heliostat progress

=energy =manufacturing

 

 

Around 1997, heliostat costs were estimated at $250 to $300 per m^2. Adjusting for inflation, that's to $460 to $560 in 2022 dollars.

In 2022, this report estimated the cost of 2 modern heliostat designs at $127 and $96 per m^2. So, heliostat real costs came down >4x in 25 years.

 

what changed

Some reasons heliostats got cheaper are:

- Heliostat fields used to use open-loop control, which required stable foundations and precise positioning. Newer ones use closed-loop control, with mirror angles detected by cameras or something.
- Heliostats all used to be connected with wires for power and data. There's now a trend towards ones with a small PV panel to power the drive system and a wireless datalink.
- People found cheaper ways to manufacture the supports and drive systems. You can see the report linked above for some examples.

 

With such low cost targets, a lot of common manufacturing methods can't be used. For example, an obvious approach to supporting a mirror is to stamp a plastic-coated steel sheet into a ridged pattern, then bond it to the back of the mirror. But that's too expensive.

On some of those heliostat designs, you can see this funky drive with a roller chain going around a metal semicircle, connected at the ends. I guess that works, but if you were actually doing mass production, I feel like an injection-molded (overmolded) nylon semicircular gear would be better...?

Another common actuator in low-cost heliostat designs is a long narrow leadscrew that only pulls.

 

 

heliostat applications

$100/m^2 is not very expensive compared to construction. Windows in buildings are >$200/m^2. Houses often cost >$1000/m^2 of floor area to build. With helistat prices having decreased, perhaps it's worth considering potential applications for them now.

 

lighting

Currently, people use solar panels to turn sunlight into electricity, move that electricity long distances, and use it to run LED lights. That has a net efficiency of perhaps 8% and requires a lot of equipment. It's more efficient to use sunlight for lighting directly.

Heliostats can focus sunlight onto skylights or windows. A few buildings have used such systems, but they're rare. You have to put the heliostats somewhere they get light, and people prefer big windows to small windows with extra sunlight pointed at them, so heliostats have largely been used to technically comply with regulations about not entirely blocking sunlight to nearby places.

There's also a town in a valley that built a few heliostats to give it sunlight for more of the year.

 

water heating

Even if heliostats have gotten cheaper, if you don't need very high temperatures, my understanding is that parabolic troughs are still cheaper. But using those for water heating is a real thing. As of 2017, global solar hot water thermal capacity is 472 GW.

 

process heat

Rather than generating electricity, high-temperature heat from concentrated sunlight can be used for endothermic industrial processes directly. The obvious options are methane steam reforming and cement production. There are a few startups pursuing concentrated solar for both those things, using heliostats and towers. That seems cheap enough for society to do if it wants to, but not cheap enough to be competitive with burning cheap natural gas.

 

PV solar

Once upon a time, solar panels were expensive and 2-axis tracking was worthwhile for them. Today, solar panels are cheap, and single-axis tracking is worthwhile but 2-axis is not.

 

solar-thermal

Installed solar cost per peak watt is ~$1 for big utility projects and ~$3 for residential solar. Average/peak power (capacity factor) varies with location and tracking, but 25% is typical with 1-axis tracking. So, you multiply those costs by 4 or so, more if it's rooftop solar with no tracking. And you can't control generation times, so maybe that electricity is worth less than average. (These are approximate numbers, of course.)

If you suppose $100/m^2 for helistats, 250 W/m^2 average solar irradiance considering the tracking, and 40% conversion efficiency, that's $1/W for the heliostats, but that's acceptable. That leaves $3/W for generation to match PV solar, and we can spend significantly more than that if there's storage.

Well, actual solar-thermal projects have been considerably worse than that. The Ivanpah Debacle was $6/W peak output, with a 22% capacity factor, no energy storage, and 19% efficiency. So, >$27/W overall and no advantages over PV solar. And that's at a relatively good location for solar-thermal; most places are worse.

 

Maybe investors should've gone with, say, NREL people instead of those BrightSource idiots? Well, the Crescent Dunes project went even worse. Let's see, the CEO was...this guy? MBA, international studies, former Navy...yeah, that makes sense.

Solar-thermal has a lower capacity factor than PV. It uses 2-axis tracking, which helps somewhat, but it's worse when there are clouds or low sunlight levels.

Some things that aren't economically viable for solar-thermal power include:

- Using steam. The steam turbines and such are too expensive. Coal plants aren't really competitive these days, and intermittent use would make things much worse.
- Using nitrate molten salts for heat storage. The salts are cheap, but some corrosion mitigation is needed and that makes things too expensive.
- Using carbonate or chloride molten salts for heat storage. They're more corrosive than the nitrate salts and require higher-temperature materials, so they're more expensive despite less material being needed.
- Using packed-bed thermal energy storage, with gas flowing through something like sand. It's too expensive.
- Thermal energy storage that stores heat by releasing CO2 from minerals and later absorbing it. Too expensive, and not very efficient either.
- Not using thermal energy storage. Without it, solar-thermal has no real advantages over PV solar, and the electricity-generating equipment isn't used enough.

 

Solar-thermal power can be viable. Just avoid the above things. It's a fun little challenge.

 

decoration

A cost-optimized mass-produced heliostat is about as cheap as a moving thing that size can be made. $1000 for 10 m^2? Do you know how much stupid-looking large moving sculptures that rich people or companies might get cost? More than $1000, that's how much.

If part of the mirror was painted over, the reflected light would form an image. A painted heliostat could be used to have a company's logo wander around a shaded wall during the day.

 

 


back to index