1 / 33

CSP and the Energy Water Nexus – Greg Bartlett

CSP and the Energy Water Nexus – Greg Bartlett. Summary. Solar thermal plants need to be sited properly Is there adequate groundwater? Can a previous/planned usage be “retired? Is reclaimed water available? Case Study: Hualapai Valley Solar Project

talmai
Download Presentation

CSP and the Energy Water Nexus – Greg Bartlett

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CSP and the Energy Water Nexus – Greg Bartlett

  2. Summary • Solar thermal plants need to be sited properly • Is there adequate groundwater? • Can a previous/planned usage be “retired? • Is reclaimed water available? • Case Study: Hualapai Valley Solar Project • Yes – more than 15 million AF in remote sub-basin • Yes – approved 100-year residential usage • Yes – reclaimed water from City of Kingman • Result – net reduction in groundwater impact • Improperly sited projects are not viable projects

  3. Who we are HUALAPAI VALLEY SOLAR CONFIDENTIAL

  4. Hualapai Valley Solar Project • 340 MW parabolic trough project (solar thermal) • 7+ hours of thermal energy storage • Private land near Kingman AZ (4,000+ acres) • State of the art evaporative cooling system • Two sources of cooling water • Groundwater • Effluent water from City WWTP • Start of operation: 2014

  5. Parabolic troughs 5 5

  6. Aerial view of HVS Project 6 6

  7. HVS power block 7 7

  8. Aerial photo of the Hilltop WWTP 8

  9. Why we are here THE WATER CHALLENGE CONFIDENTIAL

  10. Abundant fuel 10 10 10

  11. Solar technologies • Solar Trough is best for utility scale • Proven, reliable steam turbine • Thermal energy storage used to match load • Financeable and operating today at scale • Solar Tower, Solar Chimney, CPV, Stirling • Not yet financeable or operating at scale • PV • Violent intermittency • Regional grid and utilities cannot support scale

  12. Alternatives to Water Cooling • Air Cooling • Large towers, large fans, large electricity usage • Higher capital cost: 2-3x • Efficiency drops significantly on hot days: up to 40% • LCOE: +7-9% • Hybrid Cooling • Highest cost, to build both systems (water+air) • Switch between both, based on air temperature • Solar plants generate mostly on hot days, thus a strong operational bias against air cooling

  13. Market realities today • Why are there no Air / Hybrid Cooling solar thermal plants in the world today? • Not competitive – solar is already at a premium; the 7-9% additional LCOE would be passed on to utility ratepayers • Air (and thus Hybrid) Cooling are not cost effective, except for 24/7 power plants Thus, banks see these alternatives as unacceptable risks…

  14. Policy considerations • Today, Water Cooling is needed • The only economical solution today to meet RPS • Need to build some solar thermal plants now • Solar plants should be sited to: • …avoid endangered aquifers • …retire previous/planned water use • …allow use of reclaimed water Siting is the single most overlooked and most important criterion; not all projects are viable.

  15. Policy should cover all uses • ADWR issued a 100-Year Letter of Adequacy to a planned residential development that included portions of the HVS site for 1.2 AF per acre per year. • (2) Actual acreage not known, estimated for comparison purposes to be 100 acres.

  16. The developer should site and design responsibly THE HVS APPROACH CONFIDENTIAL

  17. Reuse and reduce usage • Reuse – plans to use reclaimed water • Reduce – evaluating other technologies and techniques to reduce net water usage • Electrocoagulation • Centrifugal filtration • Recycling, capture of rainwater, etc. This strategy meets the goals of the Arizona Blue Ribbon Panel on Water Use (Dept. of Water Resources, Dept. of Environmental Quality, Corporation Commission)

  18. Treated wastewater is reclaimed water, ready to use again EFFLUENT CONFIDENTIAL

  19. What is effluent? • Wastewater that is treated & suitable for reuse • Arizona classes of reclaimed water: • Class B+ reclaimed water – wastewater that has undergone secondary treatment, nitrogen removal treatment, and disinfection • Class A+ reclaimed water – additional filtration • More than 190,000 AF of effluent is being generated annually in Arizona

  20. Class A+ allowed uses

  21. Class B+ allowed uses

  22. Effluent users in Arizona • Palo Verde Nuclear Power Plant • SCA Tissues • Arizona Snowbowl Ski Resort (proposed) • Various golf courses • Many counties require new courses to use effluent • City of Flagstaff • 2,300 AFY of effluent in use by 10 schools, 8 parks,2 cemeteries, 3 golf courses and a playing field at NAU

  23. Plans to use reclaimed water to generate solar electricity HVS AND EFFLUENT CONFIDENTIAL

  24. The Vision CONFIDENTIAL

  25. Effluent cooling advantages • Relatively constant water quality • Groundwater quality can change over time • Preserves water currently stored in aquifer • Reuses an otherwise wasted resource • Wastewater may be easier to treat • Consistent with AZ Blue Ribbon Panel • Palo Verde Plant – operational precedent 25

  26. Effluent cooling challenges • Higher capital & operating costs • Supply does not match demand • Supply is relatively constant year-round, while demand for cooling water is greatest in summer • Requires storage to buffer flows • Pipeline • ROW/easements required for length of pipe • Expands the Project’s environmental footprint • Potential risk of contaminating cooling water 26

  27. City of Kingman • Upgrading existing Hilltop WWTP (2011) • Treats more than 1.4 MGD today • Designed to expand to 5 MGD • All new growth will be processed at Hilltop • North Kingman (10,000 homes) currently using septic • Today, the effluent is evaporating in ponds • No effluent purchaser prior to HVS • Located 22 miles due south of HVS site

  28. Chronology • Letter of Intent with Kingman – Jun 09 • Binding MOU – Dec 09 • New City Policy on Sale of Effluent • Approved by Kingman City Council – Mar 10 • First draft of Purchase Agreement – Jun 10 • Currently negotiating final purchase contract

  29. Options considered • Pipeline – construct a pipeline, pumping stations, and storage facilities at and/or between WWTP and HVS site • Recharge – inject effluent into the aquifer near WWTP, and withdraw using groundwater wells at HVS site • Contracted Delivery – contract with a third party to deliver effluent to the HVS site, allowing delivery of effluent to other users • Trade – deliver effluent to other user(s), thus permitting them to decrease their demand on the Kingman sub-basin, and withdraw using groundwater wells at HVS site

  30. HVS water sources – if online today 30

  31. CSP and the Energy Water Nexus SUMMARY CONFIDENTIAL

  32. Summary • Solar thermal plants need to be sited properly • Is there adequate groundwater? • Can a previous/planned usage be “retired? • Is reclaimed water available? • Case Study: Hualapai Valley Solar Project • Yes – more than 15 million AF in remote sub-basin • Yes – approved 100-year residential usage • Yes – reclaimed water from City of Kingman • Result – net reduction in groundwater impact • Improperly sited projects are not viable projects

  33. Contact InformationHualapai Valley Solar Project Greg Bartlett Project Director Mohave Sun Power LLC 85 Hamilton Street Cambridge, MA 02139 +1 206 349 6068 mobile greg@mohavesun.com Skype address: gjbartlett 33

More Related