/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10957243]

People are always whining about photovoltaic cells requiring rare minerals that are environmentally unfriendly to mine and whatever so why aren't we just doing solar energy through the mirror method?
is photovoltaic really more efficient than just heating up some water with the suns heat and running that shit through a turbine, this method just requires some good ol' fucking steel and idk what else
like yeah sure this method isn't usable for smaller applications but it is very much usable for big power plants which ought to make up the majority of solar power production anyhow

[Anonymous No.10957259]

>>10957243
>That Lucky Old Sun

[Anonymous No.10957478]

>>10957243
>this method isn't usable for smaller applications
I literally heat my pool with a solar collector.

[Anonymous No.10957491]

>>10957243
It’s a niche power plant because you need it to be consistently hot, high direct radiation and clear skies for most of the year to be economical. Not that many locations are suitable, plus not many population centers near those locations so you have to build more infrastructure to pipe the energy to where you need it. It also needs a fuckton of space to get worthwhile amounts of energy

[Anonymous No.10957497]

>>10957478
you're not turning your pool to steam and running it through a turbine to make electricity

[Anonymous No.10957513]

>>10957243
More expensive than even photovoltaic, and unlike photovoltaic you'll be producing fuck all when it's cloudy as oppose to just less.
Also the mirrors probably have to track the sun to produce any power at all, unlike photovoltaics.

[Anonymous No.10958032]

>>10957497
Just use a fresnel lens. You can buy turbines rated at less than a kilowatt.

[Anonymous No.10958041]

>>10957243
there's energy wasted keeping the fluid warm to prevent it solidifying permanently during the night
also converting heat to mechanical energy always experiences significant losses

[Anonymous No.10958046]

>>10957243
>rare minerals
Like what?

[Anonymous No.10958518]

>>10957243
>so why aren't we just doing solar energy through the mirror method?
We are. That is what is in the photo you posted. Did you not realize that?

>is photovoltaic really more efficient than just heating up some water with the suns heat and running that shit through a turbine,
No, PV is extremely inefficient. PV also requires chemical battery energy storage which is terribly inefficient when compared to well-insulted thermal storage systems like the plants in your image use.

>like yeah sure this method isn't usable for smaller applications
Well, their are a few technologies that take advantage of passive solar thermal cycle. Solar steam generators and solar Sterling engines for instance. There are even systems that are completely passive where there are no moving parts or electric generated/required (like what is needed for pumping liquid.)

The simplest design you can have is a solar oven for food cooking. It is just an insulated box with a window and some reflectors. Being able to use the thermal energy directly where it is needed will be the most efficient use of that energy.

Some homes have a roof system that use vacuum tubes, a pump, heat exchanger, and thermal mass storage to heat their homes and hot water. The vacuum tubes and heat exchanger have anti-freeze in their system for cold areas. Otherwise, a batch solar water heater is used in warmer climates that don't have freezing temperatures. In those locations, the design of the water heater allows for everything to be out on the roof.

>>10957478
Some people use a solar blanket on top. It insulates the water and prevents loss from evaporation too. If you couple this with a portion of the pool floor being painted black then you can get the water almost hot enough to cook with. The % of the pool floor that is black helps determine how hot it will get under optimal conditions.

[Anonymous No.10958526]

>>10958041
>there's energy wasted keeping the fluid warm to prevent it solidifying permanently during the night
This will depend exclusively on the type of storage system and its design. It can be extremely inefficient or extremely efficient as a result. Most systems do not have optimal insulation because aerogel-based insulation is fucking expensive.

[Anonymous No.10958905]

>>10957243
>is photovoltaic really more efficient

meanwhile photovoltaic is just cheaper, also power towers only work in very sunny regions, photovoltaic works almost everywhere

[Anonymous No.10958972]

>>10957243
photovoltaics don't need rare elements. Really only concern is for indium and tin for the transparent conductors. We can make transparent conductors out of other materials, but don't because it is still economical to use indium and tin. Photovoltaic efficiency and batteries are improving faster than power towers can make a profit

[Anonymous No.10959102]

>>10958972
>We can make transparent conductors out of other materials
Such as?

[Anonymous No.10959143]

>>10958905
>pic
>those numbers and this thread's anons getting totally BTFO by
Ouch, lol. Kind of nice that my suspicion that wind is the best for cost ratios is correct. I mean turbines are extremely efficient now. It is too bad that wind turbines take up a great deal of land space, though that doesn't matter for most of the world. Hydro seems to be missing... Still it is pretty cool pdf.

[Anonymous No.10960636]

>>10959102
the meme material graphene. There are also some transparent conductors made of things like zinc.

[Anonymous No.10961157]

>>10959143
large scale hydro is even chaeper then wind. costs on average are at 30$/MWh and it's high value because you can sell on peak demand also service time is extremely long, 100 years and more, operating cost is low
but getting permission to build a new hydroelectric plant may take decades

[Anonymous No.10962415]

>>10959143
>wind turbines take up a great deal of land space
They do? The base is rather narrow though but they have to be spaced by 1 km unless there is a strongly prevailing wind direction.

[Anonymous No.10962611]

>>10962415
Are you forgetting all the flooded land? They're still top tier though.

[Anonymous No.10962614]

>>10962611
I somehow misread this a water turbine, nevermind....

[Anonymous No.10962741]

>>10962415
Wind turbulence causes problems with surrounding wind turbines reducing their efficiency a great deal. So, they have to be space very far apart. There are designs to eliminate this, but the style of wind turbine isn't something people are buying into.

[Anonymous No.10963661]

>>10962741
admittedly, but they still take only like a a 5 meter radius circles worth of space that cannot be used for other things (barring more wind turbines of course)

[Anonymous No.10963673]

>>10957243
>rare minerals
Those are for the batteries, anon, which all rebewables need.

[Anonymous No.10963701]

>>10963673
hydro is renewable and needs no batteries, hydro IS the battery

[Anonymous No.10964098]

>>10963701
except that not every part of the world is hilly. Fortunately, flow batteries are becoming competitive with pumped hydro. Lithium batteries might actually become competitive too if they can demonstrate long lifetimes.

[Anonymous No.10964137]

>>10962741
The turbulence is the reason for the 1 km spacing. After that, the turbulence has dissipated sufficiently not to interfere significantly with the next turbine.

[Anonymous No.10964273]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EahfGfDdgNY

[Anonymous No.10964288]

>>10964098
>except that not every part of the world is hilly

[Anonymous No.10964340]

>>10963661
Nothing with people or animals in it though.. Have you ever been near a wind turbine while it's running? They're very loud.

They're almost entirely built on agricultural farm land, or hills where it's not reasonable to build other shit.

[Anonymous No.10964356]

>>10964288
Only massive turbines with very good infrastructure can come close to matching the energy efficiency of batteries. This wouldn't be the case with a water tower sized system.

And that's before you factor in the generation inefficiency since this would just store and release energy, not produce it.

[Anonymous No.10964615]

>>10964340
>Have you ever been near a wind turbine while it's running?
Yes
>They're very loud.
No. There was a slight "swish" when a blade passed directly above you but once you walked a little bit away from the base it was noiseless. I hear a lot of drama about loud wind turbines but when I ask for a sonogram they all clam up.

[Anonymous No.10964643]

>>10963661
The problem stems from zoning. Wind farms normally can't have other land uses, though that depends on local government. But, it isn't like the world will run out of room any time soon or ever really.

>>10964615
It may be various designs. Like older designs being loud while new ones aren't nearly as loud. Blade design plays a huge role in that.

[Anonymous No.10964868]

>>10964643
in most Midwestern states there are windmills between fields.

[Anonymous No.10964922]

>>10964615
While the cause is still unknown it is believed some people have a sensitivity to wind turbine noise. The Australian government, for example, limits building location of wind turbines on the basis that this is a real phenomena.

[Anonymous No.10964998]

>>10964615
For me it was the gearbox whine from the ones nearest me. Couldn't tell you what type they are or if they're the standard type.

The swish was also apparent but the mix of high and low frequency noise from that gearbox was utterly terrible. Could never have a house within maybe 300m of the thing. Also the swish isn't too loud, but a cyclical noise like that is more annoying to the ear than a constant drone. Animals also have way better hearing, and studies have shown livestock gets stressed by stuff like that.

[Anonymous No.10966608]

>>10964098
there are enoug hills in the world and you can transfer electric energy with power lines over distances

[Anonymous No.10966616]

>>10964340
>Have you ever been near a wind turbine while it's running? They're very loud

I have and it's as loud as a running car engine. If this is loud for you you would be horrified by the sound of a highway.

it's crazy how people want to live on a road but not near a wind farm.

[Anonymous No.10966633]

>>10958905
That picture is a meme that ignores hundreds of variables contributing to the higher cost of PV. PV is extremely expensive. It costs $0.25/kWh with local providers vs $0.05 for nuclear. It's a no brainier which is better.

[Anonymous No.10966653]

>>10957243
Could you use this to get an instant tan?

[Anonymous No.10966659]

>>10966653
As long as it included an instant extra crispy breading, yes.

[Anonymous No.10966670]

>>10966659
Sorry man gotta stay away from those carbs, guess it's normal tanning for me

[Anonymous No.10966862]

>>10966633
it's not just a picture it shows results of extensive research in this matter, also PV becomes cheaper and cheaper every year,
atomic power was a costly mistake

[Anonymous No.10967793]

>>10957243
>People are always whining about photovoltaic cells requiring rare minerals that are environmentally unfriendly to mine
It's just a false argument made by shills and cultists

[Anonymous No.10968175]

>>10967793
While the minerals may be there, all the low hanging fruit has already been picked a long time ago.

[Anonymous No.10969105]

>>10964922
My hearing is very sensitive to the point of being a problem. And when I ask people for a sonogram from a wind turbine they claim is noisy I get nothing back, ever. You can get some impressive sonogram apps for Android, probably also Apple.

[Anonymous No.10969116]

>>10968175
Solar cells are made of silicon. That's the most common element. You also need some copper for wiring but that's common as well.
For panels you also need glass, an aluminium frame and a plastic layer to protect the backside. Solar is the cheapest energy source because all material used is very common.

[Anonymous No.10969163]

>>10961157
Ok bro hold on just going to build a few more mountains and rivers.

[Anonymous No.10969168]

>>10969116
>You also need some copper for wiring but that's common as well
>t. Hasn't paid attention to the massive price rise of copper over the last 5-10 years

[Anonymous No.10969206]

>>10957491
You mean only a quarter of the world's surface is a desert?
they could make the entire nevada desert into one giant collector

[Anonymous No.10969217]

>>10969116
>he thinks all it needs is silica and copper

No, it needs that plus these and including whatever is needed for the batteries: aluminum, cadmium, cobalt, gallium, indium, indium, iron, lead, lithium, manganese, nickel, silver, selenium, tellurium, tin, and zinc.

[Anonymous No.10969317]

>>10966862
>extensive research
>gotta make that green energy source appear cheap
Climate 'scientists' lost the confidence of the people with their bs predictions and garbage solutions
the discussion is so twisted that you no longer can believe a study, not from climate/energy research.
It's highly dubitable that PV is equally expensive as gas
and that wind is less expensive than gas
they're leaving out variables or how the entire system is build up and how much it actually costs

actually lol the top of your pic says it all
>does not take into account
dropped, your graph is entirely worthless

[Anonymous No.10969321]

>>10958972
Newer PV's for higher efficiency are made from GaAs? I'm sure those are readily available.

[Anonymous No.10969325]

>>10961157
It only ruins the entire ecosystem of the Yellow River, forced atleast two mammal species into extinction(one dolphin) and flooded thousands of homes.
Hydro is a meme because it inherently ruins ecosystems, and destroys the natural flow of the river. This is how you get a dead river and eventual ground erosion as floodings get more severe and unnatural, and the silt the rivers carry will be deposited at the wrong places (earlier in the river instead of later)
there's hardly any advantage to using hydro if you think about the ecological costs.

[Anonymous No.10969340]

>>10957491
>It also needs a fuckton of space to get worthwhile amounts of energy
Completely irrelevant given your first point.

[Anonymous No.10969370]

>>10964288
>let's build tens of thousands of ugly towers to sustain the population, and cover the land with inefficient-per-area ecofriendly plants to produce the power surplus to fill them up daily

[Anonymous No.10969385]

>>10969325
Who cares? I don’t give a shit about any of that, only greenhouse gas emissions.

[Anonymous No.10969401]

>>10969385
>t. every normie on this godforsaken planet
fuck them all. Ecology is the most important, not muh co2.

[Anonymous No.10969452]

>>10969385
Water vapor is a greenhouse gas emission. It is also the worst one.

[Anonymous No.10969551]

>>10969206
Cool idea desu

[Anonymous No.10969554]

>>10969317
I want to see your graph anon

[Anonymous No.10970079]

>>10969321
>Newer PV's for higher efficiency are made from GaAs? I'm sure those are readily available.

it's very expensive this is mainly used for satellites where it does not matter,
here on Earth almost everything is just cheap silicon, efficiency is 15-20% and good enough

[Anonymous No.10971812]

[Anonymous No.10972353]

PV wins because it's cheaper

[Anonymous No.10972374]

>>10969452
the only way to increase water vapor in the atmosphere is increase the temperature

[Anonymous No.10972378]

>>10969317
cope

[Anonymous No.10972386]

>>10972374
There are other ways, but no need to list them to you since you do not deserve the information.

[Anonymous No.10972883]

>>10969217
I have never seen goal posts moving at superluminal velocities before, bravo!

[Anonymous No.10973093]

>>10969217
These are various metals you can make batteries from. You don't need all of them at once.

[Anonymous No.10973137]

>>10957243
The giant natural gas burning plant on the other side of the highway is conveniently out of the picture.

[Anonymous No.10973138]

>>10973137
dumb anon, the natural gas burning plant is right in the middle

[Anonymous No.10973140]

>>10963701
economical pump storage is pretty much maxed out in the US

[Anonymous No.10973146]

>>10969116
all high-efficiency panels require REE to break into economic efficiency, while ignoring power factor.

[Anonymous No.10973159]

>>10973138
no, it isn't. it is on the other side of the i-15 highway. That is a storage building, you fucking mongoloid

[Anonymous No.10973208]

>>10973159
the fuck are you talking about you dumbass?
there's a natural gas facility nearby but it is a completely different facility, the ivanpah facility occasionally uses natural gas to run its turbines, the very same turbines it usually runs with solar power, the turbines in the middle of those spherical arrays of reflectors

[Anonymous No.10974247]

>>10972386
not for any meaningful amounts of time

[Anonymous No.10974339]

>>10973140
it's not, the US is huge, you can build much more

[Anonymous No.10974390]

>>10969385
hydropower with significant reservoirs of water tend to release methane to some degree

[Anonymous No.10974434]

>>10962741
extinct humans don't care what turbines look like, just like no one cares what a power grid or an oil rig looks like.

[Anonymous No.10974730]

>>10973208
On Google Maps it seems quite a lot of the mirrors are missing or pointing in odd directions.

[Anonymous No.10974732]

>>10974390
your ass is releasing methane to some degree