Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (8885)	6/3/2009 4:59:44 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86355

For the record we should acknowledge that utilities are looking at such things because of legislative mandates. How much of this they'd be doing w/o mandates we don't know. This central solar backed up by natural gas combo makes the most sense in southern CA, AZ, NM, southern NV imo. Especially in areas near major cities so the transmission costs will be minimized. It might make sense in FL too. Elsewhere probably not. Natural gas backup will probably be vastly preferable to molten salt storage or ideas like that. The shortage of water and land disturbance of vast areas are major barriers. The water problem wouldn't be a problem in FL, but the land disturbance would still be there. We don't know if environmentalists will allow massive solar plants anywhere even though they demand solar power. If it ever happens, I'd bet the El Paso Tx area might be the #1 prospect area for this.