In past entries, I've looked at FPL's Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center, which will combine solar thermal energy with existing steam boilers to power combined-cycle turbines. As it turns out, FPL and its NextEra siblings already operate the largest solar photovoltaic power plant in the United States: the 25-megawatt DeSoto Next Generation Solar Energy Center. At DeSoto, over 90,500 PV panels are projected to generate about 42,000 megawatt-hours annually, enough power to serve about 3,000 homes. Over 30 years, the DeSoto facility's generation will decrease fossil-fuel usage by approximately 7 billion cubic feet of natural gas and 277,000 barrels of oil. This shift will displace more than 575,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions, equivalent of removing more than 4,500 cars from the road every year for the entire life of the project.
How about costs? The DeSoto facility cost $150 million to construct (and was $22 million under budget). This translates roughly into a capital cost of 12 cents per kWh over the 30-year lifetime of the plant.
In Maine renewable news, the Lewiston Sun Journal reports that a petition is circulating in Dixfield that asks to leave wind siting decisions to a vote of the townspeople. The second of two successive six-month moratorium periods will end this fall. Dixfield wind energy isn't just a hypothetical situation; Massachusetts-based Patriot Renewables LLC has proposed developing the wind energy potential on Colonel Holman Mountain and its surrounding ridges. Patriot Renewables also has a project proposed in nearby Carthage and Woodstock. (Woodstock and Carthage have both rejected moratoria recently.) The area is also home to proposed projects by First Wind and Independence Wind in Rumford and Roxbury. (Thanks to Mike Novello for straightening me out on the projects in this area of Maine.)
Energy powers society; society's choices shape energy policy. A blog about our energy resources and the choices they present for society.
Showing posts with label FPL. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FPL. Show all posts
June 7, 2010 - update: Fort Halifax dam removal and erosion
Monday, June 7, 2010
A Morning Sentinel article today describes how the Maine Department of Environmental Protection is requiring FPL Energy Maine Hydro, the company that removed its Fort Halifax dam in July 2008, to stabilize the riverbank beneath the Fort Hill cemetery.
After years of legal battles, FPL removed the Fort Halifax dam from the mouth of the Sebasticook River in Winslow, Maine. As a condition of its dam removal permit, FPL was required to "closely monitor the slope adjacent to the cemetery and promptly remediate any slumping or erosion" in order "to protect the Fort Hill Cemetery from irreparable harm." Back in April, the riverbank suffered after another major landslides. FPL commissioned a study by Findlay Engineering Inc. of Yarmouth, which concluded that heavy rains and a small earthquake 41 miles away were contributing factors, but largely absolved FPL of responsibility.
Today, the news breaks that the Maine DEP is challenging FPL's study. DEP points to soil loss during the dewatering process, and a resulting lack of work by FPL to re-stabilize the slope after drawdown.
After years of legal battles, FPL removed the Fort Halifax dam from the mouth of the Sebasticook River in Winslow, Maine. As a condition of its dam removal permit, FPL was required to "closely monitor the slope adjacent to the cemetery and promptly remediate any slumping or erosion" in order "to protect the Fort Hill Cemetery from irreparable harm." Back in April, the riverbank suffered after another major landslides. FPL commissioned a study by Findlay Engineering Inc. of Yarmouth, which concluded that heavy rains and a small earthquake 41 miles away were contributing factors, but largely absolved FPL of responsibility.
Today, the news breaks that the Maine DEP is challenging FPL's study. DEP points to soil loss during the dewatering process, and a resulting lack of work by FPL to re-stabilize the slope after drawdown.
June 2, 2010 - Integrated Solar Combined Cycle: piggybacking of solar thermal onto combustion
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Yesterday I wrote about FPL's Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center, which uses "Integrated Solar Combined Cycle" technology. FPL describes the Martin plant as the "first hybrid solar facility in the world to connect to an existing combined-cycle power plant". The idea is to use parabolic trough reflectors to concentrate sunlight to help heat a special heat-transfer fluid that will be used to make steam -- steam that will be mixed with the steam produced by gas- and oil-fired boilers, and used to power generators.
Through discussions, I learned that others are experimenting with integrated solar combined cycle technology. In August 2009, Abengoa Solar announced its plans to build the first CSP installation integrated with a coal-fired plant. The Abengoa modification to Xcel Energy's existing Cameo plant, located near Grand Junction, Colorado, could add up to 4 MW equivalent (MWe) to the installed capacity.
The ISCC plant that is farthest along appears to be a 470 MW plant located at Ain Beni Mathar, Morocco. To be operated by nationalized utility Office National de l'Electricité (ONE), the Ain Beni Mathar plant combines parabolic trough solar technology and a conventional gas-fired power plant. Projections suggest that the solar component will supply 20 MWe, with the remaining 450 MW coming from the conventional thermal plant. On a production basis, the solar output is projected to be about 40 GWh, or just over 1% of the project's annual net production of 3538 GWh per year. Ain Beni Mathar is just one part of an ambitious 2000 MW solar program underway in sunny Morocco.
Here's a link to the Ain Beni Mathar project page on the African Development Bank Group site. The site lists a project cost of 179,073,180 Euro -- or about $218 million in US dollars at today's exchange rates.
Yesterday, we looked at the price tag of FPL's Martin plant: $420 million for 75 MW of solar. Dividing this linearly, we get a cost of $5.6 million per MW installed solar capacity. By comparison, Ain Beni Mathar offers about 20 MW of solar equivalent, or $10.9 million per MW.
Can these numbers be right? From the technology perspective, this is really neat stuff -- but are these prices reasonable?
Through discussions, I learned that others are experimenting with integrated solar combined cycle technology. In August 2009, Abengoa Solar announced its plans to build the first CSP installation integrated with a coal-fired plant. The Abengoa modification to Xcel Energy's existing Cameo plant, located near Grand Junction, Colorado, could add up to 4 MW equivalent (MWe) to the installed capacity.
The ISCC plant that is farthest along appears to be a 470 MW plant located at Ain Beni Mathar, Morocco. To be operated by nationalized utility Office National de l'Electricité (ONE), the Ain Beni Mathar plant combines parabolic trough solar technology and a conventional gas-fired power plant. Projections suggest that the solar component will supply 20 MWe, with the remaining 450 MW coming from the conventional thermal plant. On a production basis, the solar output is projected to be about 40 GWh, or just over 1% of the project's annual net production of 3538 GWh per year. Ain Beni Mathar is just one part of an ambitious 2000 MW solar program underway in sunny Morocco.
Here's a link to the Ain Beni Mathar project page on the African Development Bank Group site. The site lists a project cost of 179,073,180 Euro -- or about $218 million in US dollars at today's exchange rates.
Yesterday, we looked at the price tag of FPL's Martin plant: $420 million for 75 MW of solar. Dividing this linearly, we get a cost of $5.6 million per MW installed solar capacity. By comparison, Ain Beni Mathar offers about 20 MW of solar equivalent, or $10.9 million per MW.
Can these numbers be right? From the technology perspective, this is really neat stuff -- but are these prices reasonable?
June 1, 2010 - market theory of policy, and the madness of crowds; FPL's 75 MW solar thermal
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
BP shares are taking a hit today. One estimate suggests BP has lost $50 billion in market value based on share price. Meanwhile, another estimate suggests the true cost to BP of the massive oil release from its Deepwater Horizon well is on the order of $20 billion.
From the policy level, it's interesting to observe the market perform its assessment of BP's liabilities. If the large-cap stock market is the product of the "madness of crowds", what is the gap between share price and true value? How does the size of this gap vary with time and conditions?
This inquiry has implications for the policy world as well. What is the absolute value, in economic or preferential terms, of a given policy outcome -- for example, affordable electricity, or reduced CO2 emissions? How does society value that policy outcome? What is the size of the gap between the value we place on an outcome, and its true value? What choices should we as a society be making that we don't find "worth it", but that are truly the lowest-cost and best path forward?
More grid-scale solar: FPL is building a massive solar thermal plant near Lake Okeechobee, Florida. At up to 75 MW, FPL's Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center is on track to be the second-largest solar plant in the world. This solar thermal plant has a unique design. The plant will use mirrors to concentrate the sunlight 80 times, and then heat water up to 700 degrees. To get over the limitations of Florida's humid and often cloudy weather, the Martin facility is unique because it is co-located with an energy campus that already has 13 oil and gas-fueled generators. The heat exhaust steam from four natural-gas generators will be combined with the solar plant's steam to spin an existing generator. This saves the significant capital cost of installing a new generator, and seems like an efficient use of existing untapped capacity.
What's the cost? About $420 million, or about 16 cents a month to the average FPL residential bill.
From the policy level, it's interesting to observe the market perform its assessment of BP's liabilities. If the large-cap stock market is the product of the "madness of crowds", what is the gap between share price and true value? How does the size of this gap vary with time and conditions?
This inquiry has implications for the policy world as well. What is the absolute value, in economic or preferential terms, of a given policy outcome -- for example, affordable electricity, or reduced CO2 emissions? How does society value that policy outcome? What is the size of the gap between the value we place on an outcome, and its true value? What choices should we as a society be making that we don't find "worth it", but that are truly the lowest-cost and best path forward?
More grid-scale solar: FPL is building a massive solar thermal plant near Lake Okeechobee, Florida. At up to 75 MW, FPL's Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center is on track to be the second-largest solar plant in the world. This solar thermal plant has a unique design. The plant will use mirrors to concentrate the sunlight 80 times, and then heat water up to 700 degrees. To get over the limitations of Florida's humid and often cloudy weather, the Martin facility is unique because it is co-located with an energy campus that already has 13 oil and gas-fueled generators. The heat exhaust steam from four natural-gas generators will be combined with the solar plant's steam to spin an existing generator. This saves the significant capital cost of installing a new generator, and seems like an efficient use of existing untapped capacity.
What's the cost? About $420 million, or about 16 cents a month to the average FPL residential bill.
3/25/10
Thursday, March 25, 2010
The big news in this corner of the continent is that Hydro-Quebec and New Brunswick Power have canceled their proposed deal. Details are still coming out, but key factors include the radical unpopularity of the deal in NB -- with some reports of as low as 8% of New Brunswickers supporting the deal -- and "increased costs and risk" for HQ. More to follow for sure.
In Maine legislative news:
The Utilities and Energy Committee has voted out an amended version of LD 1810, the Ocean Energy Task Force bill. This bill, proposed by Governor Baldacci's Ocean Energy Task Force, underwent a significant scaling back during the committee process, largely due to concerns over impacts to electric ratepayers. The Task Force, whose members included former Central Maine Power utility chief David Flanagan, was told to propose legislation that would remove obstacles to building 5000 MW of offshore and coastal wind and tidal energy in Maine. The result was a bill that included mandates to overbuild transmission, loosen the standards for the PUC's approval of transmission lines, have ratepayers finance generator lead lines, and expose all ratepayers to rates of up to 25 cents per kWh in order to pay for long-term contracts for ocean energy. Through extensive questioning by legislators and stakeholder involvement, the result is a dramatically scaled-back bill voted out of the Committee unanimously this evening. As voted out, the amended bill eliminates much of the the pro-transmission prejudices embodied in the original bill, and the provisions that would have had ratepayers backstop generator lead lines. The Committee also transformed an ocean energy RFP process that would have exposed ratepayers to potentially significant cost increases into a voluntary "ocean energy standard offer". This is a good result that will empower Maine's renewable energy industry and economy, without inappropriately exposing ratepayers to costs and risk.
When dam owner FPL Energy got approval to remove its Fort Halifax dam and hydroelectric station on the Sebasticook River in Winslow, Maine, many people voiced concerns ranging from bad energy policy (why remove clean hydro when we're doing all we can to install more renewable capacity?) to bankside erosion causing damage to houses. The naysayers were right about the erosion; yesterday, the town completed its $725,000 buyout and demolition project of the six houses on Dallaire Street that were in peril of falling into the river.
Central Maine Power's $1.6 billion MPRP transmission project runs into new trouble: the Sierra Club says the MPRP will harm wetlands.
In Maine legislative news:
The Utilities and Energy Committee has voted out an amended version of LD 1810, the Ocean Energy Task Force bill. This bill, proposed by Governor Baldacci's Ocean Energy Task Force, underwent a significant scaling back during the committee process, largely due to concerns over impacts to electric ratepayers. The Task Force, whose members included former Central Maine Power utility chief David Flanagan, was told to propose legislation that would remove obstacles to building 5000 MW of offshore and coastal wind and tidal energy in Maine. The result was a bill that included mandates to overbuild transmission, loosen the standards for the PUC's approval of transmission lines, have ratepayers finance generator lead lines, and expose all ratepayers to rates of up to 25 cents per kWh in order to pay for long-term contracts for ocean energy. Through extensive questioning by legislators and stakeholder involvement, the result is a dramatically scaled-back bill voted out of the Committee unanimously this evening. As voted out, the amended bill eliminates much of the the pro-transmission prejudices embodied in the original bill, and the provisions that would have had ratepayers backstop generator lead lines. The Committee also transformed an ocean energy RFP process that would have exposed ratepayers to potentially significant cost increases into a voluntary "ocean energy standard offer". This is a good result that will empower Maine's renewable energy industry and economy, without inappropriately exposing ratepayers to costs and risk.
When dam owner FPL Energy got approval to remove its Fort Halifax dam and hydroelectric station on the Sebasticook River in Winslow, Maine, many people voiced concerns ranging from bad energy policy (why remove clean hydro when we're doing all we can to install more renewable capacity?) to bankside erosion causing damage to houses. The naysayers were right about the erosion; yesterday, the town completed its $725,000 buyout and demolition project of the six houses on Dallaire Street that were in peril of falling into the river.
Central Maine Power's $1.6 billion MPRP transmission project runs into new trouble: the Sierra Club says the MPRP will harm wetlands.
3/22/10
Monday, March 22, 2010
A small fire broke out inside a trash shredder at the Biddeford, Maine waste-to-energy plant Maine Energy Recovery Company (MERC). Perhaps the energy content of the fuel was just bursting to be set free.
Remember the battle over whether the Fort Halifax dam and its associated hydroelectric generating capacity on the Sebasticook River in Winslow, Maine should be removed? The 100-year-old dam was breached in July 2008 after lengthy debate and legal proceedings. , In essence, dam owner FPL Energy Maine Hydro (formerly Florida Power & Light, now NextEra) found itself burdened by a fish passage requirement imposed during the Edwards Dam removal proceedings. Under the Kennebec Hydro Developers Group Agreement (or the KHDG Agreement), FPL found itself either required to breach the dam or install a particular fish passage technology. FPL elected to breach the dam. Many people, including state representative Ken Fletcher of Winslow, opposed this decision, arguing that FPL's choice would have dire environmental and cost consequences, and that it was bad policy in light of the overall push for more renewable capacity. Representative Fletcher has now filed a document with the Maine DEP demonstrating costs to taxpayers of between $950,000 and $1.6 million. Key cost components include: $114,997 for the town's share of replacing a sewer line exposed after breach, $30,375 in costs for title and survey work over and above the value the town recovered by selling formerly submerged lands, $800,000 more than previously estimated to replace the Mile Brook Bridge on Garland Road due to erosion, , and $725,396 to demolish six homes on an unstable riverside slope on Dallaire Street.
The "energy corridor" bill in Maine was voted Ought to Pass as Amended by the Joint Standing Committee on Utilities and Energy. Among the issues are how Maine should regulate high-impact transmission lines connecting the massive hydroelectric capacity of Hydro-Quebec to southern New England markets, given that these lines will affect Maine's costs and strategic energy position.
The AP is covering a story about a California water district's proposed use of 47 square miles of poorly-managed farmland -- land that due to bad water use is now very salty -- for a solar photovoltaic farm of up to one gigawatt.
Who wants free money? $1.3 million in energy grants through Efficiency Maine to Northern Maine Community College in Presque Isle, Eastern Maine Community College in Bangor, Kennebec Community College in Augusta and Southern Maine Community College in South Portland. $2 million in grants for water projects too.
Wind siting: Thorndike voters approved the siting ordinance. Fort Kent votes tonight.
Remember the battle over whether the Fort Halifax dam and its associated hydroelectric generating capacity on the Sebasticook River in Winslow, Maine should be removed? The 100-year-old dam was breached in July 2008 after lengthy debate and legal proceedings. , In essence, dam owner FPL Energy Maine Hydro (formerly Florida Power & Light, now NextEra) found itself burdened by a fish passage requirement imposed during the Edwards Dam removal proceedings. Under the Kennebec Hydro Developers Group Agreement (or the KHDG Agreement), FPL found itself either required to breach the dam or install a particular fish passage technology. FPL elected to breach the dam. Many people, including state representative Ken Fletcher of Winslow, opposed this decision, arguing that FPL's choice would have dire environmental and cost consequences, and that it was bad policy in light of the overall push for more renewable capacity. Representative Fletcher has now filed a document with the Maine DEP demonstrating costs to taxpayers of between $950,000 and $1.6 million. Key cost components include: $114,997 for the town's share of replacing a sewer line exposed after breach, $30,375 in costs for title and survey work over and above the value the town recovered by selling formerly submerged lands, $800,000 more than previously estimated to replace the Mile Brook Bridge on Garland Road due to erosion, , and $725,396 to demolish six homes on an unstable riverside slope on Dallaire Street.
The "energy corridor" bill in Maine was voted Ought to Pass as Amended by the Joint Standing Committee on Utilities and Energy. Among the issues are how Maine should regulate high-impact transmission lines connecting the massive hydroelectric capacity of Hydro-Quebec to southern New England markets, given that these lines will affect Maine's costs and strategic energy position.
The AP is covering a story about a California water district's proposed use of 47 square miles of poorly-managed farmland -- land that due to bad water use is now very salty -- for a solar photovoltaic farm of up to one gigawatt.
Who wants free money? $1.3 million in energy grants through Efficiency Maine to Northern Maine Community College in Presque Isle, Eastern Maine Community College in Bangor, Kennebec Community College in Augusta and Southern Maine Community College in South Portland. $2 million in grants for water projects too.
Wind siting: Thorndike voters approved the siting ordinance. Fort Kent votes tonight.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
