SOLAR POWER PLANT PROGRESS

US CSP market overview
Rikki Stancich, 12 March 2010 (CSP Today)

[Nathanial Bullard, solar associate, Bloomberg New Energy Finance, on Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) and the clean energy manufacturing tax credit:] "The manufacturing tax credit, (which so far is only ‘conditional’ – no money has actually gone out the door)…could help manufacturers bridge the way to building the bigger systems that are required in the US (unlike the smaller systems in Spain, due to the 50 MW cap)…So yes, it is likely to benefit US players seeking to build larger plants…Any new manufacturer needs to have a very deep balance sheet in order to be considered ‘bankable’ by the project finance community…[T]he investor appetite for new entrants is not very big, because there is already so much capital in play…"

[Nathanial Bullard, solar associate, Bloomberg New Energy Finance, on CSP and stringent environmental requirements:] "…[W]ithout the renewable portfolio standards, utilities would only be building gas…I’d be surprised if any new conventional power plants were built with wet-cooling in the US’ south-west…There is much more legwork in the permitting regime for solar thermal than there is for gas. The California Energy Commission’s permission process is based on that for gas and coal plants…"

click to enlarge

[Nathanial Bullard, solar associate, Bloomberg New Energy Finance, on CSP and stringent environmental requirements:] "[A] CSP plant has a much, much greater physical footprint, making the burden of site assessment much greater and more time-consuming…[T]here is not yet a standardized approach for calculating the environmental impact of solar thermal…[S]olar thermal developers are at a first-mover ‘disadvantage’; the challenge is that they have to deal with the permitting challenge on top of the huge challenge of developing a new resource. They have to establish a whole new set of processes to create that new resource…"

[Nathanial Bullard, solar associate, Bloomberg New Energy Finance, on solar power tower and parabolic trough technologies:] "…Theoretically, power towers have the highest heat and highest efficiency system, with the highest capacity factor…Power tower developers have been playing an intelligent game by incorporating performance testing as well as gaining performance guarantees from their development and technology partners, and utilities appear to be buying into this…But in terms of MW online, you now have PS10 (11MW) and PS20 (20MW) in Andalusia, then Brightsource’s SEDC test plant in Israel (4-6MW), and eSolar’s Sierra Tower (5MW) and then Torresol’s gemasolar plant in Spain (17MW)…[The parabolic] trough technology portfolio is larger."

click to enlarge

[Nathanial Bullard, solar associate, Bloomberg New Energy Finance, on US Air Force concerns about CSP mirror glare, sonic boom breakage and power tower flight pattern interference:] "…It could potentially become a real issue, given that there is not much room for negotiation when it comes to dealing with official departments such as the US Air Force…The tower height issue is a simple flight rule issue…[T]he Air Force [may] accept a tower that is 200 meters tall. I believe that there were visibility issues with the parabolic troughs…These issues may ultimately limit the potential field of available sites…But at the end of the day, a good developer will find a way to get projects developed."

[Nathanial Bullard, solar associate, Bloomberg New Energy Finance, on international standards for CSP and its components:] "Standards would certainly strengthen the ability for developers to sell the plants…But, as is the case in the PV sector…certain types of equipment are perceived by the industry as being bankable because of their sponsor, not because of a standard…Challenges in creating a standard would arise form regional disparities…At present, a strong sponsor tends to be the industry standard – a manufacturer with a proven track record…[W]hile developers may welcome competition as a means of driving down costs, the financial community tends to be less supportive of new entrants and would probably insist on using the larger, commercially proven manufacturer."