Largest solar array in the northeast goes online at BNL (http://riverheadlocal.com/local-news-content/3769-largest-solar-array-in-the-northeast-goes-online-at-bnl)

Officials from the Long Island Power Authority, BP Solar International and Brookhaven National Laboratory gathered with elected officials today at the lab in Upton to flip the switch on the Long Island Solar Farm, a 32-megawatt, 164,312 solar panel installation.

Co-owned by BP Solar and MetLife through Long Island Solar Farm LLC, the facility will introduce approximately 50 gigawatt-hours-per-year of clean, Long Island-based renewable energy into LIPA's electric grid. This amount of solar energy is equivalent to the electrical consumption of roughly 4,500 households.

:yay: But not really. Lots of development left to go.

Nice, but why not put all that in a desert where the sun shines most of the year?

Not all types of solar panels require direct sunlight, but direct sunlight is always best in all cases.....

Nice, but why not put all that in a desert where the sun shines most of the year?

Not all types of solar panels require direct sunlight, but direct sunlight is always best in all cases.....

Because you put it where the people are, not necessarily where it's most convenient or efficient. Costs too much to transport the power from the desert to the east coast.

That's like asking to have the deer crossing sign moved so the deer don't cross there.....

:lol:

Because you put it where the people are, not necessarily where it's most convenient or efficient. Costs too much to transport the power from the desert to the east coast.

That's like asking to have the deer crossing sign moved so the deer don't cross there.....

:lol:

Would you, please, expand upon what the "cost" of transporting power would be?
...are you speaking of the building and maintaining such a system?
...high voltage/energy loss transmitted over long distances?

Would you, please, expand upon what the "cost" of transporting power would be?
...are you speaking of the building and maintaining such a system?
...high voltage/energy loss transmitted over long distances?

If you have to install new feed trunks, that's expensive. If you can take advantage of existing trunks, you have to pay each power company along the route for the use of their lines, or tariffs. The further you are away from the end point, the more it's going to cost. There will always be line loss, so the closer you are to the source, the more power you can deliver more cheaply. These would not be offset by any gains in power gained by the desert location, but rather by the efficiency of the solar panels.

But all of this is moot. BNL is a government research lab which was granted funds to develop this project with assistance from the local power authority in that location. They are going to build the project in their backyard where the proof of concept can benefit the local community and provide jobs, not thousands of miles away with no benefit to the local economy.

Down here at PAX river there is a solar panel project underway. The cost is enormous and the project will never pay itself off - and it is only complementary. It won't even power the entire Moffett building (the building located directly beside the panels - which are being mounted to the top a parking garage).

:shrug:


All those panels for [only] 4500 homes?

Down here at PAX river there is a solar panel project underway. The cost is enormous and the project will never pay itself off - and it is only complementary. It won't even power the entire Moffett building (the building located directly beside the panels - which are being mounted to the top a parking garage).

:shrug:


All those panels for [only] 4500 homes?

Two different scenarios. The local waste of money is purely political - "your Navy is going Green!" - whereas the other thing is a proof-of-concept best done in realistic conditions. The requirements drive the engineering. If someone tells me to power a 5,000 user (Homes and Shopping Centers and Businesses of various descriptions) community using 1.5Gw/hour in all kinds of weather, I will develop a much different solution than powering the same community in a desert, 90% sun environment. One could estimate joules from the sun in a 4-seasons of New England environment as opposed to a Las Vegas environment, and quickly see that it is much easier to do the solar thingy in arid sunny conditions than frequently hazy to cloudy conditions.

Largest solar array in the northeast goes online at BNL (http://riverheadlocal.com/local-news-content/3769-largest-solar-array-in-the-northeast-goes-online-at-bnl)

How many ACRES will 164,000 panels cover??

Aren't panels usually like 3X5 feet?? Get ready, here we go..


So 15 sq ft per panel, * 164,312 = 2,464,680 sq ft...

An acre = 43560

2,464,680/ 43,560 = 56.58 acres ... Holy SNIKEYS!! To provide enough power for 4500 homes?? Ludicrous..

How many ACRES will 164,000 panels cover??

Aren't panels usually like 3X5 feet?? Get ready, here we go..


So 15 sq ft per panel, * 164,312 = 2,464,680 sq ft...

An acre = 43560

2,464,680/ 43,560 = 56.58 acres ... Holy SNIKEYS!! To provide enough power for 4500 homes?? Ludicrous..

The picture displayed in the link looks bigger than a 3x5. I'm thinking 4x6.

24*164312=3943488

3943488/43560=90.53 acres lol

The picture displayed in the link looks bigger than a 3x5. I'm thinking 4x6.

24*164312=3943488

3943488/43560=90.53 acres lol

Either way, that's a LOT of wasted Real Estate..

Way too inefficient to produce eclectricity of any value..

Take away the cost of the panels and just figure out how much an acre of land costs there.. They will never recover that cost. Thank God for Obamsidies..

What the article (writer) says is a panel, may actually be the 12 segregated sections of each "panel".

164312/12=13692 individual solar panel frames. This would make more sense with the picture.

I didn't count the panels, but looking at the picture I don't see 160k of them. Maybe I'm incorrect.

What the article (writer) says is a panel, may actually be the 12 segregated sections of each "panel".

164312/12=13692 individual solar panel frames. This would make more sense with the picture.

I didn't count the panels, but looking at the picture I don't see 160k of them. Maybe I'm incorrect.

Either way, coming up with enough panels to do the job in "average world" vs. the desert takes a LOT of space and the cost-vs-benefit analysis shows that this is not the smartest thing.

Nevertheless, in history people have continued investing in things when they seem a waste of time, only to see huge successes (and returns).

Impact Study:
http://www.bnl.gov/community/docs/pdf/FINAL%20FINAL%20EA%20-%20BP%20Solar%20Project.pdf
4.1.1 Project Site Location
The proposed project would cover an area in the south central to southeast and east
central portions of the BNL property within the Compatible Growth Area as
delineated by the Core Pine Barrens and Compatible Growth Areas line (see Figure
3). The proposed area is divided into north and south sections. The north section is
composed of approximately 78.5 acres (32 hectares) and is located in the vicinity of
the former experimental agricultural fields. The south section is located just north of
the line delineating Core Pine Barrens from Compatible Growth areas and mostly
east of First Street. The south section is approximately 111 acres (44.92 hectares).
Additionally, brownfield1 areas composed of the Former Landfill, Interim Landfill,
Slit Trench, and Glass Holes is available for possible placement of solar panels
and/or Laboratory dedicated array facility. This area is immediately west of the
southern portion identified above. The brownfield areas cover approximately 18.26
acres (7.84 hectares) and may be used within the controls established in the BNL
Land Use Controls Management Plan [BNL 2009a].

...Nevertheless, in history people have continued investing in things when they seem a waste of time, only to see huge successes (and returns).

True.

I hope that since they now have a farm of solar panels, they innovate, test, change, challenge the status quo ad infinitum. If those panels simply sit there and are expected to do all the work for their creators, it won't work, and I fear this very large investment will slink to becoming a blunder as opposed to a success.

But think of the TREES!!!!!!
Trees uprooted at Brookhaven Lab for BP solar project (http://www.newsday.com/long-island/suffolk/trees-uprooted-at-brookhaven-lab-for-bp-solar-project-1.2503396)

CONTRACTORS for energy giant BP this month began clearing land at Brookhaven National Labs to make way for the state's largest solar energy farm, a $300 million "green" project that has even some proponents wincing over the loss of an estimated 42,000 trees.

The sprawling solar array, which will provide up to 32 megawatts of energy to the Long Island Power Authority grid - enough for 4,500 homes - required removing trees with excavators and mobile saws from 153 acres of undeveloped land at the federal property in Yaphank. Most are native oak and pitch pines.

"I would have preferred they use less sensitive property that had already been cleared," said Dick Amper, executive director of the Long Island Pine Barrens Society.

Solar power is not cheap, nor a source of production electricity yet. Panel costs have to come way down and efficiencies go way up.

But think of the TREES!!!!!!
Trees uprooted at Brookhaven Lab for BP solar project (http://www.newsday.com/long-island/suffolk/trees-uprooted-at-brookhaven-lab-for-bp-solar-project-1.2503396)



Solar power is not cheap, nor a source of production electricity yet. Panel costs have to come way down and efficiencies go way up.

That's a lot of trees. A lot of paper. Even some timber/lumber.

I bet the lab is a metal-frame facility....

But think of the TREES!!!!!!
Trees uprooted at Brookhaven Lab for BP solar project (http://www.newsday.com/long-island/suffolk/trees-uprooted-at-brookhaven-lab-for-bp-solar-project-1.2503396)



Solar power is not cheap, nor a source of production electricity yet. Panel costs have to come way down and efficiencies go way up.

They should have made a wood burning electric generation plant.

Would have been more efficient and probably more "green" than the solar..

True.

I hope that since they now have a farm of solar panels, they innovate, test, change, challenge the status quo ad infinitum. If those panels simply sit there and are expected to do all the work for their creators, it won't work, and I fear this very large investment will slink to becoming a blunder as opposed to a success.

I expect it will turn out to be a blunder (using a polite term for it).

you know...the word blender sounds a lot like blunder.

Stick a good thing in a blender and you get a blunder.....


meh.:coffee:

If you look at an average cloud cover map for the area, they sure don't seem to get an abundance of sunshine to power those arrays.

True.

I hope that since they now have a farm of solar panels, they innovate, test, change, challenge the status quo ad infinitum. If those panels simply sit there and are expected to do all the work for their creators, it won't work, and I fear this very large investment will slink to becoming a blunder as opposed to a success.

This "project" will probably run for a year or two (maybe less) then they will lock the gates, abandon all of it, and it will be a pimple on the ass of the planet for decades to come.

NOBODY ensured lifecycle costs though to dismantling and disposal and the reason is NOBODY cared enough to do it. They'll just leave it to the locals to clean up after they are gone.

How much do you think it would cost to dispose of 164,000 solar panels? Whose landfill are they going to go in, and what kind of nasty chemicals are going to leach out of them??

I'm still curious about how much the 164,000 solar panels cost to purchase in the first place. Probably ~$1000 per panel, so ~$164M to power 4500 homes...

Because you put it where the people are, not necessarily where it's most convenient or efficient.

:lol:


I thought you could 'PLUG' something like this into the GRID anywhere ......

Down here at PAX river there is a solar panel project underway.



they should dock a Nuke Sub in the Pax River in connect to the Grid on Base :whistle:

I'm still curious about how much the 164,000 solar panels cost to purchase in the first place. Probably ~$1000 per panel, so ~$164M to power 4500 homes...

I'm sure the majority was from Govt grants and Obamsidies..

They are only going to run the plant as long as the money flows from the Gov't, once the Obamsidies stop, so will the plant

they should dock a Nuke Sub in the Pax River in connect to the Grid on Base :whistle:

There are Portable Nuclear Generators..

18 wheel trucks.. pull into a neighborhood, and walla.. POWER!!

Before they put the Nukes on Subs the Navy built a few SMALL reactors on shore.. I think we are missing out by NOT using that technology.

Instead of one HUGE plant at Calvert Cliffs, (>2000 acres) how about a dozen small plants sprinkled across SoMD, and instead of pushing the power onto the grid, use if for local consumption..

There are Portable Nuclear Generators..

18 wheel trucks.. pull into a neighborhood, and walla.. POWER!!

Before they put the Nukes on Subs the Navy built a few SMALL reactors on shore.. I think we are missing out by NOT using that technology.

Instead of one HUGE plant at Calvert Cliffs, (>2000 acres) how about a dozen small plants sprinkled across SoMD, and instead of pushing the power onto the grid, use if for local consumption..

You're thinking too small...or I guess too big as it were. I want a personal nuke plant about the size of a refrigerator. Each home should have one.

I'm still curious about how much the 164,000 solar panels cost to purchase in the first place. Probably ~$1000 per panel, so ~$164M to power 4500 homes...



depends on the panel output

this is interesting;

The chart illustrates the best laboratory efficiencies obtained for various materials and technologies (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/PVeff%28rev111103%29.jpg)

https://www.google.com/search?q=solar+panel+efficiency&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#hl=en&client=firefox-a&sa=X&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&tbm=shop&q=high+efficiency+solar+panel&ei=tiDNTt_kKKjc0QGfgpEP&ved=0CNABENsLKAAwCw&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=5c57624389286125&biw=1496&bih=945

depends on the panel output

this is interesting;

The chart illustrates the best laboratory efficiencies obtained for various materials and technologies (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/PVeff%28rev111103%29.jpg)

That doesn't say anything about cost. :confused:

That doesn't say anything about cost. :confused:



nope


I posted that because i did not know efficancies were above 20%


post updated w/Google search

390w @ $2000

This "project" will probably run for a year or two (maybe less) then they will lock the gates, abandon all of it, and it will be a pimple on the ass of the planet for decades to come.

NOBODY ensured lifecycle costs though to dismantling and disposal and the reason is NOBODY cared enough to do it. They'll just leave it to the locals to clean up after they are gone.

How much do you think it would cost to dispose of 164,000 solar panels? Whose landfill are they going to go in, and what kind of nasty chemicals are going to leach out of them??

Actually, the place they are installed is a research lab that has been in existence since the '40s. Knowing their prior history, those panels will probably be in use for many years unless the system develops major flaws and becomes cost prohibitive to repair. But you're right... at some point panels will die. I do wonder if they have a disposal/recovery plan in place?

As far as leaching of contaminants, the lab is under huge scrutiny now for contamination of ground water by radioactive isotopes used in the various nuclear reactors. You can be sure someone raised that point.

nope


I posted that because i did not know efficancies were above 20%


post updated w/Google search

390w @ $2000390W = roughly 3.25 amps at 120V (3 - 100W light bulbs) for $2000.00. :killingme

they should dock a Nuke Sub in the Pax River in connect to the Grid on Base :whistle:

YES! Instead of destroying it.

There are Portable Nuclear Generators..

18 wheel trucks.. pull into a neighborhood, and walla.. POWER!!

Before they put the Nukes on Subs the Navy built a few SMALL reactors on shore.. I think we are missing out by NOT using that technology.

Instead of one HUGE plant at Calvert Cliffs, (>2000 acres) how about a dozen small plants sprinkled across SoMD, and instead of pushing the power onto the grid, use if for local consumption..

I like this!! Makes a lot of sense and probably from a cost as well as benefit standpoint.