Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
typodupeerror delete not in

Comments: 139 +-   Google Getting Into the Solar Mirror Business on Saturday September 12, @10:17AM

Posted by Soulskill on Saturday September 12, @10:17AM
from the reflects-well-on-them dept.
google
power
adeelarshad82 writes with this excerpt from a Reuters report: "Google is disappointed with the lack of breakthrough investment ideas in the green technology sector, but the company is working to develop its own new mirror technology that could reduce the cost of building solar thermal plants by [25%] or more. The company's engineers have been focused on solar thermal technology, in which the sun's energy is used to heat up a substance that produces steam to turn a turbine. Mirrors focus the sun's rays on the heated substance. ... Google hopes to have a viable technology to show internally in a couple of months, Bill Weihl said. It will need to do accelerated testing to show the impact of decades of wear on the new mirrors in desert conditions."
story

Related Stories

: by
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Solar Beards (Score:3, Interesting)

    by conner_bw (120497) * on Saturday September 12, @10:18AM (#29398389) Homepage Journal

    Beards at Google and this article [slashdot.org] a coincidence? I think not.

  • Power? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Coren22 (1625475) on Saturday September 12, @10:19AM (#29398395)

    I guess they figured out thier electric bills were too high.

    • If I'm not mistaken, they've been into solar for some time, it's just now that they're apparently planning to create some of their own hardware for parts of it.
    • Re:Power? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Fred_A (10934) <fred&fredshome,org> on Saturday September 12, @10:33AM (#29398497) Homepage

      I guess they figured out thier electric bills were too high.

      Is it just me that's annoyed that in most power plants we actually still use glorified steam engines ?

      I know that it's the best way we currently have to convert heat (which is the only type of energy we manage to recover) into electricity, but it still feels kludgy. I hope we'll figure out something else eventually.

      • Re:Power? (Score:5, Informative)

        by emilper (826945) on Saturday September 12, @10:58AM (#29398667)

        Glorified ? How about "highly sophisticated" ? Even a nuclear submarine is powered by a "glorified steam engine".

      • Re:Power? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by FooAtWFU (699187) on Saturday September 12, @11:09AM (#29398723) Homepage
        Not really. It's good, proven technology. It is simple, with just a few moving parts that all move continuously in the same direction. It scales up very well: you get one big expensive steam turbine and you can point a boatload of cheap mirrors (/heat sources) at it. It takes advantage of some of the exotic properties of one of the most fascinating chemicals out there: Water. It produces no toxic waste to dispose of (not from the steam-engine part, at least... maybe a few lubricants you'll need to recycle, but that's pretty trivial). It doesn't distribute well (if you're piping hot working fluids around from one site to another, the heat tends to leak). Photovoltaics have it beat there, but they can't use all the spectrum. I suppose it doesn't scale down spectacularly well either; you might have better luck with a Stirling engine (more moving parts, though).

        I don't see the big "kludge", myself. Is it the part where you hook it up to a bundle of wire and spin it around in a magnetic field to make electricity? I think that's pretty awesome too; you can move a whooole lot of electrons that way.

        • by Fred_A (10934)

          Not really. It's good, proven technology. It is simple, with just a few moving parts that all move continuously in the same direction. It scales up very well: you get one big expensive steam turbine and you can point a boatload of cheap mirrors (/heat sources) at it. It takes advantage of some of the exotic properties of one of the most fascinating chemicals out there: Water. It produces no toxic waste to dispose of (not from the steam-engine part, at least... maybe a few lubricants you'll need to recycle, but that's pretty trivial).

          Another fascinating chemical that's commonly used is sodium (since there are typically two circuits) which is commonly used in the secondary circuit when the heat source is radioactive.

          Still,
          nuclear (indirect if it's solar) -> heat -> motion -> electricity
          doesn't trike me as being an elegant solution even though I'll agree that it's convenient.

          • Does anyone do sodium in anything other than Fast Breeders anymore?

            My exposure to actual practice is about 30 years out of date, but I don't think much has changed.

            Liquid metals like sodium are used on Fast Breeders largely due to the moderation effect which water in the primary loop would cause.

            They do have their own issues.

            They are more expensive to build and operate because the primary loop is highly radioactive.
            Also corrosive.
            A primary/secondary leak becomes both more likely, and much more dangerous.

            For

        • Re:Power? (Score:4, Interesting)

          by jfengel (409917) on Saturday September 12, @01:02PM (#29399709) Homepage Journal

          The kludgy bit is that you go from heat->motion->electricity, with losses at each step. Maybe that's just good reuse, having already debugged both steps pretty thoroughly.

          But after a century or so of power plants, it's starting to feel like optimization is no longer premature. The power plant is the very center of a tight loop, and worth optimizing.

          Unfortunately, any time you replace a well-understood legacy system with a new one you get bugs, and the whole heat->electricity thing isn't yet anywhere near well library-quality code. It actually turns out to be less efficient, not more. But as a programmer you look at the inefficiencies and figure there's got to be a better way.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by joocemann (1273720)

          We need someone to open-source a design of one of these setups so we can build these ourselves and power our own homes with our wasted front yard space ---- the trophy yard is dying with the baby boomers.

          Or we could grow fruits/veggies in our yards and cut back on the 400 gallons of fuel/person used each year to bring us our groceries.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        And this being bad exactly how?

        I mean a 300*300 km area of that tech suffices for all of humanity’s needs right now. With no rare materials, complex error-prone technology, or high costs.
        I call that a pretty sweet deal.

        Of course we will optimize it by the use of the right collector/core (imagine placing something else in the middle, like a special material or solar cell). But hey, until then, we’re very good with what we got. And the price... oh the price... Energy for next to nothing!

      • Not all power plants use steam. Some use liquid metal:
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_metal_cooled_reactor [wikipedia.org]

        • If I'm not mistaken, the liquid metal is just the first step - it takes the heat from the reactor away from the core into a transfer tank that super-heats water to produce steam that drives the stator that creates the electricity.
          Ultimately the reactors all seem to work on the principle of ${heat source} + water = steam to drive a turbine :: rotary motion of wires + magnets = electricity.

          In theory a propulsion engine (boats, subs) could go directly from the steam driven shaft to a propeller, but I don't thi

        • Re:Power? (Score:5, Funny)

          by Yvan256 (722131) on Saturday September 12, @01:31PM (#29399907) Homepage Journal

          Isn't it extremely dangerous? It could escape the power plant by pretending to be a cop and then go on a killing rampage.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by lennier (44736)

        We might still be using steam, but glorification technology has advanced tremendously since the nineteenth century.

        Modern glory engines generally achieve virtue ratings in the giga-archangel range on the Baden-Powell scale. The biggest problem is containment of the antikarma halo from contaminating the surrounding noosphere and uplifting our whole cultural discourse; in the worst case, this could create a self-perpetuating virtuous cycle, the so-called Shambala Syndrome. In some cases residents within fifty

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        I actually remember seeing test setups of this tech 18 years ago, not a new technology, but still very cool.

        Try 18 hundred years... While stories of Archimedes' Mirror [wikipedia.org] may have been greatly exaggerated (Mythbusters and a couple of independent projects have recreated the effect but with an infeasible time-frame for warfare), the concept and 'technology' of parabolic mirrors or arrays to concentrate solar heat are pretty ancient. Also, Death Ray FTW. :D

  • by CRCulver (715279) <crculver@christopherculver.com> on Saturday September 12, @10:21AM (#29398417) Homepage

    It will need to do accelerated testing to show the impact of decades of wear on the new mirrors in desert conditions.

    Solar panels don't have to last too long when fusion is only thirty years away, am i rite?

    • But fusion power is always thirty years away. Wait until it's ten years away, and then your mirrors will probably only need to last another fifty years or so.
  • by jnmontario (865369) on Saturday September 12, @10:30AM (#29398483)
    I'd vote for them. They (corporate entity) seem to have a better head for good governance and forward thinking than any politician I've had the 'pleasure' of running in my province.
    • Then they'd be more concerned about staying in office and getting their peers elected by the populace than about efficiency (or, as you call it, governance) and forward thinking. In a word, they become politicians and we're back at The Proverbial Square One.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ceoyoyo (59147)

      Ah, corporatism. Putting for profit businesses in charge NEVER leads to trouble.

  • Testing? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by filesiteguy (695431) <kai@perfectreign.com> on Saturday September 12, @10:46AM (#29398587) Homepage
    " It will need to do accelerated testing to show the impact of decades of wear on the new mirrors in desert conditions" - I wonder how different these mirrors are to current mirrors. After alll, we've had solar mirrror array systems here in Southern California heating up gas for over twenty years - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_Energy_Generating_Systems. I pass by one of them whenever I head up north to June or Mammoth Lake.

    The article (and others I've googled) says nothing abut what the technology will be. I wonder if it would be like the ESA improvements for the satellites - http://www.rssd.esa.int/SA/PLANCK/include/payl/node5.html
    • by Reziac (43301) *

      I don't know why they'd need to do conditions-testing; look at the auto glass in the same neighbourhood, and figure that at a couple hundred feet off the ground you get maybe 10% as much wear and tear (most of the harsh blowing sand is at ground level).

      There's a new solar-mirror setup just north of Lancaster CA. It's some sort of test prototype, I don't recall the details. The way the mirror array is situated here, the collector is visible from the ground as you go by on the highway, and the reflection is b

  • meanwhile.... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Luke_22 (1296823) on Saturday September 12, @10:47AM (#29398595)
    ...Italy just dropped all economical support to solar-termal energy.
    photovoltaic still has subsides, but no more for solar-thermal.
    and we were the 3rd country with most solar thermal in europe untill now.
    ...
    • Why? (Score:2, Interesting)

      by zogger (617870)

      Did they drop support because they couldn't get it to work well, or is it working well enough that no subsidies are needed anymore? Or is Italy just broke and dropping a lot of governmental spending in general?

  • by 140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) on Saturday September 12, @10:55AM (#29398645) Journal
    From the article:

    Weihl said Google had not intended to invest much more in early years, but that there was little to buy. "I would say it's reasonable to be a little bit discouraged there and from my point of view, it's not right to be seriously discouraged," he said. "There isn't enough investment going into the early stages of investment pipeline before the venture funds come into the play." The U.S. government needs to provide more funds to develop ideas at the laboratory stage, he said. "I'd like to see $20 billion or $30 billion for 10 yrs (for the sector)," Weihl said. "That would be fabulous. It's pretty clear what we have seen isn't enough."

    Google: "Government, please throw in some 20 or 30 billion dollars to into solar energy research"

    Govt: Nah, deficits are high. We dont have money. It should be done by the private sector. 20 or 30 billion dollars is too much way too much we cant afford it It is not a trivial sum like 780 billion dollars to clean up after wall street greedy moneybags. Tell you what? Grow too big to fail. Then come back asking for a couple of trillion dollars. Then we will be able to do it. OK?

  • "I would say it's reasonable to be a little bit discouraged there and from my point of view, it's not right to be seriously discouraged," he said. "There isn't enough investment going into the early stages of investment pipeline before the venture funds come into the play."

    The U.S. government needs to provide more funds to develop ideas at the laboratory stage, he said.

    "I'd like to see $20 billion or $30 billion for 10 yrs (for the sector)," Weihl said. "That would be fabulous. It's pretty clear what we hav

  • C'mon: they already know everything about you- they have access to your e-mail, schedule, phone calls, documents, and pretty much anything- and now they're going to take over the energy industry too? Google is aiming for world domination! Wake up sheeple!

    That was a joke. Sort of.
  • So first we had "Do no Evil" and now they're working to blind us all so we can "See No Evil" too. What next, voice recognition -- "Hear No Evil" ?

  • by TorKlingberg (599697) on Saturday September 12, @11:15AM (#29398777)

    This makes we wonder, where did Google get people who know how do develop mirrors? Did they buy a smaller solar power company, hire a bunch of people, or reassign some computer engineers?

  • If Google is smart, they will use this to start enhancing Coal and Gas plants. That will allow for manufacturing scale up, while reducing the need for new infrastructure. Adding new infrastructure (power lines, generators, etc) are very high costs and hurt the move to AE. BUT, if Google can get Solar and geo-thermal (such as their support of potter drilling) to be lower costs than Coal, then the conversion to AE and hopefully Nukes will happen rather quickly. The other thing needed is a move to electric tr
    • They could just convert the coal plant to Solar. Keeping what infrastructure is already at the site(s) then adding existing solar technology they come up with.

      Would that count as "enhancing Coal and Gas plants"?
    • by HiThere (15173)

      I think that's a good idea, but I don't think it's the first step.

      My idea of the first step is that Google builds a few pilot plants that power various Google centers during the day time. Work out the bugs on a small scale. And then license the technology to somebody else...who can use it to beef up old plants and build new ones.

  • by Thagg (9904) <thadbeier@gmail.com> on Saturday September 12, @11:42AM (#29399009) Journal

    A friend of mine who worked at Google at the time had clearly been involved in this project (although he didn't tell me...exactly) We were discussing alternative, sustainable power, and I've always been a fan of solar thermal -- he described in way more detail and depth than I thought possible the resource limits we'd run into if we tried to power America by solar thermal -- in particular the current mirrors in the prototype plants use a huge amount of aluminum, and scaling those plants up to make more than a rounding-error of our energy needs would take way more aluminum than we could forsee having. Plus, of course, it takes a ridiculous amount of electricity to refine the aluminum in the first place.

    I was rather surprised, and checked his math...which was pretty accurate. I do think that other alternatives to aluminum are practical, and Google's going there.

    Thad

      • by alen (225700)

        NYC they are all recycled. I see a lot of old 60 year old or so Chinese people taking them out of the trash and hauling them for the $.05 each recycling money back. they are always hauling hundreds of cans at a time. Since they live with kids or inlaws it's a nice source of tax free cash for them

  • Use More (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Wardish (699865) on Saturday September 12, @11:52AM (#29399095) Journal

    Since I'm fond of flights of fancy...

    Beam splitter, Fresnel lens, simple prisms, whatever works to separate different parts of the spectrum. Thermal energy going to thermal power generation, the rest going to solar cells that efficiently utilized that particular part of the spectrum.

    The rest of course is the engineering.

  • I would bet that the tech they are developing is the software/hardware required to aim the mirrors at the focal point. If that gets standardized and mass produced, I could see dramatically scaling up solar thermal power cheaply.

    Its something I have thought about for years, but never had the capital or free time to invest in seriously.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 12, @12:30PM (#29399447)

    Did Google misinterpret the reason that Oracle bought Sun?

  • by bencoder (1197139) on Saturday September 12, @03:41PM (#29400765)

    in which the sun's energy is used to heat up a substance that produces steam

    What is this mythically substance that produces steam when heated up?

    • by RobVB (1566105)
      How is what Google does anti-competitive? Most of their services are free.
    • Threatening oil company profits could turn a lot of 'civil servants' anti-Google.

      In the Obama administration? Fat chance. They'd be more likely to throw a parade. (And you just need to look at a DC opinion poll or two to see how much the civil servants love Obama).

    • Perhaps we should take action to ensure that the regional players are able to advance their wmd programs at a pace outstripping their ability to use them effectively.

      Producing a warhead is a relatively trivial matter whose only barriers are raw material and refining limitations.

      If refined weapons grade fissile materials are able to flow more freely throughout the region, the barrier to producing warheads drops to the point that any good machine shop could build a warhead.

      The beauty is that ability to put th

    • Dear Anonymous Coward,

      we at Google hear your plea about world over-population. This is why we are proud today to tell you about our upcoming product. It will not only help control the world's population but will also push the need for large-scale construction projects.

      Coming Soon from Google: Goozilla!

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by russotto (537200)

        Ironically, its the people who care very little about the environment that are using the arguments of those short sighted environmentalists to shoot down things like wind-power and hydroelectric generation concepts!

        It's to be expected. Consider a conversation between a cigar-chomping flint-hearted power company executive and his favorite toady:

        E: Smothers! What's the hold-up with the new coal plant?
        S: Well sir, some environmentalists say coal smoke causes acid rain and carbon dioxide ruins the climate
        E: P

One person's error is another person's data.