The demand, and need, for solar power is growing as we try to wean ourselves away from fossil fuels. The technology is rapidly improving and the cost per watt is decreasing as the manufacturing volume increases. Last month I watch a CNN report on a large solar farm that is beginning to operate in the desert in one of our western states. This farm covered several square miles and utilized a mirror system focuses the sun's rays on a central tube that contains a liquid solution that is heated to very high temperatures. The hot fluid is then routed to a heat exchanger that produces stream that turns turbines to produce the electricity. The cooled liquid is then recycled back into the mirror system.
The desert west has plenty of vacant, low cost land for these types of wind and solar farms, but what about the rest of the country where land is becoming increasingly expensive. Projections are that massive solar farms in the desert west could supply a large portion of our growing need for electricity, but then the issue of the how we efficiently deliver the power to other areas of the country arises. Producing the power near where it is needed is obviously the best solution.
When I was pondering these issues I took out our road atlas to think about the issue of land use. It occurred to me that our 46,876 mile long Interstate Highway could answer the question of where to locate solar cells to produce electricity because the land is already in paid for and in the public domain. To produce power by direct solar dells you need a certain amount of sunshine and the ability to orient the solar cells toward the sun, basically the eastern, southern and western directions.
If you will look at a map of the United States and examine the Interstate system, you will see that the southern states have many opportunities to locate solar cells system next to Interstate highways. My home state of South Carolina is a good example. We have three Interstate that cross the state from a northeasterly to southwestern direction. Interstate 85 on the Upstate are, Interstate 20 in the Midlands and Interstate 95 near the coast. South Carolina has an abundance of sunshine, summer and winter, and would serve as an excellent test location for this system. We also have Interstate 26 that runs in a roughly east-west direction from the Upstate to the coast.
The best approach would be a system of solar sells mounted next to the Interstate that would be mounted with small motors that would adjust the cells to point directly at the sun to provide maximum production of power. On Interstates that has an east-west orientation, like Interstates, 10. 20 and 40 that cross a number of southern states, the cells could be mounted in a horizontal orientation and would not need motors attached.
As an example, there is 5,280 feet in a mile. A mile of Interstate could lined with a maximum of 1,760 of solar cells 6 feet tall and three feet wide. Even if we assume a 50% installation rate that would mean 880 solar cells each producing about 200 watts, or a total of 176,000 watts. Ten miles of solar cells would produce 1,760,000 watts of power that could be fed directly into the national power grid.
I am not an engineer, but I am a retired financial manager and I know that removing the cost of land from the equation would dramatically reduce the cost of large-scale solar arrays. I would appreciate some feedback from readers that do have the engineering expertise on this proposal. The state and Federal governments could give the local electric utility companies the right to install and maintain the solar arrays with the understanding that that power produced would be fed into the national grid.
The solar cell industry is well established and growing. The increased demand for solar cells from this project would create jobs and produce capital to research methods to increase the efficiency of solar cells and reduce their cost. What we need is a one-mile pilot Interstate project to test the feasibility of this concept.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 5
Southeastern PA has a successful wind farm already (PECO). People in the DelMarVa region are urgin the power compny to build one off the coast and can already demonstrate that it will not harm sea life.
Note that solar farms in the desert do make a lot of sense, as they don't take land away from other use and as there is so much sunshine, especially in areas such as the Nevada deserts. A mere area of 92 by 92 miles could generate all the electricity that the US currently uses. The electricity could be distributed throughout the US relatively cheaply using High Current Direct Voltage lines, which would be cheaper than generating solar energy in places where the sun doesn't shine as strongly.
Of course, we don't need to rely solely on electricity from such wind farms. In many areas, wind energy is very price-competitive. What also makes a lot of sense is the install solar panels on roofs of commercial buildings. The electricity could power the needs of the building directly, including recharging of the batteries of electric cars parked in and around the buildings. Solar panels on and around buildings may be more expensive than solar farms in the desert, yet they may be financially attractive as there's a big difference between the price that utilities pay when they buy electricity and what they charge the end-user.
Finally, there is plenty of room to install solar facilities elsewhere, such as along highways. I suggest that we implement a FeeBate policy that imposes a fee on fossil fuel with the proceeds used for rebates on local purchase and installation of facilities that generate electricity in a clean and safe way, such as solar and wind energy. Market mechanisms can further sort out what works best where.