Archives

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/2/AmericanFlag.jpg Some solar farms use substantial amounts of water to cool (http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/30/solar-stirs-water-wars-in-the-west/)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/Concentrated_Solar_Power.jpgTodd Woody - BLOGS (http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com) - Sept 30, 2009

A solution can be found --Ed.

Depending on the technology used, some solar farms can consume more than a billion gallons of water year in regions that receive three or four inches of rain annually.

It’s a truism that all water politics are local and that’s proving to be the case as solar power becomes the latest fight in the West’s long history of internecine water wars. For solar developers that means dealing with an often-bewildering array of regulations, stakeholders and politics.

In Arizona, for instance, plans for big solar farms have revived old fears that the desert state’s scarce water resources will be exported to energy-hungry California in the form of electricity....http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/30/solar-stirs-water-wars-in-the-west/

Water in the West flows uphill toward money. Always has, and unless we radically revise our water policies it always will.

20% of the state's annual rainfall seems pretty excessive. Why can't more be recaptured?

Seems like the stirling engine system that another company has been developing may be a better choice at is uses virtually no water (except to clean)

I've never really understood "water rights." Frankly,I would be in favor of the Feds confiscating all water rights and then selling it as a commodity with the public interest in mind.

Of course since our Pols are bought and paid for, that probably wouldn't work out too well either.

A freakin' car dealer with water rights??

Charlie

I've never really understood "water rights." Frankly,I would be in favor of the Feds confiscating all water rights and then selling it as a commodity with the public interest in mind.Charlie,

You might have found a hotter topic than Health Care. :D

Cooling water is used for almost all steam plants -- Coal, nuclear, solar thermal power, combined cycle gas turbine. Less per kWHr for the combined cycle, since only the waste heat from the gas turbine goes to the steam plant. Dry cooling can be done, but is more expensive to build and results in lower efficiency (can't cool to as low a temp). Wind and PV don't require cooling water, but aren't at all dispachable (solar thermal can have storage). Simple cycle gas turbines (lower efficiency than combined cycle) and gas/diesel engines don't need evaporative cooling, either.

The stirling engine will have lower efficiency than if it used water cooling, too.
We can't recapture the cooling water because we evaporated it into the air -- that is how we got the better cooling.
Solar thermal isn't any worse than the way we generate electricity today. It may displace water for alfalfa in the desert (which makes little economic or ecological sense), but leave more water for growing alfalfa in more hospitable climates where the coal plants would have been.
As usual, conservation is key -- less cooling water needed if we use less electricity.

We can't recapture the cooling water because we evaporated it into the air -- that is how we got the better cooling.

Some can be recaptured. Look at nuclear plants and their large cooling towers. You will often find rain inside of them at the steam condenses back to moisture, collects into large enough drops, and falls back to the ground. They can (but not sure if they do) reuse the water again. And no energy loss if the system is passive, but a tremendous upfront cost of bulding the systems. Or, a cheaper system could be built, but it would eat some of the power. However these are costs that the solar energy business probably can't afford.

I supose this explains why nuclear power plants aren't built in the middle of the desert away from people...they are water hungry and the desert is dry.

Actually, one of the largest powerplants in the US is in the Arizona desert near Phoenix. Their solution is use water from the city sewer system as the ultimate heat sink.

I think Chuck's editorial comment is true and important: a solution can be found. Cooling is a problem for every single thermal power plant we build no matter the heat source.

Any chance of locating one of these close enough to the ocean and use all that nice waste heat for water desalination? Such a plant would product electricty, water AND road salt. Sounds like a nice win to me.

Actually, one of the largest powerplants in the US is in the Arizona desert near Phoenix. Their solution is use water from the city sewer system as the ultimate heat sink.

I think Chuck's editorial comment is true and important: a solution can be found. Cooling is a problem for every single thermal power plant we build no matter the heat source.

Much better than using Phoenix's fresh water for cooling, but it still takes away water that would have returned to the river (OK, so it was imported via pipes and ditches) and could have been used for other purposes.


I've never really understood "water rights." Frankly,I would be in favor of the Feds confiscating all water rights and then selling it as a commodity with the public interest in mind.

Of course since our Pols are bought and paid for, that probably wouldn't work out too well either.

A freakin' car dealer with water rights??

Water rights are bought and sold today (thus a car dealer owning a water right). You are suggesting confiscating property, re-selling it, and ultimately ending up with the same situation as today! If you don't understand something, don't be in a hurry to change it!

Bike123, if you read what I wrote, I came to the same conclusion that it wouldn't work because the pols would just make sure it went to their buddies, which is EXACTLY what happened to most water and mineral rights-the politically connected got them at HUGE discounts.

Yes,I do think that water is too important to allow the free market a free hand, just as energy policy is too important to our national interest to allow the free market a free hand. Energy itself is not a free market commodity so we shouldn't pretend it is-, nor highways, nor national defense.

If the CO2 man caused Global warming is correct, then it isn't a good idea to leave it to the free market.

Lots of things are too important to leave to a" not really free" market.

Yes,I would redistribute wealth-governments always do that-"democratic" govs do it to buy votes-why pretend otherwise.Sometimes the votes are bought by the very affluent paying for advertising for the candidate, sometimes they are bought by implied promises of gain to the less affluent.

Pols redistribute wealth to get elected and to stay in office. It is childish to pretend people give campaign contributions for any other reason other than to get a HUGE return on that investment.
All Pols are bought and paid for.But the free market has no particular in our-USA- long term national interest-hence they-both parties- allow in millions of illegals to drive down labor costs, and allow China to take over manufacturing for us-once again cheap labor.

The "Free Market" is bad for the USA and good for China(cheap labor).

Charlie

Charlie,
Corruption isn't the only problem with the federal government taking over water rights. Another problem is that water issues are very different in the arid Western states than in the East and midwest. Washington has a very bad record when it comes to decisons on Western water, and it is primarily due to not understanding the issues, rather than corruption.

Also, who decides what is the public good? Bluegrass lawns? Parks? Fruit trees? Gardens? Privately owned horses? Crops? Crops grown outside of their normal climate? Corn for ethanol (a National priority right now, for both parties)? How much per acre for each use? Requirements vary with climate and soil type. Available water is different in each river basin. If a new use comes up would existing water rights get unilaterally revoked? (Sorry about the trees you just planted, or your farm, but this new energy project is a national priority)

The free market, with all its faults, does a better job distributing water rights than the most honest guy alive, especially if he is sitting thosands of miles away.
Greg

Bike123,

Yes, no really good solutions, just least bad.

Charlie