Comments on: Worley Parsons (ASX: WOR) Announces Pilbara Solar Energy Project

By: OnlyOne

OnlyOne — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 18:02:44 +0000

Worley parsons sucks. They speak of loyalty to the company and expect it from their employees, but when the time comes to reciprocate.... Well, business is business, right? I hope wp goes belly up. Get rid of the global behemoth that does nothing more than sucks the life out of everyone and everything it touches.

By: Why Solar Investors Should Look to Australia

Why Solar Investors Should Look to Australia — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 15:32:44 +0000

[...] Worley Parsons (ASX: WOR) Announces Pilbara Solar Energy Project addthis_url = [...]

By: Michael Wadsley

Michael Wadsley — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 09:56:50 +0000

All thermal processes are subject to the limitations imposed by the fundamental laws of nature, in particular the laws of thermodynamics. Solar thermal and geothermal energy will have theoretical Carnot efficiencies between 20% and 65% depending on operating conditions with practical efficiencies likely to be around 40$ to 50%. Consequently half the thermal energy will have to be dissipated in the environment.

Most fossil fuel thermal power stations use fresh water evaporation or sea water cooling for waste heat dissipation. Few sites with appropriate solar energy exposure have access to fresh or sea water.

I would be interested to learn the method(s) of waste heat disposal proposed by Worley Parsons.

By: GWSkeptic

GWSkeptic — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 11:17:11 +0000

The problem with solar energy is that it's dilute energy and trying to convert dilute energy into an efficient usable power source is very difficult. The energy in 700 kwh/m2/yr of insolation is relatively low; even if we take the higher figure of 1400 kwh/m2/yr given the proposed location in NW Australia, it's still low. This energy needs to be collected over a wide area thus increasing capital and maintenance costs. Also, the conversion of solar energy into electrical energy is quite inefficient, typically between 10 to 15% for commercial solar cells. Even though the project proposed by Worley Parsons is for solar-thermal plants, their efficiency is still very low. The Californian Solar II plant's efficiency is between 9 and 14% only for example. In spite of 35 years of research and development into various forms of solar energy and other forms of alternative energy since the first oil crisis, the world's use of renewable energy per capita has decreased, continuing the long term trend of the last 150 years. It's a sobering thought to consider too that the majority of renewable energy is still derived from hydroelectric power and biomass and only a tiny amount from direct solar power and wind turbines. The world's needs are for not only the provision of the current energy income but also the means to produce more to enable the evolution and growth of civilisation. Renewable energy sources are not capable of doing this. The only feasible solution is nuclear power.

By: Graeme

Graeme — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 02:57:27 +0000

GaryB my house is nearly "free" apart from the infrastructure costs. That's the problem with solar. Massive initial capital cost (and incidentally massive initial fossil fuel energy investment). Do you realise the 700 kWh/yr is worth less than $100/yr at the retail level and probably half that at the supply level?

Solar may be all we have eventually but there's a time for everything. I will not be rushing to invest in Worley Pasons on the basis of project that could only be viable with a massive subsidy from the mug taxpayer.

By: GaryB

GaryB — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 01:10:17 +0000

Goodonya Worley Parsons. Solar is the only form of "nuclear energy" we want or need in Australia. Having a thermonuclear reactor like the sun, far enough away that we don't have any nuclear waste to worry about, and pumping out energy at approx 700 kwhr per sqm on the earth's surface, is a neat setup. And apart from the cost of the infrastructure to harvest this energy, it's free to all.

By: GWSkeptic

GWSkeptic — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 11:29:27 +0000

The only sensible alternative energy initiative for Western Australia is the one proposed by the Western Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, who suggested that nuclear power should be considered for WA.