The USA Has deserts of its own. Europe needs N Africa if it wants deserts to set up solar power stations in. Andalusia and Sicily aren't bad too.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Lockneed breakthough in fusion reactors.
- Thread starter BoogieWoogieWookie
- Start date
The USA Has deserts of its own. Europe needs N Africa if it wants deserts to set up solar power stations in. Andalusia and Sicily aren't bad too.
If we get useful solar power - 20% efficiency, easily storable product - land area is the least concern.
http://landartgenerator.org/blagi/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/AreaRequired1000.jpg
Both issues are difficult, because solar cells aren't even 20% efficient and because electricity can't be stored as such. There are workarounds, but they degrade efficiency further, so we're probably closer to 5% than 20% with the current technology, if that.
McHrozni
On-grid storage projects are a big thing at the moment in Europe. I don't know how this will turn out. Giant batteries at the sites of old decommissioned power stations, where the distribution system is still in place, and so on. More pumped storage. This would permit the more profitable use of intermittent sources. Here in Scotland we have so much wind, tide and wave power potential, that effective storage would be a huge boon.If we get useful solar power - 20% efficiency, easily storable product - land area is the least concern.
http://landartgenerator.org/blagi/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/AreaRequired1000.jpg
Both issues are difficult, because solar cells aren't even 20% efficient and because electricity can't be stored as such. There are workarounds, but they degrade efficiency further, so we're probably closer to 5% than 20% with the current technology, if that.
McHrozni
On-grid storage projects are a big thing at the moment in Europe. I don't know how this will turn out. Giant batteries at the sites of old decommissioned power stations, where the distribution system is still in place, and so on. More pumped storage. This would permit the more profitable use of intermittent sources. Here in Scotland we have so much wind, tide and wave power potential, that effective storage would be a huge boon.
Electricity is only a portion of our energy consumption. A substantial portion certainly, but transport can't be easily shifted to electricity, and it accounts for some 30% of all energy use. Industry takes another 20% or so, some but not all of which could be electricity without major changes. Heating and such is another issue. Electricity is either inefficient (electric heaters) or expensive and can't cover the entire temperature range you expect in Europe (inverter AC), let alone Canada.
There are workarounds, but they require either massive and hence economically risky changes in infrastructure (electric car, freight remains an issue) or significantly degrade efficiency (synthetic fuel from carbon dioxide and water).
Furthermore some of these storage methods are well suited for Scotland, but ill suited for, say, Sicily. Pumped storage is a prime example - it would be difficult to use it in Netherlands and Denmark as well, plus a range of other countries. I would warn against using Scotland as an example, since it is a clear outlier. It has a lot of available intermittent sources, and geography and climate suitable for many options unavailable elsewhere in Europe, let alone world.
McHrozni
Last edited:
Nevertheless I think there will be continued progress here. There is a big expansion of electric public transport, and CHP domestic heating is not merely feasible, but already operational on a small scale. These improvements are well within the scope of current technology, even without an advance like fusion power.There are workarounds, but they require either massive and hence economically risky changes in infrastructure (electric car, freight remains an issue) or significantly degrade efficiency (synthetic fuel from carbon dioxide and water).
I was merely using as an example the place I happen to be located in. Sicily, however, is a possible route for a DC cable to carry solar generated power from Africa to Europe, and it has huge geothermal potential, with an active volcano and many fumaroles. Scotland too might be in future the European grid landfall of a cable from Iceland carrying hydro and geothermal generated electricity.Furthermore some of these storage methods are well suited for Scotland, but ill suited for, say, Sicily.
The will and the ability to do these things is here. Has the capitalist system lost the readiness to take risks in the introduction of new infrastructure?
Nevertheless I think there will be continued progress here. There is a big expansion of electric public transport, and CHP domestic heating is not merely feasible, but already operational on a small scale. These improvements are well within the scope of current technology, even without an advance like fusion power.
Baby steps. Not insignificant, but not sufficient either.
I was merely using as an example the place I happen to be located in. Sicily, however, is a possible route for a DC cable to carry solar generated power from Africa to Europe, and it has huge geothermal potential, with an active volcano and many fumaroles. Scotland too might be in future the European grid landfall of a cable from Iceland carrying hydro and geothermal generated electricity.
Long distance power cables are always a problem, especially under the sea. You need huge voltages, and comparably significant insulation as well. Losses are fairly significant as well, up to 40% in existing grids, don't forget that - and the longer the distance, the greater the loss. Mediterranean is quite deep, making the cable even more difficult. Such a cable is also a very juicy terrorist target, much more so than internet cables.
All things considered, I'd say - yeah, it's doable. Is it cost-efficient compared to synthesizing artificial fuel and transporting and storing that? It's hard to say, especially since producing synthetic fuel (from CO2 and water) requires practically no changes in infrastructure, and is environmentally friendly as a Ficus. Even with power generation as you describe, much of Europe (let alone world) is still problematic for energy storage.
The will and the ability to do these things is here. Has the capitalist system lost the readiness to take risks in the introduction of new infrastructure?
No, but one of the downsides of capitalism (and democracy) is inherent reluctance to take major risks with little guarantee of success. That's a good thing most of the time, but not in all cases.
McHrozni.
That's being done in Iceland too, and they're thinking about using volcanic sources of CO2. http://www.technologyreview.com/new...o2-into-liquid-fuel-with-help-from-a-volcano/It's hard to say, especially since producing synthetic fuel (from CO2 and water) requires practically no changes in infrastructure, and is environmentally friendly as a Ficus.
It's something I idly considered years ago: in Iceland with a power source and a volcano (of course, the volcano might be the power source too) you could produce liquid fuel that cars can use. Now, I think there's a big future for that.