I think you are missing the point.
An "eyesore" you can only see from an aircraft or satellite is not really an eyesore in most peoples book. There are also several large sections of land in the area this will be going that are already nearly as clear as a pasture. Odds are that this farm will be built on one of them.
There's actually one over by DAK as well.Good catch. I think though that this is a power substation where the power comes from underground utilities and goes into EPCOT The larger building may be a central air chiller plant for park wide air conditioning. Not sure, but the four large fans has me thinking that. The only other actual power plant on property is directly north of MK. Not counting the small methane powered power plant at the waste treatment facility.
Here's a zoom of the location you are speaking of. on the right is the power substation and on the left is chiller plant.
Unless of course I am wrong. Then in that case, the merry-go-round is on the left and the monkey bars are on the right. LOL
View attachment 94560
Found it.... It is about half way down on this thread
I agree with you, though I still think they could have at least tried something either in the new expanded lot at the DAK or who knows what may come with the destruction of the speedway. I think the power per square inch is a legitimate concern, building in a lot vs building out of bounds as planned, but maintenance is negligible. Our airport owns its own system covering our garage
I just posted it in that thread as well haha
I think it's just a nuance of wording.
Short answer is yes, but it's not economical at this time in most states. With solar panels there is the concept of net metering. In a simplified example I put solar panels on my roof that generate 100 kilowatts of power an hour during the day when it's sunny. So for arguments sake lets say 10 hours a day, so 1,000 kilowatts produced each day. During the day I may only use 50 killowatts an hour. If I had a battery I could store the other 50 kilowatts each hour or 500 KWs total and then use them at night. With net metering the local utility is allowing me to use the grid as a virtual backup battery. The utility only bills me for the net kilowatts I use from the grid. So in my example during the day I am generating 100 KWs and using 50 KWs and dumping the other 50 KWs onto the grid. At the end of the day I have dumped 500 KWs back on the grid. Then all night I pull KWs off of the grid to use. Lets say I take 550 KWs from the grid that night. At the end of the 24 hour period I am only charged for the net kilowatts I've taken from the grid or 50 KWs (550 KWs taken at night less the 500 KWs I deposited on the grid during the day).
It depends on where they install the panels. Over a parking lot can be cheaper than on unused land if the land needs to be significantly altered to build it. If the structure was over the lot it would still likely be owned and operated by a 3rd party like Duke. They would still be responsible for maintenance. It also would provide premium covered parking in the hot FL sun. I smell an upcharge opportunity for Disney parking. They could also use it as both a PR spin and as a source of advertising revenue. You either sell advertising directly or you work into the power purchase agreement a reduced cost and allow the energy company that owns the panels to advertise on them. That's how this deal works in Philly at the Linc:
I'm intimately familiar with 2 of those 4 projects. They are huge and they are utility scale solar. Built to sell power to the major utilities in Southern CA so they can meet the renewable energy standard in CA. Not exacty the same thing as what we are talking about here. They would be 3 or 4 times the power needed to power all of WDW and would take up thousands of acres to build. While 5 MWs isn't a significant portion of the total electricty used by WDW it's not nothing. This is directly from the RCID website:5 Megawatts is peanuts. And that's exactly what this is, a trendy "We're Green!" photo op placed conveniently alongside the main entry road of the property. Bored housewives who read all the right blogs will be able to smugly say to the snowflakes in the backseat as they arrive at WDW "Look at the solar farm kids! Our vacation is helping to save the planet!". You can bet the Disney Parks Blog will be all over this too. Puke.
As a point of reference, the Ivanpah Solar Farm that opened a few months ago in Southern California is 550 Megawatts.
MidAmerican Solar Farm - Topaz, California = 580 Megawatts, energy for the entire city of San Luis Obispo (276,000 people)
Ivanpah Solar Farm - Desert Center, California = 550 Megawatts, energy for 160,000 homes distributed throughout SoCal
Solar Star Farm - Kern, California = 579 Megawatts, energy for 170,000 homes distributed throughout the West
NRG Solar Farm - Agua Caliente, Arizona = 470 Megawatts, energy for 200,000 homes at peak loads
This is what a massive 500+ Megawatt solar farm looks like, out in the California desert where no one ever sees it but where it works the best. Notice there's no tourist road next to it.
A 5 (Five!) Megawatt farm is very small potatoes by current standards and will mostly just create a feel-good and corporate-approved moment for those driving past it on their way to Disney World.
It's possible right now. Just not a very good deal economically. You could combine solar, batteries and a whole house backup generator (a commercial grade one that runs on nat gas not the one that runs on gasoline that you keep in your garage) and unplug from the grid completely. The net cost of all of that will be higher right now than staying on the grid.
You could get one of those tiny houses. They actually have a reality show now.
