Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

nationalize the fed

(2,169 posts)
Fri Sep 23, 2016, 05:05 PM Sep 2016

Adani unveils world's largest (648 mW) solar power plant in Tamil Nadu, India (Video)

The Economic Times 9/21/16

CHENNAI/NEW DELHI: Adani Green Energy, part of the Adani Group, today said it has dedicated to the nation the world's largest 648-mw solar power plant in Tamil Nadu entailing an investment of Rs 4,550 crore.



The solar power plant, producing 648 mw at a single location, was formally dedicated to the nation, a company statement said.

"The plant is set up at Kamuthi, Ramanathapuram, in Tamil Nadu with an investment of Rs 4,550 crore. It is part of the state government's ambitious target of generating 3,000 mw as per the solar energy policy unveiled by the government in 2012," it said.

The entire 648-mw plant is now connected with Kamuthi 400 kv sub-station of Tantransco, making it the world's largest solar unit at a single location, it said.

Read more at:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/54444179.cms

http://www.adanipower.com/

National Geographic Megastructures featuring Adani’s Solar Power Plant



Sep 16, 2016: World’s largest single location solar power plant with a capacity of 648 MW of energy, having over 25 lakh solar modules installed and spread across 2500 acres of land.

Watch the full episode of National Geographic's Megastructures to get a peek into how Adani makes use of this renewable source of energy at World’s largest Solar Power Plant at Kamuthi, Tamil Nadu.
2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Adani unveils world's largest (648 mW) solar power plant in Tamil Nadu, India (Video) (Original Post) nationalize the fed Sep 2016 OP
Even though I regard the solar industry as a tragic failure, I think you mean MW (megawatts), not... NNadir Sep 2016 #1
More of your bunk? kristopher Sep 2016 #2

NNadir

(33,523 posts)
1. Even though I regard the solar industry as a tragic failure, I think you mean MW (megawatts), not...
Fri Sep 23, 2016, 05:38 PM
Sep 2016

...mW, milliwatts.

This is a tragic waste of resources in a poor country.

Of course, as is traditional with the half a century of lying about this industry is the misrepresentation of a term for peak power as energy. They are very different things, not that the scientifically illiterate cheerleaders for this garbage bother to open a high school level physics book to find these kinds of things out.

As I pointed out elsewhere, the money squandered on the $2.2 billion "world's largest" solar thermal plant scarring huge surface area in the Mohave desert has resulted in a power plant whose average continuous power output is 61 MW, although the liars who built it rate it as a 392 MW plant.

Um, how much hydrogen could the $2.2 billion Ivanpah solar thermal plant produce?


In the first month of operation, January 2014, the plant produced an average continuous power of 14 MW, and it did not approach 100 MW until the month of June 2014, when it produced 89 MW of average continuous power. For the entire year of 2014, it was the equivalent of a 47 MW power plant.

Since coming on line, the plant has produced more than 100 MW of average continuous power in only three months: In April of 2015, it produced 104.59 MW of average continuous power; in June of 2015 it produced 107.68 MW of average continuous power; and in February of this year it produced 100.08 MW of average continuous power.

Overall, during it's entire history it has been the equivalent of a 61.11 MW power plant.

Thus, at 2.2 billion dollars in cost, with 1.6 billion dollars represented by loan guarantees by the US government, in order to produce as much power as a 1000 MWe nuclear plant, we would need 16.4 of these disasters, and the cost would be $36 billion. The land area required would be 265 square miles of desert.

The big difference between a nuclear plant and this piece of expensive and useless crap is that the nuclear plant would 1) actually work, 2) would operate for about 60 - 80 years and 3) would not require burning huge amounts of dangerous natural gas to start up, and 4) would not require redundant plants, fueled by dangerous fossil fuels to support it whenever the sun went down. The nuclear plant could produce all of the power of the 265 square miles of solar plant in a moderate sized industrial building.


I spent a few weeks in India, and saw first hand the depths of poverty there. Given that this plant will be toxic landfill within 20 years, and given the needs of the poor in India, this is actually a horrible tragedy.

Have a nice weekend.

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
2. More of your bunk?
Fri Sep 23, 2016, 07:31 PM
Sep 2016
SEP 22, 2016 @ 12:32 PM
We Could Power The Entire World By Harnessing Solar Energy From 1% Of The Sahara

Could the world feasibly switch to all-nuclear power generation? If so, would that be a good counter to global warming?originally appeared on Quora: the knowledge sharing network where compelling questions are answered by people with unique insights.

Answer by Mehran Moalem, PhD, UC Berkeley, Professor, Expert on Nuclear Materials and Nuclear Fuel Cycle, on Quora:

I have taught courses in Nuclear Engineering and a few seminar courses in alternative energies. I also worked for two years starting up six solar factories around the globe. In spite of my personal like for nuclear engineering, I have to admit it is hard to argue for it. Here is the simplified math behind it.

The total world energy usage (coal+oil+hydroelectric+nuclear+renewable) in 2015 was 13,000 Million Ton Oil Equivalent (13,000 MTOE) – see World Energy Consumption & Stats. This translates to 17.3 Terawatts continuous power during the year.

Now, if we cover an area of the Earth 335 kilometers by 335 kilometers with solar panels, even with moderate efficiencies achievable easily today, it will provide more than 17,4 TW power. This area is 43,000 square miles. The Great Saharan Desert in Africa is 3.6 million square miles and is prime for solar power (more than twelve hours per day). That means 1.2% of the Sahara desert is sufficient to cover all of the energy needs of the world in solar energy. There is no way coal, oil, wind, geothermal or nuclear can compete with this. The cost of the project will be about five trillion dollars, one time cost at today’s prices without any economy of scale savings. That is less than the bail out cost of banks by Obama in the last recession. Easier to imagine the cost is 1/4 of US national debt, and equal to 10% of world one year GDP. So this cost is rather small compared to other spending in the world. There is no future in other energy forms. In twenty to thirty years solar will replace everything. There will still be need for liquid fuels but likely it will be hydrogen produced by the electrolysis of water and that powered by solar. Then tankers and pipelines will haul that hydrogen around the world. One can also envision zirconium or titanium batteries that store large quantities of hydrogen.

By the way, note that the cost of a 1 GWe (Gigawatt electric) nuclear plant is about three billion dollars. the cost of 17.3 TW nuclear power will be fifty-two trillion dollars or ten times that of solar even if all the other issues with safety and uranium supply are resolved.

All that said, there is a niche application for nuclear power....
http://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2016/09/22/we-could-power-the-entire-world-by-harnessing-solar-energy-from-1-of-the-sahara/#34d60b553e5b
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Adani unveils world's lar...