photo: eSolar
NRG Energy, one of the United States’ most coal-dependent utilities, on Monday signed a deal with California startup eSolar to develop solar power plants.
The agreement calls for NRG to invest $10 million in Pasadena-based eSolar for the right to use the startup’s technology to develop and operate three solar power projects in California and the Southwest that would generate 500 megawatts of greenhouse gas-free electricity. NRG ranks as one of the nation’s dirtiest utilities, spewing 70 million tons of carbon dioxide annually from its coal-fired power plants, according to a 2007 Fortune Magazine story. But the Princeton, N.J.-based Fortune 500 company has sought to clean up its ways under CEO David Crane, pursuing carbon-capture technology and moving to build nuclear power plants.
Last year eSolar, founded by Idealab’s Bill Gross and backed by Google, won a 20-year contract to supply utility Southern California Edison (EIX) with 245 megawatts of green electricity annually. Last April, eSolar scored $130 million in funding from Google.org, Google’s (GOOG) philanthropic arm, and other investors to develop solar thermal technology that Gross claims will produce electricity as cheaply as coal-fired power plants.
Like rivals Ausra and BrightSource Energy – which have deals with utility PG&E (PCG) – eSolar will use fields of mirrors to heat water to create steam that drives electricity-generating turbines. Gross says that eSolar’s software allows the company to individually control smaller sun-tracking mirrors – called heliostats – which can be cheaply manufactured and which are more efficient and take up less land than conventional mirrors. According to Gross, that means eSolar can build modular power plants near urban areas and transmission lines rather than out in the desert, lowering costs.
In October, eSolar’s then-CEO told Green Wombat that the company was more interested in being a solar technology provider than a power plant construction company.
The eSolar deal gives NRG (NRG), which operates coal-fired power plants in Texas and the Northeast, a foothold in the California renewable energy market. The first solar farm will go online in 2011 and NRG will have the right to develop 11 of eSolar’s 46-megawatt modular power plants. eSolar currently is building a five-megawatt demonstration power plant in Lancaster, Calif., that is expected to be completed this year.
“By coupling NRG’s construction capabilities and regional operating expertise with eSolar’s innovative … technology, we can advance NRG’s renewable energy portfolio while helping to accelerate development of these important projects on a commercial scale,” said NRG executive Michael Liebelson in a statement.
During a press conference Monday, Liebelson said NRG would be able to take advantage of the 30% investment tax credit for renewable energy projects and intends to apply for federal loan guarantees for such power plants that were included in the recently enacted stimulus package.
The deal, coming less than two weeks after BrightSource Energy signed a 1,300-megawatt power purchase agreement with Southern California Edison, shows that despite the financial crisis the market for renewable energy is showing renewed signs of life.
Green Wombat 
And why doesn’t SRP and APS in ARIZONA, with sun 360 days of the year, use solar exclusively.
Because you wouldn’t be able to afford it. The delta between Fossil fuels and greener fuels can pass 100% at times.
Because AZ has sun zero nights of the year.
How about using that solar generated steam or wind turbines to compress air instead of making electricity. Store the compressed air in tapped out gas fields. Then the compressed air can run generators 24/7. The compressed air can even be piped to where generators are located now.
Good to see esolar getting off the ground. There were a couple of people from my last job who went to work for them. They also claim to get over 180 MW’s per square mile which is very impressive. A little better than the less than 60 MW’s the PV plants are claiming. Now I can just about guarantee you that they will not be anywhere close to the cost of a coal or even natural gas plant for a very long time but anything that might lower the cost would be great.
Now I guess one of my complaints about this site and all of the other “green” tech sites is they imply that 100 MW’s of solar is somehow equal to 100 MW’s of conventional power such as coal or nukes. In reality the solar is going to produce much less. It will only get close to its rated capacity for a few hours a day and then only a couple of months a year. Now hopefully someday we will have a efficient way to store energy and a more efficient grid. Then maybe we can actually produce more than just a tiny fraction of our power with these renewables.
Steve
Solar thermal will be cheaper than new nuclear plants or coal with carbon capture, and in ten years will be as cheap as wind is now, or about 5-8 cents/kWh. It will be under 10 cents/kWh in about 5 years.
Yes, you can compare this with base load coal or nukes. CSP with heat storage can provide steady base load power day and night. Plants can be designed to run all night.
Well Richard I would have to again ask you what technology exists that will allow a solar plant to run 24/7 base loaded? In another post I stated why I do not believe it can be done right now. I would be curious on why you think it can be done with your stated “proven” technology. I am a big fan of solar-thermal but it just does not come close to competing with more traditional sources of electricity for most of our energy needs. Yes you could, most of the time, run a plant 24/7 in the summer. The problem is that “most of the time” is simply not good enough. In the winter it would be unable to do it “most of the time”. The difference between a clear day in June and a clear day in December is less than half the electricity is produced. This is not something I read, it is something I learned from years of actually operating a solar-thermal plant. I would be very curious on where you get your information. I would guess you are getting it off web sites like this and by reading these companies press releases. You always have to remember they are trying to sell a project and get financed.
Now in reality the very small amount of electricity that will be produced the next few years won’t matter much if they are able to base load or not. I hope they can get the costs down. I think the last solar plant in Nevada has a contract for around 18 cents a KW. Not too bad until you factor in the transmission costs. I am sure costs can be brought down and eSolars design has some great features that I believe would be an large improvement over the type of plant I am used to running. The problem still remains that unless you have weeks of storage it will only ever supplement current sources of power and can never really replace them.