Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Solar Energy Generating Systems

Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) are a group of in California's that use collectors to concentrate sunlight, heating a to produce steam for turbine-driven . The facilities, spanning three sites near Daggett, Kramer Junction, and Harper Lake, were constructed between and by Luz International Limited as the world's first commercial-scale installations. Originally boasting a combined gross capacity of 354 megawatts, the plants incorporate hybrid operation with augmentation to maintain output during low solar periods. SEGS demonstrated the technical viability of utility-scale thermal power, operating continuously for over three decades and supplying reliable baseload-like energy to the grid through hybridization, which addressed intermittency without relying on emerging solutions. However, by 2021, five plants (SEGS III–VII) totaling 150 megawatts at Kramer Junction were decommissioned due to escalating maintenance expenses on aging equipment and the rise of cheaper photovoltaic alternatives unsubsidized at equivalent scales. The remaining facilities continue limited operations, underscoring SEGS's role as a proof-of-concept for CSP amid ongoing debates over its capital-intensive nature and land requirements compared to photovoltaic systems, which have dominated recent renewable capacity additions through cost reductions driven by manufacturing scale. Despite subsidies enabling initial deployment, the projects highlighted causal challenges in CSP , including higher levelized costs from and dependence for cooling in arid environments.

History

Origins and Development

The Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) trace their origins to the commercialization efforts of Luz International Limited, an Israeli company with operations in the United States, which aimed to deploy utility-scale parabolic trough concentrated solar power in California during the early 1980s. Building on earlier experimental solar thermal technologies, Luz focused on integrating parabolic trough collectors with conventional steam turbine generators to achieve economic viability, driven by post-1970s oil crisis interest in dispatchable renewable energy. The inaugural facility, SEGS I, a 13.8 megawatt (MW) plant located in Daggett, California, commenced commercial operation on December 20, 1984, marking the first grid-connected parabolic trough power plant worldwide. Development accelerated through a series of nine plants constructed between 1984 and 1991 in California's , culminating in a combined capacity of 354 MW. This expansion was facilitated by the federal (PURPA) of 1978, which required utilities to buy electricity from qualifying power producers at avoided cost rates, alongside California's standard offer contracts that provided revenue certainty and a 10% federal investment for equipment. Each successive SEGS incorporated refinements, including larger collector fields, improved heat transfer fluids, and limited thermal storage using or oil, enhancing capacity factors to around 20-25% with hybrid backup for reliability. financing exceeding $1.25 billion supported construction, with plants sold to groups as power projects. Luz's progress halted in 1991 when the company filed for , primarily due to inability to finance SEGS X amid the expiration of the in 1990, falling interest rates that diminished leveraged returns, and competition from low-cost . Despite this, the existing SEGS plants continued operating under new ownership, demonstrating the technology's durability, though no further U.S. plants were built until the 2000s revival spurred by renewed policy support.

Construction Phases and Milestones

The Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) were constructed in sequential phases by Industries, starting with pilot-scale implementation and expanding to full commercial capacity across three sites in California's . The initial phase encompassed SEGS I (13.8 MW) at Daggett, where construction began in 1984, followed rapidly by SEGS II (30 MW) at the same location; both achieved commercial operation in 1985, marking the debut of utility-scale technology. This phase demonstrated proof-of-concept for solar thermal power with fossil fuel hybridization, enabling power purchase agreements with under California's regulatory framework. Subsequent phases scaled operations: SEGS III through VII (150 MW total, 30 MW each) at Kramer Junction entered service between 1986 and 1988, incorporating design refinements like improved collector efficiency and larger steam turbines for higher output. The final phase added SEGS VIII and IX (176 MW total, 80 MW and 96 MW respectively) at Harper Lake, with SEGS VIII operational in 1989 and SEGS IX in October 1990, completing the 354 MW complex. Construction emphasized modular trough assembly, on-site heliostat alignment, and integration of heat transfer systems, with each phase building on prior operational data to reduce costs from approximately $4,000/kW for SEGS I to under $3,000/kW by SEGS IX. Key milestones included the 1985 online date for SEGS I-II, establishing the first grid-connected solar thermal output exceeding 40 MW; the 1988 completion of Kramer Junction expansions, surpassing 200 MW cumulative capacity; and the 1990 full SEGS IX commissioning, solidifying trough technology's viability before Luz's 1991 halted SEGS X. These phases relied on federal tax credits and state incentives, with total investment exceeding $1 billion, though post-construction upgrades in the addressed reliability issues like receiver tube degradation.

Technical Principles

Parabolic Trough Collectors

Parabolic trough collectors are linear solar concentrating devices comprising a parabolic-shaped reflector that focuses direct normal irradiance onto a parallel receiver tube positioned at the focal line. In the Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS), these collectors form extensive fields arranged in north-south oriented rows, employing single-axis tracking to align with the sun's and achieve peak optical performance. Developed by Luz International Limited, the technology evolved through three generations: LS-1 for SEGS I, LS-2 for SEGS II through VII, and LS-3 for SEGS VIII and IX, with progressive improvements in aperture size and efficiency. The reflectors utilize second-surface silvered low-iron glass mirrors with a reflectivity of approximately 0.93, concentrating by a geometric ratio of about 71:1 onto the heat collection element (HCE). The HCE features a absorber tube coated with selective surfaces such as or black chrome to minimize thermal emissions, encased in an evacuated glass envelope (outer diameter around 115 mm) to reduce convective losses. For the LS-2 model prevalent in early SEGS plants, the aperture width measures 5 meters, with individual modules approximately 7.8 meters long and solar collector assemblies extending to 49 meters, enabling scalable field deployments totaling over 1 million square meters of area in some installations. Heat transfer fluid, typically synthetic oil like Therminol VP-1, circulates through the receiver tubes, absorbing concentrated to reach operating temperatures of 100–400°C, with design outlets near 350–400°C for downstream generation via exchangers. Optical efficiency peaks at 73–75% under zero incidence angle and conditions, while thermal efficiency approximates 60% at nominal operating points, influenced by factors such as mirror cleanliness, tracking accuracy, and annulus integrity—losses can double without or quintuple without the glass envelope. In SEGS operations, collector fields deliver preheated to conventional Rankine-cycle turbines, with performance metrics derived from direct normal insolation and field aperture area; for instance, SEGS IX encompasses 483,960 m² of aperture across 888 collectors. Empirical testing at on LS-2 modules confirmed efficiency declines with increasing beam incidence angle or degraded , underscoring the causal importance of for sustained output.

Heat Transfer Fluid and Steam Generation

In Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS), the (HTF) is a , typically a eutectic of diphenyl and known as Therminol VP-1, selected for its thermal stability up to 400°C and low . This fluid circulates through the absorber tubes of collectors, where concentrated solar radiation heats it from an inlet temperature of approximately 270–300°C to an outlet temperature of 390–400°C, enabling efficient heat capture without . The use of as HTF in SEGS avoids the challenges of direct steam generation, such as instabilities, though it introduces thermal losses during indirect heat transfer. The heated HTF is then pumped to a power block consisting of shell-and-tube heat exchangers arranged in series as a preheater, evaporator (boiler), and . In these exchangers, the HTF transfers heat to pressurized , generating at conditions suitable for a conventional turbine, typically around 370–390°C and 100 bar. This indirect process ensures reliable steam production but incurs penalties from the temperature drop across the exchangers and the HTF's lower compared to alternatives like molten salts. SEGS plants incorporate using the HTF itself, storing hot oil in insulated tanks to extend operation beyond hours, with the stored heat later used for continued generation. of the HTF involves periodic purification to remove products, as prolonged exposure to high temperatures can lead to thermal cracking and viscosity changes, potentially reducing system efficiency. Overall, the HTF- generation cycle in SEGS achieves solar-to-electric efficiencies of 10–15%, limited by the indirect transfer and optical-thermal losses inherent to the design.

Hybrid Operation with Natural Gas

The Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) plants from SEGS III onward incorporate hybrid operation by integrating natural gas-fired auxiliary systems to supplement solar thermal input, enabling continuous electricity generation during periods of insufficient solar irradiance such as cloudy conditions, nighttime, or seasonal low-insolation events. This design utilizes gas boilers for feedwater preheating and gas-fired steam generators to produce supplementary steam, which mixes with solar-heated steam from the heat transfer fluid (typically synthetic oil heated by parabolic troughs) to drive the Rankine cycle steam turbines at or near rated capacity. The hybrid configuration enhances dispatchability, allowing the plants to meet contractual peak-load obligations, particularly during winter afternoons when solar input is reduced but electricity demand is high. Natural gas typically accounts for 25% to 30% of the annual energy input in these facilities, constrained by federal regulations under the (PURPA) that limit use to maintain qualifying facility status for incentives, though operational data from Kramer Junction (SEGS III-VII) indicates approximately 30% gas contribution to total power output. This supplementation has enabled high factors, with on-peak energy from gas comprising only 5% to 20% in optimized operations, as the primary solar collection dominates during clear daytime hours. For instance, the five 30 MW units at Kramer Junction rely on this approach to sustain 150 MW total , using gas to bridge gaps without full reliance on thermal storage, which is minimal or absent in early SEGS designs. The hybrid mode improves overall plant reliability and economic viability by reducing downtime and aligning output with grid needs, but it also introduces fuel cost variability and emissions, with providing the thermal boost via direct firing rather than advanced integrated cycles. Recent operations, such as at SEGS IX, have phased out routine gas use post-2020 to prioritize -only generation where feasible, reflecting evolving regulatory and environmental pressures, though backup capability remains for stability. This approach underscores the trade-offs in early concentrating deployments, balancing intermittent resource with conventional fossil dispatchability to achieve commercial-scale performance.

Facilities and Operations

Overall Scale and Capacity

The Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) originally comprised nine plants in California's , delivering a combined of 354 MW across three sites: Daggett (SEGS I-II, 44 MW), Kramer Junction (SEGS III-VII, 150 MW), and Harper Lake (SEGS VIII-IX, 160 MW). These facilities, developed between 1984 and 1990, represented the world's largest deployment of solar thermal technology at the time, utilizing over 2 million parabolic mirrors spanning approximately 6.4 square kilometers to concentrate sunlight for steam generation. Hybrid operation with allowed for baseload-like dispatchability, enabling annual electricity production exceeding 600 GWh in peak years from the full array. Due to aging infrastructure, high maintenance costs, and competition from lower-cost photovoltaic systems, significant retirements have reduced operational scale. SEGS I and II ceased operations in 2015, replaced by photovoltaic installations, while SEGS III-VII at Kramer Junction (150 MW) were decommissioned in July 2021 following Energy Commission approval. SEGS VIII (80 MW) retired by 2024, leaving SEGS IX (80 MW) at Harper Lake as the only active plant, contributing limited capacity to the grid under management. This contraction reflects broader challenges in early CSP economics, with cumulative output from SEGS exceeding 6 TWh over decades but now dwarfed by U.S. solar PV growth surpassing 200 installed by 2025.

Kramer Junction Plants

The Kramer Junction plants encompassed SEGS III through VII, five adjacent solar thermal power units employing collectors to concentrate sunlight onto for steam generation. Each unit delivered a net capacity of 30 MW, yielding a combined 150 MW output, with augmentation enabling hybrid operation for consistent dispatch. Situated in the near Kramer Junction in , these facilities were developed by Luz International Limited and commissioned sequentially between 1986 and 1988. NextEra Energy Resources operated the plants, which supplied power to via power purchase agreements. Over nearly four decades, operational enhancements including automated mirror washing and absorber tube replacements sustained performance, with the five units accumulating substantial runtime data validating trough-based CSP reliability in arid conditions. However, escalating maintenance demands and competition from lower-cost prompted decommissioning, completed on September 29, 2022, per California Energy Commission certification. The site removal adhered to regulatory stipulations, concluding a key chapter in early commercial CSP deployment.

Other Key Sites

The Daggett site, located in the Mojave Desert near , hosted SEGS I and II, the initial plants in the SEGS series with a combined capacity of 44 MW. SEGS I, a 13.8 MW facility, began operations in December 1984, while SEGS II, rated at 30 MW, came online in 1985. These plants utilized as the and demonstrated early commercial viability of trough technology, though SEGS I ceased operations in 1999 due to challenges. The Harper Lake site, situated approximately 7 miles northeast of Highway 58 in , encompasses SEGS VIII and IX, providing a total of 160 MW. SEGS VIII, an 80 MW plant, achieved commercial operation on December 1, 1989, followed by SEGS IX in October 1990. These facilities employed larger collector fields than earlier SEGS units and operated under long-term power purchase agreements with . Ownership transferred to Terra-Gen, LLC in January 2018, but SEGS VIII was terminated, and SEGS IX received decommissioning approval in February 2023 amid shifts toward photovoltaic alternatives.

Performance and Efficiency

Operational Metrics and Output

The Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) at Kramer Junction, comprising plants III through VII with a combined gross capacity of 150 MW, produced approximately 218,327 MWh of gross solar-derived in 2018, reflecting favorable insolation conditions. In 2019, output declined to about 133,462 MWh due to variable weather and maintenance factors. These figures represent the solar fraction, as augmentation contributes roughly 25% to total annual generation across SEGS facilities to extend operation beyond daylight hours and during low insolation periods. Solar capacity factors for SEGS parabolic trough plants typically range from 15% to 25%, constrained by diurnal availability without significant , though gas firing elevates overall factors. For a representative 30 MW unit, this translates to annual output around 65,700 MWh at 25% under optimal conditions, though actual performance has averaged lower in some years due to factors like mirror soiling and thermal losses. Peak thermal-to-electric conversion efficiency reaches 22% during full-load operation, with annual average solar-to-electric efficiencies of 14% to 18% reported across the fleet, reflecting improvements from initial deployments through enhanced collector cleaning and receiver coatings. Plant availability consistently exceeds 98%, enabling reliable dispatchable output aligned with periods, as evidenced by Kramer Junction units averaging 105% of rated summer peak capacity over extended operational histories. Total SEGS output, including hybrid contributions, has supported grid stability in , with historical data indicating progressive efficiency gains from 10.6% in early 1990s operations to higher sustained levels through operational refinements.

Reliability and Capacity Factors

The for SEGS plants, defined as the ratio of actual annual output to the maximum possible output at , typically ranges from 20% to 25% when accounting for operation with backup, which supplements approximately 25% of total generation. Solar-only capacity factors are lower, averaging around 17-18%, reflecting dependence on direct normal irradiance without . For instance, projections for an 80 MW SEGS-like plant indicate an annual solar-only capacity factor of 17.8% under typical conditions. These figures are influenced by site-specific solar resource availability, with Kramer Junction plants benefiting from high insolation but limited by diurnal and weather variability. Reliability of SEGS parabolic trough systems is evidenced by sustained operations since the 1980s, with the Kramer Junction facilities (SEGS III-VII) demonstrating high solar field availability and on-peak production consistency. Operators have achieved a 30% reduction in operation and maintenance costs over time, alongside record annual solar-to-electric conversion efficiencies of 11.4%. Component reliability has improved markedly; annual receiver tube failure rates dropped to 3.37% by the early through material and design advancements. Overall plant availability remains robust, supported by modular field designs and fossil fuel integration for startup and cloudy periods, enabling dispatchable output despite inherent solar .

Comparisons to Alternative Technologies

Parabolic trough systems like those in SEGS achieve overall solar-to-electric efficiencies of approximately 15-20%, lower than modern photovoltaic (PV) panels at 20-22% module efficiency, though PV systems lack inherent thermal storage for dispatchability. SEGS plants typically operate at capacity factors of 20-30% without extensive storage, comparable to utility-scale PV in sunny regions (20-25%), but PV deployments have surged due to lower levelized cost of electricity (LCOE), with global averages falling to $0.049/kWh in 2023 versus CSP's $0.10-0.15/kWh for trough systems. PV requires less land per MW (3-5 acres versus SEGS' 4.8-5 acres/MW) and enables faster installation, often in months compared to years for trough infrastructure, though CSP's thermal inertia supports better grid stability during peak demand. Compared to onshore wind, SEGS troughs offer similar or slightly higher capacity factors (25% for wind globally in 2023), but wind's LCOE is lower at $0.033/kWh, driven by scale and simpler mechanics. Wind intermittency necessitates backup, akin to solar variability, yet trough systems' potential for molten salt storage (up to 6-15 hours) provides firmer dispatchability than battery-paired wind, albeit at higher storage costs ($20-60/kWh thermal). Trough CSP land use exceeds wind's sparse footprint (0.5-1 acre/MW equivalent), and reliability suffers from mirror cleaning and alignment issues in dusty environments, where wind turbines face mechanical wear but fewer site-specific constraints. Among CSP variants, parabolic troughs lag solar towers in efficiency and output; towers achieve 30-50% capacity factors with storage due to higher concentration ratios (500-1000 suns versus troughs' 70-80), yielding LCOE reductions of 10-20% in optimized designs. Dish-Stirling systems offer peak efficiencies up to 30% but remain niche, with smaller scales (25-50 kW/unit) limiting commercial viability compared to SEGS' MW-scale trough arrays. Troughs excel in proven longevity, as evidenced by SEGS' decades-long operation, but towers and dishes reduce water needs via dry cooling options, addressing troughs' evaporation losses in steam cycles. Versus natural gas combined-cycle plants, SEGS provides zero-emission solar generation but relies on gas hybridization (1-5% fuel use) for reliability, emitting far less CO2 (10-50 g/kWh lifecycle versus gas's 400 g/kWh). Gas offers near-100% dispatchability and lower upfront costs ($1,000/kW versus CSP's $3,000-11,000/kW), with ramp rates under 10 minutes, outpacing troughs' thermal startup delays; however, CSP avoids fuel price volatility and long-term emissions mandates, though its intermittency requires grid-scale backups absent in gas.
TechnologyTypical Capacity Factor (%)LCOE (2023, $/kWh)Land Use (acres/MW)Dispatchability
Parabolic Trough CSP (SEGS-like)20-300.10-0.154.8-5Medium (with storage)
Utility PV20-250.0493-5Low (batteries add cost)
Onshore Wind25-350.0330.5-1Low-Medium
Solar Tower CSP30-500.08-0.124-6High (storage)
Natural Gas CC50-600.04-0.060.5-1High

Economic Analysis

Construction and Operational Costs

The construction of the Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) plants, primarily built between 1984 and 1991, involved significant capital expenditures due to the scale of collectors, systems, and generators required for their hybrid solar-natural gas operation. For instance, SEGS VI at Kramer Junction, a 30 MW facility completed in 1989, had a total direct of approximately $76.6 million, equating to about $3,008 per kW in nominal terms adjusted to contemporary analyses. Historical data for the SEGS series indicate ranging from $3,000 per kW for larger 80 MW units to $4,000 per kW for smaller 30 MW plants, reflecting in solar field deployment and power block integration during the late . These figures encompassed solar field structures (e.g., support at $50–$67 per m²), ($43 per m² for receivers and mirrors), and power block components ($410–$527 per kW), with total installed costs driven by custom for desert conditions and initial technology maturation. Operational costs for SEGS plants have centered on maintenance of the extensive mirror fields, heat transfer fluid circulation, and turbine operations, with hybrid natural gas firing adding variable fuel expenses during low-insolation periods. Fixed and variable O&M costs for SEGS VI were estimated at $0.046 per kWh for solar-only modes and $0.034 per kWh in hybrid configuration, incorporating labor, parts replacement (e.g., heat collection elements at 5.5% annual rate initially), and site management. Across the Kramer Junction facilities (SEGS III–VI, totaling 120 MW), collaborative efforts with the U.S. Department of Energy from 1992 to 1997 achieved a 30% reduction in O&M costs, yielding over $42 million in net present value savings through predictive maintenance, improved cleaning techniques, and component reliability enhancements. Overall SEGS O&M averaged around $0.04 per kWh historically, lower than initial projections due to operational learning but still elevated compared to fossil alternatives owing to the mechanical complexity of trough tracking and fluid systems. Natural gas supplementation, used for up to 25–40% of annual energy in some plants for dispatchability, introduced additional fuel costs estimated at $0.02–$0.03 per kWh depending on market prices, though these were partially offset by the systems' high solar capacity factors of 20–25%.
Cost ComponentSEGS VI Example (1989, 30 MW)Kramer Junction O&M Reduction Impact
Capital Cost per kW$3,008 ()N/A
Solar Field (per m²)$250 total (supports, receivers, mirrors)30% overall O&M savings ($42M NPV, 1992–1997)
O&M per kWh$0.034–$0.046Targeted HCE replacement from 5.5% to lower rates
Fuel (Hybrid Share)Variable, ~$0.02–$0.03/kWh gas componentDispatch enabled by gas, reducing solar-only variability costs

Subsidies and Financial Viability

The development of the Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) relied heavily on federal and state financial incentives to offset high capital costs and achieve initial deployment. Federal investment tax credits (ITCs), combined with state credits, reached up to 55% in the early 1980s before declining to 10%, providing crucial upfront capital relief for the projects built between 1984 and 1991. property tax exemptions for solar equipment further reduced effective costs, alongside sales tax exemptions on materials, enabling total financing exceeding $1.2 billion for the 354 MW capacity across nine plants. Long-term power purchase agreements (PPAs) mandated under the (PURPA) of 1978 required utilities like to buy output at avoided-cost rates, which were elevated during the 1980s due to high prices, effectively acting as an implicit by guaranteeing above-market revenues. These incentives proved essential for financial feasibility, as unsubsidized levelized costs (LECs) for SEGS-type plants were estimated at 16-18 cents per kWh (1998 dollars) for 30-80 MW configurations, far exceeding competitive baselines of around 5.5 cents per kWh without environmental pricing. Early plants like SEGS I achieved LECs of about 24 cents per kWh, improving to 8 cents per kWh for SEGS IX by 1988 dollars through scale and experience, yet remained high at approximately $3,500 per kW near-term. The phase-out of generous ITCs and delays in extending California's exemptions triggered the 1991 bankruptcy of developer International, halting further SEGS expansion despite operational successes like exceeding rated summer capacity by 105% from 1988-1997. Post-bankruptcy, surviving plants transferred to investors but underperformed original financial projections, primarily due to post-construction drops in avoided-cost PPAs as fell, eroding revenue streams. Without renewed incentives like proposed 3.5 cents per kWh production credits or carbon , projected LECs for scaled 200 MW SEGS-like systems hovered at 10.1 cents per kWh, requiring additional measures such as low-interest debt or financing (treating as depreciable "") to approach viability at 6.9-8.3 cents per kWh. Long-term projections suggested potential LECs as low as 6.1 cents per kWh with cost reductions, but empirical outcomes highlighted dependency on policy support, as unsubsidized operations faced competition from cheaper and gas, with no new domestic builds absent guarantees like those for later CSP projects. Hybridization with , used in SEGS for reliability, further inflated expenses, underscoring causal limits of intermittent without advancements or sustained subsidies.

Long-Term Economic Outcomes

The Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS), operational since 1984, have realized long-term economic viability primarily through extended operational lifespans exceeding 30 years, subsidized initial financing, and progressive reductions in operational expenditures, despite elevated upfront capital costs averaging $3,000 to $4,000 per kilowatt installed. These costs, financed via federal investment tax credits and long-term power purchase agreements with California utilities, enabled the plants to amortize investments over cumulative generation surpassing 20 billion kilowatt-hours across the facilities by the early 2000s, with ongoing annual output supporting revenue streams amid low marginal production expenses. Levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) for early SEGS plants ranged from 15 to 20 cents per kilowatt-hour, reflecting high capital intensity and the hybrid solar-natural gas design that provided dispatchability but added fuel variability. Operational enhancements, including mirror cleaning optimizations and component replacements, yielded up to a 30% decline in operations and maintenance (O&M) costs per unit of output by the mid-1990s, enhancing as capital charges diminished over time. With sunk capital, post-amortization favor continued operation, as variable costs—dominated by O&M at approximately 1-2 cents per and occasional supplementation (accounting for 25% of annual )—remain competitive against wholesale electricity prices in , where SEGS contribute baseload-like capacity factors of 20-25%. NextEra Energy Resources' persistence in maintaining the Kramer Junction plants as of 2025 underscores positive cash flows, bolstered by the absence of fuel price volatility risks inherent in non-hybrid renewables. Nevertheless, SEGS exemplify causal limitations in CSP : while demonstrating proof-of-concept for dispatchable solar thermal power, the technology's LCOE has not declined commensurately with photovoltaic alternatives, stabilizing at 10-18 cents per for vintage plants versus under 4 cents for modern utility-scale without incentives. Dependency on site-specific insolation, land extensivity (over 1,000 acres per 100 MW), and periodic refurbishments—such as replacements every 20-25 years—impose ongoing capital outlays that erode returns absent policy support, contributing to minimal U.S. CSP expansion post-SEGS. Empirical outcomes thus highlight SEGS as economically marginal without subsidies, with lifetime internal rates of return likely in the 5-8% range for investors, contingent on low-discount-rate public financing rather than unsubsidized market dynamics.

Environmental Impacts

Resource Use and Land Footprint

(CSP) facilities like the SEGS require extensive land areas to accommodate collector arrays, which must be precisely aligned to capture direct beam over large fields. According to a (NREL) analysis of U.S. plants, CSP installations exhibit a total land footprint averaging 7.3 acres per MWac of , with direct for collector fields at about 5.6 acres per MWac for systems. This is higher than photovoltaic () systems due to the need for spacing to minimize cosine losses and , resulting in lower —typically 40-90 W/m² for CSP compared to over 100 W/m² for utility-scale . The SEGS plants, with a combined 354 MW , exemplify this, utilizing over 1,600 acres in the , equating to roughly 4.5 acres per MW, though efficiency variations across units affect precise ratios. Material resource demands for SEGS and similar CSP plants center on bulk commodities rather than scarce minerals. Construction of a reference 50 MW plant requires approximately 10,000 metric tons of for foundations and structures, 10,000 to 15,000 metric tons of for supports and , and 6,000 metric tons of low-iron for reflector surfaces coated with reflective silver layers. Per MW, this scales to about 200 metric tons of , 200-300 metric tons of , and 120 metric tons of , sourced primarily from operations for , , and . These inputs involve energy-intensive extraction and processing, contributing to upstream environmental burdens, but CSP avoids the , , or rare earth dependencies of thin-film , favoring abundant, recyclable materials with recovery rates exceeding 90-95% for and at end-of-life. Lifecycle assessments confirm that CSP's material footprint is dominated by these structural elements, with heat transfer fluids (such as in SEGS) adding minor hydrocarbon-derived inputs, but overall critical use remains low compared to other renewables. Land conversion for CSP often targets arid, low-productivity areas, minimizing competition with agriculture, yet the contiguous nature of installations precludes distributed deployment options available to , amplifying habitat displacement risks on sites like the Mojave. Recycling provisions in CSP designs facilitate , aligning with principles for steel and glass.

Emissions and Hybrid Fuel Dependency

The Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) incorporate hybrid firing to enable reliable operation, primarily for preheating the (HTF), startup of the , and supplemental generation during cloudy periods or at night. This design addresses the intermittency of thermal input by allowing the plants to maintain output levels mandated by contracts, but it introduces a dependency on fossil fuels that offsets the zero-emission profile of pure thermal processes. is combusted in auxiliary boilers or directly to generate , with usage peaking in winter months when insolation is lower. Fuel dependency in SEGS varies across plants but typically constitutes 20-30% of annual energy production. For instance, SEGS plants employ backup contributing approximately 25% of their total output to ensure baseload-like performance. In SEGS III through VII, analysis of operational data indicates a gross split of about 70% -derived and 30% gas-derived, reflecting the practical limits of in the without extensive storage. Later plants like SEGS IX phased out routine gas firing by 1996 through efficiency upgrades, but earlier facilities continue hybrid operations as of 2020 emissions reporting. This hybrid reliance results in direct emissions of CO2, , , and from combustion, undermining claims of emission-free generation. Quarterly emissions reports for SEGS at Kramer Junction, for example, document and PM releases calculated from total gas consumption using standard emission factors, with controlled via low-NOx burners but still present. Life-cycle assessments of hybrid CSP systems, including those akin to SEGS, attribute operational GHG emissions primarily to the fraction, with increases of up to 650 g CO2eq/kWh possible under high scenarios, though actual SEGS figures remain lower due to the majority. Overall, while SEGS reduce emissions relative to or gas-only plants, the hybrid component elevates their footprint beyond photovoltaic alternatives, which emit zero during operation.

Biodiversity and Water Consumption Effects

The Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS), located in the , occupy approximately 1,000 acres for the Kramer Junction facilities alone (SEGS III-VII), resulting in the clearing of native desert scrub and contributing to fragmentation of ecosystems supporting species such as the Mojave desert (Gopherus agassizii), a federally threatened reptile whose populations have declined due to loss from in the region. This land conversion disrupts soil stability, perennial vegetation, and burrows essential for tortoise shelter and , with broader solar projects in the Mojave exacerbating connectivity issues across tortoise home ranges spanning multiple square miles. designs, as used in SEGS, alter local microclimates by shading understory vegetation and reducing retention, potentially affecting invertebrate communities and pollinators that form the base of desert food webs. Avian impacts from SEGS operations are primarily from collisions with mirrors, support structures, or power towers, rather than solar flux-induced singeing, which is minimal in trough systems due to lower irradiance concentrations (typically 30-80 suns) compared to central receiver towers exceeding 500 suns. Studies at similar parabolic trough facilities report extrapolated bird mortality rates of around 0.5-2 birds per GWh, driven by attraction to cooling ponds or dust suppression features, though comprehensive long-term data for SEGS specifically remains limited, with no evidence of population-level declines attributed directly to these plants. Bat fatalities, while documented at CSP sites through barotrauma or collisions, are also lower at troughs than at higher-flux systems, but operational noise and lighting may deter nocturnal foraging in surrounding habitats. Water consumption at SEGS plants is substantial due to wet cooling towers and steam generation, with each 30 MW unit requiring about 450 acre-feet annually, equating to roughly 2,250 acre-feet per year across the five-unit Kramer Junction complex under historical operations. In the water-scarce , this demand—equivalent to 730 million gallons yearly for Kramer Junction—relies on imported supplies from the or local , contributing to regional depletion rates where annual precipitation averages under 5 inches and competing uses include and urban growth. Such evaporation-based losses (600-800 gallons per MWh generated) intensify stress on aquifers and the basin, prompting recent regulatory approvals for retrofits to dry cooling, which could reduce usage by over 98% to under 15 acre-feet annually while maintaining output, though at a potential efficiency penalty of 2-5% in thermal performance. These measures highlight causal trade-offs between energy production and hydrological in arid environments.

Controversies and Criticisms

Technical and Efficiency Shortcomings

Parabolic trough systems employed in the Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) achieve overall solar-to-electric conversion efficiencies of approximately 10-15%, constrained by the fluid's maximum of around 400°C, which limits the Rankine cycle's to below 40%. This temperature ceiling arises from the fluid's thermal stability limits, preventing higher Carnot efficiencies compared to plants operating at 500-600°C. Capacity factors for SEGS plants without extensive typically range from 20-25%, reflecting dependence on direct normal irradiance () and vulnerability to atmospheric variability such as clouds or , which reduce optical . Even with two-hour storage using heated oil tanks, dispatchability remains limited, often requiring hybridization for nighttime or , introducing losses from startup transients and diluting pure solar output. Optical and thermal losses compound these issues: mirror soiling from desert can degrade reflectivity by 1-2% per month without intervention, necessitating frequent water-based that, if suboptimal, further lowers annual yield. losses in extensive piping networks—spanning kilometers—add 5-10% inefficiency due to imperfections and circulation pumps. reliability has historically plagued SEGS operations; for instance, turbine-generator failures at SEGS V in 1991 reduced power block availability and dropped annual efficiency below design targets. Component degradation, including seal wear in vacuum receivers and oil changes over time, demands intensive maintenance, with studies indicating operation and maintenance programs were essential to mitigate exceeding 10% annually in early years. These factors contribute to ratios below 5:1 in some analyses, underscoring scalability barriers for CSP relative to photovoltaic alternatives.

Incidents and Safety Issues

The primary safety hazards associated with SEGS arise from the use of synthetic (HTF), a mixture of diphenyl oxide and heated to approximately 400°C in collectors, which poses risks of leaks, fires, and toxic emissions due to its flammability and instability. Leaks can occur at ball joints, valves, and piping connections subjected to daily cycling, leading to HTF loss rates of about 2% annually and potential ignition upon contact with hot surfaces or air. permeation from HTF degradation into tube vacuums has also caused overheating and structural failures, necessitating widespread replacements between 2007 and 2009 at SEGS plants. Worker exposure risks include burns, chemical from vapor leaks, and high-pressure ruptures, with auxiliary HTF heaters implicated in hazards due to burner design flaws. Specific incidents at SEGS facilities highlight these vulnerabilities. On February 27, 1999, a explosion at a SEGS plant in the released flames and smoke for several hours, prompting evacuations and hazmat response, though no injuries were reported; the cause was linked to HTF system overpressurization. In May 2001, a broke out in a at SEGS V in Junction, requiring emergency response from Engine 89, with the incident confined to the equipment but underscoring ignition risks in HTF circulation systems. August 2002 saw a hazmat event at SEGS III-VII involving a spill of 93% from temporary storage, handled by units without broader environmental release. Operational leaks and fires at SEGS III-VII, particularly from valves and ball joints, have been publicly documented, often extending downtime due to difficult containment in inaccessible areas. These events, while not resulting in fatalities, have driven mitigations such as improved designs, getter materials for control, and routine repacking of joints, though remains labor-intensive. Broader CSP trough systems, including SEGS, face ongoing concerns with fugitive HTF emissions and emergency responder risks from toxic byproducts, emphasizing the need for specialized and protocols.

Policy and Scalability Debates

Government policies supporting (CSP) systems, including the Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) in , have primarily relied on tax incentives, production tax credits (PTC), investment tax credits (), and federal loan guarantees to offset high and stimulate deployment. The SEGS plants, operational since , benefited from early state and federal renewable portfolio standards and avoided cost clauses in power purchase agreements that guaranteed above-market rates, enabling the initial commercialization of technology. However, these mechanisms have sparked debates over their efficiency, with proponents arguing they were essential for overcoming deployment barriers in nascent technologies requiring dispatchable output via thermal storage, while detractors contend they represent inefficient taxpayer-funded risk transfer to private developers without commensurate long-term cost reductions. Scalability debates center on CSP's limited global expansion despite policy support, with installed capacity reaching approximately 7 GW by 2025, compared to photovoltaic (PV) solar's over 2 TW, highlighting fundamental economic and technical hurdles. CSP's (LCOE) remains higher, often exceeding $0.10/kWh even with storage, versus PV's sub-$0.04/kWh in sunny regions, due to capital expenditures of $3,000–11,000/kW and dependency on direct normal irradiance (DNI) above 2,000 kWh/m²/year, restricting viable sites to arid deserts. Policy interventions like Spain's feed-in tariffs () temporarily scaled CSP to over 2 GW by 2013 but led to fiscal overruns and project bankruptcies when subsidies ended, underscoring risks of over-reliance on intermittent support rather than inherent competitiveness. Critics of CSP scalability emphasize its inferior modularity and land intensity—requiring 5–10 acres/MW versus PV's 4–7—exacerbating permitting delays and environmental conflicts, while advancements in PV-plus-battery storage have eroded CSP's dispatchability edge without its complexity. Empirical data from U.S. Department of Energy analyses indicate CSP's capacity factors (25–40%) lag behind combined PV-battery systems in cost-effective firm power delivery, prompting questions on whether continued subsidies justify niche applications in high-DNI areas or divert resources from more scalable renewables. International Energy Agency projections forecast CSP growth to 73 GW by 2030, but historical underperformance relative to targets—evident in stalled post-2013 U.S. projects like Ivanpah—fuels skepticism about policy-driven scalability absent dramatic cost breakthroughs.

Current Status and Legacy

Ongoing Operations as of 2025

As of 2025, the Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) facilities in California's have concluded their power generation activities, following a series of retirements that began in the mid-2010s. SEGS I and II, located near Daggett and operational since 1984 and 1985 respectively, ceased electricity production in 2015 due to aging infrastructure and economic challenges in competing with lower-cost photovoltaic alternatives. At Kramer Junction, SEGS III through VII—five interconnected 30 MW plants totaling 150 MW—underwent decommissioning starting in July 2021, with full retirement of all units by December 2021; this included dismantling activities for SEGS III-V completed on December 23, 2021, and ongoing work for VI-VII shortly thereafter. The decision reflected operational inefficiencies, high maintenance costs, and the plants' reliance on hybridization, which diminished their viability amid falling solar PV prices and improved grid integration options. , the operator, shifted focus to newer renewable assets. SEGS VIII and IX at Harper Lake, each 80 MW, followed a similar trajectory, with regulatory filings indicating planned cessation of operations by 2020 and subsequent permit retirements; Terra-Gen, which acquired them in , has not reported active generation post-decommissioning. Overall, the aggregate 354 MW capacity of the nine SEGS plants is no longer contributing to the grid, underscoring the transition from early to more scalable photovoltaic and storage technologies.

Repowering Efforts and Decline in CSP

Several units of the Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) have undergone repowering or decommissioning as their original infrastructure aged beyond economic viability, with replacements favoring systems due to lower and simpler operations. In , SEGS I and SEGS II, operational since 1984 and 1986 respectively, were decommissioned and replaced by facilities Sunray 2 (20 MW) and Sunray 3 (20 MW) at the Daggett site. Similarly, SEGS VIII (80 MW), which began operations in 1989 at Harper Dry Lake, was retired in 2021 after failing to secure viable extension contracts amid declining and maintenance challenges. SEGS IX (80 MW), the last remaining unit at Harper Dry Lake certified for hybrid solar-natural gas operation, received approval for decommissioning in February 2023 from the California Energy Commission, paving the way for redevelopment with panels and energy storage systems to maintain grid contributions while eliminating thermal inefficiencies. These repowering initiatives reflect a broader shift, where aging CSP assets are supplanted by -plus-storage that achieve higher capacity factors without the high water and operational demands of steam-turbine cycles. As of 2025, only SEGS III through VII (150 MW total) at Kramer Junction continue CSP operations, supported by ongoing hybrid gas supplementation, though their long-term viability remains pressured by similar economic factors. The decline of CSP globally and in the United States stems primarily from its inability to compete with 's plummeting costs—PV module prices fell over 90% since 2010—resulting in CSP's (LCOE) remaining 2-3 times higher even after subsidies. No new utility-scale CSP plants have been built in the U.S. since Ivanpah in 2014, and its 392 MW closure announced in 2025 underscores the technology's marginalization, as deployments surged to over 10 quarterly by mid-2025. Worldwide, CSP grew modestly to 6.7 by 2023, adding just 400 MW that year, concentrated in storage-equipped projects in and the , while captured over 95% of new solar additions. CSP's capital-intensive requirements (e.g., $3,000–11,000 per kW installed) and land/water needs have limited scalability, particularly in water-scarce regions, exacerbating its retreat against 's modularity and rapid deployment. Despite cost reductions to an average $0.118/kWh for new projects (2010–2022), CSP's dispatchability advantages via thermal storage have not offset -battery pairings, which now match or exceed CSP's flexibility at lower expense.

Influence on Modern Solar Technologies

The Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) established collectors as the foundational technology for utility-scale (CSP), influencing subsequent designs by demonstrating reliable heat collection and power generation at megawatt scales. Built between 1984 and 1991, these nine plants in California's aggregated 354 MW capacity using curved mirrors to focus onto oil-filled tubes, achieving operational that validated the for commercial viability. This early success provided empirical data on mirror alignment, tracking systems, and losses, which informed refinements in optical and structural durability for later trough-based installations. SEGS operations highlighted the limitations of synthetic oil as a heat transfer fluid, prompting advancements toward higher-temperature alternatives like molten salts in modern CSP plants for improved thermal storage and dispatchability. While initial SEGS plants relied on fossil fuel hybridization for nighttime generation, this experience underscored the value of integrated storage, leading to two-tank molten salt systems in facilities such as Spain's Andasol plants, which extend output beyond daylight hours. Lessons from SEGS' levelized energy costs, which fell from over 25¢/kWh in 1984 to 10-12¢/kWh by the 1990s through economies of scale and incremental optimizations, guided cost-reduction strategies in global trough deployments, including enhanced receiver coatings and automated cleaning to minimize dust impacts. The legacy of SEGS extends to hybrid integration and debates, where its proven reliability—over 25 years of continuous for most units—contrasted with emerging photovoltaic dominance, yet reinforced troughs' role in regions with high direct normal irradiance. Modern iterations, such as those in Morocco's Noor complex, incorporate SEGS-derived modular field layouts and pairings, achieving capacities exceeding 500 MW while addressing water use through dry-cooling adaptations informed by SEGS' wet-cooling baselines. Overall, SEGS' empirical track record shifted CSP development from experimental prototypes to standardized practices, emphasizing robust systems over speculative innovations.

References

  1. [1]
    [PDF] Solar Trough Power Plants - Publications
    The SEGS plants use parabolic-trough solar collectors to capture the sun's energy and convert it to heat.
  2. [2]
    SEGS III – VII - Kramer Junction - California Energy Commission
    The SEGS III-VII project is a 150-megawatt thermal solar, natural gas facility located near Kramer Junction, San Bernardino County.
  3. [3]
    Solar Energy Generating System - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
    SEGS is the largest solar energy generating facility, consisting of nine solar power plants in California's Mojave Desert, with a 354 MW capacity.
  4. [4]
    World's longest-operating solar thermal facility is retiring most of its ...
    Sep 20, 2021 · The Solar Energy Generating Systems (SEGS) facility in California's Mojave Desert retired five of its solar plants (SEGS 3 through 7) in July 2021 and plans to ...
  5. [5]
    Solar thermal power plants - U.S. Energy Information Administration ...
    Solar thermal-electric power systems collect and concentrate sunlight to produce the high temperatures needed to generate electricity.
  6. [6]
    [PDF] Parabolic Trough Solar Power for Competitive U.S. Markets - OSTI
    The SEGS projects are qualifying facilities (QFs) as defined by the 1978 Federal Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act. (PURPA) legislation, which enabled the ...
  7. [7]
    [PDF] MASTER t? - UNT Digital Library
    of PURPA in California. LUZ's first two projects ... The impact of PURPA limits on the early development of the LUZ technology was significant The second SEGS ...
  8. [8]
    [PDF] Barriers to Commercialization of Large Scale Solar Electricity
    Over $1.25 billion of private financing has been raised to build the nine power plants. The author of this report, Michael Lotker, was LUZ's Vice President of ...
  9. [9]
    [PDF] Financing Solar Thermal Power Plants - Publications
    However, the question must be asked why no additional solar power plants have been build following the bankruptcy of the developer of the SEGS projects, LUZ.
  10. [10]
    [PDF] Solar Parabolic Trough
    Trough Technology: The experience from the nine SEGS plants demonstrates the commercial nature of parabolic trough solar collector and power plant technologies.
  11. [11]
    [PDF] Advances in Parabolic Trough Solar Power Technology - LEPTEN
    Luz built. In 1991, Luz filed for bankruptcy when it was unable to secure construction financing for its tenth plant 共SEGS X兲. Although many factors ...
  12. [12]
    USA - SolarPACES
    The SEGS plants consist of nine solar power plants using parabolic trough technology with an aggregate capacity of 354 MW. These plants are still operating and ...
  13. [13]
    [PDF] The History of Solar
    Cumulative worldwide installed photovoltaic capacity reaches 1000 megawatts. First Solar begins production in Perrysburg, Ohio, at the world's largest ...
  14. [14]
    SEGS VIII - Harper Lake - California Energy Commission
    The project was certified by the CEC on March 29, 1989 and began commercial operation on December 1, 1989. On May 11, 2022, the CEC approved the ...
  15. [15]
    [PDF] SOLAR THERMAL POWER AND ENERGY STORAGE HISTORICAL ...
    Oct 9, 2014 · All of the SEGS plants were sold to investor groups as independent power projects and continue to operate. THERMAL SOLAR COLLECTOR TECHNOLOGY.
  16. [16]
    [PDF] Parabolic Trough Collectors
    Trough systems are modulary arranged, and many of them can be grouped together in parallel rows to form small or large field arrays (where the short name "farm" ...
  17. [17]
    [PDF] SEGS LS-2 Solar Collector - OSTI
    Thc SEGS plants use largc fields of SEGS parabolic trough collectors to supply thermal cnergy to boilers producing steam to drivc a conventional. Rankine steam ...
  18. [18]
    [PDF] Guidelines for Reporting Parabolic Trough Solar Electric System ...
    The parabolic trough collectors track the sun such that the direct radiation from the sun is focused on the receiver tube. A high temperature heat transfer ...
  19. [19]
    [PDF] 19467 DE92 012327 CHEMICAL ENERGY STORAGE ... - OSTI
    collectors are used to heat a synthetic heat transfer fluid, which in turn is used to generate steam and drive a conventional steam Rankine conversion cycle. As ...
  20. [20]
    Solar Thermal Power Plants with Parabolic-Trough Collectors
    Though all SEGS plants currently in operation use thermal oil as a heat transfer fluid between the solar field and the power block, direct steam generation (DSG) ...<|separator|>
  21. [21]
    Unified model of solar thermal electric generation systems
    The study showed that the major difference between the performance of the two types of SEGS is due to thermal losses in the oil/steam heat exchanger. The flow ...
  22. [22]
    [PDF] Heat Transfer Analysis and Modeling of a Parabolic Trough Solar ...
    The model determines the performance of a parabolic trough solar collector's linear receiver, also called a heat collector element (HCE). All heat transfer and.
  23. [23]
    [PDF] Solar Electric Generating System (SEGS) Assessment for Hawaii
    Since 1985, Luz had developed and operated nine large solar power plants in California's Mojave Desert. The cumulative firm capacity of the. SEGS plants ...<|separator|>
  24. [24]
    [PDF] Parabolic Trough Solar Power for Competitive U.S. Markets
    To minimize technology risk, SEGS type plants and Luz trough technology will be assumed. The plants are assumed to operate with solar energy whenever possible.
  25. [25]
    [PDF] evaluation of power production from the solar electric generating ...
    LUZ International declared bankruptcy in late 1991. This led to a shortage of spare parts for the solar field. Prior to the bankruptcy it was common ...
  26. [26]
    [PDF] Printed June 1999 - OSTI
    The five 30-MW plants at Kramer Junction use large fields of parabolic trough solar collector assemblies (SCAs) to supply thermal energy to produce superheated ...
  27. [27]
    [PDF] NextEra Energy Resources, SEGS III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII & IX, 2009.
    SEGS VIII and SEGS IX are the largest solar plants individually and collectively in the world. They are located in the Mojave Desert, which is an area where ...
  28. [28]
    Item_01c SEGS III through VII - California Energy Commission
    Jun 9, 2021 · The SEGS III-VII site is located one mile north of Kramer Junction in unincorporated. San Bernardino County. Prior to being decommissioned, SEGS ...
  29. [29]
    [PDF] CSP Projects US - Sustainable Energy
    2. ) Daggett, CA. SEGS I. Parabolic Trough. 13.8. Operational. 1984. 82,960. Daggett, CA. SEGS II. Parabolic Trough. 30. Operational. 1985. 190,338. Kramer ...
  30. [30]
    Amargosa Valley Solar Millennium Scoping Meeting August 2009
    Aug 18, 2009 · It operated between 1985 and 1999. SEGS II Location: Mojave Desert, Daggett, California First Year of Operation: 1986. Type: Solar electric ...
  31. [31]
    SEGS IX - Harper Dry Lake - California Energy Commission
    The SEGS IX project is an 80-megawatt thermal solar, natural gas facility located near Hinkley, San Bernardino County.
  32. [32]
    Solar Energy Generating Systems - Wikipedia
    SEGS is a concentrated solar power plant in California, United States. With the combined capacity from three separate locations at 354 megawatt (MW),Principle of operation · Individual locations · Harper Lake · Kramer Junction
  33. [33]
    Solar-Thermal Plant Will Be Redeveloped With PV, Battery Storage
    Feb 17, 2023 · Like previously decommissioned SEGS units, it will be redeveloped as a solar-photovoltaic facility with battery energy storage. California ...
  34. [34]
    [PDF] SEGS III - VII 2018 Annual Compliance Report - DOCKETED
    Feb 19, 2019 · Performance of SEGS III-VII was generally good during 2018. The annual gross solar-derived electrical production was about218,327 MWh.
  35. [35]
    [PDF] SEGS III - VII 2019 Annual Compliance Report
    Feb 25, 2020 · Performance of SEGS III-VII was generally good during 2019. The annual gross solar-derived electrical production was about 133,462 MWh.Missing: output | Show results with:output
  36. [36]
    [PDF] CONCENTRATING SOLAR POWER PLANTS - UNT Digital Library
    Parabolic trough solar technology is employed at Kramer Junction. However, many of the O&M improvements described in the report are also applicable to CSP ...
  37. [37]
    [PDF] The Potential for Low-Cost Concentrating Solar Power Systems
    Current and future estimates of capital and O&M costs, and performance, were based on data from the existing. SEGS plants. The trough technology capital cost.
  38. [38]
    [PDF] Field Survey of Parabolic Trough Receiver Thermal Performance
    During this period, these plants have demonstrated impressive operational availability and have sustained a high level of solar performance.
  39. [39]
    Structural reliability analysis of parabolic trough receivers
    Jun 15, 2014 · The most recent data for SEGS indicated that annual receiver tube failures had decreased to 3.37% of the total field receivers [3]. Since 2000, ...Missing: availability | Show results with:availability
  40. [40]
    [PDF] Reducing the Cost of Energy from Parabolic Trough Solar Power ...
    Jan 1, 2003 · The SEGS VI plant is a hybrid plant and can produce electricity from both solar energy and natural gas. Federal law allows the SEGS plants to ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  41. [41]
    Concentrating solar power (CSP) technologies: Status and analysis
    For the first time, this work summarized and compared around 143 CSP projects worldwide in terms of status, capacity, concentrator technologies, land use factor ...
  42. [42]
    [PDF] Renewable power generation costs in 2023 - IRENA
    Solar PV, wind and hydropower experienced the most considerable cost decreases in 2023. The global average cost of electricity (LCOE) from solar PV fell by 12% ...
  43. [43]
    [PDF] Renewable Energy Cost Analysis: Concentrating Solar Power - IRENA
    While the levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) of parabolic trough systems does not tend to decline with higher capacity factors, the LCOE of solar towers tends ...
  44. [44]
    Concentrating Solar Power - Stanford University
    Nov 5, 2013 · [4] For example, SEGS 3-9 cover more than 1500 acres with a capacity of 310 MW averaging 4.84 acres per MW. This is compared to 6.86 acres per ...Missing: comparison | Show results with:comparison
  45. [45]
    The economics of concentrating solar power (CSP): Assessing cost ...
    Capital costs for CSP fell 50 % in the last decade to $3000–11000/kW. •. Adding 6–15 h of thermal storage at $20–60/kW is now considered economical.Missing: reliability | Show results with:reliability
  46. [46]
    [PDF] CONCENTRATING SOLAR POWER
    Capacity factor for a parabolic trough system with no storage is estimated to be around 25%. For CSP systems with 6 hours of thermal storage, a capacity factor ...
  47. [47]
    [PDF] Analysis of the Cost and Value of Concentrating Solar Power in China
    With 6 hours of storage and SM of 2, the parabolic trough plant only has a capacity factor of 30.62% whereas the tower plant can reach a capacity factor of ...Missing: SEGS | Show results with:SEGS
  48. [48]
    [PDF] Concentrating Solar Power Commercial Application Study
    Feb 20, 2008 · Four main concentrating solar power technologies are described in this report: parabolic troughs, linear Fresnel, power towers, and dish/engine.
  49. [49]
    [PDF] Solar thermal power plants - SolarPACES
    Jun 14, 2021 · The power plant generates direct emissions when it burns fossil fuels such as natural gas or diesel to operate the steam generator. In ...
  50. [50]
    Natural gas and the environment - U.S. Energy Information ... - EIA
    Natural gas is a relatively clean-burning fossil fuel. Burning natural gas for energy results in fewer emissions of nearly all types of air pollutants and ...Missing: dispatchability | Show results with:dispatchability
  51. [51]
    Why Wind and Solar Need Natural Gas: A Realistic Approach to ...
    Sep 30, 2024 · Wind and solar power will replace consistently dispatchable electricity from fossil fuels with variable and more unpredictable clean energy.Missing: comparison | Show results with:comparison
  52. [52]
    [PDF] Assessment of Parabolic Trough and Power Tower Solar ...
    For a given plant size and capacity factor the net annual efficiency is the determining factor in the collector area; ... scale-up factor of 0.7 was attained: ...
  53. [53]
    [PDF] Concentrating Solar Power Best Practices Study - Publications
    LUZ filed for bankruptcy in 1991 when the company was unable to finance its tenth project due to a delay in extension of a state property tax exemption that.
  54. [54]
    [PDF] Solar Trough Systems - Publications
    In addition to operating on solar energy, the. SEGS plants are configured as hybrids to oper- ate on natural gas on cloudy days or after dark. Natural gas ...
  55. [55]
    CSP LCOE ($/kWh) over time worldwide (real dollars). - ResearchGate
    The results show that the LCOE of the analyzed CSP plants is between 120% and 260% above the SETO target, with values ranging from 11 to 18 ¢/kWh. However, the ...
  56. [56]
    Techno-Economic Analysis of Concentrated Solar Power Plants in ...
    The initial CSP learning curve through the SEGS plants was extremely quick and LCOE dropped rapidly over a period of 6 years. Following the market restart in ...
  57. [57]
    Technical and economic assessment of thermal energy storage in ...
    Kearny et al. determined that the LCOE of Solar Energy Generating System (SEGS) plants in California can be reduced by 14.2% for a parabolic trough plant with a ...
  58. [58]
    Calculating Solar Energy's Land-Use Footprint
    Aug 8, 2013 · On a capacity-weighted basis, total land requirements average out to 8.9 acres/MWac, and 7.3 acres/MWac for direct land use. Redefining its ...Missing: SEGS | Show results with:SEGS
  59. [59]
    [PDF] Review of CSP Technologies - ESMAP
    Apr 14, 2011 · For a 50 MW reference plant, for example, about. 10,000 tons of concrete, 10,000–15,000 tons of steel, and 6,000 tons of glass are required. For ...
  60. [60]
    [PDF] Concentrating solar power: its potential contribution to a sustainable ...
    Nov 16, 2011 · The main materials used are commonplace commodities such as steel, glass and concrete whose recycling rates are high: typically over 95% is.
  61. [61]
    [PDF] Material constraints for concentrating solar thermal power
    For CSP plants reaching end of life, recycling of materials is assumed to be. 95% for aluminium and molten salts, 90% for steel (incl alloying material) and ...
  62. [62]
    [PDF] SEGS Kramer Junction Q2 2020 Emissions Report
    Jul 8, 2020 · Total emissions of CO and particulate matter (PM) were calculated based upon total gas usage and emissions factors. These emissions factors ...Missing: CO2 | Show results with:CO2
  63. [63]
    8.3. Environmental assessment of CSP Technology | EME 812
    The CSP emissions have been shown to increase by 650 g CO2 equiv./kWh if a fossil-fuel back-up is used and by 60 g CO2 equiv./kWh if heat storage is used. The ...Missing: SEGS | Show results with:SEGS
  64. [64]
    [PDF] Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Concentrating Solar ...
    These results show that: • Total life cycle GHG emissions from CSP systems are similar to other renewables and nuclear energy, and much lower than coal.
  65. [65]
    [PDF] Mitigating Impacts of Solar Energy Development on Desert Tortoises
    Ongoing habitat loss, including losses to solar-energy development, has created the urgent need to design and refine strategies that support this species' ...
  66. [66]
    Tortoises and Solar Power - Science for Conservation
    Unfortunately, large-scale renewable energy facilities can have negative impacts on desert habitats if they are inappropriately sited. Large expanses of the ...
  67. [67]
    All that glitters – Review of solar facility impacts on fauna
    Solar facilities impact fauna through habitat loss and fragmentation, altered microclimate, and creation of novel habitat.
  68. [68]
    [PDF] Review of Avian Mortality Studies at Concentrating Solar Power Plants
    Leading causes of bird deaths at CSP plants are collisions with reflective surfaces and singeing from concentrated solar flux. Safe irradiance levels are 4-50 ...
  69. [69]
    Impacts of a concentrated solar power trough facility on birds and ...
    Jun 4, 2019 · Searchers detected 72% of bird carcasses, with large birds more likely to be detected than small birds. The extrapolated mortality rate for the ...
  70. [70]
    Solar electric generating stations (SEGS) - IEEE Xplore
    Luz International, a privately owned firm headquartered in. Los Angeles, California, has designed, financed, constructed and is now operating the SEGS units.
  71. [71]
    [PDF] Concentrating Solar Power and Water Issues in the U.S. Southwest
    This report discusses Concentrating Solar Power and Water Issues in the US Southwest. It is a technical report from March 2015.
  72. [72]
    [PDF] Board Order No. R6V-2023-0004 - WDID No. 6B364550002
    Aug 15, 2022 · facility, which will reduce water usage from approximately 1,000 acre-feet per year to less than 15 acre-feet per year. This Order further ...
  73. [73]
    Parabolic Trough - ESTELA
    Parabolic trough systems are suited to a hybrid operation called Integrated Solar Combined Cycle (ISCC), where the steam generated by solar is fed into a ...Missing: work | Show results with:work
  74. [74]
    Enhancing the efficiency of solar parabolic trough collector systems ...
    Jan 15, 2024 · The results show that the overall system has a thermal efficiency of 56.64 %. Solar energy, as the most plentiful source of renewable energy ...
  75. [75]
    [PDF] MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR - OSTI
    The five 30-MW plants at Kramer Junction use large fields of parabolic trough solar collector assemblies (SCAs) to supply thermal energy to produce superheated ...<|separator|>
  76. [76]
    (PDF) Final Report on the Operation and Maintenance Improvement ...
    Apr 5, 2017 · This report describes the results of a six-year, $6.3 million project to reduce operation and maintenance (O&M) costs at power plants ...
  77. [77]
    Concentrated Solar Power is unreliable, full of glitches, & has a low ...
    Nov 28, 2021 · Castro (2018) concludes that because of a low capacity factor and Energy Returned on Invested, an intensive use of materials—some scarce, and ...
  78. [78]
  79. [79]
    Storage Tank at Solar Power Plant in Desert Explodes
    Feb 27, 1999 · A storage tank exploded at a solar power plant Friday, sending flames and billows of smoke into the sky for hours and forcing authorities to ...Missing: leaks | Show results with:leaks
  80. [80]
    [PDF] DOCKET - California Energy Commission : e-filing
    May 21, 2001 · 1103 TEXT 046 FIRE AT THE KRAMER SOLAR PLANT, E89 RESPONDING ... 1324 TEXT 164 ON 58 10 MILES EAST OF KRAMER JUNCTION/RP WILL MEET ON ...
  81. [81]
    Fire Department Response to Solar Thermal Power Plants
    August 2002: The fire department hazmat unit was called to assist the plant personnel with a hazmat incident at SEGS III – VII. A temporary sulfuric acid (93%) ...
  82. [82]
    GSR 2025 | Global Overview - REN21
    Total installed concentrated solar thermal power (CSP) capacity grew by 350 MW to reach 7.2 GW in 2025. ... FIGURE CSP1 Global installed Concentrated Solar ...
  83. [83]
    [PDF] Renewable power generation costs in 2024 - IRENA
    Mar 28, 2025 · In 2024, 91% of all newly commissioned utility-scale renewable projects delivered electricity at a lower cost than the cheapest new fossil fuel- ...
  84. [84]
    The future of concentrated solar power
    Feb 22, 2022 · Scaling challenges. Of course, there are reasons for the relatively under-developed CSP sector, beginning with the logistical and ...<|separator|>
  85. [85]
    Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) vs Photovoltaic (PV) - Terli
    Jul 3, 2025 · The table below compares CSP vs PV by looking at cost, size, and environmental impact, helping stakeholders choose the most suitable technology.
  86. [86]
    Concentrating Solar Power | Electricity | 2024 - ATB | NREL
    It is anticipated that the ATB CSP 2022 CAPEX of $7,912/kilowatt-electric (kWe) could drop by approximately 35% to $5,180/kWe by 2030. From 2030 to 2050, CSP ...
  87. [87]
    Concentrated solar: An unlikely comeback? - RatedPower
    Nov 12, 2024 · Concentrated solar power (CSP) seems to have found its second wind. The market ballooned to $53 billion in 2023 and is expected to reach $212 billion by 2032.
  88. [88]
    [PDF] Solar Energy Generating System Unit VIII
    Jul 23, 2020 · SEGS VIII shares a parcel totaling 1,073 acres located within a Rural Living Land use district. The nearest residences are located 1.6 miles ...<|separator|>
  89. [89]
    SEGS VIII power station - Global Energy Monitor - GEM.wiki
    SEGS VIII power station is a retired power station in Hinkley, San Bernardino, California, United States.<|control11|><|separator|>
  90. [90]
    SEGS IX power station - Global Energy Monitor - GEM.wiki
    SEGS IX power station is a retired power station in Hinkley, San Bernardino, California, United States.
  91. [91]
    California's Ivanpah CSP closure shows tech shift, not solar decline
    Oct 7, 2025 · The shutdown of California's $2.2 billion Ivanpah concentrated solar power (CSP) plant highlights the rapid rise of cheaper, more efficient ...
  92. [92]
    Solar Market Insight Report Q2 2025 – SEIA
    Jun 9, 2025 · The US solar industry installed 10.8 gigawatts direct current (GWdc) of capacity in Q1 2025, a 7% decline from Q1 2024 and a 43% decrease ...Missing: SEGS | Show results with:SEGS
  93. [93]
    Market and Industry Trends | CSP - REN21
    In 2023, the total installed capacity of concentrated solar thermal power (CSP) grew 400 megawatts (MW) to reach 6.7 GW. (See Figure 19.) CSP with thermal ...Missing: decline | Show results with:decline
  94. [94]
    Cost of Concentrated solar power (CSP) projects fell from USD 0.38 ...
    Total installed costs increased to USD 9 728/kW in 2021, before falling back to USD 4 274/kW in 2022. This trend should be interpreted with care, however, as ...
  95. [95]
    [PDF] Technology Roadmap - Concentrating Solar Power - NET
    The SEGS CSP plants, built in California between 1984 and 1991, use natural gas to boost production year-round. In the summer, SEGS operators use backup in the ...
  96. [96]
    Trough integration into power plants—a study on the performance ...
    ISCCS are modern combined cycle power plants with gas and steam turbines and additional thermal input of solar energy from a field of parabolic troughs.Missing: percentage | Show results with:percentage