Sun, Sand & Water
Wind power has a few problems, but I tend to think of Solar Power as the Holy Grail of sustainable energy. But Robert Glennon tells us that some solar plants use a great deal of water, that is super-heated to run turbines - not unlike nuclear plants.
Is Solar Power Dead in the Water?
In contrast, most large solar power projects use a system called concentrating solar power, or CSP, that heats a fluid that boils water to turn a turbine. CSP, just like any thermal power plant, produces waste heat as a byproduct. In most cases, cooling towers release the heat to the atmosphere through evaporation, a process that uses gobs of water. In fact, CSP uses four times as much water as a natural gas plant and twice as much as a coal or nuclear plant.
Where are the easy choices?
This kind of system does not need to vent, it's just easy as long as you have a handy supply. Also, it does not need to be drinkable water, just somewhat filtered. In principle the system could have secondary low-temp heat exchangers for extracting more energy out of the cooling towers.
A solar-thermal plant near the ocean could yield desalinated water from its steam, and produce net surplus. But inland, like in the open Southwest, the plans are mainly to use PV, straight photovoltaic.
The "most" is only medium-sized commercial installations for industry, I think. Washington Post is not the ideal source for energy news. These stories are like the ones about it costing too much oil to make ethanol, which ignore the sensible approach of using the ethanol you made to farm more. It's easy cynicism.
June 10, 2009 9:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ethanol: A way to feed cars instead of people. Instead of going to all the trouble of making a fuel with a third less energy, why not just keep using the oil (diesel, really) to farm?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-glennon/ethanol-and-water_b_152072.html
June 10, 2009 9:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I dunno. A quick scan shows a lot of big CSP projects touted or underway. I think ideally solar, like wind, can be very earth-friendly.
In reality though, an energy utility is less concerned with being earth-friendly than with turning a profit. I've seen that wind utilities are perfectly happy to clearcut areas in deep forests to find the best wind, and I wouldn't be surprised if CSP plants take a few shortcuts as well.
June 10, 2009 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Its always something.
June 10, 2009 9:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
The problem is, we're going to need more energy sources to move away from oil - which is finite - and toward renewables, if for no other reason than that someone is going to have to build the new infrastructure. And that is going to take casting and machining and smelting and painting and many more activities that require some form of energy input.
I don't want to say we've painted ourselves into a corner, though we do seem up against a conundrum or two. I wonder if the recent biodiesel advances made here in MN at Augsburg bear watching - I have not been following them closely, though they seem to have some very interesting lab-based results. Now if they do in fact scale.
And to return to a comment someone made, there is no silver bullet, just a thousand silver BB's. As consolation, let's keep in mind that energy technology is improving both rapidly and constantly. Let's hope it keeps up with population growth.
June 10, 2009 11:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Running a turbine is running a turbine. I don't see how turbine-based solar, gas, oil, or nuclear would be all that different methods. They all wastefully produce or harness heat to do mechanical work via a turbine.
The fluid heated by the sun might not even be water and would generally be in a closed system, but it's true that the waste heat has to be dissipated somehow. Secondary or "cogeneration" can improve overall thermal efficiency somewhat (using the "waste" heat to run secondary generation means).
June 11, 2009 8:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
This sounds like a good solution for the middle of the country with big open expanses and dwindling water supplies. I don't pretend to be a science wiz, but I watched a show on this project a while ago and can't see a downside beyond cost. I would think we could use the greenhouses to grow food as well as provide heated air for the wind turbines.
June 11, 2009 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Approximately 74% of the Earth's surface (an area of some 361 million square kilometers) is covered by ocean,
Why not learn a lesson from the observable creation?
With focused Solar power we could heat vastly more amounts of sea Water. Presently the amount of Energy from the Sun, (Solar constant) almashriq.hiof.no/lebanon/600/610/614/solar-water/unesco/21-23.html
Using the knowledge we know about the hydrological cycle. Why not imitate the principle on a smaller scale? Harnessing the free energy that hits the Earth.
http://www.und.nodak.edu/instruct/eng/fkarner/pages/cycle.htm
Someone recently posted images of container ships in Indonesia.
I wish they could find satelite images of the ships burning hydrocarbon fuel off our shores. Fisheries and the making of plywood and other lumber materials. Other manufactured goods, Could tap into a grid system, based offshore utilizing the solar powered steam genertion from Salt water.
This Salt water could utilized as eds said. As a secondary
A secondary Evaporation technology based up the hydrolocical cycle.
Mankind learning how to capitalize on the existing energy of Wind patterns as they swing down or up across the continental United States. Carrying this evaporation and redepositing in the form of precipitation on our Agricultural regions. Creating more runoff to generate hydro-electric power.
Learning from Creation itself mankind could create it’s own energy efficient cycle.
We know there's energy in the trade winds, the Oceans currents. Invest in ways to harness what we have.
Google Tons of landfill material. Even our waste material is wasted. Could this Sea water be used as wet scrubbers? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrubber
June 11, 2009 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink