[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 318 KB, 566x650, 1275687034439.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1240628 No.1240628 [Reply] [Original]

>"If just 1% of the Sahara Desert were covered in concentrating solar panels it would create enough energy to power the entire world."

Is this true?

Also:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65J1ZO20100620

>The European Union is backing projects to turn the plentiful sunlight in the Sahara desert into electricity for power-hungry Europe, a scheme it hopes will help meet its target of deriving 20 percent of its energy from renewable sources in 2020.

>> No.1240646

I hope Europe told Africa about this...

>> No.1240643

Green technology does not have the energy density needed to power the world at its current rate of development. its just too expensive. Coal works, but Nuclear is the best option.

>> No.1240655

no, it is a lie spread by jews

>> No.1240652

>>1240646
dude, when has Europe told Africa it was gonna do anything?

>> No.1240658

It's an over-idealization (maybe true if you don't have to transport the power, etc.) I could run through numbers to prove this, but I'm too lazy.

Yes, they are seriously considering it.

>> No.1240681

>>1240658
so lets say(hypothetically) we were to begin using a grid that spread power to Northern Africa only to being with, do you think that 1% would be enough to power Saharan Africa?

>> No.1240706

>>1240646
why? niggers can't read, you could get them to sign whatever contract you wanted.

>>1240643
fuck coal, but nuclear is a good temporary fix until more efficient green energy is developed

>> No.1240717

A solar panel consumes as much energy to create as it produces in ten years.

The average life expectancy of a solar panel before falling below 50% of its original efficiency is less than ten years.

If you're putting them in the Sahara, the energy produced still needs to be transported.

>> No.1240718

Massive glass-surfaced solar panels in a sand-storm-prone region?

Maintenance costs much?

>> No.1240731

It's all about He-3 fusion, y'all.

>> No.1240750

>>1240717
Sounds like a great way to employ millions of africans

>> No.1240760

>>1240681
*sign* damnit. you're going to make me run through the numbers.

Okay, the world uses about 6TW of energy, if I remember right, and at the equator, there is an average of 250W of power per square meter.

= 24000000000 square meters

Sahara = ~9,400,000 square kilometers (Wikipedia)

(9.4 × 10^12) / 24000000000 = 391 --> 1/x --> .00255, or about 0.25% of the Sahara.

When you consider that solar panels are about 20% efficient, and that about half of the energy will be lost in transport, you get that about 2.5% of the Sahara's surface would need to be coated with solar panels to provide power for the world.

However, this still ignores a large number of effects. For example, we have neither the silicon on hand or the manufacturing capabilities to make that many panels any time soon.

>> No.1240769

>>1240717
That's 1990s solar panels. Solar panels are being manufactured with new nanotechnology that brings the efficiency up to 40%.

Some recent break-throughs in exploiting the quantum nature of photosynthesis for solar panels should result in solar panel efficiency upwards of 60% or more after it becomes commercialized within another 5 years.

>> No.1240772

>>1240760
>don't have silicon on hand
>in a fucking DESERT

>> No.1240775

>>1240769
>60% efficient

We obey the laws of thermodynamics in this house, mister.

>>1240772

I lol'd.

>> No.1240779

well sahara is 9,400,000 square kilometres

1 % is 94,000 square kilometres

I've managed to find that some solar panels give 600 watts per square meter

so this leads to 56400000 watts or 56 gigawatts
(I suck at math, so correct me)

this is a lot but it it will not do

+ 94000 square kilometres ?!?!? are you fucking serious ?

>> No.1240778

Good luck transmitting that power outside of northern africa without losing 80% of it

>> No.1240789 [DELETED] 

>>1240779
1 km^2 =/= 1 m^2

>> No.1240788

>>1240778
This. Sounds like a bunch of welfare both corporate and nigger.

>> No.1240793
File: 27 KB, 429x410, 1255575957808.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1240793

>>1240779
>I've managed to find that some solar panels give 600 watts per square meter
>600 watts per square meter

>> No.1240794

>>1240779
you're not very good at the metric system, are you? and 56 terrawatts sounds pretty good

>> No.1240795

>>1240775
>implying that your education in thermodynamics taught you a single fucking thing about the thermodynamics of quantum systems

>implying that heat engines have something to do with semiconductors

>> No.1240797

>>1240626
ＲＥmｏｅv_ＹUOr_ILlgｅAl cLoen_FＯ_hｔＴＰ://TIｎＹurl.cOM/3ｙKPｈF3 ＩｍｍｅＩｄＡＴelY. sicvnalppybkw dsnxo gkxipomqnf vafa yfyf q j

>> No.1240807

>>1240795

You sort of sabotaged yourself by >implying that it's only applicable to heat engines.

>> No.1240804

>>1240778

superconductive cables, fuckwit. And don't worry about cooling and shit because any month now they'll be announcing that the right combination of ceramics and metals was found for room temp superconductivity.

>> No.1240810

>>1240769
>implying we use nanotechnology today

>> No.1240815

>>1240775
Except that I am obeying the laws of thermodynamics. I'm also not trolling.

I present to you the following...

http://www.physorg.com/news195995540.html

>If the higher energy sunlight, or more specifically the hot electrons, could be captured, solar-to-electric power conversion efficiency could be increased theoretically to as high as 66 percent.

>> No.1240827

ITT: People confuse theoretical possibilities with really existing technology.

>> No.1240834
File: 38 KB, 523x478, what the fuck am i skull.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1240834

>>1240815
>high energy sunlight is just hot electrons

>> No.1240837

>>1240827
>existing technologies
>lead selenide nanocrystal arrays

>> No.1240838

>>1240827

ITT: You and the others like you are typing posts inbetween sucking metric asstonnes of bags of cocks.

>> No.1240848

Good luck building solar panels in the desert.

We have faggots who bitch about mountains in fucking West Virginia and talk about how we should save the mountains boo hoo.

I bet you there'd be fucking eco-faggots crying about the poor poor desert and how it's covered with solar panels and how it's just so fucking terrible and man is just so evil.

I don't want to deal with any more of their bullshit.

>> No.1240866
File: 146 KB, 474x718, vonnegutumad.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1240866

>>1240838

>> No.1240878

>>1240834
You're just interpreting the poor science journalism for face value. All science journalism is watered down shit that caters to the masses.

What they're probably referring to by mentioning hot electrons is how the semiconductor material of solar cells ends up losing a lot of the potential electricity as heat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_electron

>A hot electron is an electron which is not in thermal equilibrium with the lattice. It occurs in the region of semiconductor device featuring high electric fields.

>> No.1240888

It really isn't the best idea. All of the world's energy coming from a single source? Enjoy our dark age when some terrorists knock that shit offline.

>> No.1240881

HOW YOU GOING TO KEEP THE SAND OFF THEM?? WELL?? DIDN'T THINK OF THAT, DID YOU SMART GUY?

>> No.1240896

>>1240888
Or build a weather dominator and block out the sun.

Cobra commander would have us by the balls.

>> No.1240901

COVER OUR PENISES WITH SOLAR PANELS SO WE CAN ALL HAVE SUN-POWERED DICKS!

>> No.1240905

>>1240881
Saran wrap.

>> No.1240917

>>1240848
The people that bitch about this stuff in America are just butt-hurt yuppies, who don't want their views and favorite party spots to get fucked up.

No one cares about Africa except Africans. And they're more concerned about starving to death than they are about their view of the desert.

>> No.1240927

>>1240917


it really gets amazing when each african tribe boasts that their people can out-starve the other tribes.

>> No.1240952

>>1240905

moar liek saharan wrap amirite

>> No.1240989

>>1240804
>>1240804
>>1240804

lulz. you dont know shit. cuprate based superconductors are just barely at the point where very very thin sections can be cooled using stirling cryocoolers (Without N2(l))


>>1240815
>>1240815


>doesnt know what a hot electron/photon is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_carriers_injection

Hot carrier injection is literally a function of a basic boltzmann distribution of energies. some of the injected electrons will have high energies and will hit shit, and some of those will cause stimulated emission.

the concept you posted is MANY MANY years old, and is a pure science fiction concept developed by physicsts who do work in theoretical areas.

it is essentially the equivalent of harnessing an amplifying effect through hot carrier injection.

doesnt work in reality


>>1240837
>>1240837


>doesnt know about terhertz MEMS gold antennas

>> No.1240992

>>1240952
lolz

>> No.1240999

>>1240989
/thread

>> No.1241071

>>1240989


I call bullshit on all your shit. PROOFS NAO FAGGOT

>> No.1241348

HAVE YOU READ YOUR SICP TODAY? :3

>> No.1241357

>>1240810

>implying that your 45nm cpu core isn't nanotechnology

>> No.1241383

>>1241071
> I don't understand what this means
>please post links so that I can learn and
>not feel retarded
fix'd

>> No.1241395

Europe has no say over the Sahara Desert. Africa is its own independent entity.

>> No.1241412

>>1241383

>I don't have sources to back up my claims so I'll respond with not so subtle ad-hominem attacks.

fix'd.

>> No.1241413

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE4AP50M20081127

The vatican are moving towards solar power in a big way. Apparently the maintenance needed is minimal

>> No.1241436

Look. The only current technology that could be used to cover such a wide area without ruinous costs is amorphous silicon. That stuff has an efficiency that is lower than 18% (don't know the exact numbers, but that's the efficiency of a poly-Si panel, and amorphous is obviously lower because it has shitty transport).

Given that the energy density reaching the ground is about 0.9 kW/m², and that only a fraction of the spectrum can be absorbed and turned into energy by the panel, that's very little.

But the Sahara is big, so it might be possible.

>> No.1241450

>>1241413
inb4 the Vatican becomes a beacon of scientific and technological progress

>> No.1241452

>>1241450
this would be a sad day for humanity

>> No.1241465

>>1241450
It's probably supported more research than any other group.

Also there's this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontifical_Academy_of_Sciences

>> No.1241482

>>1241452
I think you mean this would be a hilarious day for humanity and a sad day for religion vs science trolls.

>> No.1241501

>>1241452
>scientific advancement is bad because I don't like the people doing it

>> No.1241518

>>1241501
No, what I mean is:
>the Vatican being the height of scientific advancement
THAT is sad.
For the rest of the fucking world, not being better than a bunch of fucking bible-waving fucktards.

The scientific advancement is awesome, I just don't like the idea that the rest of the world fails so hard, the Vatican is somehow on top.
The fucking VATICAN, man.

>> No.1241521

>>1241518
>Bible
>Catholics
oh you!

>> No.1241531

>>1241518


Religion is a system used to control a large number of people and keep them organized with similar morals/customs. It would make sense that the people who control the religion, and in turn have the least "faith" of anyone else, are the ones who are more scientifically productive.

>> No.1241541

>>1241518
Do you not know? The Vatican is in the business of controlling people. That's why they so readily change canon, such as accepting that evolution and the Bible can go hand-in-hand. They'll use technology as well as religion.

>> No.1241545

>>1241518
I don't think you know a goddamned thing about Catholicism.

>> No.1241547

>>1241541
I still find it sad that they would somehow go before the rest world in science.

>> No.1241563

>>1241547
They've built a ton of universities, they kind of invented the modern university

>> No.1241569

Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if the Vatican was the first to land on Mars.

Of course, it wouldn't officially be the Vatican. It'd be a civilian of another country who just happened to be Catholic. And there'd be a micro-print of the Vatican's seal or flag or whatever in the flag of the country planted there.

>> No.1241576

>>1241569
>Of course, it wouldn't officially be the Vatican.

And then the Vatican built a huge launchpad in St. Peter's Square.

>> No.1241582
File: 119 KB, 819x1024, souvereignventure.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1241582

>>1241569
You know what I'm looking forward to? Space cathedrals.

>> No.1241592

If we could find enough silicon it is feasible, but the oil companies would never allow it.

>> No.1241593

what's up with the religiousfags in here pimping the catholic cult?

fuck that shit.

>> No.1241596

>>1241592
Umm, this planet is teeming with silicon. It makes up over 25% of the Earth's crust by mass.

>> No.1241598

I remember hearing about some way you could print solar cells, much cheaper than previous methods

>> No.1241600

Why don't they make a huge space station and build like 100s of solar panels on the space station and fly the space station towards the sun.

Would this increase the amount of enegry the solar panels collect? By being closer to a solar source of solar enegry.

>> No.1241602

>>1240625

RＥＭOＥｖ_ＹｕｏR_IｌＬGｅAｌ_ｃＬoＥN_Ｆｏ_ＨＴＴＰ://ＴiｎｙuRＬ.CoM/3ｙ
kpHｆ3_ｉmｍＥｉＤＡtｅＬY. w pskj rylvca vi aobw xohabar bccgctigkiyqs zhq

>> No.1241603

>>1241600
Because it would be very difficult to get that energy back to earth

>> No.1241606

>>1241603
Long ass cords
how do they work?

>> No.1241607

>>1241600
and then what?

>> No.1241610

>>1241603

What if the space station had a ton of generators and when the shuttle landed on earth they just took out the generators and replaced them with empty ones and sent the shutter back into space to refill the new generators while they used the full generators on earth.

>> No.1241613

>>1241610
Methods of storing electricity are pretty inefficient

>> No.1241615

>>1241613

Not really.

>> No.1241616 [DELETED] 

ＲＥMoＥV YＵｏｒ IＬｌgＥａl ＣLoＥn_ｆｏ ＨTTＰ://tｉnｙｕｒL.com/3YkｐHＦ3 IMｍEIｄａTElｙ. mx ol elubr mzrwyhqadmv kh uxt yrh ewu nspsy

>> No.1241617

>>1241600

if you gather and beam too much light/energy that normally wouldn't reach earth it could start to cause the earth to heat up.

>> No.1241618

>>1241617

We could counter-balance that by building achines that cooled earth by using enegry.

>> No.1241620

rEｍＯＥｖ_yＵoｒ iＬｌgEaＬ clＯeN_Fｏ_HTtP://tiｎyｕＲｌ.ｃOM/3ｙkpＨＦ3_IｍMｅIＤaTＥｌＹ. jim zz moqyh uokmo gucfiybef awqc xsz

>> No.1241622

"Concentrating solar panels" doesn't just mean photovoltaics. Does anyone know figures for arrays of mirrors coupled to heat engines (not necessarily directly)?

>> No.1241627

>>1241622
If I'm not wrong we already have some thermal solar plants. They are much more efficient than photovoltaics.

>> No.1241639

ReＭｏEv YuOｒ iｌLgＥＡL ＣLOｅＮ fO_hＴTP://TＩNyｕｒL.CｏＭ/3YkpｈＦ3_ＩMMｅIｄＡTELｙ. sjk v jsankid pkyj gkqvnl z kt hk in

>> No.1241675

Such a spaceship could beam power to Earth with a laser.It could pulse every time a collecting station on the Earth's surface passes through its range.

It's true that the Earth would heat up due to this, but the same goes for any energy input to the planet. Cooling the Earth down enough would take more energy than we'd get from the ship, so there's no point. As long as we use the energy efficiently, and in ways that store it for a long time (for example it can be stored in the materials created through electrolysis, and so on) such that it doesn't become heat straight away. (ie. we don't treat the Earth as an infinite cold reservoir like many things currently do (eg. nonregenerative braking))

>> No.1241705

>>1241675

much more than just regenerative braking; the vast majority of all the energy produced from burning fuels ends up as heat., mostly lost to resistance and friction.

only a few chemical processes such as aluminum smelting actually semi-permanently convert energy to something besides heat.

>> No.1241708

Would they really use photovoltaics?
Surely just building one of those solar furnaces would be a better idea and cheaper?
Also while everyone is saying 'omg sand' not all north africa is sand dunes everywhere. Some of it more rocky dusty desert.

>> No.1241723

Since sunlight is free, the optimisation should be for energy per dollar, rather than energy per m^2 or whatever. If one system is 5 times more efficient, but costs 10 times as much, go with the less efficient one. As it's been pointed out: there's more than enough desert to put these things in, space is not the limiting factor.

>> No.1241729

>>1240627
ｒeＭOｅｖ ｙｕｏr ｉLＬGeAL cＬOｅＮ Fｏ_hｔｔp://TiNｙuＲｌ.ｃom/3ｙKＰｈｆ3_iMＭEIＤATEly. bu gd l yxofipjso vm a fo hkgyh iqn at pehee

>> No.1241736

solar-reflector-Sterling-generator powerplants is what is discussed right nown as a viable solution... it has energy loss ~80%...and it is cheep as fukk and easy to put up.