When was this clip made? They make no mention of the way the Spanish government has rather scaled down their subsidy commitments:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-01/spain-proceeds-with-plans-to-cut-subsidies-for-new-solar-power-stations.html

Thank you for posting this -- this renewed my positive energy about .. renewable energy.
I sincerely hope we are the laughing stock of our grandchildren's generation ..
"So... Grandma... tell us about how they blew up all the mountains in Virginia, dropped nuclear waste onto the ocean floor, and flooded entire valleys .. so you could turn on the lights, *tee hee*.. "

I've heard numbers thrown around that seem to contradict some said here. Stuff like there isn't enough space to meet the worlds energy needs without building over already crucial farm land etc.

Still, fossil fuels are just stored solar energy. Once those resources finally run out then it seems clear to me that any future must go right to the source. That or fusion, but I don't see the latter being practical for a long while yet.

Either way, that solar tower is without a doubt the most beautiful power stations I've ever seen. May the future be bright hurrhurr.

>> ^taranimator:

Thank you for posting this -- this renewed my positive energy about .. renewable energy.
I sincerely hope we are the laughing stock of our grandchildren's generation ..
"So... Grandma... tell us about how they blew up all the mountains in Virginia, dropped nuclear waste onto the ocean floor, and flooded entire valleys .. so you could turn on the lights, tee hee .. "

Pft. We're more likely to be a laughing stock of future generations because the previous generations insane response to nuclear power generation, that effectively set back fusion power by 50 years.

*Awesome.

>> ^rebuilder:

When was this clip made? They make no mention of the way the Spanish government has rather scaled down their subsidy commitments:
http://www.bloomberg.com/
news/2010-08-01/spain-proceeds-with-plans-to-cut-subsidies-for-new-solar-power-stations.html


Friday. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/video/2011/feb/11/spain-solar-towers?INTCMP=SRCH

I know. They got the idea for Fallout 3 Helios One.

I think the one in Fallout New Vegas is based on Solar One. They have actually tried to build more of these in California, but lawsuits constantly halt their progress. The most recent attempt has been stymied by a lawsuit over the possible displacement of a desert tortoise.

I visited Solar One when I was a kid in the Boy Scouts, it was modified and became "Solar Two", then it was torn down and they took the Concept over to Spain to build Solar Tres.

The best bit about this is that it doesn't rely on solar photoreceptors which can be quite toxic to produce, and difficult to make in large amounts.

It'd be nice if solar power was efficient. It isn't being widely adopted because of a simple fact... It isn't efficient, effective, reliable, or cheap. Solar power is unable to generate energy 12 hours out of every day. Of the 12 hours of possible power generation, only 6 are 'peak'. In order to geneate the power required to satisfy a human population, you need to have a solar array that exceeds the peak power requirements of that population by at least 300%. But even then you need to store a solid chunk of that power for when the sun is not up. That power must be stored in batteries, which are expensive and take a lot of toxic metals. Plus solar cells and batteries don't last forever. Cells have to be replaced every 10 to 15 years. Batteries have to be replaced every 5 years or so. Replacement & maintainance of solar send its costs through the roof, and make it far less efficient than almost ANY other power source except.

I know that there are a lot of people that really really REALLY want solar power to be 'the thing'. But come on. Solar power as a means of electrical production has existed for over 120 years. No one has ever come up with a plan that can make it even remotely viable as a power source that can satisfy industrial & municipal power needs. It is a romantic idea, but that's all.

Winstone, uhmm, efficiency in heating water is no more or less efficient then current natural gas and nuclear tech which does the same thing to provide electricity. Also if you bothered to click play, you would have seen they has solved the day night cycle problem by storing the heat, although in the future im sure it will be easier to store the electricity instead.

Of course that fact that there are no fuel cost or waste by products mean that solar towers and the like will have no harmful impacts on the future like every other method of providing electricity out there.

efficiency in heating water is no more or less efficient then current natural gas and nuclear tech

Solar is inefficient in the sense that it costs more money to produce per watt of energy. It takes 25 years for a solar facility to break even. That's 25 years of citizens paying bigger power bills to subsidize a questionable technology.

you would have seen they has solved the day night cycle problem by storing the heat

Molten salt heat storage has existed at least since the early 1980s. I remember watching an episode of NOVA as a kid talking about this. The Spain plant is the first one in the world to use salt thermal storage tanks to run the plant for between 6 to 8 hours without sunlight.

Even in ideal locations, sunlight is interrupted by weather, cloud cover, and normal day/night cycles. These all reduce power generation capacity. Heat storage is not enough to make up the gap unless you live in close proximity to a few very specific geographic locations. Solar plant in "non ideal" locations require a fossil fuel backup for 75% of their total capacity. Essentially, the solar plant you see is just a coal-fired plant that burns 25% less coal.

Of course that fact that there are no fuel cost or waste by products mean that solar towers and the like will have no harmful impacts on the future like every other method of providing electricity out there.

Well, I'd debate your language a bit on this. There are fuel costs in the sense that you have to buy solar cells, and so forth. They require rare earth metals and other materials. There is waste also because you have to replace those things every few years. Modern nuclear plants are just fine, as are most modern US coal plants (if they would just let them be built).

I think this is what you wanted to say... >> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

I did not watch the video or bother to understand anything about this type of solar power generation.

You would need one million of these plants at a cost of $246 trillion to meet the world's energy needs. As such, I think solar is a good additional source of power, but if we want to get off fossil fuels, we need more and better nuclear power.

edit: Early on in the video, the guy says we could power the world by covering 1% of the world's deserts with solar plants, as if that wasn't very much at all. I was interested so I checked, and that would be 300,000 square km of solar plantage.

I don't want to come off all negative, but it bothers me when these things are presented as though there was some easy solution if only we would make up our minds to do it. That sort of thinking leads to putting off the problem.

GODDD its awesome looking from a distance

first??? Yves Massarde has a big time solar setup in the Saharan desert collecting solar energy, but he is using it to dispose of nuclear waste.

Shut your eyes, Marion. Don't look at it!