Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Smack)
    Not at the moment because the power loss along the transmission cables would be too great.

    Maybe when superconductors exist and can be used in cables.
    HVDC cables have pretty low transmission losses for long distances (like >700km, which is what we'd need)
    It's something like 4% per 1000km loss. It's not that bad, considering you might get a 50% increase in insolation by relocating panels from britain to central spain (for example).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tuerin)
    All the more reason for us to get our hands on the land ourselves so that when non-renewable energy runs out we can charge extortionate amounts. It being expensive could become very profitable for us.
    Haha that's not how economics work, people would just be happy to pay 8p/kWh for wind energy than the 10p/kwh for solar from the sahara energy.

    No, renewable energy,actually energy production works best when the energy produced is used at source; there is less loss through transmissions and conversions etc.

    We should really be gearing towards smaller community based micro-grids. Which produce enough energy for itself. Usually through wind turbines/ pv panels/ mCHP and a storage mechanism usually a massive battery.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moleman1996)
    Problem with Solar is witht he current technology youve gotta use the power pretty much as soon as its generated or lose it, its difficult to store. Although i did here they've done somethign at one plant involving heating salt to store the energy generated...
    The solution we were naively given at GCSE was that hydrogen fuel cells were unhelpful because you needed energy to produce the hydrogen and oxygen in the first place, but that if you used such 'instant' desert energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen you could easily (explosions aside) transport that back and use it in hydrogen powered cars, effectively storing the energy.

    I have no idea if that actually works.
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tuerin)
    Can you explain what you mean by 'European power transfer mechanism'?
    The high voltage transmission lines to actually export the electricity from Africa to us.

    Some interesting links...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20357167
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...pe-solar-power
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rugby7)
    Haha that's not how economics work, people would just be happy to pay 8p/kWh for wind energy than the 10p/kwh for solar from the sahara energy.

    No, renewable energy,actually energy production works best when the energy produced is used at source; there is less loss through transmissions and conversions etc.

    We should really be gearing towards smaller community based micro-grids. Which produce enough energy for itself. Usually through wind turbines/ pv panels/ mCHP and a storage mechanism usually a massive battery.
    I've long believed that energy should be devolved to county/regional authorities.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Manitude)
    HVDC cables have pretty low transmission losses for long distances (like >700km, which is what we'd need)
    It's something like 4% per 1000km loss. It's not that bad, considering you might get a 50% increase in insolation by relocating panels from britain to central spain (for example).
    What happens when Spain wants to use their solar resources??

    We need to work on using the UKs resources most effectively rather than far-fetched ideas about using foreign countries.

    Also consider reducing the demand for energy, insulating our homes etc, it's not really the energy supply that's the problem it's our attitude towards energy.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rugby7)
    Haha that's not how economics work, people would just be happy to pay 8p/kWh for wind energy than the 10p/kwh for solar from the sahara energy.
    We should really be gearing towards smaller community based micro-grids. Which produce enough energy for itself. Usually through wind turbines/ pv panels/ mCHP and a storage mechanism usually a massive battery.
    And that's not how politics works. You're seriously suggesting that when non-renewable energy runs out countries will be entirely reliant on wind energy? In the UK currently wind power provides 5.3% of our power, and we're the 6th biggest user of wind power in the world. Already there is huge popular opposition to wind turbines; there's simply no prospect of politicians having the popular support to have us entirely reliant on wind. Politicians would be happy to pay the extra 2p/kWh in solar energy for the political savings they'd make against wind and most people would probably prefer the higher costs to the absolute universal eyesore wind power would be if we were entirely reliant.

    No, renewable energy,actually energy production works best when the energy produced is used at source; there is less loss through transmissions and conversions etc.
    Yes, but the vastly greater amounts produced from desert panel fields would surely outweigh the comparative inefficiency of transmitting over long distances.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    The high voltage transmission lines to actually export the electricity from Africa to us.

    Some interesting links...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20357167
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...pe-solar-power
    What exactly were you trying to say when you said building solar panel fields on desert floor 'requires an overhaul of the European power transfer mechanism'?

    The BBC article seems to focus on economic disagreements rather than problems in transmitting the energy. The second focuses on political problems in the region. What exactly is your reason for doubting the possibility of transmitting electricity from these desert fields to us? Desertec and investors seem to think it can be done.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by rugby7)
    What happens when Spain wants to use their solar resources??

    We need to work on using the UKs resources most effectively rather than far-fetched ideas about using foreign countries.

    Also consider reducing the demand for energy, insulating our homes etc, it's not really the energy supply that's the problem it's our attitude towards energy.
    Spain was just a hypothetical example of a country which has a lot of bright sunlight most of the year.

    However, I DO think we should look to other countries which have a surplus of natural energy AND we should be looking to use our own resources. To put reliance on both is extremely unwise, for the wind doesn't always blow, the sun doesn't always shine, long distance cables can break and welsh/yorkshire coal won't last forever.
    And yes, making things more efficient is another strategy that needs to be employed. Again, that alone is not sufficient. Gotta make an effort everywhere to create a sustainable energy future!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tuerin)
    And that's not how politics works. You're seriously suggesting that when non-renewable energy runs out countries will be entirely reliant on wind energy? In the UK currently wind power provides 5.3% of our power, and we're the 6th biggest user of wind power in the world. Already there is huge popular opposition to wind turbines; there's simply no prospect of politicians having the popular support to have us entirely reliant on wind. Politicians would be happy to pay the extra 2p/kWh in solar energy for the political savings they'd make against wind and most people would probably prefer the higher costs to the absolute universal eyesore wind power would be if we were entirely reliant.



    Yes, but the vastly greater amounts produced from desert panel fields would surely outweigh the comparative inefficiency of transmitting over long distances.
    That's not what I'm suggesting at all, it's not possible to have an energy system based on a single renewable, and it isn't really possible to get energy from the Sahara to the UK, the costs i gave were an example and it is likely they would be far greater....
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tuerin)
    What exactly were you trying to say when you said building solar panel fields on desert floor 'requires an overhaul of the European power transfer mechanism'?

    The BBC article seems to focus on economic disagreements rather than problems in transmitting the energy. The second focuses on political problems in the region. What exactly is your reason for doubting the possibility of transmitting electricity from these desert fields to us? Desertec and investors seem to think it can be done.
    Oh i mean that that when we build the new cables to transfer power from Africa, they can't simply join the poorer European grid and so you'd have to put the more modern cabling all across Europe to distribute the electricity which is pretty costly as you can imagine.

    Another part is to develop a grid of high-voltage transmission lines that can carry the power from Morocco, Jordan, Tunisia, Egypt and Algeria to power-hungry markets in Europe.
    This i understand from a different article (afraid i didn't save the link) is the expensive part.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Manitude)
    Spain was just a hypothetical example of a country which has a lot of bright sunlight most of the year.

    However, I DO think we should look to other countries which have a surplus of natural energy AND we should be looking to use our own resources. To put reliance on both is extremely unwise, for the wind doesn't always blow, the sun doesn't always shine, long distance cables can break and welsh/yorkshire coal won't last forever.
    And yes, making things more efficient is another strategy that needs to be employed. Again, that alone is not sufficient. Gotta make an effort everywhere to create a sustainable energy future!
    I'm not sure of the sources but the UK has enough Wind energy to power itself, through in predictable renewables such as solar (you know roughly how much energy you are going to get), tidal (you know exactly how much), wave power, biomass, geothermal energy. There is enough to secure our future.

    If the government would stop subsidizing the Oil and Gas industry and support renewables instead we would be much better off.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by rugby7)
    I'm not sure of the sources but the UK has enough Wind energy to power itself, through in predictable renewables such as solar (you know roughly how much energy you are going to get), tidal (you know exactly how much), wave power, biomass, geothermal energy. There is enough to secure our future.

    If the government would stop subsidizing the Oil and Gas industry and support renewables instead we would be much better off.
    One of the main problems with things like wind and solar is the unpredictable nature, even if you can average out over a year there'll be huge variations from day to day.
    The national grid has to be balanced so output is almost identical to demand, that's pretty hard to achieve if you don't know where your power is coming from. It makes things like nuclear, GCCT and coal very attractive as you can turn them off and on as you please. You could go and build so many wind farms and solar panels etc that you can guarantee there's always enough power, but the cost would be so much higher than anything else I don't think it'd be worth it.
    One also needs to remember that it takes a LOT of energy to make the facilities for renewable energy. Wind turbines are typically made from steel (I think). For every tonne of steel you make, you need 8 tonnes of coal. Let's not forget that the coal is being shipped from south america/china/australia to a steel works elsewhere, then the steel shipped to somewhere that makes it into the turbines.

    And then on top of that you've got to find neodymium for the generator magnets, and the global supplies are running low.

    Oh, and your turbines don't last forever. Moving parts will wear out, steel will rust, magnets lose their magnetism. You'll have to make them all over again after a few decades.

    I agree totally that oil and gas aren't the future, but I don't think it's possible for the UK to be permanently and completely self sufficient on renewables. We're going to have to import from elsewhere. Personally I like the idea of the planned HDVC between Iceland and Britain. We can use their extremely plentiful supplies of geothermal. Although I gather a lot of Icelanders are very much against industrialising their country and destroying the natural beauty, which is fair enough.
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    There we go...

    http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/opin...nergy-strategy
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...nergy-uk-power

    That's all our heating and a lot of our electricity.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nebelbon)
    This petition is about trying to stop any wind farms, or individual wind turbines from being created using government money. Wind turbines are not an efficient source of green energy, they are ugly, loud, widely opposed by the public and have been known to explode. They also will not become Carbon Neutral until the year 2020. There are many more viable green and other sensible energy producing options. Therefore the money gained from this would be used to invest in other energy means, preferably tidal power, and investment into nuclear facilities.
    Have some pos rep because people are dicks.

    But no to the petition!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Government money? And also many turbines start operating at a profit after 6 years, not the 10 years you claimed.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'd be in favor of scrapping plans for future wind turbines IF the money saved was spent on investment for building new nuclear power stations. Not tidal.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    ITER is the correct vision for solution, and the correct direction of being for future.

    ITER


    this is correct way
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Wind turbines are ****. They exist essentially as a flow of money to land owners from government under the pretence of supporting green energy. Wind turbines are not green, they are a waste of money.

    I 100% support this petition, both from an engineering view point and an ideological one.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MacDaddi)
    A tidal barrage in the Severn estuary could cost up to £34 Billion. Nice and cheap.
    No thanks!
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.