratory
[email protected] (303) 384-7458
www.nrel.gov/csp
Special Bonus Slides!!!!
SOLAR 2006, Denver“Renewable Energy: Key to Climate Recovery”
U.S. Carbon Emissions Displacement Potential from Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy by 2030
57% Energy Efficiency, 43% Renewables
$3 B/yr$7 B/yr$5 B/yr$5 B/yr$9 B/yr$0 B/yr
-$108 B/yr
Total:Savingsof $82 B/yr
What doesit cost?
U.S. Renewable Electricity Generation in 2030
TechnologyPercent of GridEnergy in 2030
Concentrating Solar Power* 7
Photovoltaics 7
Wind 20
Biomass* 8
Geothermal* 9
Total 51*Can provide baseload or near-baseload power
ASES reportreleasedJan. 31, 2007
Available at: www.ases.org
Adopted by SierraClub as their“energy roadmap”