Archive for the ‘Energy’ Category

Dyson spheres and Solar Wind Power by satellite

September 26, 2010

Freeman Dyson is credited with being the first to formalize the concept of the Dyson sphere in his 1959 paper “Search for Artificial Stellar Sources of Infra-Red Radiation”, published in the journal Science.

Dyson Sphere: centauri-dreams.org

However, Dyson was inspired by the mention of the concept in the 1937 science fiction novel Star Maker, by Olaf Stapledon, and possibly by the works of J. D. Bernal and Raymond Z. Gallun who seem to have explored similar concepts in their work. Such a “sphere” would be a system of orbiting solar power satellites meant to completely encompass a star and capture most or all of its energy output. Dyson speculated that such structures would be the logical consequence of the long-term survival and escalating energy needs of a technological civilization.

The New Scientist carries a report on  a speculation about using the solar wind to generate power for use on earth, based on the paper by  Harrop and Schulze-Makuch in the International Journal of Astrobiology, “The Solar Wind Power Satellite as an alternative to a traditional Dyson Sphere and its implications for remote detection”.

The concept for the so-called Dyson-Harrop satellite begins with a long metal wire loop pointed at the sun. This wire is charged to generate a cylindrical magnetic field that snags the electrons that make up half the solar wind. These electrons get funnelled into a metal spherical receiver to produce a current, which generates the wire’s magnetic field – making the system self-sustaining.

Dyson-Harrop Satellite

Any current not needed for the magnetic field powers an infrared laser trained on satellite dishes back on Earth, designed to collect the energy. Air is transparent to infrared so Earth’s atmosphere won’t suck up energy from the beam before it reaches the ground.

Back on the satellite, the current has been drained of its electrical energy by the laser – the electrons fall onto a ring-shaped sail, where incoming sunlight can re-energise them enough to keep the satellite in orbit around the sun.

A relatively small Dyson-Harrop satellite using a 1-centimetre-wide copper wire 300 metres long, a receiver 2 metres wide and a sail 10 metres in diameter, sitting at roughly the same distance from the sun as the Earth, could generate 1.7 megawatts of power – enough for about 1000 family homes in the US.

A satellite with the same-sized receiver at the same distance from the sun but with a 1-kilometre-long wire and a sail 8400 kilometres wide could generate roughly 1 billion billion gigawatts (1027 watts) of power, “which is actually 100 billion times the power humanity currently requires”, says researcher Brooks Harrop, a physicist at Washington State University in Pullman who designed the satellite.

Solar panels cost more per pound than the copper making up the Dyson-Harrop satellites, so according to Harrop, “the cost of a solar wind power satellite project should be lower than a comparative solar panel project”.

A smaller version of this satellite could help power some space missions perhaps in helping generate power for something like the Ulysses spacecraft, which went around the poles of the sun.


Fascinating stuff!

It occurs to me that getting a sharp enough focus for the laser beam may be restricted – everything else becoming feasible –  to “base stations” having no atmosphere and therefore located in space not too far from the satellite.

A point to note about all such schemes where man’s power generation needs on earth are satisfied by using off-earth sources of energy (including solar energy which does not normally get to earth) is that all such power will eventually be dissipated as heat into the first 100m of the earth’s atmosphere. If such power is significant with respect to the solar radiation reaching the earth then cooling will need to be arranged for.

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

“We don’t want to be poor any more” – but the WWF is not listening

September 26, 2010

Laos says it rejects calls for a dam moratorium on the Mekong River because it wants cheap power to develop its economy despite threats to fish habitats. The Southeast Asian nation moved this week to secure regional approval for the first major hydropower plant on its stretch of the lower Mekong in the face of protests from international conservation groups. The Sayaboury dam is to be built across a part of the Mekong that flows through Laos.

Mekong and its main tributaries.

Wikipedia: Mekong and tributaries

The backers of the 1260 MW Sayaboury Hydro project include the World Bank and the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT), a state utility that signed an agreement in Laos in June to buy power once the new dam’s turbines come to life. The BBC reports that the World Bank would provide loans and guarantees for the $1.2bn project. The decision comes after nearly 10 years of discussions with the Laos government.

Laos is a poor, landlocked country which has few viable industries. But it does have plenty of mountains and rivers, and that is why it is pinning its hopes for the future on hydroelectric power. Nam Theun 2 is the country’s largest dam project, on a tributary of the mighty Mekong. It is designed to produce electricity for export to neighbouring Thailand, earning valuable foreign currency that Laos says it will use to alleviate poverty.

“We don’t want to be poor any more,” said Viraphone Viravong, director general of the country’s energy and mines department. “If we want to grow, we need this dam.”

But needless to say the WWF and The Guardian are opposed:

Giant Catfish _Pangasianodon gigas_ ©Sut.jpg

Giant dog-eating Catfish

Catfish the length of cars and stingrays that weigh more than tigers are threatened by the proposed 800m barrier.

“This dam is the greatest challenge the Mekong River Commission has faced since it was formed. It is the most serious test of its usefulness and relevance,” said Marc Goichot, of the WWF. “It is already very clear this dam would amplify and accelerate the negative impacts of Chinese dams to the Mekong delta. What are the other impacts?”

It has taken 10 years to get this far, but WWF supports a delay in the approval of the mainstream dams, including the Sayabouly hydropower dam in Sayabouly Province, Laos — and let the poverty and misery continue.

Virus War! A taste of things to come?

September 24, 2010
Advertisement from the 1970s by American nucle...

Wikipedia:Advertisement from the 1970s by American nuclear-energy companies

(Reuters)

A computer virus that attacks a widely used industrial system appears aimed mostly at Iran and its power suggests a state may have been involved in creating it, an expert at a U.S. technology company said on Friday.

Kevin Hogan, Senior Director of Security Response at Symantec, told Reuters 60 percent of the computers worldwide infected by the so-called Stuxnet worm were in Iran, indicating industrial plants in that country were the target. Hogan’s comments are the latest in a string of specialist comments on Stuxnet that have stirred speculation that Iran’s first nuclear power station, at Bushehr, has been targeted in a state-backed attempt at sabotage or espionage.

“It’s pretty clear that based on the infection behavior that installations in Iran are being targeted,” Hogan said of the virus which attacks Siemens AG‘s widely used industrial control systems.

“The numbers are off the charts,” he said, adding Symantec had located the IP addresses of the computers infected and traced the geographic spread of the malicious code. Diplomats and security sources say Western governments and Israel view sabotage as one way of slowing Iran’s nuclear program, which the West suspects is aimed at making nuclear weapons but Tehran insists is for peaceful energy purposes. It was clear the worm’s creators had significant resources.

“We cannot rule out the possibility (of a state being behind it). Largely based on the resources, organization and in-depth knowledge across several fields — including specific knowledge of installations in Iran — it would have to be a state or a non-state actor with access to those kinds of (state) systems.”

BUSHEHR CONNECTION

Siemens was involved in the original design of the Bushehr reactor in the 1970s, when West Germany and France agreed to build the nuclear power station for the former Shah of Iran before he was overthrown by the 1979 Islamic revolution.

The company has said the malware is a Trojan worm that has spread via infected USB thumb drives, exploiting a vulnerability in Microsoft Corp’s Windows operating system that has since been resolved. Siemens, Microsoft and security experts who have studied the worm have yet to determine who created the malicious software, described by commentators as the world’s first known cyber “super weapon” designed to destroy a real-world target.

Israel, which is assumed to have the Middle East’s only atomic arsenal, has hinted it could attack Iranian facilities if international diplomacy fails to curb Tehran’s nuclear designs. Israel has also developed a powerful cyberwarfare capacity. Major-General Amos Yadlin, chief of military intelligence, last year said Israeli armed forces had the means to provide network security and launch cyber attacks of their own.

In Washington, Vice Admiral Bernard McCullough, the head of the U.S. Navy’s Fleet Cyber Command, told Reuters on Thursday after testifying about cyber operations before a House of Representatives Armed Services subcommittee, that the worm “has some capabilities we haven’t seen before.”

On Wednesday, Army General Keith Alexander, head of the Pentagon’s new Cyber Command, said his forces regarded the virus as “very sophisticated.”

Siemens is the world’s number one maker of industrial automation control systems, which are also the company’s bread-and-butter, but it was not immediately clear whether the specific Siemens systems targeted by Stuxnet are at Bushehr.

Computer virus wars instead of mass killing would be a preferable trend to virus wars as a precursor to mass killing.

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68N2DY20100924?pageNumber=1

New Scientist permits the sun to join the climate club

September 23, 2010

It does seem as if the AGW establishment are preparing the ground for admitting that the sun is perhaps critical for climate.

The New Scientist runs an editorial today grudgingly admitting that “The sun’s activity has a place in climate science”.

FOR many years, any mention of the sun’s influence on climate has been greeted with suspicion.

People who believe human activity has no effect on the climate staked a claim on the sun’s role, declaring it responsible for the long-term warming trend in global temperatures. Climate scientists were often uneasy about discussing it, fearful that any concession would be misunderstood by the public and seen as an admission that climate sceptics are right.

No one has ever denied that the sun has an effect on climate. But the consensus view has always been that variations in the sun’s activity, such as the 11-year sunspot cycle, have insignificant effects. While this remains true, the latest findings show that the sun might be significant on a more regional scale. It seems changes in solar activity can have consequences ranging from higher rainfall in the tropics to extreme weather events in the north.

Mighty sun

But then they go out of their way in this article (see “The sun joins the climate club”) to denigrate the sun.

THE idea that changes in the sun’s activity can influence the climate is making a comeback, after years of scientific vilification, thanks to major advances in our understanding of the atmosphere.

The findings do not suggest – as climate sceptics frequently do – that we can blame the rise of global temperatures since the early 20th century on the sun. “There are extravagant claims for the effects of the sun on global climate,” says Giles Harrison, an atmospheric physicist at the University of Reading, UK. “They are not supported.”

Where solar effects may play a role is in influencing regional weather patterns over the coming decades. Predictions on these scales of time and space are crucial for nations seeking to prepare for the future.

Over the famous 11-year solar cycle, the sun’s brightness varies by just 0.1 per cent. This was seen as too small a change to impinge on the global climate system, so solar effects have generally been left out of climate models. However, the latest research has changed this view, and the next report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), due in 2013, will include solar effects in its models.

But the sun does not much care (Beware the Icarus Syndrome) I think for the scientific establishment and will continue to do its own thing.

Renewable Realities

September 16, 2010
Modern wind energy plant in rural scenery.

Image via Wikipedia

Renewable energy sources – when they have become commercial – have their part to play. Engineers and scientists have made remarkable progress in the development of concepts, materials, systems and technologies. But the exaggerations and distortions regarding the possibilities follow a political agenda. Fundamentals and common sense are discarded in the fervour – almost religious – of “environmentalism” and “global warming” and subsidy scams. The realities of what renewables can offer is far from the rosy perceptions that prevail.

It is worth just reminding ourselves of the fundamental constraints which apply:

Generating Capacity: Wind and solar capacity require full back-up capacity but hydro power does not.

  • Wind power is intermittent and cannot be predicted. Therefore generating capacity needs cannot rely on wind power capacity and 100% back-up in the form of alternate capacity is always needed. Since electrical power cannot be stored, wind power cannot follow load needs. Any variation in wind power produced must be compensated for by changing the power generated by some other plant in order to follow load. Wind power cannot be despatched.
  • Solar power (thermal or photovoltaic) is intermittent not only between day and night and between winter and summer but also during the hours of sunshine due to clouds, rain and dust storms. Some little storage of thermal energy (molten salts for example) is possible but storage of electrical power in batteries or the like is not
    Solar Array récupéré de http://en.wikipedia.or...

    Image via Wikipedia

    feasible.

    Solar plant capacity must also be backed up by alternate generating capacity and since this falls to zero every night, the back up required is also around 100% (with some variation due to the particular night time load profile). Because thermal storage can be available some load changing during daylight hours is feasible.

  • Hybrid solar thermal – fossil fuel plants can ensure continuous operation and eliminate the back up capacity.
  • The lifetime of components in a solar thermal plant is drastically affected by the enforced cycling caused by daily starts and stops. (Material fatigue and creep considerations are determined by thermal cycling).
  • Hydro power plants are dependent upon seasonal water levels in reservoirs for large plant or on variations of water flow in smaller run-of-the-river plants. Large plants are nearly always used for base load power (when in-season) and can also be used for power storage of surplus power from other plants if equipped with a pumped-storage facility. Hydro power plants are always included within the generating capacity base and require no back up capacity. However a grid’s load changing needs (to follow load) must usually be provided for by other types of plant (gas or coal).

Availability and capacity factor:

  • Wind power is available only when the wind blows above a minimum value (around 4 m/s) and below a maximum value (around 25 m/s). It cannot operate in gusting conditions. For safety considerations ice formation on turbine blades must be avoided and this gives a minimum ambient temperature for operation as well. Though wind turbine machinery may be available to operate for over 90% of time, the wind or weather conditions are the limiting factor and a wind turbine – dependent on siting – can usually generate power for not more than about 40 -50%  of a year. But it is not possible to predict when it will be in operation and at what load. The resultant capacity factor for a wind turbine is around 20% (i.e. a wind power plant only generates about 20% of its rated capacity on an annual basis).
  • Solar thermal plants  without storage can operate for about an annual average of 8 -9 hours per day. With thermal storage they can operate for about 14 or 15 hours per day and where the solar field is used to augment a fossil fuel plant continuous operation is possible. Without storage, a solar thermal plant has a capacity factor of around 20% which can be increased with thermal storage to about 40%. Currently the cost of thermal storage adds about 75% to the cost of a solar thermal plant.
  • Solar photovoltaic plants cannot use any form of energy storage and therefore have a capacity factor of around 20%
  • Large hydro plants running at base-load have capacity factors well above 80% (in-season).
  • Small run-of-the-river hydro plants can have capacity factors ranging from 30% in seasonal flows and over 80% in perennial flows.



Reality Check:Since 2008 US constructing 17.9 GW of coal power

September 14, 2010
Hunter Power Plant, a coal-fired power plant j...

Image via Wikipedia

An Associated Press examination of U.S. Department of Energy records and information provided by utilities and trade groups shows that more than 30 traditional coal plants have been built since 2008 or are under construction.

“Building a coal-fired power plant today is betting that we are not going to put a serious financial cost on emitting carbon dioxide,” said Severin Borenstein, director of the Energy Institute at the University of California-Berkeley.

Sixteen large plants have fired up since 2008 and 16 more are under construction. Combined, they will produce an estimated 17,900 megawatts of electricity.

Carbon-neutralizing technologies for coal plants remain at least 15 to 20 years away.

Once the carbon dioxide hysteria dies away – as it surely will – the misguided and wasted effort on carbon sequestration can be redirected to real issues connected with power generation. These are the mundane but practical though unfashionable fields of development – such as energy storage, small scale distributed use of wind power sources (since they cannot ever provide base-load), increase of efficiency for conventional coal and gas plants, integration of solar- thermal contributions into fossil plant to get continuous sustainable generation, mini-hydro (run of the river) power and distributed micro-hydro plants. Subsidies wasted on renewables can also be redirected to more fruitful areas.

Anthracite coal, a high value rock from easter...

Image via Wikipedia

Coal has not gone away.

Low energy bulbs – something wrong here.

August 31, 2010

This is in favour of the simple, cheap, traditional incandescent light bulb.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/01/07/article-1108775-02F409FC000005DC-572_468x313.jpg

I just do not like the new low energy bulbs — they are slow and the light they emit is cold and creepy.

Their claims of 5 or 8 or 10 year life cannot really be tested (there is no guarantee of course and if you drop one its life is over immediately). They are generally bulky and ugly.

They seem to have health risks (http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss_news/Study_warns_of_green_light_bulb_electrosmog_.html?cid=8584642)

and emit more mercury. http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=aa7796aa-e4a5-4c06-be84-b62dee548fda

They are supposed to reduce man’s carbon footprint but this is a nonsense on three counts: firstly switching bulbs is almost insignificant in terms of reducing man-made carbon emissions which are in turn a very small part of total carbon emissions and  in any case the effect of CO2 on climate change is insignificant. This argument is not very convincing.

I cannot help feeling that somebody, somewhere is making a lot of money from this change of regulations and enforced switch to the new bulbs. My prime suspect is the lighting manufacturers and their bureaucratic symbiotes.


Wind Turbine blades a security threat?

August 31, 2010

Wind turbines are not without their problems –they are expensive, have to be shut down for strong winds, don’t like freezing weather, need back-up, weaken the grid they are connected in to, are dangerous to transport, can be very noisy and can be dangerous for large birds.

In addition it seems they pose a threat to the military.

The New York Times reports that Dr. Dorothy Robyn, deputy under secretary of defense, has declared that wind turbines pose an unacceptable risk to national security and military training in some areas–because  moving turbine blades can cause “blackout zones” where planes disappear from radar. And in certain cases,  turbine blades are indistinguishable from approaching planes.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/08/19/timestopics/windpower_395.jpg

Moving turbine blades can be indistinguishable from airplanes on many radar systems, and they can even cause blackout zones in which planes disappear from radar entirely. Clusters of wind turbines, which can reach as high as 400 feet, look very similar to storm activity on weather radar, making it harder for air traffic controllers to give accurate weather information to pilots.

Although the military says no serious incidents have yet occurred because of the interference, the wind turbines pose an unacceptable risk to training, testing and national security in certain regions, Dr. Dorothy Robyn, deputy under secretary of defense, recently told a House Armed Services subcommittee.

In 2009, about 9,000 megawatts of proposed wind projects were abandoned or delayed because of radar concerns raised by the military and the Federal Aviation Administration, according to a member survey by the American Wind Energy Association. That is nearly as much as the amount of wind capacity that was actually built in the same year, the trade group says.

As a result of the military’s opposition, Horizon Wind Energy recently withdrew three project applications in the area. AES Wind Generation said it found out in May, after nine years of planning, that the military had objections to its proposal to build a 82.5-megawatt, 33-turbine wind farm.

Wind Power apart from its cost and technical issues is not as benign as it might seem.


“Thank god for BP”:Louisiana fishermen net more cash working for BP

August 24, 2010

There is always a silver lining – for some.

The FT reports:

The white shrimp season officially began this week in Louisiana, and at this time of year 46-year-old Mr Foret, a hardened Cajun shrimper from Houma in the Mississippi delta, would normally be out on the water plying the trade that has kept him and his family since he was 13. But now that he is a BP contractor through the oil company’s Vessels of Opportunity programme, designed to employ local fishermen in the oil spill clean-up operations, he earns more consistent money, and works a lot less than he used to. “BP is a very nice fella, and this is a guaranteed cheque,” he says, pointing to a huge yellow skin or “bladder” on his boat that is used to collect skimmed oil. “I’m sticking with this for as long as I can.”

Captain Michael Owen, better known as the big “O”, has been doing pretty well out of BP. For the past three months, he and his 24-foot fishing boat have been ferrying clean-up workers to parts of the Gulf affected by the oil spill. As a BP contractor, he does not have to worry about securing charter fishing contracts for small parties of tourists visiting the Mississippi delta, the business he ran until the oil spill. Nor does he have to stress over the pressure to find fish – redfish and speckled trout – for his demanding clients. “I’m super happy with BP,” he says. “And I’m not taking a cut [in pay].”

“It takes you three days to make that charter fishing,” says a charter fisherman from Port Sulphur about 30 miles up the road. “Thank god for BP.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/23/former-gulf-fishermenturn_n_691451.html

Gulf Coast Fisherman

Wind Power Sector struggles

August 21, 2010

Wind Power is still a long way from being commercial and is  still critically dependent upon subsidies. Austerity packages resulting from the financial crisis have sharply reduced subsidy programs and there have been a spate of cancelled and delayed projects. There is also some disillusionment evident as wind turbines demonstrated their weaknesses during the last cold winter when many had to be shut down in Europe for fear of ice on the turbine blades. The requirement for back-up power and the instability they add to the grid has not helped either. The Spanish support for renewables has dried up as the financial crisis has hit hard.

An injection of realism and common sense to the the use of renewable energy is long overdue. Wind and Solar and tidal and geothermal energies all have their place but they will not – and cannot – provide the base load power generation that coal, nuclear and hydro power have provided.

The FT reports that shares in Vestas Wind Systems lost more than a fifth of their value on Wednesday after the world’s largest wind turbine manufacturer slumped to its second consecutive quarterly loss and cut its profit guidance for the year.

image: http://www.pcdistrict.com/modules/productcatalog/product_images/132027-Windmill-3D-Screensaver.jpg

image. http://37signals.com/svn/images/dutch_windmill.jpg

Vestas warned that some expected orders from Europe and the US had been delayed as banks take longer to approve financing and deficit-laden governments review their support for wind power. Analysts highlighted regulatory uncertainty in Spain, which recently cut subsidies for renewable energy as part of its fiscal austerity programme, and the US, where legislation to promote clean energy has stalled on Capitol Hill. Low natural gas prices, caused in part by the surge in supplies from newly exploited US shale gas reserves, was another factor deterring investment in more costly renewable energy, analysts said.

New wind power installation in the US declined by more than two-thirds in the first half and fell below new coal power capacity for the first time in five years.