Slashdot Mirror
Superconducting Power Grid Launches In New York
EmagGeek writes "IEEE is running a story about a new superconducting power grid that was energized in April in New York State. The lines operate at 138kV and are cooled to 65-75K to maintain superconductivity. These lines are run underground and can carry 150 times more electricity than copper lines of the same cross section. The project is funded with taxpayer dollars through the Department of Energy."
A related story at MarketWatch indicates that this is part of a large-scale effort to upgrade aging infrastructure.
With the influx of superconducting articles I got a pretty good feel of "hight temperature" superconducting being vaporware. It's cool that we're seeing real world applications now. TFA even tries to trick you into not believing the summary by saying they were "commissioned", but if I read correctly they mean "was put on the power grid" by commissioned, not "was approved to be built."
To a large extent good old passive wires make for quite a robust system.
However with the addition of all the support equipment necessary for LN2, doesn't this make for a step
backward in terms of reliability ?
Decentralized power production, e.g., solar, still seems like a more worthwhile idea to me.
Absolute statements are never true
This is only a 150 metre prototype, but if the technology scales then it will have a major effect on the economics of power distribution.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
I wish that was funny and not depressing.
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
Actually, in Type-II (high temperature) superconductors there can be a small but finite resistance. From wikipedia:
In a class of superconductors known as Type II superconductors, including all known high-temperature superconductors, an extremely small amount of resistivity appears at temperatures not too far below the nominal superconducting transition when an electrical current is applied in conjunction with a strong magnetic field, which may be caused by the electrical current. This is due to the motion of vortices in the electronic superfluid, which dissipates some of the energy carried by the current. If the current is sufficiently small, the vortices are stationary, and the resistivity vanishes. The resistance due to this effect is tiny compared with that of non-superconducting materials, but must be taken into account in sensitive experiments. However, as the temperature decreases far enough below the nominal superconducting transition, these vortices can become frozen into a disordered but stationary phase known as a "vortex glass". Below this vortex glass transition temperature, the resistance of the material becomes truly zero.
Even if it took alot of energy to cool the lines, these would still make sense in NY. Long Island is like the epicenter of the NIMBY philosophy, so no new power generation has been added for 30-40 years. Most new power is actually transported from the large hydro projects in Quebec. Using the existing power rights of way, 60-75% of each marginal increase in power transmission is lost in transit. So if you send 10 units of electricity from Quebec, 2-4 units will come out on the other end.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
Comment removed based on user account deletion
In regard to projects like this, you have it all wrong. Let's think for a minute.
New York City and its tri-state metro area is the largest in the country, and essentially the world's financial capital. Its arguably one of the most important areas in the country.
For a variety of reasons like NIMBY, the dysfunction of NY state government and rapidly increasing demand, an increasing proportion of the electricity supply is coming from places hundreds of miles away in Upstate NY and Quebec. The geography of NYC and Long Island (and the high cost of land) makes it very difficult to add transmission lines, and makes it relatively easy to attack the existing lines.
So, if a technology like superconducting transmission lines would allow you to increase capacity and better protect these lines by burying them, it seems like a valid security measure to me.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
Okay, maybe this is a stupid question but I really don't think that it is.
- Liquid nitrogen is cheap. The more of it you need, hence the larger your machinery for making it, the cheaper it gets.
- We're talking about a hundred million dollar system here, just in construction and maintenence costs. Not to mention the billions of dollars worth of services that would depend on it.
- If your insulation is at all effective, the amount of liquid nitrogen required to cool a given stretch of cable is pretty small, since the whole cross-section of cable is something like two centimeters, including part of the cladding.
This being the case, maybe it would be cheaper all around to just keep two or three hundred liters of "extra" liquid nitrogen in tanks connected to the system every mile or so. If the system is leaky, who cares? As long as you're making liquid nitrogen faster than you're leaking it and you are keeping the stuff flowing effectively to the leak, it's just not that big a deal. Keep in mind that at retail prices "two or three hundred liters" is about four hundred bucks worth. Maybe. Relative to the cost and importance of a system like this, a few hundred bucks, even the cost of the equipment to make that liquid nitrogen, is a rounding error.
It's all about the information. And what we do with it.