Thursday, December 5, 2013

Cost of solar power (40)

It’s been a few months since I blogged about the Cost of Solar Power.  Part of the reason is that I had a holiday in China in September, which was an overwhelming experience.  I came back convinced that China is on an unstoppably huge economic trajectory, which will of course have enormous implications for us in Australia.

I’ve also been very busy with R&D on solar-powered recuperated Brayton-cycle engines, a topic that I’ll discuss on another occasion.  Some details, but not recent or confidential results, are at www.sunoba.com.au.

In Australia the domestic PV market is in a calm and modestly-growing condition now that feed-in tariff schemes of various state governments have been wound back.  But there is one segment of the market that’s growing nicely – that’s related to medium-sized PV installations on commercial buildings, especially when the electricity produced can be used within the facility during the day.  Under such circumstances, my understanding is that the installations are economically attractive.

Let’s look at the economics of a recently-announced installation on a winery in Western Australia.

In July 2013, Ferngrove Winery opened a 228 kW PV system.  According to Solar Progress, the system has 696 high-efficiency SunPower 327-Watt panels with six 39 kW German-made Kaco inverters.  The project was half-financed by the federal government’s AusIndustry Clean Technology Food and Foundries Program, which announced that the total project cost was AUD 892,780.   On their website, Ferngrove state that the project will deliver 341 MWh of electricity per year.

I’ll analyse the Levelised Cost of Electricity (LCOE) for the Ferngrove Winery project using my standard assumptions:


  • there is no inflation,
  • taxation implications are neglected,
  • projects are funded entirely by debt,
  • all projects have the same interest rate (8%) and payback period (25 years), which means that the required rate of capital return is 9.4%,
  • all projects have the same annual maintenance and operating costs (2% of the total project cost), and
  • government subsidies are neglected.

For further commentary on my LCOE methodology, see posts on Real cost of coal-fired power, LEC – the accountant’s view, Cost of solar power (10) and (especially) Yet more on LEC.  Note that I am now using annual maintenance costs of 2% rather than 3% as in posts during 2011.

The results for the Ferngrove Winery project are as follows:

Cost per peak Watt              AUD 3.92/Wp
LCOE                                     AUD 298/MWh

The components of the LCOE are:

Capital           {0.094 × AUD 892,780}/{341 MWhr} = AUD 246/MWhr
O&M              {0.020 × AUD 892,780}/{341 MWhr} = AUD 52/MWhr

 
By way of comparison, LCOE figures (in appropriate currency per MWh) for all projects I’ve investigated are given below.  The number in brackets is the reference to the blog post, all of which appear in my index of posts with the title “Cost of solar power ([number])”:

(2)        AUD 183 (Nyngan, Australia, PV)
(3)        EUR 503 (Olmedilla, Spain, PV, 2008)
(3)        EUR 188 (Andasol I, Spain, trough, 2009)
(4)        AUD 236 (Greenough, Australia, PV)
(5)        AUD 397 (Solar Oasis, Australia, dish, 2014?)
(6)        USD 163 (Lazio, Italy, PV)
(7)        AUD 271 (Kogan Creek, Australia, CLFR pre-heat, 2012?)
(8)        USD 228 (New Mexico, CdTe thin film PV, 2011)
(9)        EUR 200 (Ibersol, Spain, trough, 2011)
(10)      USD 231 (Ivanpah, California, tower, 2013?)
(11)      CAD 409 (Stardale, Canada, PV, 2012)
(12)      USD 290 (Blythe, California, trough, 2012?)
(13)      AUD 285 (Solar Dawn, Australia, CLFR, 2013?)
(14)      AUD 263 (Moree Solar Farm, Australia, single-axis PV, 2013?)
(15)      EUR 350 (Lieberose, Germany, thin-film PV, 2009)
(16)      EUR 300 (Gemasolar, Spain, tower, 2011)
(17)      EUR 228 (Meuro, Germany, crystalline PV, 2012)
(18)      USD 204 (Crescent Dunes, USA, tower, 2013)
(19)      AUD 316 (University of Queensland, fixed PV, 2011)
(20)      EUR 241 (Ait Baha, Morocco, 1-axis solar thermal, 2012)
(21)      EUR 227 (Shivajinagar Sakri, India, PV, 2012)
(22)      JPY 36,076 (Kagoshima, Kyushu, Japan, PV, start July 2012)
(23)      AUD 249 (NEXTDC, Port Melbourne, PV, Q2 2012)
(24)      USD 319 (Maryland Solar Farm, thin-film PV, Q4 2012)
(25)      EUR 207 (GERO Solarpark, Germany, PV, May 2012)
(26)      AUD 259 (Kamberra Winery, Australia, PV, June 2012)
(27)      EUR 105 (Calera y Chozas, PV, Q4 2012)
(28)      AUD 205 (Nyngan and Broken Hill, thin film PV, end 2014?)
(29)      AUD 342 (City of Sydney, multiple sites, PV, 2012)
(30)      AUD 281 (Uterne, PV, single-axis tracking, 2011)
(31)      JPY 31,448 (Oita, PV?, Japan, to open March 2014)
(32)      USD 342 (Shams, Abu Dhabi, trough, to open early 2013)
(34)      USD 272 (Daggett, California, designed 2010)
(35)      GBP 148 (Wymeswold, UK, PV, March 2013)
(36)      USD 139 (South Georgia, PV, June 2014)
(37)      USD 169 (Antelope Valley, CdTe Pv, end 2015)
(38)      AUD 137 (Mugga Lane, PV, mid 2014)
(39)      AUD 163 (Coree, fixed PV, Feb 2015)
(40)      AUD 298 (Ferngrove Winery, July 2013)

Conclusion

You can compare results in the graphic below (click for a larger image), which expresses costs in USD/MWh at the exchange rates of 6 December 2013.   (Currencies deflated at 1.75% per annum, baseline date is end 2014.  Red is for solar thermal, blue for PV.  Filled-in circles denote completed projects, open circles denote announced projects.)

According to my methodology, the LCOE for the Ferngrove Winery project is not especially good.  It’s 83% higher than that for the large Coree project (number 39 on the list) announced in mid-2013, and 15% higher than the Kamberra Winery project (number 26 on the list) completed in mid-2012.

But Ferngrove had to pay only half the cost, which means the LCOE as they see it would be AUD 149 per MWh.  That would be economically worthwhile at present, and presumably will be much more so in the future when the world gets serious about climate change.

 

Wednesday, August 21, 2013

Cost of solar power (39)

Two days ago, I wrote about the Levelised Cost of Electricity (LCOE) for one of two recently-announced PV installations in the Australian Capital Territory.  Today I’ll estimate the LCOE for the second of the projects.

The ACT government is awarding these projects on the basis of bids into a reverse auction.  Proponents nominate the price at which they can deliver power; the ACT government provides the difference between the agreed tariffs and the price that that the retailers want.   I presume the ACT government retains federal government benefits associated with the Renewable Energy Certificates.

As I mentioned on Tuesday, RenewEconomy has a good story about the projects.  There were 15 bidders, and my expectation is that the prices bid were at cut-throat levels.

The OneSun Capital Solar Farm at Coree, about 30 kms west of Canberra is a project of Elementus Energy.  The peak output is 7 MW from 26,190 solar panels at fixed tilt, which will produce an estimated 11,900 MWh of electricity per year.  The cost of the project is reported as around AUD 17 million.  The agreed reverse auction price is AUD 186/MWh.

A completion date in 2015 is envisaged because there is a need for local network upgrades before the project can be finalised.  For the sake of my records, let me estimate the completion date as the end of February 2015.

Let me see how my estimate for the LCOE compares with the auction price.

I’ll analyse the LCOE using my standard assumptions:
 
 
  • there is no inflation,
  • taxation implications are neglected,
  • projects are funded entirely by debt,
  • all projects have the same interest rate (8%) and payback period (25 years), which means that the required rate of capital return is 9.4%,
  • all projects have the same annual maintenance and operating costs (2% of the total project cost), and
  • government subsidies are neglected.
 
For further commentary on my LCOE methodology, see posts on Real cost of coal-fired power, LEC – the accountant’s view, Cost of solar power (10) and (especially) Yet more on LEC.  Note that I am now using annual maintenance costs of 2% rather than 3% as in posts during 2011.
 
The results for the Coree project are as follows:
 
Cost per peak Watt              AUD 2.43/Wp
LCOE                                     AUD 163/MWh
 
The components of the LCOE are:
Capital           {0.094 × AUD 17×10^6}/{11,900 MWhr} = AUD 134/MWhr
O&M              {0.020 × AUD 17×10^6}/{11,900 MWhr} = AUD 29/MWhr
 
By way of comparison, LCOE figures (in appropriate currency per MWh) for all projects I’ve investigated are given below.  The number in brackets is the reference to the blog post, all of which appear in my index of posts with the title “Cost of solar power ([number])”:
 
(2)        AUD 183 (Nyngan, Australia, PV)
(3)        EUR 503 (Olmedilla, Spain, PV, 2008)
(3)        EUR 188 (Andasol I, Spain, trough, 2009)
(4)        AUD 236 (Greenough, Australia, PV)
(5)        AUD 397 (Solar Oasis, Australia, dish, 2014?)
(6)        USD 163 (Lazio, Italy, PV)
(7)        AUD 271 (Kogan Creek, Australia, CLFR pre-heat, 2012?)
(8)        USD 228 (New Mexico, CdTe thin film PV, 2011)
(9)        EUR 200 (Ibersol, Spain, trough, 2011)
(10)      USD 231 (Ivanpah, California, tower, 2013?)
(11)      CAD 409 (Stardale, Canada, PV, 2012)
(12)      USD 290 (Blythe, California, trough, 2012?)
(13)      AUD 285 (Solar Dawn, Australia, CLFR, 2013?)
(14)      AUD 263 (Moree Solar Farm, Australia, single-axis PV, 2013?)
(15)      EUR 350 (Lieberose, Germany, thin-film PV, 2009)
(16)      EUR 300 (Gemasolar, Spain, tower, 2011)
(17)      EUR 228 (Meuro, Germany, crystalline PV, 2012)
(18)      USD 204 (Crescent Dunes, USA, tower, 2013)
(19)      AUD 316 (University of Queensland, fixed PV, 2011)
(20)      EUR 241 (Ait Baha, Morocco, 1-axis solar thermal, 2012)
(21)      EUR 227 (Shivajinagar Sakri, India, PV, 2012)
(22)      JPY 36,076 (Kagoshima, Kyushu, Japan, PV, start July 2012)
(23)      AUD 249 (NEXTDC, Port Melbourne, PV, Q2 2012)
(24)      USD 319 (Maryland Solar Farm, thin-film PV, Q4 2012)
(25)      EUR 207 (GERO Solarpark, Germany, PV, May 2012)
(26)      AUD 259 (Kamberra Winery, Australia, PV, June 2012)
(27)      EUR 105 (Calera y Chozas, PV, Q4 2012)
(28)      AUD 205 (Nyngan and Broken Hill, thin film PV, end 2014?)
(29)      AUD 342 (City of Sydney, multiple sites, PV, 2012)
(30)      AUD 281 (Uterne, PV, single-axis tracking, 2011)
(31)      JPY 31,448 (Oita, PV?, Japan, to open March 2014)
(32)      USD 342 (Shams, Abu Dhabi, trough, to open early 2013)
(34)      USD 272 (Daggett, California, designed 2010)
(35)      GBP 148 (Wymeswold, UK, PV, March 2013)
(36)      USD 139 (South Georgia, PV, June 2014)
(37)      USD 169 (Antelope Valley, CdTe Pv, end 2015)
(38)      AUD 137 (Mugga Lane, PV, mid 2014)
(39)      AUD 163 (Coree, fixed PV, Feb 2015)
 
Conclusion
 
You can compare results in the graphic below (click for a larger image), which expresses costs in USD/MWh at the exchange rates of 20 August 2013.   (Currencies deflated at 1.75% per annum, baseline date is end 2014.  Red is for solar thermal, blue for PV.  Filled-in circles denote completed projects, non filled-in circles denote announced projects.)
 
According to my methodology, the LCOE for the Coree project is not as cut-throat as the LCOE for the Mugga Lane project, the co-winner in the ACT reverse auction.  Perhaps they have managed to incorporate a bit of profit in the deal?
 
My estimated LCOE (AUD 163/MWh) is to be compared with the reverse auction price, namely AUD 186/MWh.  The comparison is closer than that for the Mugga Lane project.
 
Overall, these two projects show the continuing trend towards cheaper PV.  I see this as excellent news and I look forward to the days when solar thermal power in Australia is able to give such competitive prices.  Of course, I also look forward, fervently, to the day when we no longer need or use fossil fuels to provide power.
 
 
 

Monday, August 19, 2013

Cost of solar power (38)

Things are rather bizarre in Australia at the moment. 

A federal election campaign is under way, and both main parties are slinging mud at each other as hard and fast as they can.  My general response is to deploy the mute button on the TV and not read any political stories in the mainstream media.  It’s not as if frantic last-minute campaigning is going to change my vote.

But I do make exceptions.  I attempt to keep up to date with policies about renewable energy and climate change.  The existing government’s policies are weak, but at least heading in the right direction.  I hope they aren’t further weakened.  The opposition’s policies are poor, or actually bad, and will set the nation back in its quest to lower emissions.

However one level of government in Australia is setting a splendid example – that’s the provincial government of the Australian Capital Territory.

The ACT government yesterday announced the winners in its second round of solar developments.  These are decided by a reverse auction, and the winners are Zhenfa Solar (a 13 MW plant at Mugga Lane) and Elementus Energy (a 7 MW plant at Coree).  Today I’ll report on the Mugga Lane project, tomorrow on the Coree project.

RenewEconomy has a good story about the projects.  There were 15 bidders, so presumably the prices bid were at cut-throat levels.

The Mugga Lane solar farm will feature 53,000 solar modules with a mix of fixed and tracking systems and will generate 24,956 MWh per year.  (Yes, the output is quoted to five significant figures!)  500 kW of the 13 MW peak power will be from a tracking system.

According to RenewEconomy, the cost of the project is about AUD 30 million and the winning price in the reverse auction was AUD 178/MWh.  (The ACT government will make up the difference between the agreed tariffs and the retail price of electricity.  I presume the ACT government also retains federal government benefits associated with the Large-Scale Renewable Energy Certificates.)

Let me see how my estimate for the Levelised Cost of Electricity (LCOE) compares with the auction price.

I’ll analyse the LCOE using my standard assumptions:
 
  • there is no inflation,
  • taxation implications are neglected,
  • projects are funded entirely by debt,
  • all projects have the same interest rate (8%) and payback period (25 years), which means that the required rate of capital return is 9.4%,
  • all projects have the same annual maintenance and operating costs (2% of the total project cost), and
  • government subsidies are neglected.
 
For further commentary on my LCOE methodology, see posts on Real cost of coal-fired power, LEC – the accountant’s view, Cost of solar power (10) and (especially) Yet more on LEC.  Note that I am now using annual maintenance costs of 2% rather than 3% as in posts during 2011.
 
The results for the Mugga Lane project are as follows:
Cost per peak Watt              AUD 2.31/Wp
LCOE                                     AUD 137/MWh
 
The components of the LCOE are:
Capital           {0.094 × AUD 30×10^6}/{24,956 MWhr} = AUD 113/MWhr
O&M              {0.020 × AUD 30×10^6}/{24,956 MWhr} = AUD 24/MWhr
 
By way of comparison, LCOE figures (in appropriate currency per MWh) for all projects I’ve investigated are given below.  The number in brackets is the reference to the blog post, all of which appear in my index of posts with the title “Cost of solar power ([number])”:
 
(2)        AUD 183 (Nyngan, Australia, PV)
(3)        EUR 503 (Olmedilla, Spain, PV, 2008)
(3)        EUR 188 (Andasol I, Spain, trough, 2009)
(4)        AUD 236 (Greenough, Australia, PV)
(5)        AUD 397 (Solar Oasis, Australia, dish, 2014?)
(6)        USD 163 (Lazio, Italy, PV)
(7)        AUD 271 (Kogan Creek, Australia, CLFR pre-heat, 2012?)
(8)        USD 228 (New Mexico, CdTe thin film PV, 2011)
(9)        EUR 200 (Ibersol, Spain, trough, 2011)
(10)      USD 231 (Ivanpah, California, tower, 2013?)
(11)      CAD 409 (Stardale, Canada, PV, 2012)
(12)      USD 290 (Blythe, California, trough, 2012?)
(13)      AUD 285 (Solar Dawn, Australia, CLFR, 2013?)
(14)      AUD 263 (Moree Solar Farm, Australia, single-axis PV, 2013?)
(15)      EUR 350 (Lieberose, Germany, thin-film PV, 2009)
(16)      EUR 300 (Gemasolar, Spain, tower, 2011)
(17)      EUR 228 (Meuro, Germany, crystalline PV, 2012)
(18)      USD 204 (Crescent Dunes, USA, tower, 2013)
(19)      AUD 316 (University of Queensland, fixed PV, 2011)
(20)      EUR 241 (Ait Baha, Morocco, 1-axis solar thermal, 2012)
(21)      EUR 227 (Shivajinagar Sakri, India, PV, 2012)
(22)      JPY 36,076 (Kagoshima, Kyushu, Japan, PV, start July 2012)
(23)      AUD 249 (NEXTDC, Port Melbourne, PV, Q2 2012)
(24)      USD 319 (Maryland Solar Farm, thin-film PV, Q4 2012)
(25)      EUR 207 (GERO Solarpark, Germany, PV, May 2012)
(26)      AUD 259 (Kamberra Winery, Australia, PV, June 2012)
(27)      EUR 105 (Calera y Chozas, PV, Q4 2012)
(28)      AUD 205 (Nyngan and Broken Hill, thin film PV, end 2014?)
(29)      AUD 342 (City of Sydney, multiple sites, PV, 2012)
(30)      AUD 281 (Uterne, PV, single-axis tracking, 2011)
(31)      JPY 31,448 (Oita, PV?, Japan, to open March 2014)
(32)      USD 342 (Shams, Abu Dhabi, trough, to open early 2013)
(34)      USD 272 (Daggett, California, designed 2010)
(35)      GBP 148 (Wymeswold, UK, PV, March 2013)
(36)      USD 139 (South Georgia, PV, June 2014)
(37)      USD 169 (Antelope Valley, CdTe Pv, end 2015)
(38)      AUD 137 (Mugga Lane, PV, mid 2014)
 
Conclusion
 
You can compare results in the graphic below (click for a larger image), which expresses costs in USD/MWh at the exchange rates of 20 August 2013.   (Currencies deflated at 1.75% per annum, baseline date is end 2014.  Red is for solar thermal, blue for PV.  Filled-in circles denote completed projects, non filled-in circles denote announced projects.)
 
According to my methodology, the Mugga Lane project is at the ‘bleeding edge’ on costs.  The only two large projects with a comparable LCOE are Calera y Chozas (number 27 on the list above) and South Georgia (number 36).  The Mugga Lane result is about 30% cheaper than the large Australian project at Nyngan and Broken Hill (number 28 on the list), which is still under construction.
 
Finally, although the agreed price in the reverse auction was AUD 178/MWh, RenewEconomy reports the actual figure is “less than AUD 150/MWh when indexing is taken into account”.  With my simple LCOE methodology, I aim to give a lifetime estimate, equivalent to inclusion of indexing, so I’m happy enough with the comparisons.


 

Tuesday, July 9, 2013

Cost of solar power (37)

The Antelope Valley Solar Projects are two co-located PV installations in Kern and Los Angeles Counties, near Rosamond Ca in a desert location. 

These are a big deal!  The peak output is 579 MW and the annual output is said to be enough to supply 400,000 households.  In today’s post, I’ll make an estimate of the Levelised Cost Of Electricity (LCOE) for the projects.  But first let me give a few details. 

Construction on the projects began in April 2013 and will continue for nearly three years.  Let’s assume completion by December 2015.  SunPower (majority owned by Total of France) did the initial development work using the company’s own CdTe panels and solar trackers.  Then earlier this year the project was on-sold to Berkshire Hathaway subsidiary, MidAmerican Energy Holdings.  We can assume that Warren Buffett, a notoriously canny investor, is happy with the deal.

The site occupies 3,230 acres (13.07 km^2).   MidAmerican expects to employ 650 workers on the construction site, which will generate more than USD 500 million in regional economic impact.

What was the cost of the deal?  As usual, that’s hard to establish.  Various reports on the internet give a figure of between USD 2.0 and 2.5 billion, whereas this report gives a remarkably precise figure of USD 2.742 billion, which I find hard to believe since it gives an LCOE that’s too high.  I’m inclined to use a figure of USD 2.25 billion, the midway point of the figures most commonly cited.

And what is the annual output in MWh?  Let me estimate that in two ways.

As is often the case, the press reports aren’t specific, merely saying that the output is enough to power approximately 400,000 average California homes when fully operational.  Now the Energy Information Agency gives the average site consumption in California homes as 6,888 kWh per year.  Therefore the annual output would be 400,000 × 6,888 /1,000 = 2,755,200 MWh per year.  According to those figures, the Capacity Factor would be 2,755,200 / 579 × 365 × 24 = 0.54, an estimate that is much too high.

Let’s estimate the CF in another way.  In a technical paper [1], Matt Campbell of SunPower helpfully provides information about Capacity Factors.  For plants in Nevada, typical CF values for one-axis tracking are around 0.30.  Let’s use that for Antelope Valley.  The annual output would thus be 0.30 × 579 × 365 × 24 = 1,521,612 MWh per year.  That figure is acceptable.

We can now proceed to analyse the LCOE using my standard assumptions:
  • there is no inflation,
  • taxation implications are neglected,
  • projects are funded entirely by debt,
  • all projects have the same interest rate (8%) and payback period (25 years), which means that the required rate of capital return is 9.4%,
  • all projects have the same annual maintenance and operating costs (2% of the total project cost), and
  • government subsidies are neglected.

For further commentary on my LCOE methodology, see posts on Real cost of coal-fired power, LEC – the accountant’s view, Cost of solar power (10) and (especially) Yet more on LEC.  Note that I am now using annual maintenance costs of 2% rather than 3% as in posts during 2011.

The results for the Antelope Valley project are as follows:

Cost per peak Watt              USD 3.9/Wp
LCOE                                     USD 169/MWh

The components of the LCOE are:

Capital           {0.094 × USD 2.25×10^9}/{1.521×10^6 MWhr} = USD 139/MWhr
O&M              {0.020 × USD 2.25×10^9}/{1.521×10^6 MWhr} = USD 30/MWhr

By way of comparison, LCOE figures (in appropriate currency per MWh) for all projects I’ve investigated are given below.  The number in brackets is the reference to the blog post, all of which appear in my index of posts with the title “Cost of solar power ([number])”:

(2)        AUD 183 (Nyngan, Australia, PV)
(3)        EUR 503 (Olmedilla, Spain, PV, 2008)
(3)        EUR 188 (Andasol I, Spain, trough, 2009)
(4)        AUD 236 (Greenough, Australia, PV)
(5)        AUD 397 (Solar Oasis, Australia, dish, 2014?)
(6)        USD 163 (Lazio, Italy, PV)
(7)        AUD 271 (Kogan Creek, Australia, CLFR pre-heat, 2012?)
(8)        USD 228 (New Mexico, CdTe thin film PV, 2011)
(9)        EUR 200 (Ibersol, Spain, trough, 2011)
(10)      USD 231 (Ivanpah, California, tower, 2013?)
(11)      CAD 409 (Stardale, Canada, PV, 2012)
(12)      USD 290 (Blythe, California, trough, 2012?)
(13)      AUD 285 (Solar Dawn, Australia, CLFR, 2013?)
(14)      AUD 263 (Moree Solar Farm, Australia, single-axis PV, 2013?)
(15)      EUR 350 (Lieberose, Germany, thin-film PV, 2009)
(16)      EUR 300 (Gemasolar, Spain, tower, 2011)
(17)      EUR 228 (Meuro, Germany, crystalline PV, 2012)
(18)      USD 204 (Crescent Dunes, USA, tower, 2013)
(19)      AUD 316 (University of Queensland, fixed PV, 2011)
(20)      EUR 241 (Ait Baha, Morocco, 1-axis solar thermal, 2012)
(21)      EUR 227 (Shivajinagar Sakri, India, PV, 2012)
(22)      JPY 36,076 (Kagoshima, Kyushu, Japan, PV, start July 2012)
(23)      AUD 249 (NEXTDC, Port Melbourne, PV, Q2 2012)
(24)      USD 319 (Maryland Solar Farm, thin-film PV, Q4 2012)
(25)      EUR 207 (GERO Solarpark, Germany, PV, May 2012)
(26)      AUD 259 (Kamberra Winery, Australia, PV, June 2012)
(27)      EUR 105 (Calera y Chozas, PV, Q4 2012)
(28)      AUD 205 (Nyngan and Broken Hill, thin film PV, end 2014?)
(29)      AUD 342 (City of Sydney, multiple sites, PV, 2012)
(30)      AUD 281 (Uterne, PV, single-axis tracking, 2011)
(31)      JPY 31,448 (Oita, PV?, Japan, to open March 2014)
(32)      USD 342 (Shams, Abu Dhabi, trough, to open early 2013)
(34)      USD 272 (Daggett, California, designed 2010)
(35)      GBP 148 (Wymeswold, UK, PV, March 2013)
(36)      USD 139 (South Georgia, PV, June 2014)
(37)      USD 169 (Antelope Valley, CdTe PV, end 2015)

Conclusion

You can compare results in the graphic below (click for a larger image), which expresses costs in USD/MWh at the exchange rates of 13 June 2013.  Antelope Valley is not shown on the chart since it will not be finished until the end of 2015. (Currencies deflated at 1.75% per annum, baseline date is end 2014.  Red is for solar thermal, blue for PV.  Filled-in circles denote completed projects, non filled-in circles denote announced projects.)

My estimate for Antelope Valley has uncertainties in both price and output.  That’s normal in this business.   However, it’s reasonable to conclude that the project is in the same LCOE range as the best of the PV projects I have analysed, and definitely superior to current LCOE results for solar thermal projects.

Note also that the Antelope Valley project is not cheap at USD 3.9/Wp.  One-axis tracking adds to the costs, but also adds to the output; the ultimate LCOE figure is good.

Reference
 
[1]  Matt Campbell, “Minimizing utility-scale PV power plant levelized cost of energy using high capacity factor configurations”, available at www.pv-tech.org.