First Solar scores large California deal
A First Solar installation in Dimbach, Germany.
(Credit: First Solar)Southern California Edison has signed a deal under which First Solar will build two solar power generation stations with the potential to provide electricity to 170,000 homes, the utility giant said Tuesday.
The contract, which is subject to the approval of the California Public Utilities Commission, has solar module maker First Solar completing two solar stations by 2015 that together would create 550-megawatt generation capacity.
Financial details of the deal were not disclosed, but once up-and-running the plants would be capable of producing about 1.2 billion kilowatt-hours of energy annually, according to Southern California Edison.
Specifically, a 250-megawatt solar power installation is planned for Desert Center in Riverside County, while a 300-megawatt installation is planned for an unspecified location in San Bernardino County. Both stations will consist of thin-film photovoltaic solar modules.
The deal is one of a number that have been announced in keeping with California's goal to have 20 percent of its energy supplied by renewable resources by 2010--and, if extending legislation is passed, 33 percent by 2020. In February, Southern California Edison announced a contract for seven solar generation plants with BrightSource Energy that if completed could power 845,000 homes.
"First Solar is an excellent partner in helping us achieve our goals. This agreement is good for our customers, for the industry, and for the environment," Stuart Hemphill, Southern California Edison senior vice president, said in a statement.
This latest deal is also more evidence in favor of analysts' predictions that First Solar will be among the solar tech companies that make it through the recession.
In March, First Solar acquired the rights to OptiSolar's incomplete projects and land rights, after its competitor had trouble raising enough capital to complete its projects in development. That deal was estimated to be worth $400 million and predicted to bring First Solar $70 million in revenue for 2009, according to the First Solar CEO Michael Ahern.
In a software-driven world, it's easy to forget about the nuts and bolts. Whether it's cars, robots, personal gadgetry or industrial machines, Candace Lombardi examines the moving parts that keep our world rotating. A journalist who divides her time between the United States and the United Kingdom, Lombardi has written about technology for the sites of The New York Times, CNET, USA Today, MSN, ZDNet, Silicon.com, and GameSpot. E-mail her at candacelombardi@gmail.com. She is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not a current employee of CNET. 
Must be a misprint.
Photovoltaic is much less efficient than solar thermal. Although both still add to global warming, less than coal and more than nukes.
Although I am a fan of nuclear power I disagree that solar thermal contributes more to global warming than nukes.
To put it in perspective for you , in 2008 Southern California Edison delivered 12.6 billion kilowatt-hours of energy to its customers from renewable resources, about 16 percent of its total energy portfolio.
And in 2007 about 526 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity in the U.S. were used for lighting alone by the residential and commercial sector, according to the Energy Information Administration's most recent statistics available.
Your point is moot...
"A CdTe PV module contains very little cadmium. In fact, it has less than 0.1% cadmium by weight. One 8-square-foot module contains less cadmium than one size-C NiCd flashlight battery, and the cadmium in the module is in a much more environmentally stable form (i.e., a compound rather than a metal). " - http://www.nrel.gov/pv/cdte/
"Researchers from the U.S. Department of Energy's Brookhaven National Laboratory have found that: Large-scale use of CdTe PV modules does not present any risks to health and the environment, and recycling the modules at the end of their useful life completely resolves any environmental concerns. During their operation, these modules do not produce any pollutants, and furthermore, by displacing fossil fuels, they offer great environmental benefits. CdTe PV modules appear to be more environmentally friendly than all other current uses of Cd." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadmium_telluride
- by ablazev October 9, 2009 8:27 PM PDT
- This type of CdTe TFPV panels average 70Wp/ea., so the 20.0GW CdTe fields planned for installation in the US will consist of approx. 300 million panels. Each panel contains 7-9 grams of Cadmium in form of CdTe and CdS, or over 4 million lbs. Cadmium poison, uniformly spread over 260,000 acres US land.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(11 Comments)Since Cd is a well known toxic carcinogen heavy metal, we do hope that no major accidents, or serious natural disasters hit these fields, because we would not be able to handle such mega-size hazmat sites. And it would be better not to live close to these fields too...just in case Cadmium in the panels decides to misbehave during its long 25-30 years life under the elements--something that nobody can prove otherwise.
Which is why Cadmium and Cadmium compounds are banned in the EU, China and other more advanced countries. The US Government is not worried about it yet, so CdTe TFPV is here to stay...for now.
And if you look carefully, you'll see that BNL and other scientists have performed only very limited small scale lab-bench tests with small pieces of panels. None of the results from these tests can be extrapolated to Cadmium behavior in large scale fields during 25-30 years on sun operation.
Since CdTe mega-fields are new phenomena, still in the making, nobody knows what will happen on the long run, so these potentially toxic fields are totally untested and unproven, and yet they are here to stay.
But then, we are almost done with the Asbestos and Lead debacles, so we have time and money to plan for the next biggie. This is how Big Business works...