prices are indicated in Ukrainian kopecks for 2013, I think it’s the same story in Russia
hi lad Well, what if we don’t criticize Russia?
For example, in Crimea, stations were built under a feed-in tariff of 0.65 dollars (2013) per kW, which required the purchase of the Energorynok KP. Consider - to build a station that pays out instead of 12-25 kopecks (nuclear power plant - hydroelectric power station) per kW - 505 (five hundred five) kopecks per kW, this is some kind of nonsense.
The comparison is incorrect, because in Ukraine, nuclear power plants are “free” (inherited from the USSR), and in Crimea, Austrian investors built solar power plants with their own money and loans and wanted to recoup their investments.
Moreover, they wanted to recoup costs and repay loans quickly, in just a few years. Accordingly, they included all the costs of building power plants in the price of electricity and included their excess profits. That’s why they planned such an expensive price - $0.65 per kWh. Otherwise, they would not be able to repay the loans and receive their excess profits.
It is necessary to develop either cheap, clean electric power - nuclear power plants, for example
Nuclear power plants are not cheap and certainly not clean electricity.
If you include the cost of building the nuclear power plant itself in the price of nuclear electricity, you will get much more expensive electricity. To build 1 power unit for a nuclear power plant costs from 4-5 billion dollars and more. For example, the cost of the Akkuyu NPP in Turkey is estimated at $27 billion (4 power units of 1200 MW each), the cost of the Belarusian NPP was estimated at $9-10 billion (2 power units of 1200 MW each). If you do the math, you get construction costs alone - from 4.2 thousand dollars per 1 kW of nuclear power plant capacity. Plus, nuclear power plants require high maintenance costs, expensive repairs, hiring a large number of highly qualified specialists, purchasing expensive nuclear fuel, disposing of this fuel, etc.
Solar power plants are practically free of charge compared to nuclear power plants. A huge solar power plant can be serviced by only a few people of average qualification - brushing dust off the panels and monitoring the wiring, that’s all the worries throughout the entire service life. No super complex dangerous reactors, no high pressure circuits, steam turbines, cooling systems, fire extinguishing systems, etc. no need.
Ukraine got all nuclear power plants (as well as factories, transport infrastructure and much more) for free from Soviet Union, therefore, the cost of electricity does not include the colossal cost of building nuclear power plants themselves. And wages in Ukraine are 4-5 times lower than in Russia; Ukrainians simply cannot pay much for electricity, so power engineers are forced to keep prices relatively low.
Let’s say that some Austrian investors decided to build a new nuclear power plant in Ukraine with 4 power units of 1000 MW each. The entire project will cost about $20 billion. The number of highly qualified nuclear power plant workers is at least 6 thousand, with salaries of at least 900-1000 dollars a month, i.e., salaries alone amount to another 72 million dollars a year. Plus repairs, fuel purchases (1 1000 MW power unit consumes 27 tons of nuclear fuel per year, at $1200-1500 per 1 kg) and so on - another $200-230 million per year, in total the cost of maintaining a nuclear power plant will be about $300 million per year. year. Let’s divide the cost of building a nuclear power plant by 4 (even if the cunning Austrian investors want to recoup their investments in 4 years), and in total they need to earn $5.3 billion a year from selling electricity. The power plant will generate about 28 billion kWh per year (similar to LNPP), which means the cost of 1 kWh will be at least 20 cents excluding taxes. If hypothetical Austrian investors would also like to make a profit and pay taxes, then the cost of 1 kW would already be 40 cents, 0.4 dollars, 10 hryvnia per 1 kWh. This is the price that would be in Ukraine if they built nuclear power plants there from scratch themselves, rather than using Soviet nuclear power plants they got for free.
There is no need to create illusions about the “cleanliness” of nuclear energy - this is very dirty energy. Primarily due to uranium mining technologies:
Fuel cycle. Uranium miningThe era of uranium mined in industrial scale, began at the end of World War II, when this material was mined as a strategic resource. To obtain this raw material for nuclear bomb Great efforts have been made at great expense.
At first, no one paid any attention to the effects of radiation on the health of workers and the environment. The United States obtained uranium from a variety of sources, mainly from its own and Canadian deposits. The Soviet Union, prior to the discovery of large domestic deposits, established a huge uranium mining industry in European satellite states, parts of East Germany and Czechoslovakia, as well as Hungary and Bulgaria. At that time, more than 100,000 people worked hard in the East German Wismut project to extract the same amount of uranium that a few hundred people can now extract from a Canadian mine.
In the 1970s, uranium increasingly became a commercial resource for mining nuclear energy, the situation began to change: the market developed - now governments were no longer the only customers for uranium - environmental standards were established for the mining industry. With the end Cold War the greater need for uranium mining disappeared as secondary resources, raw material reserves, or nuclear bomb material became available for civilian use. Recycled resources currently supply almost half of the nuclear industry, leaving only the most economical uranium mines with a chance of survival. However, due to the rapid depletion of secondary resources and proposals to expand nuclear energy production made in several countries, the situation is changing again: uranium may once again become a rare resource that will be mined at a high (environmental) cost.
Uranium Mining: Technology and Impact
At an average concentration of 3 g/t in earth's crust, uranium is not a very rare metal. Production makes sense only in deposits containing concentrations of at least about 1000 g/t (0.1%); ore with more low content are currently mined only in emergency circumstances. Concentrations of industrial significance are found in various parts peace. These deposits differ in geological location, size, amount of uranium contained in the ore, and conditions of access to the deposit. In the Colorado Plateau of the western United States, where the ore grade is 0.1 to 0.2 percent, uranium was mined in thousands of small mines until the early 1980s, when the price of the material plummeted. At the same time, in Elliot Lake (Ontario, Canada), East Germany and Czechoslovakia, uranium was mined for many decades mainly in very large underground mines and often at lower grades in the ore. When East German uranium mining operations were shut down in 1990, the price of their products was approximately ten times higher than world market prices.
After the end of the Cold War, development of only the most profitable deposits continued. High concentrations in ore are rare - on the McArthur River in an underground deposit (Saskatchewan, Canada) material with a uranium content of 17.96% is mined. The lowest concentration in the ore is in the Rössing open pit mine in Namibia (0.029%).
A large amount of uranium is mined traditionally - in open or underground mines. With the exception of a few deposits in Canada, the uranium content of the ores is usually below 0.5%, so very large quantities of ore must be mined to obtain uranium. In mines, workers are not protected from radioactive dust and radon gas, which increase the risk of lung cancer. On early stages During uranium mining after World War II, the mines were poorly ventilated, resulting in unusually high concentrations of dust and radon in the air. In 1955, typical radon concentrations in the Wismut mines were approximately 100,000 Bq/cubic meter, with peaks of 1.5 million Bq/cubic meter. A total of 7,163 East German miners died from lung cancer between 1946 and 1990. For 5,237 of these, occupational exposure was identified as the cause of illness. In the United States, Congress recognized the government's responsibility for the health of early miners (mainly Navajo Indians) only in 1990, passing the Radiation Compensation Act. The administrative barriers to receiving compensation were so high and the capital allocated for the program so insufficient that many miners (or surviving family members) received compensation only after the new law was passed in 2000.
During the mining cycle, large volumes of contaminated water are pumped out of the mine and released into rivers and lakes and released into the environment. Wastewater from the Rabbit Lake deposit in Canada, for example, caused an increase in the mass of uranium in the bottom sediments of Hidden Bay of the Wollaston River. In 2000, the uranium content in bottom sediments was 8 times higher than the natural level. Since then it has grown exponentially and increased 10-fold between 2000 and 2003. In river bottom sediments in the area of the Wismut deposit, the concentrations of radium and uranium are 100 times higher than the natural norm.
Mine ventilation, while reducing health hazards for miners, releases radioactive dust and radon gas into the atmosphere, increasing the risk of lung cancer for people living nearby. At Wismut (Schlema-Alberoda mine), for example, a total of 7,426 million cubic meters (235 m3/s) of polluted air were released into the atmosphere in 1993, with an average radon concentration of 96,000 Bq/cubic meter. Dumps are formed in an open mine, for example, when tunnels are driven through barren zones or the concentration of uranium in the ore is too low. Dumps often contain increased concentrations of radionuclides compared to normal rock. Such material continues to threaten people and environment and after the mine is closed, as it emits radon gas and radioactive water. The waste piles from the Wismut uranium mines in the Schlema/Aue area contain a volume of 47 million cubic meters and cover an area of 343 hectares. The dumps were often dumped in close proximity to residential areas. As a result, high concentrations of radon in the air (approximately 100 Bq/cubic meter) were detected over large areas. In some places, the radon concentration was even higher - 300 Bq/cubic meter. This continued until the radioactive material was isolated. The Independent Institute of Ecology (Ecology Institute) found that with a long life in such an area, the risk of developing lung cancer reaches 20 cases at a concentration of 100 Bq/cubic meter and 60 cases at a concentration of 300 Bq/cubic meter - per 1000 inhabitants. In addition, dumps were often used mixed with gravel or cement for road construction. Thus, gravel containing elevated radioactive concentrations was distributed over large areas.
In some cases, uranium is extracted from low-grade ore by leaching. This is done for economic reasons if the uranium content of the ore is too low. An alkaline or acidic liquid is introduced into the mass of material and penetrates downwards, where it is pumped out for further processing. In Europe, for example in East Germany or Hungary, this technology was used until 1990. The leaching process still poses the risk of releasing dust, radon gas and leach liquid. Once the leaching process is complete, especially if the ore contains iron sulfide (the case of Thuringia in Germany and Ontario in Canada), new problems may arise. Access to water and air can cause continuous bacterial production of acid in the dumps, leading to spontaneous leaching of uranium and other contaminants over many centuries, with possible permanent contamination of groundwater. Leaching is currently not in demand due to falling uranium prices, but it may become of interest to producers again if mining of low-grade uranium ores begins to be of economic interest again.
An alternative method is solution mining. This technology, also known as in situ leaching, involves injecting an alkaline or acidic liquid (such as sulfuric acid) through wells into the deposit. uranium ore, and pumping it back. Thus, this technology does not require the removal of ore from the mining site. This technology can only be used where uranium deposits are located in an aquifer in permeable rock, not too deep (approximately 200 m) in the base, and bordering impermeable rock. The advantages of this technology are a reduced risk of accidents and radiation exposure for personnel, low cost, and does not require much space for waste storage. The main disadvantages are the risk of leaching fluids diverting from the uranium deposit and subsequent contamination of groundwater, and the inability to restore natural conditions in the leaching zone after the end of operations. The resulting contaminated mixture is either dumped on the surface in some reservoirs, or introduced into the so-called deep disposal wells. Historically, leaching has been used on a large scale where there are large deposits - it has involved the injection of millions of tons of sulfuric acid, at Straz pod Ralskem, Czech Republic, in various places in Bulgaria, and a little in Konigstein, in East Germany. In the case of Königstein, a total of 100,000 tons of sulfuric acid were injected as a liquid into the ore deposit. After the field is closed, 1.9 million cubic meters of this liquid remains in the pores of the rock; another 0.85 million cubic meters of such liquid are located somewhere between the leach zone and the processing plant. The liquid contains high concentrations of hazardous impurities. When compared with acceptable for drinking water concentrations, then there is 400 times more cadmium, 280 times more arsenic, 130 times more nickel, 83 times more uranium. This liquid poses a danger from the point of view of contamination of the aquifer. The problem of groundwater contamination is much more serious in the Czech Republic, at Straz pod Ralskem, where 3.7 million tons of sulfuric acid were injected: 28.7 million cubic meters of contaminated liquid are still contained in the leaching zone located in an area measuring 5.74 square meters. km. In addition, the contaminated liquid spread horizontally and vertically outside the leaching zone, exposing an area of approximately 28 square meters to the threat of contamination. km. and 235 million cubic meters of groundwater.
With the decline in uranium prices over the past decades, Solution leaching is the only method used in the United States. In situ leaching is becoming widespread around the world for low-grade uranium deposits. New projects are being implemented in Australia, Russia, Kazakhstan, and China. Ore mined in open or underground mines is first leached in a special plant. The plant is usually located near mines to reduce transportation. The uranium is then processed using a hydrometallurgical process. In most cases, sulfuric acid is used as the leaching agent, although alkali is also used. Since the leaching process separates not only uranium from the ore, but also several other elements (molybdenum, vanadium, selenium, iron, lead and arsenic), it is necessary to separate the uranium from this mixture. The final product produced at the plant, usually called “yellow cake” (U3O8 with impurities), is packaged and shipped in barrels. The main danger resulting from the enrichment process is dust emissions. When closing a uranium mining plant, large quantities of radioactively contaminated waste must be disposed of in a safe manner. Waste from the enrichment process, waste from a uranium enrichment plant, is in the form of a liquid solution. They are usually pumped into artificial reservoirs for final disposal. The amount of waste produced is actually equal to the amount of ore mined, since the uranium recovered represents only a small fraction of the total mass. Thus, the amount of radioactive waste (RAW) produced per ton (t) of uranium is inversely proportional to the quality of the ore (the concentration of uranium in the ore). The largest in the world artificial pond near the Rossing uranium production plant in Namibia; it contains more than 350 million tons of solid material. Similar sites in the United States and Canada contain up to 30 million tons of solid material. In East Germany - 86 million tons. However, in the past, waste was in some cases simply thrown into the environment without any control. The most alarming example is that in Montana (Gabon), this practice continued until 1975: a subsidiary of the French company Cogema had been mining uranium there since 1961. During the first fifteen years of operation, waste from the uranium production plant was dumped into a nearby stream. In total, about two million tons of waste from this plant were released into the environment, polluting the water and sinking into the sediments of the river valley. When mining ceased in 1999, instead of being removed and disposed of, the radioactive waste was covered with a thin layer of soil prone to erosion. Apart from the removed uranium, the liquid waste contains all the elements of the ore. Since the half-life products of uranium (thorium-230 and radium-226) are not separated from the ore, the solution contains up to 85 percent of the natural radioactivity of the ore. Because of technical limitations All the uranium present in the ore cannot be extracted. Therefore, the liquid solution contains some residual uranium. In addition, the slurry contains heavy metals and other contaminants such as arsenic, as well as chemicals added during the crushing process.
Radionuclides contained in uranium waste typically emit 20 to 100 times more gamma radiation than natural levels. Gamma radiation is localized and its level decreases rapidly with increasing distance. When the surface of the dumps dries out, the fine sand is blown away by the wind. The skies were dark with storms carrying radioactive dust through villages located in close proximity to East German waste dumps near a uranium processing plant until the dumps were protected by covers. Subsequently, radium-226 and arsenic were found in dust samples from these villages. Radium-226 in waste decays to form the radioactive gas radon-222, the decay products of which can cause lung cancer if inhaled. Some radon evaporates. The radon emission rate does not depend on the percentage of uranium content in the dumps; it depends mainly on the total amount of uranium originally contained in the mined ore. Radon release is the main danger that remains after uranium mines are closed. The American Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimated the risk of lung cancer in residents living near uncontained radioactive waste dumps at a distance of up to 80 hectares as two cases per hundred people. When radon is spread by wind, many people receive small doses of radiation. Although the risk to humans is not too great, it should not be forgotten due to the large number of people affected by this problem. Taking into account the no-threshold dose effect, EPA estimated that uranium mining waste deposits existing in the United States (as of 1983) could cause 500 lung cancer deaths over 100 years if no countermeasures were taken. The leakage of contaminated liquid from dumps is another big danger. Such leaks pose a risk of contamination of ground and surface waters. Uranium and arsenic, which are dangerous to people, end up in drinking water and fish. The problem of leakage is very important in the case of acidic liquids, since radionuclides are more mobile in an acidic environment. In waste containing iron sulfide, self-sustaining production of sulfuric acid occurs, which increases the rate of movement of radionuclides into the environment. Leakage from the waste storage facility in Helmsdorf (Wismuth) occurred at a rate of 600,000 cubic meters annually; only half of this amount could be stopped and pumped back to the storage facility until the contaminated water treatment plant started operating. Compared to drinking water standards, the liquid in Helmsdorf contained 24 times more sulfates, 253 times more arsenic, and 46 times more uranium. In the area of the Hungarian uranium waste storage plant Pecs, contaminated groundwater moves at a speed of 30-50 m annually towards the drinking water sources of the nearest city.
Due to the long half-life of radioactive elements, the safety of waste storage facilities must be maintained at a high level for a long time, but storage facilities are susceptible to many types of erosion. After a rainstorm, gullies may form; plants and animals can damage the storage facilities, increasing radon emissions and making the storage facility more susceptible to climate change. In the event of earthquakes, heavy rain or floods, storage facilities may be completely damaged. For example, this happened in 1977 in Grant, New Mexico (USA) and led to the leak of 50,000 tons of liquid mixture and several million liters of contaminated water, in 1979 in Church Rock, New Mexico, it led to the leak of more than 1000 tons of liquid mixture and approximately 400 million liters of contaminated water. Sometimes, because suitable characteristics, dry radioactive waste was used for building houses or for garbage disposal. In houses built from such material, high levels of gamma radiation and concentrations of radon gas were found. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimated the risk of lung cancer for residents of such houses as 4 cases per 100 people.
Cleaning up depleted deposits
At the dawn of the development of the uranium mining industry, after the Second World War, mining companies left the mines in the form in which they were at the time of depletion of the deposit: in the United States it was not considered necessary to do anything even in the case of discovered deposits, not to mention the disposal of the produced waste; in Canada, waste from uranium processing plants was often simply dumped into nearby lakes. In Canada and the United States, there are still hundreds of small uranium mines where no recovery or recovery efforts have been undertaken. In some cases, officials are still trying to identify owners who could be considered responsible for waste disposal; from time to time, government departments have to dispose of waste at these sites at their own expense (at least they advertise it). An example of a successful recycling program is the large Jackpile Pugwhite mine in New Mexico. Significant work, which is nearing completion, has been carried out to dispose of waste from the large Wismut uranium mines in East Germany. Cleanup is necessary not only for idle mines, but also after the completion of mine leaching: the liquid waste produced must be safely disposed of, and groundwater contaminated by the leaching process must be restored to a clean state. Restoring groundwater is a very labor-intensive process; it is impossible to restore its quality to its original level, although complex pumps and treatment schemes are used. In the United States, water restoration efforts have stalled in many cases after years of pumping and treating water failed to produce a measurable reduction in pollutants. After this, water treatment standards were relaxed. While uranium deposits are mostly located in remote areas where groundwater is barely drinkable, many mining sites were in densely populated areas, particularly in areas where uranium was extracted through leaching for the Soviet Union. While reconstruction programs are in full swing in Germany and the Czech Republic, nothing is being done in Bulgaria. To limit the release of pollutants into the environment, it is necessary to solve the problem of disposal of radioactive waste. The idea of returning waste to where the ore was mined is not necessarily the right decision. Although most of the uranium was extracted from the ore, this did not make it any less dangerous: quite the contrary. Most radionuclide contaminants (85 percent of all radioactivity and all chemical contaminants) are still present. Through mechanical and chemical processes, the spent uranium ore is placed in a form in which the radionuclides are more mobile and more susceptible to being released into the environment. Therefore, in most cases, dumping waste into underground mines is not possible; there they would be in direct contact with groundwater. This is similar to the situation with waste storage in open mines. Here too there is direct contact with groundwater and leaks increase the risk of groundwater contamination. There is only one advantage of storage in mines - it is relatively good protection from erosion. In most cases, waste is dumped on the ground due to lack of other options. In this case, it is possible to take protective measures. It is imperative to protect radioactive waste from erosion. In the United States detailed instructions for waste disposal were developed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in the 1980s. These guidelines not only define maximum soil contaminant concentrations and permissible pollutant emissions (particularly for radon), but also the length of time over which the measures taken should work: 200−1000 years, preferably without active maintenance. Based on these instructions, more than a dozen places where radioactive waste had accumulated were put in order. Partially by covering the radioactive waste with a layer of clay and rock, and partly by moving waste to more suitable locations to avoid flood hazards or groundwater contamination. In Canada, by contrast, the measures taken to dispose of uranium waste are much less stringent; for RW in the Elliot Lake region of Ontario, for example, such measures include “water cover” as the only “protective barrier.” Near uranium mines in Eastern Europe and the ex-USSR, the situation is different: in East Germany, Hungary and Estonia, they are currently trying to clean up uranium mining sites and solve the problem of radioactive waste, and in the Czech Republic, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, restoration measures have not yet been developed. 100 million tons of waste in Aktau (Kazakhstan) are not even equipped with temporary cover; therefore, large amounts of dust continue to disperse throughout the surrounding area. Waste in Kyrgyzstan is located on steep slopes and is at risk of spreading due to landslides. The cost of waste disposal covers an extremely wide range. Governments in the United States and Germany set price ceilings. Based on the product produced, the waste generated during the production of a pound of U3O8 costs $14. This figure was more than the value of a pound of U3O8 before the recent price increase began. The lower limit is noted in Canada - US$ 0.12; this reflects the unusually low environmental standards applied in the case of the Eliot Lake site. To avoid a continuing situation in which abandoned mines have to be cleaned up at taxpayer expense, the mining industry is required to begin paying money for waste disposal the moment mining begins. But even this measure cannot guarantee that taxpayer funds will not be involved: the funds set aside for the cleanup of radioactive waste at uranium mining sites owned by the bankrupt Atlas Corp in Moab (Utah, USA), for example, account for only three percent of the cost of the cleanup program, which amounts to US$ 300 million. In Australia, closing the Ranger Mine costs about A$176 million, of which only A$65 million is available. If ERA, which owns Ranger Mine, went bankrupt, taxpayers would have to pay for waste disposal.
That is, when mining uranium, thousands of tons of alkali and other toxic chemicals are pumped underground, or huge dumps of uranium ore emit radioactive dust; after the closure of uranium mines, enormous amounts of money must be spent on their cleaning and conservation (which is often not done).
Last week, a huge solar power plant officially began operating in California's Mojave Desert, which fascinates with its beauty. The design capacity of the power plant is 400 megawatts, which, according to experts, is enough for 140 thousand homes in California. Let's find out more about it.
Experts emphasize that the new station will significantly reduce emissions carbon dioxide: as if 72 thousand cars were removed from California roads. In such “sunny” states as Arizona, Nevada, California and others, 17 sites have already been allocated for the construction of similar solar power plants.
At the same time, projects are being implemented more slowly than planned, encountering, oddly enough, protests from the “greens.” The fact is that although in the long term such stations benefit the environment, in fact the construction of the stations itself pollutes the areas allocated for them, depriving turtles and other representatives of the desert fauna of their usual habitats.
However, the US plans to become a world leader in the use of clean energy. Now it occupies no more than 1% of the total energy market in the country, but by 2020, according to the adopted state program, a third of all produced energy should be transferred to renewable sources.
This station is the largest in the world, covering an area of 14.24 square kilometers (5.5 sq mi). This object is called Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System. This station belongs to the type of thermal solar power plants.
This plant is capable of producing about 30% of all “thermal energy” produced in the United States. The facility features 3 towers 140 meters high, surrounded by 300,000 mirrors the size of garage doors. All these mirrors focus the sun's rays onto a collector located at the top of the tower. At the top of the tower there is also a water reservoir, where all the thermal energy, collected by mirrors.
Each tower has its own control center, plus there is also general center control, from where the operation of the entire system is controlled. However, according to the company that created the station, the system does not have storage for molten salt coolant, as is the case with smaller projects such as Crescent Dunes.
It is worth noting that each of the mirrors can change the angle and direction of tilt upon command from the center. The mirrors are washed once every two weeks. As far as can be understood, it is used special system mirror washing + a special team of cleaners cleaning mirrors at night. To control all mirrors, a proprietary SFINCS (Solar Field Integrated Control System) system was created.
The entire system consists of 22 million individual parts (rivets, bolts, etc. do not count).
The total cost of the project was 2.2 billion US dollars, of which 1.4 was a federal loan.
At the same time, water vapor is generated in the system, which is directed to the blades of turbines, which produce energy that is sufficient for the needs of 140 thousand California households.
True, it was not without problems. For example, the focused rays of the sun burn birds flying over the station. This fact is the reason for protests from US environmental organizations. But, despite all the protests, the project was completed and put into operation.
Finally, the design still has room to develop. BrightSource Energy engineers are already proposing to abandon water boilers and use special salt solutions, which will further increase the efficiency of the system while maintaining its environmental and energy qualities.
86 employees are employed in servicing the station. The estimated period of operation is 30 years, during which the station will provide electricity to 140 thousand houses from the cities of the district.
The mighty power of solar energy was known to man thousands of years ago. Since ancient times, man has tried to curb, tame this energy, make it serve himself. In the sixth century, Anthemius of Trallius wrote a treatise on mirrors. In this treatise, he mentioned how the ancient Greek scientist Archimedes, with the help of numerous mirrors and concave shields-defenders of Syracuse, burned the Roman fleet, focusing the rays of the sun on the ships. Whether this was a legend or not is unknown.
But experiments that should have confirmed or disproved the possibility of this event were carried out repeatedly. By different people, V different countries and in different time. And each time these experiments ended with confirmation of the real possibility of this episode in the defense of Syracuse.
Before the advent of new technologies, new materials, and the opportunity to practical application Voltaic solar energy was used only and exclusively for heating small volumes of water. With the discovery of the photoelectric effect and the advent of materials capable of converting sunlight into electric current on an industrial scale, solar energy entered a new phase of its development.
New reflective and light-absorbing materials, heat-resistant composite elements made it possible to create structures that made it possible to use solar energy for thermal power plants, thermal installations that provide hot water and heating the house.
Solar energy is a renewable energy source. It is increasingly used by humans and finds its application in a wide variety of fields. Renewable because the sun is an inexhaustible source of energy.
And if we take into account that solar power plants that generate electricity or heat guarantee complete safety for the environment, and prices for traditional energy resources are constantly rising, then it becomes obvious that solar energy will undergo rapid development in the very near future.
The prospects opening up for solar energy are large-scale. The projects of new solar complexes are ambitious, and their implementation could radically change our attitude towards traditional energy sources. Of course, it would be naive to believe that solar energy is a panacea for humanity, which constantly suffers from energy shortages.
The capacity of solar power plants is constantly increasing, but, nevertheless, the share of electricity produced by them is only 0.8% of the total amount of electricity generated by all generating installations in the world.
Dependence weather conditions, depending on the time of day, limits the use of solar power plants as permanent energy sources. Without storage devices, they can be fully used only as additional sources that take on the load during the daytime, thereby unloading the main electricity producers.
The periods of electricity generation often do not coincide with the periods of demand for it, since the peak of consumption occurs mainly in the evening hours. And at high latitudes, solar power plants are simply unprofitable. However, these disadvantages of helium power plants are not so critical for solar heat-generating installations, since these installations are rather inertial systems, especially if a carefully thought-out thermal insulation system has been implemented in them.
The largest solar power plants in the world
Almost all powerful helium electrical installations are built in low latitudes, where there is a lot of sun, where most days of the year are cloudless, where there are vast free areas for placement solar panels or mirrors.
The most powerful complex of solar power plants was commissioned in 2012 in the Indian state of Gujarat. The total capacity of forty-six solar parks combined into a single energy system is 856.51 megawatts. With the launch of this complex to its design capacity, India can receive from the systems alternative energy up to 15% of the total electricity generated in the country.
SES complex in India. State of Gujarat
At the end of 2015, the STAR solar power plant was put into operation in southern California (USA), in the Antelope Valley. Almost four million solar panels were required to build this station.
To ensure maximum possible use of the sun's energy, about a fifth - just over 750 thousand panels - were mounted on moving chassis connected to a solar tracking system. This ensured that the maximum amount of solar radiation was received throughout the day.
When it reached its design operating mode, this power plant provided an output power of about 580 megawatts. This power is enough to provide electricity to residents of a city with a population of up to 75 thousand. If such an amount of electricity were generated by a conventional thermal power plant, then the harmful emissions into the atmosphere from it would be equivalent to those resulting from the operation of 30 thousand cars.
Solar power plant STAR. California, USA
Several more solar power plants have been built in California, which use the principle of direct conversion of light energy into electrical energy. This is primarily the Topaz helium power plant, the third most powerful in the world. Its power output is 550 megawatts, and it is part of a cascade of solar plants that should provide up to 33% of the power consumed in California by 2020. Electricity at this station is produced by 9 million thin-film panels based on cadmium telluride.
Topaz solar power plant. California, USA
In addition to these power plants that produce electricity through direct conversion sunlight, in California there are several thermal solar power plants, which are among the ten most powerful solar power plants in the world. This is primarily the Ivanpah tower-type solar power plant, commissioned in 2013.
This station has a power output of almost 400 megawatts. Heating of the boilers to a temperature of almost 700 degrees is provided by 173,500 heliostats, each of which consists of two mirrors. Heliostats ensure that the sun's rays are constantly focused on the working boiler. This solar power plant ranks fifth in the list of the most powerful solar power plants.
Ivanpah Solar Power Plant. California, USA
Solar power plants in Russia
In Russia, solar energy has not become as widespread as in Europe, the USA, India, and China. The total capacity of Russian solar power plants does not exceed the capacity of one in California. However, the development of solar energy in Russia is now being given great attention. This is especially true for Crimea and Siberia.
The two most powerful solar power plants are currently operating in Crimea. The Perovo solar power plant has an output power of about 100 megawatts, another solar power plant, Okhotnikovo, is 20 megawatts less. In addition, in August 2015, a solar installation with a capacity of 70 megawatts was put into trial operation in the village of Nikolaevka. A solar power plant with a capacity of 110 megawatts was built in the village of Vladislavovka.
In 2014, the Kosh-Agach solar power plant with a capacity of five megawatts was launched in Altai. An electric current of this power is generated by 20,880 solar panels.
Kosh-Agach SES. Altai, Russia
In 2015, a solar power plant with a capacity of one megawatt was put into operation in Yakutia. In the Stavropol region, in the village of Staromaryevka, a solar power plant with a capacity of 75 megawatts is planned to be put into operation in 2019, and in Siberia, from the Arctic to the borders with Kazakhstan, XEVEL plans to build several solar power plants with a total capacity of more than 250 megawatts.
Solar heating
Thermal helium power plants, in addition to electric current, generate such an amount of thermal energy that can provide hot water and heat for large industrial premises, sports facilities, residential buildings.
The coolant, heated to 150 - 200 degrees, enters heat exchangers, where it heats the water supplied to houses for heating and hot water supply. Therefore, all thermal solar power plants are built in such a way that excess thermal energy is transferred to heating plants, and from there hot water is supplied for its intended purpose.
At the same time, the consumption of traditional fossil energy sources is significantly reduced. For example, in Denmark, the design and construction of thermal solar power plants are currently underway at an accelerated pace, which will not only provide environmentally friendly electricity generation, but will also supply heat and hot water to residents of adjacent settlements.
Using solar energy at home
At the everyday level, the possibilities of using solar energy depend only on human imagination. And of course, to a certain extent, on material capabilities. Here we can talk about anything: about power supply to the house, lighting of streets and parks, about traffic lights, about street illumination, about decorating a dacha, lighting fountains, garlands on trees, supplying hot water and warmth to a country house or cottage.
Various companies produce and install turnkey solar installations for individual use. It could also be a mini-power plant solar powered, and helium concentrators for heating and hot water supply, and maybe a combined installation.
The range of uses of solar energy is enormous. This energy works everywhere: from giant power plants to portable chargers, which fit easily in a pocket or handbag. And its main advantages are inexhaustibility and safety for the environment.
This report is available in high definition
In California, in the Mojave Desert, the world's largest solar power plant, Ivanpah, was launched, covering an area of almost 13 sq. km. The $2.2 billion facility consists of three power plants and nearly 350 thousand heliostat mirrors.
Let's go to California to get a closer look at this miracle of technology.
The world's largest solar power plant, Ivanpah, is located 64 kilometers from Las Vegas. As already mentioned, it consists of 350 thousand heliostat mirrors (each the size of a garage door).
A heliostat is a device capable of rotating a mirror so as to direct the sun's rays constantly in one direction, despite the apparent diurnal movement of the Sun. (Photo by Ethan Miller | Getty Images):
3 heliostat fields surround 40-story power plant towers. The mirrors focus sunlight on the boilers located at the top of the towers (see title photo). Steam is produced, which drives turbines. This creates enough electrical energy to power 140,000 buildings in California.
The world's largest solar power plant has a power output of almost 392 MW. (Photo by Ethan Miller | Getty Images):
Heliostats at the Ivanpah Solar Power Plant, February 20, 2014. (Photo by Ethan Miller | Getty Images):
As you can see, the heliostat consists of two mirrors and a control mechanism. The number of such heliostats here is 173,500 pieces. Accordingly, there are 2 times more mirrors. (Photo by Ethan Miller | Getty Images):
At the bottom of each of the three power plants are cooling systems. At the top is a steam boiler. (Photo by Ethan Miller | Getty Images):
Control room. (Photo by Ethan Miller | Getty Images):
Graphic control system for the world's largest solar power plant, Ivanpah. (Photo by Ethan Miller | Getty Images):
Cars on the road to understand the scale. (Photo by Ethan Miller | Getty Images):
Two of three power plants. You can see how steam is generated in boilers from solar energy focused by heliostats. (Photo by Ethan Miller | Getty Images):
(Photo by Ethan Miller | Getty Images):
This is how the solar energy receiving tower with boilers inside glows. (Photo by Ethan Miller | Getty Images):
(Photo by Ethan Miller | Getty Images):
An aerial view of one of the mirror fields with a power plant in the middle. (Photo by Ethan Miller | Getty Images):
As already mentioned, all here are 3 fields with heliostats. (Photo by Ethan Miller | Getty Images):
The construction of the Ivanpah solar power plant is part of state program, according to which the United States intends to transfer a third of its energy production to renewable sources by 2020.
It was a tour of the world's largest solar power plant, Ivanpah, California. Also see the articles "", "" and "". (Photo by Ethan Miller | Getty Images)
The amount of energy produced by solar power plants is growing at a breakneck pace. In 2014, the total installed capacity of solar projects will exceed 150 gigawatts, up from 5 GW in 2005, an exponential growth that comes from reducing production costs and increasing the efficiency of each panel.
And now is the time to capture the rapidly evolving picture of what's happening in the solar industry. In this article, we present you with the top ten solar power plants based on the number of gigawatt hours produced annually. In some cases, these installations have much greater power potential, but since they are still in the build-up or installation stage, at the time of writing, their full potential has not yet been reached. So let's get to the list:
10 Best Solar Power Plants in the World
1. Topaz Solar Farm, California, USA (1.096 GW).
As you know, the most powerful solar power plant, Topaz Solar Farm, was launched in November, which was actively published in all the news. And this is very great, since the popularization of solar energy is very important for most people who still consider it a curiosity.
The Topaz project is located in California and is the largest solar power plant in the world with a capacity of 550 MW, and can reduce carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere by at least 380 thousand tons per year. For comparison, Beloyarskaya nuclear power plant in Russia it produces only a little more - 600 megawatts.
Expected annual output is 1,096 gigawatt-hours.
The station is located in San Luis Obispo County and has 9 million solar panels.
Topaz will power over 160,000 homes and industrial enterprises near. Construction cost was approximately $2.5 billion.
Construction began only two years ago. The solar panels, like the entire project, were developed by First Solar.
2. Agua Caliente Solar Power Plant, Arizona USA (626 GW)
The Agua Caliente solar power plant is located in the desert 160 kilometers southwest of Phoenix. The plant was launched in April 2014 and until recently occupied first place. According to some observations, the cost of solar panels becomes half as cheap approximately every 2 years, which means that every two years companies can double the size of a solar plant for the same price.
Of course, this is not entirely accurate, since there are other costs besides solar panels. It is noteworthy that the panels at the Agua Caliente station are thin film manufactured by First Solar, they are cheaper than those made from crystalline silicon. The station also does not have sun tracking modules, which makes it even more economical. The sun's energy is harvested here by maximizing a huge number of panels.
But this principle is unlikely to keep the Agua Caliente project in first place for long.
3. Mesquite Solar Power Plant, Arizona USA (413 GW)
The only area that rivals the Mojave Desert in the United States for solar radiation intensity is the desert in southern Arizona. There are more than 300 here sunny days year and this is where the Mesquite solar station is located, 100 km from a large regional center Phoenix (population 1.5 million).
Mesquite Station has the potential to supply approximately 260,000 homes with electricity. The station has 800,000 solar panels from the Chinese manufacturer Suntech Power.
4. California Solar Farm, California USA (399 GW)
California Solar Ranch is located 270 km northwest of Los Angeles and covers 800 hectares of pasture where cattle were previously grazed.
The station has 88,000 solar panels with tracking modules manufactured by Sunpower, which allows them to absorb the maximum amount of sunlight throughout the day.
The solar farm has the potential to power up to 100,000 homes.
There are about 2 million homes in the Los Angeles area, meaning about 5% of homes are potentially powered by solar energy - that's a good start!
5. Yellow River Hydropower Solar Park, Qinghai China (317 GW)
And although the name of the solar station contains the word hydro, this power station is 100% solar. It is located in the hottest high productivity spot, Qinghai Province in China. In China, solar energy consumption per person is 4 times higher than in the West (but 4 times less than here) and therefore the return from solar power plants is much higher.
6. Catalina Solar Power Plant, California, USA (204 GW)
Mojave Desert in California - popular place for solar power plants and deservedly so, as it has one of the most high levels solar insolation in North America, the most energy-hungry metropolises of Southern California are also nearby.
The plant produces enough energy to power about 35,000 homes and reduce about 74,000 metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions - the latter figure is very important in California, which has very stringent emissions standards.
7. Xitieshan Solar Farm, Qinghai China (150 GW)
The station is located in the North-West of China, in the already known Qinghai province, where there are clear skies and a lot of good sunlight. The plant was developed by solar development company CGN, which is a subsidiary of a nuclear power corporation in China's Guangdong province. At the time of its completion in 2011, it was the largest solar installation by solar gigawatts produced in the world - but things are moving so quickly that it fell to 6th place in 2014.
8. Ningxia Qingyang Solar Park, Ningxia China (150 GW)
The park is located in Ningxia Hui Autonomous Prefecture in China in a high desert area where it enjoys increased level solar insolation. The station covers an area of 2.3 square kilometers. Among other things, this solar farm reduces the evaporation of surface water and also helps green desert areas. This is very important to prevent evaporation and erosion.
9. Solar park Perovo, Crimea (133 GW)
The power plant is owned by Austrian energy company Activ Solar and can supply energy to 16,000 homes. In Ukraine, the solar park enjoyed relatively high feed-in tariffs of €0.46 per kilowatt-hour, but now the territory of Crimea is annexed by Russia and it is unlikely that Ukraine will continue the tariff program.
10. Northern Silver State Project, Nevada USA (122 GW)
This thin film solar farm is designed by First Solar. It produces enough electricity to power 15,000 homes in Nevada and California. Under US law, First Solar is entitled to receive 30% of the construction cost back from the government - or about $30 million.
__________________________________________________________
