tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19508699.post7888752081742829992..comments2024-03-13T18:55:49.391+00:00Comments on Energy Balance: British Motoring - are its Days Numbered?Professor Chris Rhodeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12060542089215379056noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19508699.post-89609917925126517342011-07-29T15:29:35.140+01:002011-07-29T15:29:35.140+01:00Oil is enough for another fifty years onlyOil is enough for another fifty years onlyUsed carshttp://themotoring.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19508699.post-66244415466469003462008-06-10T08:58:00.000+01:002008-06-10T08:58:00.000+01:00ok, but since oil comes from the middle east anywa...ok, but since oil comes from the middle east anyway, I think it wouldn't be a bad idea to transform those areas in sun power harvesting areas.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19508699.post-55256517230025531622008-06-10T08:21:00.000+01:002008-06-10T08:21:00.000+01:00There is some information about losses in power tr...There is some information about losses in power transmission here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission#Losses<BR/><BR/>It would seem these are less than 10% (as I understood it to be, e.g. the efficiency of the National Grid) and so transmission from e.g. the Sahara desert to the EU should not be unduly hampered by the distances involved. The most efficient transmission was found to be over a distance of 7,000 km (4000 miles).<BR/><BR/>I guess there are other issues - political, who will bear the various costs along the chain, threats of terrorism and not insignificantly the fabrication of such a large area of solar-panels which would be no mean undertaking.<BR/><BR/>Large-scale solar pv energy is thought to be only feasible if thin-film technology is implemented and that is some way off as yet. The efficiency is less but then only around 1% of the silicon or other semiconducting materials is required - a huge advantage for potential scale-up. Amorphous materials can be used too for thin-film cells, which takes some of the draconian pressure off from e.g. ultra high purity, crystalline silicon wafers.<BR/><BR/>I did read one report of a company that claims it can print thin-film cells onto thin metal sheets, rather line an ink-jet printer does on paper. This would get costs down considerably, which is necessary for pv to really be applied "in anger"!<BR/><BR/>Regards,<BR/><BR/>Chris.Professor Chris Rhodeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12060542089215379056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19508699.post-13169626260921924682008-06-10T07:32:00.000+01:002008-06-10T07:32:00.000+01:00ok thank you. I was thinking, how feasible would b...ok thank you. I was thinking, how feasible would be to cover part of the deserts in the world with solar panels and transfer the energy long distances to Europe? Is it possible or the dissipation on the way would be too much? Does the energy have to be generated where or near where it is consumed or can it travel long distances? In fact, if there's something greenhouse gases resulted in is a hotter sun and creating more arid areas. What if part of the sahara desert was covered with solar panels and their power transferred to EU?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19508699.post-71840818867827231982008-06-08T08:04:00.000+01:002008-06-08T08:04:00.000+01:00That figure of 44% efficiency is very high and I d...That figure of 44% efficiency is very high and I doubt it refers to a commercially ready solar-cell as yet. 30% is still good going commercially, and 15 - 20% is usually regarded as more realistic. Thin-film cells are less efficient, counting-in at around 8%.<BR/><BR/>However, to answer your question at face value, I note the following:<BR/><BR/>The average insolation in the UK is quoted at 0.1 kWh/m^2 which would accord to 2.4 kWh/m^2/day.<BR/><BR/>At an efficiency of 44% that amounts to 1.056 kWh/m^2/day, x 365 days = 385.44 kWh/m^2/year.<BR/><BR/>The UK electricity total is 390 TWh/year and so dividing:<BR/><BR/>390 x 10^12 Wh/385.44 x 1000 Wh per year/m^2 = 1.01 x 10^9 m^2 of cell area.<BR/><BR/>So, that's just over 1000 square kilometers, or 0.4% of the UK mainland surface.<BR/><BR/>However, it would make more sense to place them on the roofs of buildings - particularly those that are south-facing, rather than spoil the countryside with them.<BR/><BR/>My feeling is however, that making 1010 km^2 of panels would prove a considerable undertaking.<BR/><BR/>Regards,<BR/><BR/>Chris Rhodes.Professor Chris Rhodeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12060542089215379056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19508699.post-45978467348952999592008-06-06T16:27:00.000+01:002008-06-06T16:27:00.000+01:00hello, not related to this post, I have found this...hello, not related to this post, I have found this link, http://www.physorg.com/news131027836.html<BR/>It says that in theory solar panels with this nano technology could have a 44% efficiency. I think the average efficiency is around 30%, so I was wandering what this could mean in terms of how many sqm of solar panels would be needed to be built to supply energy consumption. thanksAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com