Will Europe Be Powered by the Sahara
November 4, 2009 by Miranda Marquit
Image source: U.S. government via Wikimedia Commons
(PhysOrg.com) -- Europe has long been interested in developing alternative energy sources. And, one of the more interesting places that some Europeans are looking for solar power is the Sahara. With the vast amounts of sun beating down on the Saharan desert, it seems an ideal place for solar panels. The Desertec Industrial Initiative, a consortium of 12 companies, including Siemens and Deutsche Bank, aims to make Saharan solar power for Europe a reality. But it won't exactly be easy.
First of all, there is the fact that Africa is not exactly connected by land to Europe. The Initiative has a plan for that, though. The Guardian reports that power lines will stretch across the Mediterranean to provide as much as 15% of Europe's electric power by 2050. Another issue is the fact that there are some, er, less than stable countries involved.
Just as energy from oil can be disrupted by conflict and political turmoil in African nations, solar energy in the Sahara could be impacted by problems in the region. And, of course, if Saharan countries agree to allow such farms on their land, it is likely that some of the power will have to go to African cities, and that there will be leases to pay and perhaps royalties. It is likely that some sort of financial arrangement will have to be made, and could affect the project's profitability.
The technology to be used for the solar farms is described by The Guardian:
The solar technology involved is known as concentrated solar power (CSP) which uses mirrors to concentrate the sun's rays on a fluid container. The super-heated liquid then drives turbines to generate electricity. The advantage over solar photovoltaic panels, which convert sunlight directly to electricity, is that if sufficient hot fluid is stored in containers, the generators can run all night.
The technology has been around for years, but never used on this scale. There are hopes that, if everything goes well, the first power station of the project could be build by 2015.
© 2009 PhysOrg.com
1hour ago
Frajo, you got it - economic wealth will promote political stability (of some sort - we may not like it but it will be stable).
Also power lines seem like an extremely easy target for terrorism. It would be impractical to patrol the entire length to kepe it safe, and it would be all too easy to cut power to a large portion of Europe by simply cutting a few cables.
USA can destroy a city by nuclear bombing it. You never know!
It doesn't have advantages for Europe, we will still be dependant on the Arabic world regarding our energy needs. We should become able to suffice in our own energy needs. Electricity has become a primary need in modern society.
African countries can't join the EU, because they don't lie in Europe.
how would europe like to have a black out for weeks when a sand storm reduced output and teams of people have to go out to scrub 100,000 panels.
Since the power plants would be distributed along the entire northern part of Africa a sand storm would only affect a miniscule portion of them at a time. Africa is BIG. Look at a map. When there is a dust-bowl event in the mid-west you don't notice it in California or New York, do you? (And sand storms of the intensity that could black out a single power plant don't last for weeks but 1-2 days at most. Check out the sand storm entry on wikipedia)
With good design you would also not need to scrub anything. Picture something like cling-wrap over the mirrors. Once the storm passes you just tear it off and put on a new layer. Alternatively you could have a simple shutter mechanism that closes over each mirror if a sand storm threatens. These storms are pretty predictable.
They have cheap oil. They don't NEED solar. If they had no oil they'd have long ago built solar powerplants. These plants aren't exactly rocket science.
nuge:
Since these nations are not politically aligned with each other there is little chance of that. Since any of them would be gladly incorporated into the EU they'd think twice before threatening to cut off the energy supply to it (in effect strengthening the position of their neighbors for such a bid)
Nederluv:
The EU is not so short sighted as to bar a country from joining just because it is not geographically located in Europe. Already there are such territories (e.g. Azores, Canary Island, Martinique, ... )
I think people need to look at a map. Africa is far more than 'the Sahara' and not all of that is desert. Cities exist there and have existed there for thousands of years without being 'wiped out by sand storms'. Algiers, Tunis, Tripolis, Cairo, Rabat, ... (people, you have GOT to stop watching 'The Mummy' and think that this is what Africa looks like!)
The solar power generation plants will likely be situated close to the coast so that cables can be stung under the mediterraneon or accross Gibraltar.
Africa is not a homogeneous political entity. It's unlikely that such countries would decide 'in unison' to screw over Europe (what for? And since the aim is 15% energy dependedance even a single country turning away won't matter much)
There have been a lot of stable buiness partnerships between the EU and countries in that region. No reason to suspect this would go any other way.
I think you need to look at the title of the article. I am aware that Africa is not all desert.
Improving the efficiency of electrical appliances would solve the supply short-comings in the near future, until we finally move towards a Hydrogen-based society. By then, we should be able to extract it straight from seawater, using the sun.
This way everyone gets what they want: The EU a stable business partner and the north African nations a free supply of clean water (I strongly suspect something along that line of thought will be implemented)
nuge:
Then why do you make such inane comments about the 'difficulty of building stuff inthe Sahara'?
And the sand will blast though and cellophane layer you want to put over your mirrors, then go through the glass very easily.
I have no idea how they are going to make this happen. I think you'll have to find a way to stop/slow the sandstorms first. Maybe huge holding ponds of water?
Air cooling is of course possible, but this lowers efficiency thus making the projects costlier. This is often ignored in price per kW calculations when this project is presented.
You mean as opposed to Europe and the US being held ransom at the whim of desert oil nations in the middle east controlling energy prices?
Funny how all those cities over there have survived all these thousands of years without being blasted away.
(I think you've been reading too much 'Dune'.)
You can sit in a sandstorm with nothing more than a heavy cloak and ride it out without your cloak even being 'worn away'. Cars, which have notably less than 'inch thick steel' come through sandstorms without their PAINTJOBS being unduly damaged.
And the solar power plants would be close to the coast where there are no big sandstorms, anyways.
Interesting. What exactly do you need to cool in a solar power plant?
You don't have to read it, go use your time on something else.
On topic: We have lots of technology to improve the world for every one, politics and hunger for power slows everything down.
As far as solar power goes, we already CAN get enough cheap green clean energy for everyone, we just lack the willpower to do good.
No, I mean in the exact same way.
In this case it`s easy to play one against the other in order to prevent a ransom situation.
Energy in the EU is organized differently than in the US. We aim to always have a surplus of available energy. That case, if one source 'fails', there is still no shortage and no powerplay possible.
The problem is this would cost far more than using Europe's best RE resource, the kinetic tidal/river power without dams. There is enough to power Europe without coal or nuke.
But for some reason the 'engineers' can't seem to build a decent one. I built a series of small ones it the 80's and they worked fine. So good in fact they had to be turned of most of the time from too much power. Back then we were not allowed to sell it to the grid.
Doing this would cost about 1/4 the desert scheme which is more for corporate welfare than cost effective power.
Also, the same win/win benefits of building a desalinization plant likewise applies to building an electrolysis plant - a steady supply of hydrogen and oxygen would have polenty of industrial applications for both African hosting nations and their European partners.
Best - both of these examples don't need pipelines farther than from the sea to the plant and back, as opposed to a electricity production model which would require transmission lines that would span hundreds or thousands of kilometers.