Toshiba to participate in solar photovoltaic and wind power generation project in Aichi
Technology ( 31 )
TOKYO —
Toshiba Corp will participate in a consortium that proposes to construct and operate Japan’s largest mega solar photovoltaic plant. The seven-company consortium, headed by Mitsui Chemicals Inc, will carry out a feasibility study for a combined solar and wind power plant in Tahara, Aichi Prefecture, toward starting construction in 2012. Toshiba will take responsibility for engineering, procurement and construction of the solar photovoltaic plant.
The “Tahara solar photovoltaic and wind power generation joint project” proposes to construct a 50MW photovoltaic power plant and a 6MW wind power plant on a coastal site in Tahara, Aichi prefecture, in central Honshu, owned by Mitsui Chemicals. The total cost of the project is estimated at approximately 18 billion yen and construction is scheduled to start in June 2012, subject to the results of a feasibility study.
Toshiba has won orders for eight major mega solar projects in Japan. At this point, Toshiba will draw on this experience to undertake the basic design, overall engineering, supply of major equipment and construction for Takahara.
Expertise Toshiba will bring to the project will range from measures to protect the site from natural disasters; including soil liquefaction caused earthquakes, to provision of advanced equipment. This will include Toshiba’s 500kW power conditioner, which achieves a 97.7% conversion efficiency*1, the highest in the industry.
In carrying out the project, the consortium members will share know-how and information, toward developing optimum solutions and to promote wider application of renewable energy sources.
With the gathering momentum of efforts to mitigate climate change, the global solar energy market for utility and industrial use is expected to reach 2,200 billion yen by 2015. Toshiba will support this trend by contributing to mega solar power generation projects in Japan and overseas.
Order by Time Order by Popularity
31 Comments
Login to comment
2
zichi
This sounds like energy supply and generation is going in the right direction.
-7
NetNinja
There's plenty of energy in this world. Our problem is we can't store the energy
1
zichi
But we can store energy. New batteries are becoming available. In the right location solar energy can be stored in salt. There are also new solar panels coming which work even in low light, including moonlight.
-6
NetNinja
Zichi, I love your optimism. Why can't we go any faster?
Tesla: "The World can only tolerate one change at a time"
This is great news. i'm glad to hear it Zichi. We need to stop charging money for it. Just make it already.
These batteries can store energy, then they can power refrigerators, greenhouses, purification centers. The world is in the worst shape ever and it's disgusting because we can do something about it.
-1
zichi
NetNinja,
Spain, which is now the leading country for solar power, have build power plants which generate power 24/7 by storing overnight energy or power in salt solutions which lasts for about 15 hours. Also works on rainy days.
Prior 3/11 I think renewables didn't really grab the attention of industry but because of 3/11 there will now be more input and hopefully working solutions but it will be a long haul and some level of nuclear energy will still be required for the near future.
-2
Star-viking
The problem with storing energy with salt is that it can only be done with Thermal Solar Power - where mirrors focus the sun's light on a central point - providing heat to produce steam and so drive turbines. The same concentrated heat can be used to melt the salt, which can then be used to drive the turbines in overcast conditions or at night. These power stations need a lot of flat land, and operate well in hot, dry climates, i.e. deserts. They are non-starters in Japan.
Storing power in batteries or with pumped water storage is both very expensive, and inefficient - you have to put 2 kwhr in to get one back out again.
-1
zichi
I wasn't stating that Thermal Solar Power could be used in Japan, I was saying there are ways to store power. The one in Spain is large but it will also be possible to build smaller plants.
I find it interesting that Toshiba which build some of the reactors at Fukushima are now getting involved with solar panels and wind power. It would only do that if there was a business model and a profit to be made.
Solar power can provide more than 15% of the power needed in the daytime period and with low light solar panels some thing of overnight power too.
Nuclear energy is not the answer, especially after 3/11. More renewable energy less nuclear energy.
-2
Foxie
There are already some propellers like that in Tahara. It doesn't say how many more they are planning to put there exactly. Tahara is such a beautiful place with so many cabbage and rapeseed blossom fields, it would be sad to see them gone.
-2
Star-viking
@ Zichi
For the first statement I'd need some facts and figures: how big of an area would need to be covered, the cost of the electricity, and whether the 15% is the minimum available throughout the year - or just the maximum achieved at some point in the year. As for the second statement about 'low light solar panels' - where did you hear that? We get around 700 W per square metre from the sun (at noon on a clear day). At night we get zero W per square metre - no solar panel is going to produce electricity when the incoming radiation is zero.
-4
Foxie
Is that 700W per day or per hour per sq. meter?
0
futurebeast
I believe that the majority of our power generation for domestic and daily needs can be taken care of by distributed renewable energy sources such as this, but what about high energy flux density projects such as space travel and water desalinization?
-1
Christina O'Neill
Combination of solar wind hydro and tidal could supply the whole of Japan in the future. New methods of harvesting and storing eco energy are being developed quite rapidly now as none renewable energy supplies diminish. Nuclear power especialy in the aftermath of two critical accidents on this our earth is hopefully on the decline. Time to move forward and ensure our childrens futures
-1
Star-viking
Foxie Oct. 25, 2011 - 11:04PM JST
It's the power you get from the sun at noon, on a clear day, per square metre.
It doesn't account for the efficiency of solar panels, which at around 15% would give 135 W per square metre at noon.
Averaging solar energy received over 24 hours you typically get 140 W per square metre - so solar panels will only produce around 21 W per square metre.
Most solar power proponents emphasise the maximum possible output - in our case 135 W, versus the 21 W we get averaged over 24 hours.
-1
Star-viking
futurebeast Oct. 25, 2011 - 11:12PM JST
I'm doubtful that the renewables will live up to the hype - lots of core and implementation problems are not being addressed by Japan's uncritical media. As for the high energy needs pick one: Oil, Coal, Gas, Nuclear Fission, and if we're lucky - Nuclear Fusion.
-3
Star-viking
Christina O'Neill Oct. 26, 2011 - 05:44AM JST
Solar and Wind require massive areas of land to be set aside for them - and Japan's winter, rainy seasons, typhoons and lightning storms will cause big trouble for Solar, Wind and Tidal. Hydro capacity in Japan is small - but could be doubled according to a scientific paper I read (if you want the title I'll hunt for it).
Well, there is bioenergy - harvesting and storage in one renewable package - but why on earth would we be burning more stuff to release more CO2 into the atmosphere in this era of global warming? As for other methods of storage: pumped hydro, compressed air, batteries - some are unproven, all are hideously expensive.
I don't want my child to have to endure 45 degree+ summers in Japan, so I'm for all power options which have drastically lower CO2 emissions - which includes nuclear power.
0
Star-viking
Judging from the almost instant dislikes it seems some people don't like having their over-rosy view punctured by reality. The fact is, the universe doesn't care about our aspirations - if we push for renewables without analysing the downside there'll be a world of pain for our children.
And, as usual, I call on those who gave me the thumbs down to tell me where I've made an error in my posts.
-1
NetNinja
About Solar Panels
Is it possible to stack solar panels into a a column / pillar in order to always collect energy?
I'm thinking vertically here. A column with a bloom mechanism that would allow the pillars to open up around noon into a flower shape and still collect energy.
The solar energy collectors don't necessarily need to be spread out. If we build vertically we could collect more energy. If buildings had solar collectors on the outside of the building instead of all glass we could collect and power the building itself.
-2
zichi
The argument from the pro nuclear quarter is that only nuclear energy can reduce the amount of green house gases. The greatest per capital producer of greenhouse gases is America, which refused to sign the Kyoto agreement and next door China is now the biggest producer of green house gases.
There are many ways to reduce green house gases, including buying carbon credits and even collecting the gases and turning them into useful chemicals. I don't think any country in the world would complain if Japan announced it was ending nuclear power.
Some experts have stated that the cost of the nuclear disaster, including compensation, will be $260 billion. That much money could buy 100+ Fukushima power plants operating on geothermal power. That's only an example of the cost of this grave nuclear disaster.
All power to the Sun and Toshiba, which originally built some of the Fukushima reactors.
http://zichi.posterous.com/japan-solar-and-wind-power#
-1
Elbuda Mexicano
Man, I love reading Star Vikings comments, he is very intelligent, or maybe she?? Keep up the great comments! As for me, I love the sun, we should have SOLAR everything! DOWN with Stupid Tokyo electric!!!
-3
zichi
Japan could reduce it's amount of green house gases by coming up with a variety of rice which produces less methane, rice is a major source of methane. Feeding cows garlic so that they fart less. Cows are another source of green house gases. More of a problem in Australia than Japan. More fuel efficient cars.
-1
zichi
There's a government discussion which would require new homes to be built with solar panels installed.
-3
Elbuda Mexicano
All of Tokyo and then the rest of Japan should go SOLAR ASAP!! The USA etc..should really try to clean up its act and go SOLAR too! Sorry Zichi, I know a lot a about cows, you want to kill them, feed them garlic! You want to kill all of us?? Try putting up with garlic farts and from cows?? OMG!
0
zichi
While some pro nuclear power supporters will push the theory that nuclear energy is the only one which is zero C02, and therefore the only one capable of saving the planet from climate disaster, it's an incorrect belief and nuclear energy does create CO2, and other greenhouse gases.
It's correct to state that a nuclear reactor does not produce any CO2 because there's nothing burning, there's no stack releasing gases into the atmosphere. Unfortunately, the nuclear industry is much more than just the reactors. The nuclear rods inside the reactors are made with uranium which is first mined in some foreign country, like Niger, Canada or Australia. Japan buys it's uranium from one of these countries. The mining has produced CO2.
The uranium is shipped to Japan producing further CO2. The nuclear industry needs to enrich the uranium and convert it into pellets and then used in the construction of the fuel rod assemblies. The uranium is shipped back to Europe for enrichment, usually France or Britain. The uranium is then send to Belgium for the fuel rod assemblies. The completed fuel rod assemblies are shipped back to Japan in special built casks. This all further generates CO2 and other greenhouse gases.
Nuclear power plants are very large and complex and take many years of construction. Millions of tons of concrete and steel are used, all adding to the total amount of CO2 produced. The construction involves burning millions of liters of disel. The nuclear power plants contain very complex pieces of equipment like the reactors and the turbines. They also contain millions of kilometers of steel piping. The manufacture of all this is also producing CO2 and other greenhouse gases.
Because of the complexity of nuclear energy, the power plants are very large and require a very large number of workers to run them. The highly skilled workers, the nuclear engineers have to spend several years at universities and in further training. Everyday, millions of nuclear power plant workers drive their cars to work.
Many deliveries are needed at the nuclear power plants every single day. All being delivered by disel trucks.
Nuclear power plants also require large power corporations and need a very large number of various levels of office workers.
I could go on, but I think you'll be getting the idea.
The production of solar panels and wind turbines is far less complex and produces far less CO2 and other greenhouse gases than the nuclear industry. They require much less workers to install, maintain and administrate than nuclear power.
All power to the Sun and Toshiba!
1
Elbuda Mexicano
No idea who thinks Zichi lasts post was bad, I think it was very, very good, and informative, now if we can get all the Toshibas of the world behind clean energy like solar etc..and they can also make $$$$$$$$$ too! Time to shut all of the nuclear reactors down here in Japan and in many other parts of the world before it is too late. IMHO.
-1
Star-viking
@zichi Oct. 27, 2011 - 12:35AM JST
A nice long post - but some facts an figures would be nice. Also, most of your points on how CO2 gets emitted in supporting Nuclear Power hold true for renewables too. If you look at the recent IPCC Report on renewables you find that Nuclear is lower in emissions than solar panels, biopower, equvalent to wind power, and better by a large amount than the fossil fuel plants. See http://srren.ipcc-wg3.de/report/srren-figures-spm/srren-figure-spm.08
Where do you get your facts Zichi?
1
zichi
Star-viking,
I knew I couldn't expect anything else from you. All manufacturing will produce it's own levels of CO2 and other greenhouse gases The fact that the manufacture of both the likes of wind turbines and solar panels require far less complex parts, machinery and don't need complex power plants like atomic energy.
Once installed they only require low level maintenance. They don't need vast armies of highly trained engineers, atomic safety agencies, nor do they produce any dangerous waste which must be shipped to Europe for processing and returned to be kept in storage for thousands of years.
Saying renewables like solar panels produces more CO2 than the atomic energy industry would be like someone stating that the manufacture of bicycles creates the same level of CO2 has the manufacture of motor bikes.
I'm losing any respect I did have for your comments.
Are you more pro nuclear than just concerned about climate change. If there was no problem with the climate would you still hold the same views on atomic energy?
BTW, this this a news forum with comments on that. We are not required to write scientific papers. But I do extensive reading and fact checking first before I make any serious comments here.
-1
Star-viking
Zichi,
the IPCC paper covers all CO2 emissions.
Not asking you to write a scientific paper, but It would be good to know where you are getting your facts from. You note I do try and provide references.
Also, if you do fact checking - then why do you come out with things like:
I would hold the same views, as I think the danger of nuclear power is over-hyped. As it is, with climate change - nuclear power is essential, along with the renewables that emit low levels of CO2 in their lifecycle.
To switch the question around - if you held the view (and you may do) that climate change is a massive threat to humanity, would you support nuclear power as a part of averting that danger?
1
zichi
Star-viking
The CO2 released worldwide through electricity production accounts for only 9% of total annual human greenhouse gas emissions. In Japan the generation of electrical power by atomic energy has saved about 3% of the CO2 and greenhouse gases produced by the country. But that 3% was more than lost when it produced CO2 in the manufacture of complex machinery and vast complex power plants using a deadly and highly dangerous form of fuel. A vast capital wealth was used to create the nuclear energy industry. Japan didn't build nuclear power plants to save the planet from climate change but because with fossil fuels it had to rely on other countries to supply them.
According to the Oko Institute in 1997, windpower creates 20 CO2-eq./kWh. Nuclear energy produces 33 CO2-eq./kWh. In a number of other studies similar emissions data are reported, where nuclear power emissions are calculated in the range of 30-60 g CO2-eq. /kWh (IAE, 1994; CRIEPI, 1995). A more recent study by Storm van Leeuwen & Smith (2004) estimated the difference in emissions between nuclear and gas power plants to be much smaller than the assessments described above. According to their data, nuclear power production causes the emission of just 3 times fewer greenhouse gases than modern natural gas power stations.
http://www.motherearth.org/energy/nuclear2.php
1
zichi
Star-viking,
I'll pass on your thoughts to all the good people of Fukushima and Tohoku, I'm sure they'll be happy to know that.
There are solar panels in development which will operate in very low light. There is also solar power paints being developed.
-2
Star-viking
Zichi, once again - where do you get your figures?
I find those figures hard to believe - because when you compare Japan with another industrialised nation - the United States, you find that electricity generation produces 41% of the US CO2 emissions. The US drives and flies a lot, producing a lot of CO2 - and yet power production still takes up 41%. That would suggest Japan's emissions for power production would be even higher
Reference:http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/co2_human.html
And natural gas power stations are the lowest CO2 producing power plants, so nuclear power stations produce only a third compared to them? Sounds good.
Star-viking,
No need Zichi - I live in Tohoku.
Zichi, the limiting factor is 'low light'. You may have solar panels that can operate in low light - but they can not miraculously produce copious amount of energy when the sun is not above the horizon. It's basic science.
-3
Star-viking
zichi Oct. 27, 2011 - 01:43PM JST
I tracked down this reference - it's from a information brochure produced by the Uranium Information Centre in 2001, called "SUSTAINABLE ENERGY - Uranium, Electricity and Greenhouse".
Even I'd want more solid facts than that.
Back to top