[AR] Re: Way off topic (was Nitrating C60)
- From: Bill Claybaugh <wclaybaugh2@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 19:07:57 -0400
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 16, 2015, at 11:05 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 10:10 PM,Bill Claybaugh <wclaybaugh2@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>> Ian:
>> I don't understand: price is price. If rooftop solar is cheaper than coal
>> then it will be installed and the base load reduced.
>
> How do you reduce base load? Base load feeds streetlights, domestic
> water pumping, sewer pumps, refrigerators and critical infrastructure.
> Shut it off at night and some people will get up the next morning knee
> deep in sewage.
>
With storage and interconnection:
I assume storage is obvious; connecting U-rope with the Arabian
peninsula--where the Saudi's and Oman plan to use the oil to build vast solar
plants--extends the effective "daylight" period. Ultimately, connecting the
future Arab, European, and North American grids will provide more than
sufficient supply for the small nighttime load.
>> Once there is enough of it--Germany has this issue at 3% solar--the
>> distribution system has to be changed to accept multipoint input and storage
>> added. Which the Germans are currently planning.
>
> Germany has some of the most expensive electrical power in the world.
> And they are burning more low grade coal as well. Storage is
> expensive any way you do it.
So? Solar is currently projected--by oil companies--at 2.5 US cents per Kw/
hour--in current dollars but in 2040. Storage may well drive up the overall
cost but there is very significant headroom available. As Tesla understands....
>
>> That is what one can see happening today. Why do want to spend bajillions on
>> pipe dreams?
>
> The power satellite idea has been around for 47 years. It has never
> been a technical problem, but it has not made economic sense till now,
> and I could be wrong that it does now. If the idea will not stand up
> to intense engineering and economic scrutiny, then it should not be
> done.
>
> If it does make sense in these terms, then why oppose cheaper
> electrical power and low cost synthetic transport fuels?
>
> At least people in this group should appreciate the exhaust velocity
> of large arcjets. The attached picture is of a 50 MW unit being fired
> in air. There is work going back into the 1960s showing Ve as high as
> 50 km/s, though the spreadsheet behind the graph in the article shows
> around 25 km/s to be more economical.
>
> Keith
>
>
>> Bill
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Mar 14, 2015, at 9:29 AM, Ian Woollard <ian.woollard@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> It's qualitatively different to rooftop solar; powersats are baseload power.
>>>
>>> Baseload power seems to be getting relatively more expensive right now;
>>> it's traditionally produced by burning fossil fuels, but fossil fuels are
>>> becoming difficult and expensive.
>>>
>>> The baseload alternatives include nuclear, but nuclear has problematic
>>> aspects.
>>>
>>> On 14 March 2015 at 13:29, Bill Claybaugh <wclaybaugh2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Solar rooftop installations already meet coal--with a subsidy--and are
>>>> projected to be lower cost on an absolute basis w/i five years.
>>>>
>>>> I want to spend a bajillion dollars on this BS why?
>>>>
>>>> Bill
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 14, 2015, at 2:56 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> As some of you know, I have been working off and on for forty years on
>>>>> getting the cost to GEO down to where power satellites can undercut
>>>>> coal.
>>>>>
>>>>> Currently working on a thermal power satellite design that looks to
>>>>> come in at 32,500 tons and puts out 5 GWe at the rectenna bus bars.
>>>>>
>>>>> To undercut coal, the total cost can't exceed $2.4 B/GW. For 6.5
>>>>> kg/kW, the cost to get the parts to GEO can't exceed $200/kg. Between
>>>>> Skylon at more than 10,000 flights per year and an old proposal by
>>>>> William Brown, it looks like that can be done.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's here http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumberp46244
>>>>> for those who can get through the pay wall. If not, there is a copy
>>>>> here:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5iotdmmTJQsc2htUG5yVTczT2xBME1GOGhzWlBaWkg5R29v/view?usp=sharing
>>>>>
>>>>> Off topic, but some of you may find it amusing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Keith
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> -Ian Woollard
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> End of arocket Digest V3 #49
>> ****************************
>>
> <AEDC_H3_Arc_Heater.jpg>
Other related posts: