Question for any energy experts out there

[chillspike]

Can someone explain to me how the proposed solar power plant in northern Africa will supply energy to Europe? I mean, how would that actually work?

http://www.economist.com/node/13982870?story_id=13982870

Specifically, how would these "trans-Mediterranean HVDC cables" transmit power over long distances and through water without significant losses?

I ask because I'm thinking if this can work, is it possible we could transport solar generated electricity from the sunlit sides of the earth to the dark and cloudy sides, as needed?

I'm sure there's a lot more involved in the process that i'm not aware of, though, and would like to hear some experts chime in.

But, if possible, couldn't this give us a 24/7 source of solar electricity because the sun is always shining somewhere on the earth, right?

Thanks

[phantom power]

1. Transmission losses are, last I read, around 25%.

One way that losses are minimized is to transmit at very high voltages. Over long distances, they step up the voltage to hundreds of thousands of volts, then step it back down locally.

[kristopher]

13. Transmission losses are minimal over the distance from N. Africa to Europe.

Below the figure of 3% per thousand kilometers is given, and that sounds right.

The idea that we'd attempt to rely exclusively on solar and a massive global transmission network instead of also using regional and local wind, biofuels, wave/current/tidal, hydro, and geothermal is an absurd proposition. Of course, that absurd proposition is exactly the red herring that the pro-fission/antirenewable RubeGoldbergian attack squad is fixated on below.

[FBaggins]

18. Fixated?

It was the OP's question.

One would think that an attempt to shift the discussion to something else instead would be avoidance... but no, you want to spin straight answers as a red herring.

And let us not pretend that it's the pro-nuclear side posting world maps with tiny dots on it and claims that all the world's power needs could be handled this way.

[kristopher]

20. So when you conflated the two separate quesions asked into one in post #3

it was a sample of your total inability to use basic reasoning skills rather than a deliberate act?

[FBaggins]

21. The title references a single question.

It's in multiple parts, but it's clear where the OP is going. (S)he asks a question and then tells us why it's being asked.

Context is important.

[phantom power]

24. The 25% figure was some kind of U.S. average, and likely included A.C. and lower-voltage xmission.

[kristopher]

25. The 25% figure is BS.. Overall average losses are 7%.

[phantom power]

26. not so bad, then

[s-cubed]

2. Transmission losses are less with DC than AC. n/t

[FBaggins]

3. It's theoretically possible, but has significant challenges.

Not the least of which would be a foreign nation's ability to hold much of the rest of the world hostage by flipping a light switch.

The required space/cost are virtually insurmountable problems even if the politics could be overcome (and it can't). Don't be fooled by pretty world maps with tiny dots on them claiming "that's all the land we would need!". Compare one of those dots to the largest solar farms ever contructed. The largest I can think of covers 1600 acres and provides a peak of 350 MW.

You would need over a million such plants to provide for our electrical needs, and that's at peak power. How many times that number do you need in order to also power eastern europe where it's currently dark? Plus transmission loss? Plus excess capacity to deal with the possibility that it's cloudy somewhere today?

Offset that somewhat by more efficient solar facilities in the future, to be sure... but we're still talking an effort unlike anything we've ever seen... all to let some N.African dictator hold a gun to our heads on winter night.

[groundloop]

5. I'd prefer that we'd be looking at local power generation

First build houses and appliances with as much efficiency as possible to minimize demand, then install rooftop solar panels and hot water heaters.

Zero transmission line loss, no dependance on the power company, no dependance on politics.

[FBaggins]

7. All true... but that reduces the value of solar generation in general.

There are parts of the country where peak electrical demand frequently occurs when solar PV is at its best... and they make lots of sense there (especially as costs come down and efficiency increases)... but you can only count on so much penetration from solar until you start talking about something less "local".

[bananas]

4. HVDC has very low transmission losses, about 3% per 1,000 km

According to wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-voltage_direct_current
"The advantage of HVDC is the ability to transmit large amounts of power over long distances with lower capital costs and with lower losses than AC. Depending on voltage level and construction details, losses are quoted as about 3% per 1,000 km."

Superconducting transmission cables are coming out with even lower losses.

[FBaggins]

8. Can you do the math on that?

How many kilometers are there between New York and her antipode when it's midnight in NY?

20,000?

What's that "very low" transmission loss add up to at that point? And do you think China is willing to install enough solar to meet her own needs during the day AND those of the US/Canada/Mexico/etc times x for transmission loss etc?

And did you by any chance read that wiki you linked? Is the US willing to live with a 98.5% availability for electricity? No power at all for a day every couple months?

[bananas]

10. As I said, superconducting transmission cables will have even lower losses.

So I'm not going to bother doing the math on something which will be obsolete by the time it's implemented.

[FBaggins]

12. Why not get the magic faeries to carry it for you?

There are no transatlantic superconducting transmission cables.

The current best-case requires liquid nitrogen to keep the superconductor cool enough. This saves about half of your transmission loss while the other half is used up cooling the nitrogen. That's fine for a transmission to the next state... but how do you do that under the ocean for thousands of miles?

And you're still left doing the math for the other half of the loss.

It's really not an issue that you can wave away and ignore. In the OP's scenario, you still need to get power from the sunny side of the globe to night side (while simultaneously producing enough for yourself and an excess margin for contingencies.

And OSEC is still gonna own your a$$. :-)

[bananas]

42. Ultra-high voltage lines could do it today

As time goes on, the HVDC lines will be replaced with UHVDC lines.
As technology improves, eventually those will be replaced with superconducting lines.

[FBaggins]

43. You must live on a smaller planet than the rest of us.

There's this guy "bananas" lower down on the thread that claims this technology can work for distances up to 7,000 km.

A worldwide grid that's primarily solar would require much longer transmission distances.


and you're still dodging the math. How much loss to transmission would there be from an antipode?

[bananas]

6. Ignore the anti-renewable luddites - this can and will work.

Google is building an off-shore transmission cable off the East Coast for the off-shore windfarms that are coming.

[FBaggins]

9. Is that Google cable to an "off-shore" windfarm in India?

Then there's something of a difference, now isn't there?

And why does your version of "this can work" not include the "this" (solar) the OP asked about?

[Confusious]

11. He's still pushing that "super-conducting" transmission line

When I found an article about it, the builders said it was for short distances and the cost would be prohibitive for long runs. Oh, and they needed to be kept at 75 kelvin.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/the-smarter-grid/superconductors-enter-commercial-utility-service

[bananas]

14. Oh gee, you found an article and misread it - no surprise there. nt

[FBaggins]

15. You have an article for higher-temperature superconductors?

By all means... interpret it for us.

[Confusious]

32. Well you never actually gave the article

so I had to find one for myself. And please, do enlighten me on how I misread it, or else you're just full of it.

[bananas]

41. You're ignoring the timeline

As time goes on, technology improves, providing more capability for less cost.
As I posted below, China is installing Ultra-High Voltage transmission lines which have lower losses than High Voltage lines.

The improvements in cost-effectiveness are true for most but not all technologies. For example, nuclear energy has a negative learning curve, as the technology improves, it becomes more expensive. And technologies based on non-renewable resources like fossil and nuclear fuels become more expensive as the high-grade ores are used up.

[chillspike]

16. Thanks everyone.

I just wanted to confirm if it was feasible. So it's basically not going to be the one shot solution unless different technology comes along.

What about fiber optic cables for transmitting sunlight?

[kristopher]

17. You're conflating two questions

1) N. Africa & Europe as a connected grid is completely workable and doable.

2) Relying exclusively on solar and transmitting it around the world to the dark side is idiotic.

[Nihil]

33. I agree 100% with your post, the content and the wording.

And no, there are no snarky comments in the body of my reply
that would contradict my subject line.

:hi:

[FBaggins]

34. So you admit your error?

Or is it that you don't know what "conflate" means.

[bananas]

19. The reality is, new technologies aren't needed for a transition to renewables

Solar, wind, other renewables, and storage will be able to provide all energy without a global superconducting grid.
But as time goes on, newer technologies will be available.

[FBaggins]

22. Which is it? "Are" available or "will be" available?

And at what cost?

[bananas]

23. The technologies *are* available, but they haven't been built out yet,

and as they get built out, *newer* technologies will be available.
Is the concept really that hard to grasp?

[FBaggins]

27. The technology to go to the moon is "available"...

that doesn't mean we're going back any time soon - or cheaply.

There's very little grid-scale storage available (not even many demonstrations) and no indication that significant amounts will be available for many years.

Right up there on the list of top challenges to storage in the DOE study is "insufficient technical progress".

[kristopher]

28. Is there a reason you want to constantly disrupt discussions about renewable energy?

You are not providing meaningful, critical discussion; you are quite clearly intent on disruption.

This is a progressive discussion board and there is no question that support for renewable energy policy is a solid plank in the progressive agenda.

[FBaggins]

29. I know you wish you could just make it up as you go along and have everyone trust you.

You'll have to do a better job with your facts if you hope for that to happen.

Sorry if the fact that not every bows down to your personal opinion and accepts it as gospel makes you think they're "disrupting"...

...but it isn't all about you.

I happen to support renewable energy just fine. I simply insist on actual facts, not pie in the sky.

You have this constant irrationality that tells you that facts are a function of "values" (sic).

[kristopher]

30. You are intent on disrupting any substantive discussion on renewables.

[FBaggins]

31. You mistake your spamblings as "substantive" n/t

[bananas]

35. If you want to understand the future of energy, read this

This is a rough outline of the next several decades:
"The full global warming solution: How the world can stabilize at 350 to 450 ppm"
http://climateprogress.org/2011/01/10/the-full-global-warming-solution-how-the-world-can-stabilize-at-350-to-450-ppm/

[bananas]

36. I just remembered - Buckminster Fuller worked this out with 1960s technology

I'll try to post some links later.

[bananas]

37. Ultra-high voltage transmission lines can go 7000 kilometers (UHV-DC)

http://www.geni.org/globalenergy/issues/overview/grid.shtml

Global Issues >> Overview >> Global Energy Grid - The Details



<snip>

Today, research shows the efficient distance of ultra-high voltage (UHV) transmission to be 7000 kilometers for direct current, and 4000 kilometers for alternating current. This would allow for power interchange between North and South hemispheres, as well as East and West. Because of electricity's link to a quality standard of living, the interconnection of regional power grids became the highest priority objective of the World Game.

<snip>

[bananas]

38. Ultra high voltage (UHV) electricity transmission in China and other countries

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra_high_voltage_electricity_transmission_in_China

Ultra high voltage (UHV) electricity transmission in China is being introduced and four UHV circuits are completed or under construction.

Contents

* 1 Background
* 2 Transmission and distribution
* 3 UHV transmission worldwide
* 4 Reasons for UHV transmission in China
* 5 UHV circuits completed or under construction
* 6 Controversy over UHV
* 7 References

Background

Since 2004, electricity consumption in China has been growing at an unprecedented rate due to the rapid growth of industrial sectors. Serious supply shortage during 2005 had impacted the operation of many Chinese companies. Since then, China has very aggressively invested in electricity supply in order to fulfill the demand from industries and hence secure economic growth. Installed generation capacity has run from 443GW at end of 2004 to 793GW at the end of 2008.<1> The increment in these four years is equivalent to approximately one-third of the total capacity of the USA, or 1.4 times the total capacity of Japan.<2> During the same period of time, power consumption has also risen from 2,197TWh to 3,426TWh.<1>

<snip>

UHV transmission worldwide

UHV transmission is not a new idea, and a number of UHVAC circuits have already been constructed in different parts of the world. For example, 2,362 km of 1,150 kV circuits were built in the Former USSR, and 427 km of 1,000 kV AC circuits have been developed in Japan. Experimental lines of various scales are also found many countries.<5> However, most of these lines are currently operating at lower voltage due to insufficient power demand or other reasons.<6><7> There are fewer examples of UHVDC. Although there are plenty of +/-500 kV (or below) circuits around the world, the only operative circuit above this threshold is the Itaipu +/-600 kV project in Brazil. In Russia construction work on a 2400 km long bipolar +/-750 kV DC line, the HVDC Ekibastuz–Centre started in 1978, but it was never finished. In USA at the beginning of the 1970s a 1333 kV powerline was planned from Celilo Converter Station to Hoover Dam. For this a short experimental powerline near Celilo Converter Station was built, but the line to Hoover Dam was never built.

<snip>

[bananas]

39. Fuller's grid was feasible with 1960's technology (1500 mile transmission lines)

http://www.animatedsoftware.com/geni/rh2000ge.htm

The potential impact and importance of R. Buckminster Fuller's vision of a Global Energy Grid
by Russell D. Hoffman
Spring, 2000

<snip>

(2) Historic perspective:

When Bucky originally conceived his idea, energy could be transmitted only about 350 miles, roughly the distance from Boston to Washington, D. C.. At further distances the financial losses caused by the electrical resistance in the wires became too substantial.

The electrical energy transmission industry traditionally considers 15% or 20% loss to be the limit of cost-effective transmission. That was about 350 miles when Bucky thought of the idea for the grid -- making it totally unfeasible at the time.

(3) Technological feasibility reached in the 1960's:

Then, around 1960, Bucky saw that energy could be transmitted cost-effectively (according to industry standards) about 1500 miles, making the idea technologically workable. From then on, the only things holding back Bucky's idea for a Global Energy Grid have been complacency (unwillingness to change from the way we currently do things) and ignorance about the idea (most people still have never heard of it).

When the 1500 mile transmission capability was reached, Bucky began to design the grid itself, that would actually carry the loads, looking at where the population centers are, and where the renewable energy resources are, and what would be needed to connect the two. He also looked into energy-producing equipment that right now produces wasted energy during part of each day, or is shut down, due to the daily cyclic fluctuations of energy needs in a city or geographic area. He wanted to see where that lost energy could be delivered -- where to make the connections so the lost energy could be given to a far away city which was at that time using more energy than their average daily load, during business hours, for instance. For there are not many good ways to store energy. Use it before you lose it. (Pumping water to a high height, then letting it drop through a turbine generator, is still one of the most common energy-storage methods used by humans, but even with very good pumps to raise the water and turbines to turn it back into electricity, it's not very efficient.)

<snip>

[bananas]

40. A very short video describing Fuller's global energy grid (only 44 seconds long)

Posted in the Video forum: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x581563

The interconnection of the world's generators to form a planetary energy internet to provide a permanent supply of abundant clean energy to end hunger, poverty, pollution and war.

[kristopher]

44. How Europe can go 100 % renewable and phase out dirty energy

Greenpeace: Battle of the Grids
Publication - January 18, 2011

How Europe can go 100 % renewable and phase out dirty energy

...Today, Europe’s electricity grid is characterised by big, polluting power stations pumping out constant energy, regardless of consumer need, along a wasteful, aging A/C (alternating current) network. The patchwork of national grids stitched together over the years is an uncomfortable, uneconomical fit.

Climate policy and consumer demand are hurtling us towards a smarter, more efficient Europe-wide grid that is already opening up vast new technological, business and consumer opportunities. Such a grid could guarantee supply despite extreme weather conditions, delivering green energy around Europe via efficient, largely below ground DC (direct current) cables. However, the report’s title, Battle of the Grids, hints at the fact that we are at a political crossroads.

Despite the remarkable growth in renewables, last year they generated more investment than any other sector, we are fast reaching a showdown between green and dirty energy. Thousands of wind turbines delivering near free energy were turned off in 2010 to allow polluting and heavily subsidised nuclear and coal plants to carry on business as usual. It is estimated Spain had to ditch around 200GWh of energy last year. The buzz on the lips of industry specialists, lobbyists and in boardrooms is about system clash and
the costs of building and running what is increasingly becoming a dual system. This groundbreaking report demonstrates the problem on a European scale. It also proves that Europe is capable of moving smoothly to a system that delivers nearly 100 percent renewable power around the clock

Taken with Greenpeace’s 2010 Energy evolution report, Battle of the Grids builds on Greenpeace’s earlier Renewables 24/7 study. It is a ‘how to’ manual for the kind of system we need to deliver 68 percent renewable energy by 2030 and nearly 100 percent by 2050....

http://www.greenpeace.org/eu-unit/en/Publications/2011/battle-of-the-grids/

PDF: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/Global/international/publications/climate/2011/battle%20of%20the%20grids.pdf






Renewables 24/7
Publication - February 4, 2010
Smart grid or super grid, decentralised or centralised renewable power plants? The discussion about the future of our power supply is running hot, and hi- tech visions are everywhere.

Executive summary: The solar and wind markets have continued to grow despite the economic crisis. So as more and more renewable power generation comes online a question arises. How do we transport and integrate renewable energy sources into existing power grids? Will the lights go out if the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining? Do we still need coal or nuclear power to provide base-load and back-up for wind and solar power?

Climate friendly infrastructure is needed in all countries. The time to build up our ‘climate friendly infrastructure’ – comprising networked smart grids and district heating pipelines – is now! The window of opportunity is available for industrialised countries as well as developing countries. While the industrialised nations in North America, Europe and Australia have to reinforce their 40- and 50-year old grids, developing countries – especially China and India – are in the process of building theirs for the first time.

http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/publications/reports/renewables-24-7/