Quote:
Originally Posted by xelasnave
The real problem is storage of energy.
Batteries are ok but it is difficult to see them solving the problem.
In my view water storage is the answer even if that means we have to change rivers and make dams where none would be better.
Everything is a trade off but I could handle more Snowy Mountain systems.
It was not electricity that killed the Dowry River it was the add on irrigation system.
|
Hi Alex,
The storage of energy is not necessarily the problem.
Some of the largest players in the electrical engineering industry,
corporations such as Siemens in Germany and ABB in Switzerland, have
been promoting the wider adoption of HVDC (High Voltage Direct Current)
networks including into global supergrids.
For example, see IEEE Spectrum, 28 July 2015. "Let's Build a Global
Power Grid", by Clark W, Gellings -
http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/the-...bal-power-grid
As Gellings says, "With a little DC wizardry and a lot of cash, we could
swap power across continents".
Quote:
Clark W. Gellings, IEEE Spectrum
.. the technology now exists to transmit massive amounts of electricity over long distances without significant losses, thereby allowing operators to balance consumption and generation across an entire continent—or, potentially, the globe. If an outage occurs in one country, the sudden change in line voltage and frequency could trigger a generator thousands of kilometers away to compensate for the shortfall. Similarly, if the wind in a normally wind-dependent area dies, electricity from its neighbors could quickly fill in. Or if one region is experiencing heavy rainfall, hydroelectric dams there could capture the energy, to send elsewhere as needed. A supergrid would ensure that all or nearly all the electricity that’s generated would get consumed, thus avoiding such wasteful practices as paying wind-farm operators to curtail production or dumping energy that’s not immediately needed. (To be sure, storing excess energy would also help avoid such problems, but large-scale economical energy storage is still not widely available.)
In general, a global supergrid would allow power to be generated far from population centers. For instance, some of the world’s best sunlight can be found in the sparsely populated region south of Darwin, Australia, where it’s estimated that all of that country’s energy needs could be supplied from a solar farm the size of a cattle station. With an undersea link to Southeast Asia, that electricity could also be dispatched to countries like Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, and Singapore. And with a supergrid in place, operators could significantly scale back their spinning reserves—backup capacity that they can tap if demand spikes but in practice is rarely used.
|
HVDC systems have been widely employed for decades and technological
advances have made them cheaper.
Already China has the most extensive HVDC grid in the world which delivers
solar and wind from remote areas to the cities.
The Baltic states have been freeing themselves of dependence on Russian
energy by building HVDC links to Sweden and Poland. The links will
give the Baltics the ability to get 100% of their imported electrical power
from non-Russian sources.
See
http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/poli...in-the-baltics
Meanwhile, a new HVDC line will let Europe store more wind energy
in Norway's hydropower system. See "Norway Wants to Be Europe’s Battery",
IEEE Spectrum, Oct 2014 -
http://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/...uropes-battery
Somewhere in the world it will be sunny or windy at any one time, or
someone will have an excess of hydropower or available nuclear power
capacity. HVDC networks are already allowing countries to trade
electrical energy and they could be extended to trade it globally.
Best regards
Gary Kopff
Member IEEE 38 years
Building the batteries specifically has a larger carbon footprint than driving a 1960's Chevvy from when it was built to now... And I believe it! It may produce a lot less emissions to run but it is building them in the first place that is the real issue.
