I was reading an article recently about a huge solar tower which will be built in Australia. It was interesting because Australia, like the U.S., has huge coal reserves for cheap power. Instead of sitting back and relying on coal, some enterprising Australians have a vision for solar power being used on a grand scale. This tower is supposed to provide energy to 100,000 homes. The cost is steep--I think somewhere in the neighborhood of $700 million. However, as with most technology in its early stages, this initial tower will probably spawn more efficient ways to produce subsequent towers. In addition, once the tower is built, its power source--i.e. the sun--is free. The tower will produce power at all times of the day. It will capture the heat from the sun, which will rise through the tower and move wind turbines (and hence, generate electricity). When it's dark out, heat captured in ponds around the tower by day, will be used to produce electricity in the tower.

China, with its insatiable need for electricity, has expressed interest in this tower project, as has California (which is another positive environmental measure Governor Schwarzenegger has taken). There is talk to build similar towers in other areas of the southwest U.S., as well, such as in New Mexico or Arizona.

Hopefully, this bold solar project will be the jumpstart for a solar power movement in homes, schools, etc. I recall my friend's dad in the 1970s making a solar addition on his house. It worked great. The project fit with his image--a kind of hippie man who kept bees, but who worked at IBM by day. It doesn't seem like solar panels have changed much since then. I always wondered why this idea didn't catch on. If this huge solar tower can't get attention for solar power, I don't know what will.