Saharan solar power for Europe

[salm]

I´m surprised that this hasn´t been posted. It´s been all over the news here the last couple of days.

Desertec is a consortium of companies that want to supply 15% of Europeans power by setting up solar thermal energy collectors in the sahara desert and bringing the energy to Europe via cables. Today they signed a memorandum to develope the framework. They´re planing to invest 400 billion Euros in order to cover 17.000 km² (6500 square miles) in the Sahara with these solar collectors.

There are of course voices of criticism pointing out that such a project is immensly expensive and that this money would better be used on domestic development of renewable energies. Furthermore there´s fear of political dependencies on North African countries as well as problems with political stability. Also this type of power plant as well as the intercontinental cables could be easy to attack by terrorists.

Here´s the Wikipedia entry and the Desertec press release:

Desertec is a proposed large scale solar power project in North Africa by the Desertec Foundation. It operates under the auspices of the Club of Rome and the Trans-Mediterranean Renewable Energy Cooperation.[1]

escription

Under the proposal, solar thermal energy collectors (not solar cells) would be located on 6,500 square miles (17,000 km2) in the Sahara Desert.[2][3] Produced electricity would be transmitted to European and African countries by a super grid of high-voltage direct current cables.[3][4] It would provide continental Europe with 15% of its electricity.[2] By 2050, investments into solar plants and transmission lines would be total €400 billion.[3]

Consortium

The project is developed by consortium of German companies led by Munich Re.[4] The consortium consists of Deutsche Bank, Siemens, ABB, E.ON and several other partners.[3][4] The consortium will meet 13 July 2009 in Munich to discuss the feasibility of the project.[5]

Benefits

According to the report by Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy and the Club of Rome, the project could create 240,000 German jobs and generate €2 trillion worth of electricity by 2050.[6]

[edit] Critics

Critics of the project say that the project costs too much and the transmission costs are too high. Some experts fear that generation so much of electricity consumed in Europe in Africa would create a political dependency on North African countries. Centralized solar energy plants and transmission lines may become a target of terrorist attacks.[3]

13 July 2009
Press Release
12 companies plan establishment of a Desertec Industrial Initiative



Munich – 12 companies today signed a Memorandum of Understanding in Munich to establish a DESERTEC Industrial Initiative (DII). The objective of this initiative is to analyse and develop the technical, economic, political, social and ecological framework for carbon-free power generation in the deserts of North Africa. The DESERTEC concept, developed by the TREC Initiative of the Club of Rome, describes the perspectives of a sustainable power supply for all regions of the world with access to the energy potential of deserts. The founder companies of the DII, whose regional focus is on Europe, the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), will be:



* ABB
* ABENGOA Solar
* Cevital
* Deutsche Bank
* E.ON
* HSH Nordbank
* MAN Solar Millennium
* Munich Re
* M+W Zander
* RWE
* SCHOTT Solar
* SIEMENS



The companies intend to establish a planning entity whose shareholders will include the DESERTEC Foundation. The Memorandum of Understanding was signed in the presence of high-ranking representatives from German and international politics.

Among the DII’s main goals are the drafting of concrete business plans and associated financing concepts, and the initiating of industrial preparations for building a large number of networked solar thermal power plants distributed throughout the MENA region. The aim is to produce sufficient power to meet around 15% of Europe’s electricity requirements and a substantial portion of the power needs of the

producer countries. All of the DII's activities will be aimed at developing viable investment plans within three years of its establishment. The initiative’s clear focus on implementation is set out in the DII Principles for all future DII shareholders.

Besides the business opportunities for the companies, there are other economic, ecological and social potentials:



* Greater energy security in the EU/MENA countries
* Growth and development opportunities for the MENA region as a result of substantial private investment
* Safeguarding the future water supply in the MENA countries by utilising excess energy in seawater desalination plants
* Reducing carbon-dioxide emissions and thus making a significant contribution to achieving the climate change targets of the European Union and the German Federal Government



The DII planning entity is to be established as a GmbH (limited liability company) under German law by 31 October 2009. It is envisaged that other companies will join the DII once the company has been established. The aim is for the DII to include shareholders from a variety of different countries.

Representatives of the parties involved had the following to say about the joint initiative:

[CJvR]

Replacing oil arabs with solar arabs?

I would rather build a dozen new nuclear plants.

[Hawkwings]

Well at least it's solar thermal and not photovoltaic.

[Narkis]

If we're going solar anyway (damned antinuclear activists), why not install those collectors in the northern mediterranean countries? Almost just as much sun to use, none of the drawbacks.

[Teebs]

If we're going solar anyway (damned antinuclear activists), why not install those collectors in the northern mediterranean countries? Almost just as much sun to use, none of the drawbacks.

The main drawback would surely be far less space and considerably more expensive land?

[Serafina]

Replacing oil arabs with solar arabs?

I would rather build a dozen new nuclear plants.

There is a notable difference - oil is a natural resource, thus belonging to the owner of the land.
Those solar panels are not a natural resource - their output is completly controlled by the owner of them.

[Ted C]

Actually, solar facilities sound like a fine way to generate some electricity... for Africa. I don't see much sense in stringing cable across the Mediterranean to send that electricity to Europe.

Anyone consider the cost of maintaining this equipment in desert conditions?

[Narkis]

If we're going solar anyway (damned antinuclear activists), why not install those collectors in the northern mediterranean countries? Almost just as much sun to use, none of the drawbacks.

The main drawback would surely be far less space and considerably more expensive land?

Far less energy would be lost during the transfer to the other EU countries than if it had to cross the Mediterranean, so it'd take far less space to fill Europe's demands anyway. It'd also spare them the expense of extending a cable over the sea, and protecting both said cable and the collectors from people who don't have our best interests in mind. And, of course, it'd have the added benefit of increased energy independence for Europe, which I thought was something our elites were very keen on having.

[Sky Captain]

I don`t know what are social conditions in North Africa, but some time ago I read about Japanese attempt to construct a major road in Niger or Chad (don`t remember exactly which one) and all equipment Japan company brought on site were stolen in first few weeks and project failed. I`m guessing if conditions in North Africa are comparable these European companies will need a military grade security perimeter around their solar power stations and transmission lines or everything will be stolen.

Why don`t they just plan building solar power stations in central Spain - nearly as much sunlight, lot`s of mostly unused semi arid land, no need for very expensive trans Mediterranean cables and much safer place.

[Darth Tanner]

This sounds crazy. The cables between the UK and France can only handle 2GW and they expect to lay cables into the Sahara for 15% of all of Europes energy!

Also not to sound ignorant of conditions in the Sahara but what exactly is going to stop the first sand storm burying the entire facility?

Why don`t they just plan building solar power stations in central Spain

Hell for 400 billion euros why not put the solar cells on everyones roof, efficiency will be shit but if your throwing that amount of money around you can plaster everything in sight. Where the hell they expect to get that money from is another matter seeing as thats about 5,000 euros per person in Germany. Of course you could also build a few dozen or so nuclear reactors, but hey that's dangerous talk. Even if your committed to renewables for political reasons (EU law states members have to have over 30% in the next few decades) then that amount of money could cover the coast in tidal generators and off shore wind farms.

[salm]

I don`t know what are social conditions in North Africa, but some time ago I read about Japanese attempt to construct a major road in Niger or Chad (don`t remember exactly which one) and all equipment Japan company brought on site were stolen in first few weeks and project failed. I`m guessing if conditions in North Africa are comparable these European companies will need a military grade security perimeter around their solar power stations and transmission lines or everything will be stolen.

That must have been a special case. When you drive around in Africa you frequently pass signs that say something like "This road was built by "instert rich country" development institution!". So i doubt that it´s that much trouble to develop something like that.

Hell for 400 billion euros why not put the solar cells on everyones roof.

They´re not building solar panels. They use solar thermal energy systems which means that thousands of mirrors reflect the sunlight onto a large body of fluid like oil or water which is heated. The hot fluids power turbines which produce power.
Something like this can not be put onto a conventional roof.

[Lord of the Abyss]

I don`t know what are social conditions in North Africa, but some time ago I read about Japanese attempt to construct a major road in Niger or Chad (don`t remember exactly which one) and all equipment Japan company brought on site were stolen in first few weeks and project failed. I`m guessing if conditions in North Africa are comparable these European companies will need a military grade security perimeter around their solar power stations and transmission lines or everything will be stolen.

That must have been a special case. When you drive around in Africa you frequently pass signs that say something like "This road was built by "instert rich country" development institution!".

You can't steal a road. You can steal power lines and such, though.

[Samuel]

Replacing oil arabs with solar arabs?

I would rather build a dozen new nuclear plants.

There is a notable difference - oil is a natural resource, thus belonging to the owner of the land.
Those solar panels are not a natural resource - their output is completly controlled by the owner of them.

You can just as easily nationalize the solar plant as an oil well.

[[R_H]]

Spiegel article

The interesting bits:

It's actually relatively easy. Desertec is low-tech -- no expensive nuclear fusion reactors, no CO2-emitting coal power plants, no ultra-thin solar cells.

Under the plan, the sun-rich states of North Africa and the Middle East would build mirror power plants in the desert and generate electricity. As a side benefit, they could use residual heat to power seawater desalination plants, which would provide drinking water in large quantities for the arid countries. At the same time they would obtain a valuable export product: environmentally friendly electricity.

For countries such as Libya, Morocco, Algeria, Sudan and especially Middle Eastern states, the solar power business could be the start of a truly sunny future. It could create jobs and build up a sustainable energy industry, which would bring money into these countries and enable investment in infrastructure.

Müller-Steinhagen has calculated what the energy switch would cost: To generate 15 percent of Europe's electricity demand, around €400 billion ($623 billion) would be needed by 2050 to pay for the construction of solar thermal power plants. The power plants would cost €350 billion, while €50 billion would have to be spent on an electricity grid network to transport electricity from North Africa to Europe.

Too many questions remain unanswered. Who will pay for the electricity network? Who would own it? Could the various stakeholders agree on a collective guaranteed price for solar thermal electricity fed into the grid?

A lack of money is not the problem. "Renewable energy is in," says Nikolai Ulrich of HSH Nordbank. "It is relatively easy at the moment to get investment for renewable energy projects."

As easy as getting subprime mortgages? Sounds great!

But if it is all so simple, then why do countries with enough solar radiation build expensive and dangerous nuclear power plants, instead of investing in this simple technology?

Yeah, oh so expensive and oh so dangerous.

I wonder how much the EPRs would cost if they were massed produced? Further more, how high would the operating costs of the Desertec plants be?

[His Divine Shadow]

Um, what about transmission losses? I mean even just getting the power over to europe is a huge deal, even then it cannot be distributed across the EU, only in the local areas before transmission losses are too severe.

[Sky Captain]

I`m curious how long the equipment will last in desert conditions? Sand is very bad for mechanical systems, also focusing mirrors will require cleaning after every dust storm and will get scratched in the process. It will probably require a huge army of maintenance workers to keep the equipment in working order.

[salm]

Um, what about transmission losses? I mean even just getting the power over to europe is a huge deal, even then it cannot be distributed across the EU, only in the local areas before transmission losses are too severe.

They are going to use high voltage direct current lines. These power lines have an energy loss of three percent per 1000km.

[Sea Skimmer]

There is a notable difference - oil is a natural resource, thus belonging to the owner of the land.
Those solar panels are not a natural resource - their output is completly controlled by the owner of them.

You can just as easily nationalize the solar plant as an oil well.

Damn right, it’s all a matter of local laws and they WILL change those to cash on a project like this. Nationalization isn’t even required; they could just levy a 75% export tax on electricity after construction has gone too far to stop. All of which is why I don’t think anyone is actually going to be crazy enough to throw a half trillion dollars as this idea. More likely one or two pilot plants will be built to show that something is ‘being done’ about energy and then it will just fall apart amid a decade of treaty negotiations.

[Elfdart]

I think this is a great idea just as long as the 5:1 payoff estimates are accurate, and no one gets too greedy and reneges on the deal.

[Elfdart]

Damn right, it’s all a matter of local laws and they WILL change those to cash on a project like this. Nationalization isn’t even required; they could just levy a 75% export tax on electricity after construction has gone too far to stop. All of which is why I don’t think anyone is actually going to be crazy enough to throw a half trillion dollars as this idea. More likely one or two pilot plants will be built to show that something is ‘being done’ about energy and then it will just fall apart amid a decade of treaty negotiations.

I don't know, Khadaffi is such a political gelding nowadays that he'd be happy to let the consortium build whatever it wanted in Libya, and would accept his share without being greedy or stupid about it.