Comments on: A Bloody Big Solar Tower

By: Uncle B

Uncle B — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:51:11 +0000

This application is good but specific to location, financing and demands to be met! Cheaper Solar schemes are welcome in my books, and as far as I can see, lower cost to get any power for free from the Sun is good! Betcha it would charge my batteries just fine, Let the Actuaries on the particular installation decide for the greatest particular advantages – alternatives all welcome! Narrow minds drive Cadillacs with V-8 engines, black, bigger and six inches longer, this years model of course! – Smart money rides the electric bullet trains, smiles and nods at the Cadillac folk and banks the difference for highest interest rate possible! Different strokes for different folks! I like this option but in a windy place, I put wind turbines and in the Bay of Fundy I put Tidal power, wouldn’t you?

By: Uncle B

Uncle B — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:51:00 +0000

By: Ion Besteliu

Ion Besteliu — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 15:43:44 +0000

Naturally, there could be a small problem when the hurricane escapes control…

By: Ion Besteliu

Ion Besteliu — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 15:43:00 +0000

Naturally, there could be a small problem when the hurricane escapes control…

By: Ion Besteliu

Ion Besteliu — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 15:40:27 +0000

Hmm…

Also, you could paint white elephants on the tower.

However, there is also an invention called the atmospheric vortex engine, which would produce a strong updraft, along similar principles, just without the tower (which is replaced by a funnel wind). It’s in fact a machine to make a hurricane. See http://vortexengine.ca/index.shtml.

By: Ion Besteliu

Ion Besteliu — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 15:40:00 +0000

Hmm…

Also, you could paint white elephants on the tower.

By: Roland Mösl

Roland Mösl — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 09:33:18 +0000

What a wast of land. 200 MW is a joke.

Imagine the roofs of 20000 houses, each covered with 10 kW peak cheap thin film photovoltaic.

Same energy, but much less cost. US$ 1 billion for 20km² covered land and an 1 km high tower, that’s unbelievable. Let’s split the billion in 2.

$26 per squaremeter covered including all the construction,

$500.000 per m height of a very big tower with several hundered meter dieameter.

While cheap thin film photovoltaic really comes soon down to 10 Cent per kWh in very sunny areas, no chance for this construction.

By: Roland Mösl

Roland Mösl — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 09:33:00 +0000

What a wast of land. 200 MW is a joke.

Imagine the roofs of 20000 houses, each covered with 10 kW peak cheap thin film photovoltaic.

Same energy, but much less cost. US$ 1 billion for 20km² covered land and an 1 km high tower, that’s unbelievable. Let’s split the billion in 2.

$26 per squaremeter covered including all the construction,

$500.000 per m height of a very big tower with several hundered meter dieameter.

While cheap thin film photovoltaic really comes soon down to 10 Cent per kWh in very sunny areas, no chance for this construction.

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:39:46 +0000

I think it’s safe to say that, in the desert, the sun virtually, always shines, but the wind doesn’t necessarily always blow. I agree, it is expensive. But in the long run it will provide a more consistant form of electricity.

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:39:00 +0000