Greenpeace

Just read an article in the NY Times about the addition of a huge solar power plant adjacent to the nation's largest natural gas plant in Florida. The system will function as a "hybrid" model, supplying energy from both alternative and fossil-fuel powered sources.Evidently, this will be the world's second largest solar plant, and is scheduled to be completed by the end of this year.

My initial reaction is that this is an obvious step in the right direction. The cost of building the solar plant was greatly reduced by utilizing existing features connected to natural gas plant. Makes sense to build something like this in Florida- the sunshine state, but the sad reality is that the power produced by the alternative portion of the facility will be dwarfed by the capacity of the fossil fuel plant. The solar field is only a means of supplying supplemental energy, especially in times of great need- the hot summers (when sunshine is more abundant).

 On second thought, wouldn't it seem more logical to build an alternative facility that could surpass production of the natural gas plant? Seems like the dirty plant should act to supplement the energy produced by alternative methods. Maybe the solar field could stand to eventually replace the gas plant...

 At any rate, it is good to hear that more alternative plants are being produced, even if they are directly connected to a polluting facility. Seems like "baby steps" are the method of change... almost mirrors the auto industry slowly converting to hybrid models- even the prior gas guzzler models (cadillac escalade!)

Read more at the link below:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/business/05solar.html?pagewanted=1&ref=technology