Priligy online now, save money

APR 15

Recent Comment

"These projects are akin to the destruction of the Redwood Forests in t..."

View all Comments

Google Invests $168 Million in Huge Mojave Desert Solar Project

Google announced this week that it will be making its largest renewable energy investment to date by investing $168 million in Brightsource Energy's Ivanpah solar thermal power plant in the Mojave desert.  The plant will have an installed capacity of 392 MW.

The Ivanpah plant began construction last year and should be completed in 2013.  It will employ 173,000 heliostats, each with two mirrors, to concentrate solar energy onto a tower where the heat will make steam that turns a turbine and creates electricity.  While other solar thermal projects are in the works in the Southwest, Ivanpah is the largest solar tower project so far.

This type of solar power technology is one that Google is trying to improve upon themselves.  The company announced last year that it was working on a more efficient mirror technology that could lower the cost of solar thermal plants.

This latest investment brings Google's total renewable energy investments up to $250 million.

via Google

Hits: 24430
Comments (12)Add Comment
This saddens me.
written by Eric, April 15, 2011
I'm all for expanding our use of renewable energy but I respectfully disagree with the order cialis from canada idea that a fragile desert is the right place. In fact, while maybe not be as efficient as a factory solar farm, I believe that environmentally, that taking a hyper local approach such as roof top solar will prove the second best solution to our escalating energy needs. The best approach of cheapest levitra prices course will always be to consume less energy.
..., Low-rated comment [Show]
written by Al Plumlee, April 16, 2011
Google has what it takes to be a going concern. Would it not be nice if they were to start a Google political party that has get up and go and is always looking into the Future?
bright idea
written by ds, April 16, 2011
Not only there is cialis suppliers in uk reduction of CO2 but it transforms naturally occurring sunlight into mecanical energy.
Environmental impact has been thoroughly examined.
No radiation, no mercury and no mining.
Why did it take so long?
written by Shoken Ritsu, April 18, 2011
I can't believe any right minded person would seriously entertain a Google political party. I presume you are in favor of facism (why don't you Google the definition of fascism).
I'm not a super smart ecogeek but...
written by Elias, April 19, 2011
Why does it take a company to invest in a "good for the environment" idea like this? Why doesn't our government that uses all this taxpayer earmark money on sometimes dumb projects, invest instead in stuff like this that would be more beneficial to US citizens and to the world?
It has to go somewhere
written by Bob in CA, April 28, 2011
Eric, I don't mean to usa generic cialis be harsh but I've heard that sort of comment too many times. People are all for renewable energy, but they don't want solar in the desert, they don't want wind turbines on the plains, and they don't want dams on viagra sale canada the rivers. They don't want power transmission lines anywhere.

Renewable energy is just barely viable from a cost standpoint as it is. Renewable energy facilities have to go where they will work, and for solar that's the desert. That's not to say that we shouldn't plaster the roofs of buildings with solar panels, we should do that too. This is a big installation that only produces 392 MW. A recently completed natural gas powered plant a bit closer to LA takes up much less area and produces over three times as much electricity. If the solar plant wasn't out in the desert, it would produce even less.

Besides, have you ever been to Ivanpah? It isn't like it's pristine.

You can't have it both ways. If you want renewable energy we have to build the buy prescription viagra without facilities. Solar goes where there is the most sun, wind goes where there is the most wind, etc. Anything else simply isn't realistic.
written by tom Kuchnicki, April 29, 2011
392MW of power is obtainable at 100% sunload which is available for 5/6 hours per day.
Since electricity cannot be stored in any viable quantity where will all this clean power be used?
The US does not have a quality interstate "smart Grid System", so the power generated will have to be used locally during an off-peak power usage time period.
I'm glad to see Google taking an active role in producing clean power, I just hope the end user was thought of before starting this project.
I was researching solar power and wow it's great canadian pharmacy viagra prescription found it takes $900.00 of solar equipment to light a 100 watt light bulb. Pretty expensive in my book.
Solar power isn't that expensive anymore @tom Kuchnicki
written by frisbee, April 29, 2011
@tom Kuchnicki
To light a 100 watt light bulb for 24 hours a day (I think that's what you mean) takes 2400 Wh per day, which means 365 x 2.4 = 876 kWh per year. In 20 years this will take 17.520 kWh. At 10 cents per kWh this would cost you about $1750. I'd prefer that solar equipment for $900!
Besides: what a waste of energy. Better use a 20 W LED bulb! Much more efficient. Use the rest of the solar power for other means :-)
Why the feddle gubmint isn't doing more
written by David Guion, April 30, 2011
Elias, corporations can to things like this project because they know it will make them money. Government can't, because lobbyists working on behalf of interests who would lose money in any change from the status quo can buy enough Congress-creatures and regulators to stand in the way of obvious public interest. Alternative energy is hardly the only example of that. Perhaps if enough corporations and individual households get really serious about doing whatever they can, whether it's a lot or a little, we can reach a tipping point that will overcome the wealth of the opposition. Then the government will start doing its job.
written by leslie, May 07, 2011
the invanpah project received $1.6 billion in loan guarantees from the federal dept of energy
More environmental destruction…..
written by Mojave , January 25, 2012
These projects are akin to the destruction of the Redwood Forests in the 1800s - 1970s. I don't understand how anybody would view these projects as ecoconscious.
Secondly, energy costs will likely not decrease and the costs to build the infrastructure to transport this energy all the way back to large cities will be passed on to the consumer.
I guarantee you that science will not save the planet. Only decisions to change our lifestyles will protect the earths chemistry and maintain conditions hospitable to humans.

President Obama vowed last night to open up public lands fro development. I will not be voting for his reelection and I hope that many of online prescription for levitra us you make the same decision.

Write comment

security code
Write the cialis cialis online displayed characters


Are you an EcoGeek?

We've got to keep 7 billion people happy without destroying our planet. It's the biggest challenge we've ever faced....but we're taking it on. Are you with us?

The Most Popular Articles