[Server-sky] [ExI] Power sats again

[Michael Turner]

>
> Hydro power is cheap, but it is "maxxed out".  that is, they require
> enormous areas of real estate, ...

It depends. If it's a steep gorge, the dam head will be high in
proportion to the volume of water, and the amount of real estate will
be relatively small.

> ... and there is simply nowhere left in the
> world to put them.

No? I thought Africa suffered from /under/-exploitation of its
hydroelectric potential.

http://www.scidev.net/global/policy/news/hydropower-could-supply-africa-s-entire-power-needs-.html
http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/bulletin/worlds-largest-hydroelectric-plant-could-finally-rise-in-africa/21449
http://www.hunton.com/files/Publication/4fd007a8-fb12-4100-9acd-be885997514c/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/f2a87d4e-6449-4154-8c8e-c0024eb2e5d2/Financing_hydropower_in_Africa_Ketchum.pdf

According to this source

  http://www.uniseo.org/hydropower.html

the world is using only about half of its "economically feasible"
hydroelectric potential. What becomes "economically feasible" could
grow significantly if high GHG emission prices start making
hydroelectric in the "technically feasible" (but not now economical)
sites more competitive.

> ... There is no way that hydro can scale up to supply
> the entire world's needs.

That's no argument for not using more of it where appropriate. There's
no way that ANY terrestrial renewable can economically scale up to the
entire world's needs. Would you argue, by the same token, against
having PV arrays in the Sahara beaming power to microwave relays in
orbit? Against the idea of wind-power sites far from civilization
doing the same?

> ... Hydro also suffers from the same problem
> problem as most other terrestrial renewables, that of geography and
> transmission costs.

But it was precisely to defeat the transmission costs that I suggested
beaming hydroelectric power up to GEO -- a very efficient transmission
from what I understand. Also precisely to defeat geography.

It's like you didn't even read what I proposed.

> Most of the sites which are good for renewable
> energy power generation are very remote from the industrial consumers,
> and the capital cost of building new transmission liens can be more than
> the coast of building the generating plant.

See how I counter these objections, above. The idea is actually to
avoid transmission lines and to build capacity in places where it's
relatively cheap to do so.

> Space Based Solar power, by comparison, requires relatively little land
> area and can scale up without limit, to easily supply (and exceed) the
> world's needs.

Agreed except for the "easily" part. If it were easy, it would have
been done by now.

> Also, the recetennas can be placed fairly close to
> industrial demand centers, reducing transmission costs.

Fine. Dams in Africa and elsewhere (SE Asia gets a lot of rain, and
has a lot of gorges) beam power up to a rectenna in orbit, which beams
it down to industrial demand centers. This could save building out a
huge PV array in orbit, at least at the start, which is where people
get nervous about their capital investment. By reducing the capital
costs and technical risk of orbital power transmission equipment, SSP
might be further enabled.

So just what, exactly, is the problem here?

Charles, it's really like you didn't even read what I proposed.

Regards,
Michael Turner

Project Persephone
K-1 bldg 3F
7-2-6 Nishishinjuku
Shinjuku-ku Tokyo 160-0023
Tel: +81 (3) 6890-1140
Fax: +81 (3) 6890-1158
Mobile: +81 (90) 5203-8682
turner at projectpersephone.org
http://www.projectpersephone.org/

"Love does not consist in gazing at each other, but in looking outward
together in the same direction." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry


On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:54 AM, Charles Radley <cfrjlr at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hydro power is cheap, but it is "maxxed out".  that is, they require
> enormous areas of real estate, and there is simply nowhere left in the
> world to put them.  There is no way that hydro can scale up to supply
> the entire world's needs.   Hydro also suffers from the same problem
> problem as most other terrestrial renewables, that of geography and
> transmission costs.  Most of the sites which are good for renewable
> energy power generation are very remote from the industrial consumers,
> and the capital cost of building new transmission liens can be more than
> the coast of building the generating plant.Hydro also
>
> Space Based Solar power, by comparison, requires relatively little land
> area and can scale up without limit, to easily supply (and exceed) the
> world's needs.   Also, the recetennas can be placed fairly close to
> industrial demand centers, reducing transmission costs.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Server-sky mailing list
> Server-sky at lists.server-sky.com
> http://lists.server-sky.com/mailman/listinfo/server-sky