Slashdot Mirror


World's Largest Ocean Thermal Power Plant Planned For China

cylonlover writes "Lockheed Martin has been getting its feet wet in the renewable energy game for some time. In the 1970s it helped build the world's first successful floating Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) system that generated net power, and in 2009 it was awarded a contract to develop an OTEC pilot plant in Hawaii. That project has apparently been canceled but the company has now shifted its OTEC sights westward by teaming up with Hong Kong-based Reignwood Group to co-develop a 10 MW pilot plant that will be built off the coast of southern China."

74 of 112 comments (clear)

  1. Re:And anybody who complains about the unsightly v by gl4ss · · Score: 1

    Will be shot. Because the Chinese don't mess around with niceties.

    it's off the coast. who's going to complain? pirates?

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  2. RTFA, only in the tropics by alen · · Score: 3, Informative

    not like we can build this off the coast of Nantucket

    1. Re:RTFA, only in the tropics by h4rr4r · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You realize the USA extends much further south than Nantucket, right?

    2. Re:RTFA, only in the tropics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      In Stockholm, Sweden we have since many years been running the worlds largest heat pump facility, 225 MW. http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammarbyverket.
      It's using waste water from a nearby waste water treatment facility that serves a large fraction of the Stockholm metropolitan area of some 2M people.

    3. Re:RTFA, only in the tropics by ebno-10db · · Score: 1, Troll

      You realize the USA extends much further south than Nantucket, right?

      Yes, but no place much further south than Nantucket is worth going to.

      However, we might still be able to use some of that beach front real estate for OTEC. Or perhaps the poster is suggesting OTEC for Nantucket (or referring to the fact that Nantucket is a excellent place for offshore wind, blocked by various NIMBY's)

    4. Re:RTFA, only in the tropics by mackai · · Score: 2

      True on both. The idea has been around long enough to know the more obvious limitations. You need warm surface waters and access to deep cold water. Back in the 70's the only US sites viewed as suitable for land based OTEC was Hawaii and the territory of Puerto Rico. There were designs for grazing platforms that could float in tropical deep water but the problem was always how to get the energy from the platform to where it is needed. Biofouling is a tremendous problem as well. I think that it is a pretty sound concept but like most others, there is a lot of engineering needed to make it all work.

    5. Re:RTFA, only in the tropics by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      inflammatory jokes get modded down

      Inflammatory? Wow, new frontiers in political correctness.

      Better to deal with it and try harder next time than to gripe about it.

      Don't gripe? This is Slashdot!

    6. Re:RTFA, only in the tropics by Dabido · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of an old poem.

      There was an OTEC from Nantucket ...

      --
      Sure enough, the cow costume was hanging up next to the superhero outfit and sailors uniform. (S,Spud)
    7. Re:RTFA, only in the tropics by dave87656 · · Score: 1

      In Stockholm, Sweden we have since many years been running the worlds largest heat pump facility, 225 MW.... It's using waste water from a nearby waste water treatment facility

      Now that's hot sh*t

      Sorry couldn't resist.

  3. shifted its OTEC sights westward by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    To the far east... kinda like making those three lefts...

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re: shifted its OTEC sights westward by poity · · Score: 1

      That's implying Europe is the center of the world. East and West are just relative directions.

      --
      your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
    2. Re: shifted its OTEC sights westward by chromaexcursion · · Score: 4, Funny

      The shortest way from Hawaii to China is to go west.
      it's one of the features of a sphere.

    3. Re: shifted its OTEC sights westward by flimflammer · · Score: 1

      Westward in a literal sense, dude.

    4. Re: shifted its OTEC sights westward by Amouth · · Score: 1

      unless you usually like to go the long way around.

      Well this is Lockheed Martin after all.

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
  4. FIX THE LENGTH LIMIT ALGORITHM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is ridiculous, the length limit algorithm needs to be updated, these jackoffs are breaking it somehow, I shouldn't have to hold Page Down for 2 seconds to skip past one comment.

    1. Re:FIX THE LENGTH LIMIT ALGORITHM by tp1024 · · Score: 2

      Anything in html tags doesn't seem to count.
      Nor do code blocks.

      Just judging from the apperance of the post.

  5. Do the waves matter? by a_big_favor · · Score: 1

    Maybe I missed it but the picture gives me a vague impression that waves have something to do with it but I didn't see them mentioned? I suppose the water movement wouldn't be much use though.

    1. Re:Do the waves matter? by Baloroth · · Score: 5, Informative

      Maybe I missed it but the picture gives me a vague impression that waves have something to do with it but I didn't see them mentioned? I suppose the water movement wouldn't be much use though.

      No, it has nothing to do with waves. It uses the ocean's thermal gradient as a power source: because there is warm water on top, and cold on the bottom, we can use the difference to generate power (much like heat from a conventional power plant). Keep in mind it won't be very efficient, since the temperature difference is relatively low, but since you have quite a lot of seawater to utilize, efficiency isn't terribly important.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    2. Re:Do the waves matter? by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Waves have nothing to do with this. Only the temperature difference between the surface water and deeper water. The higher the difference, the better which is why this works the best in tropical regions.

      They will "boil" the working fluid in heat exchangers near the surface, generate power with the vapor, then send the vapor down to deep cold water to get condensed. I suppose that they then pump the liquid back up to the surface to start over. Seems like it will work in theory, assuming the working fluid has the proper boiling point and high enough latent heat of vaporization so enough heat can be moved. I'm worried that in order to get the proper temperatures for the phase changes is going to require working pressures that are going to be difficult to maintain or it will require large quantities of some nasty chemicals.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    3. Re:Do the waves matter? by Solandri · · Score: 5, Informative

      Kinetic energy of water is 0.5*mv^2. For 1 ton of water moving 1 m/s, that's 500 joules per ton. If it's moving at 5 m/s (about the max you'll see in tidal areas), that's 12.5 kJ/ton.

      Water has a specific heat of 4.2 kJ/kg*C. If there's a 1 degree temperature differential, that's 4.2 MJ per ton. You have to go a bit deep to get to colder water, but by about 1km down it's around 4 C. So relative to tropical surface water, you're talking about a 25 degree difference, or an energy potential of 100 MJ per ton. Nearly 5 orders of magnitude more per ton than the kinetic energy in tidal currents.

      The catch being that it's much more difficult to extract power from temperature differentials than it is from kinetic energy. If it were easy, every car engine would have a stirling engine alongside it to extract energy from the waste heat. But stirling engines generate so little power per mass of the engine that it's more efficient just to forgo the additional weight and dump the waste heat via a radiator.

    4. Re:Do the waves matter? by dj245 · · Score: 1

      Waves have nothing to do with this. Only the temperature difference between the surface water and deeper water. The higher the difference, the better which is why this works the best in tropical regions.

      They will "boil" the working fluid in heat exchangers near the surface, generate power with the vapor, then send the vapor down to deep cold water to get condensed. I suppose that they then pump the liquid back up to the surface to start over. Seems like it will work in theory, assuming the working fluid has the proper boiling point and high enough latent heat of vaporization so enough heat can be moved. I'm worried that in order to get the proper temperatures for the phase changes is going to require working pressures that are going to be difficult to maintain or it will require large quantities of some nasty chemicals.

      It is more likely they will pump the seawater from the ocean to the plant, and have the working fluid remain on land. Whatever they use for the working fluid, it is almost certainly something that environmental groups will be upset about if it leaks into the ocean. This makes the system less efficient since pumping. The Navy has apparently determined twice that such a system isn't viable. When I see any branch of the service shutting down a Lockheed project, that is a red flag that the technology isn't there and can't get there anytime soon.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    5. Re:Do the waves matter? by nickersonm · · Score: 2

      "The boundary between cold water and warm, the Thermocline, has been important to undersea warfare for hundreds of years of man's history. Now we have found away to harness that power for constructive purposes. Once what cloaked us can now feed us. Once what shielded us from death, now brings us life."

      Captain Ulrik Svensgaard, "The Ripple and the Wave"

    6. Re:Do the waves matter? by spitzak · · Score: 1

      The article said the working fluid is ammonia.

      The heat exchangers are on the surface, not on land. The problem is that a pipe to land (rather than straight up to the surface) would be many times longer and would lose most of the temperature difference.

    7. Re:Do the waves matter? by MattskEE · · Score: 4, Informative

      ...
        If there's a 1 degree temperature differential, that's 4.2 MJ per ton.
      ...

      The catch being that it's much more difficult to extract power from temperature differentials than it is from kinetic energy. If it were easy, every car engine would have a stirling engine alongside it to extract energy from the waste heat. But stirling engines generate so little power per mass of the engine that it's more efficient just to forgo the additional weight and dump the waste heat via a radiator.

      It's not just "more difficult", it's scientifically impossible to capture all of the power from temperature differentials. The maximum possible efficiency of such a heat engine is described by Carnot's Theorem and is (1-Tc/Th) where Tc and Th are the absolute temperatures of the cold and hot reservoir. So if 100MJ of heat flows from a hot water reservoir into a cold water reservoir through a heat engine you can only capture a single digit percentage of that energy for the temperature differences under discussion

      So taking a 25 degree heat difference as 275K cold water and 300K hot water then the optimum efficiency of the heat enginer is only 8.3%, and the actual efficiency will of course be less.

    8. Re:Do the waves matter? by sincewhen · · Score: 1

      Sorry to make a small correction to an informative post, but most of the waste heat from an ICE goes out the exhaust.

      --
      -- Braden's law of data: All data spends some of its lifetime in an excel spreadsheet.
    9. Re:Do the waves matter? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the fuel cost for generating that temperature difference is free so it just comes down to capital costs and maintaince costs. Of course the capital cost is huge with a slow rate of return for investment (compared with housing bubbles or whatever) which is why a government is doing it.

    10. Re:Do the waves matter? by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 1

      Ammonia isn't great to be around but as far as I know it's pretty harmless environmentally. Reactive enough that it'll be destroyed pretty quick if there's a release.

  6. Re:And anybody who complains about the unsightly v by chromaexcursion · · Score: 4, Informative

    This system requires deep water. The deeper the better. Think over a mile deep.
    It will likely be quite a distance off shore. And unlike a windmill, it doesn't have to be 300' high.

  7. Re:And anybody who complains about the unsightly v by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because China has such a stellar environmental record.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  8. China's Great Environmental Record by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    They'll find a way to make it out of lead or cadmium I'm sure.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    1. Re:China's Great Environmental Record by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      Come on you guys, the only good "room temperature" heavy metal heat transfer fluid is mercury.

  9. Could OTEC help w/ algae biofuel? by ebno-10db · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Could OTEC help produce algae for biofuel?

    AFAIK nutrients are a serious constraint on the large scale use of algae for biofuel. For pilot plants you can always dump in fertilizer, but on a large scale it might be different, due to the energy required to make that fertilizer and the fact that there is a limited supply of phosphates. Even sewage has its problems, as there is a limited supply (though some contribute much more than others) and it may be better used for agricultural fertilizer (humanure). However, deep ocean water often contains lots of nutrients because dead plankton tend to sink. That's why you get lots of phytoplankton (green water) in parts of the ocean where there are upwellings. Could the deep water that's brought to the surface for OTEC be used to fertilize algae grown for biofuel?

  10. OTEC is just a funding vessel for other technology by sonoronos · · Score: 4, Interesting

    OTEC isn't a serious contender for green energy. It sounds good because it seems to combine romantic elements of green energy: limitless sea water, temperature gradients with huge thermal sinking ability, minimal environmental impact, etc. The truth of the matter is that OTEC has serious fundamental limitations, the worst of which is the fact that economically viable energy output requires enormous amounts of water flow - beyond what is capable with modern technology. Pulling an ultra-high flow water column from deep enough in the ocean to create a good thermal differential from surface water requires enormous pipes, which current materials technology can't deliver - because the tensile strength of even the strongest materials would buckle under the weight of the pipes themselves. Heat exchanges have to be very efficient, and sea life/creatures easily clog up the internals of the heat exchangers, so conformal coatings have to be developed to allow good thermal transfer while preventing the accumulation of bio. Finally, it just can't compete with simple proven solutions like hydro-electric. Look at any company that bids on OTEC and you'll see that the real funding vessels are in conformal coatings, materials technology, and pump technology, among other things. I don't forsee anyone building a viable OTEC plant for the purpose of commercial energy production anytime soon.

  11. Re:And anybody who complains about the unsightly v by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This system requires deep water. The deeper the better. Think over a mile deep.

    Seawater at that depth is rich in nutrients. Ocean thermal plants could be combined with aquaculture to make them more cost effective. After the water is drawn up and warmed in the heat exchanger, it is released at the surface. The nutrients result in a plankton bloom that can be eaten by fish, shrimp, oysters, etc.

  12. Damn China by ebno-10db · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Damn China. Who the hell do those people think they are? A forward project that is not absolutely guaranteed to return a profit, although it may be a key to future energy production. They'll probably blithely say that although this approach might not work, try a few of them and there's a good shot at finding at least one winner. And that winner could be worth a fortune and be essential to our future. Damn China, it acts like mid-20th century America. Any good libertarian or fiscal conservative can tell you how badly this country turned out after they wasted all that government money.

    1. Re:Damn China by khallow · · Score: 1
      I wonder why people think that throwing money at buzzwords and fads of the day is useful. Research is just like any other investment. You have to know what you're doing and you have to make some sort of cost/benefit analysis just like anything else that you want to be useful. It doesn't have to be "absolutely guaranteed" to make a profit, but there should be a good possibility of getting a sufficiently positive return on investment in some sense.

      Damn China, it acts like mid-20th century America. Any good libertarian or fiscal conservative can tell you how badly this country turned out after they wasted all that government money.

      So can oh, "good liberals" and a lot of other people. They have other excuses for why things didn't work, such as the greedy corporations having their way, but the bad did follow the "forward projects".

  13. Re:And anybody who complains about the unsightly v by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I saw a documentary about using this as the basis for oases in ocean deserts; like a way to build up populations of larger sea creatures.They can also be driven by nothing but wave power.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  14. I remember when the US used to do this stuff by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Back before we became a bunch of short-sighted corporatists who laugh at anything that doesn't turn a profit in one quarter.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    1. Re:I remember when the US used to do this stuff by ebno-10db · · Score: 3

      Don't be ridiculous. A good fiscally conservative country like the US would never do anything risky or pointless like building a railroad across a continent, or a canal between oceans, sending people to the moon or trying to develop new energy sources. Our wise statesmen realize that the proper approach is to let foolish countries like China play with this stuff while we sit back and collect the eventual profits (preferably carried on the backs of unicorns).

    2. Re:I remember when the US used to do this stuff by dbIII · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The US gave up on that sort of stuff some time between 1970 and 1985. It became easiler to sit back and let the money roll in, or businesses were handed over to idiot sons, or any of a million other things that meant most US innovation happened in Silicon Valley carried out by people that had only recently arrived in the USA.

  15. soylent purple is MUPPETS! by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    I sure that once all the fish are gone, they can also use this to suck up remaining plankton and jellyfish and sell it as Li'l Lisa's patented animal slurry.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:soylent purple is MUPPETS! by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      Do you have any reason to believe that what I asked about would necessarily be terribly destructive, or are you just one of those people reflexively, fanatically and thoughtlessly opposed to anything that's done by humans other than growing organic bean sprouts (hint: even organic farming is both highly "unnatural" and environmentally destructive). If you fall into that category, please join the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. It would benefit everyone.

  16. Re:OTEC is just a funding vessel for other technol by wisty · · Score: 1

    Well, it can't be any harder than building a working space elevator. At which point we can just beam solar power down. :/

  17. China will steal it by Ugmo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If it works China will use the partnership to steal any useful technology, produce it themselves and out compete Lockheed. See partnerships with high speed train manufacturers and solar cell production.

    1. Re:China will steal it by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 1

      We'd do that if we could in the US. There are just a few small unfortunate details that keep us from competing solely on cost, such as minimum wages, child labor laws, reasonable workplace safety laws, and relatively little currency manipulation. Work out those bugs and you can stop the Chinese copycats dead in their tracks.

      There may be some good news in this particular case. For instance, we should be happy that a domestic company is involved at all in this. And OTEC, as it stands now, may only be a transitional technology in its infancy, meaning further development is necessary to make it widely commercially viable (so it isn't like China is stealing too much from us, if/when they copy it), and it is good practice and a chance for Lockheed to do science they and we can learn from. I don't think they expect this to become their core business, though they need to build OTEC plants (if they can do it while more or less breaking even, or better) to find out and to see what else they may lead to.

      --
      This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
  18. Re:And anybody who complains about the unsightly v by ebno-10db · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Because China has such a stellar environmental record.

    No, and I can give you a mile long list of serious complaints about the Chinese government, in terms of both their domestic and foreign affairs. But give the devil his due. At least they're trying something here. You know, kind of like the United States once had the guts to do?

  19. Re:OTEC is just a funding vessel for other technol by Firethorn · · Score: 3, Interesting

    because the tensile strength of even the strongest materials would buckle under the weight of the pipes themselves.

    Couldn't this be handled by ballasting the pipes along their length to maintain neutral buoyancy?

    But yeah, there's lots and lots of problems to solve with this.

    I'm reminded of a show involving an aquatic zoo that mostly works off of piped in seawater - they have an enormous crew that's devoted to simply cleaning and maintaining the involved piping, because of the bio accumulation. One method they use is an iron 'pig' that they send through using high pressure to scrape off the collected masses inside the pipes. The forces involved are so much that the 'pigs' don't last long.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  20. Re:OTEC is just a funding vessel for other technol by ebno-10db · · Score: 2

    it just can't compete with simple proven solutions like hydro-electric

    Unfortunately we have a limited supply of that, and much of it is already tapped.

    I don't forsee anyone building a viable OTEC plant for the purpose of commercial energy production anytime soon.

    Maybe not, but the only way to really find out, or to seriously improve your component technologies, is to build pilot plants like this.

  21. co-develop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That means that they are turning over all of the technology to China. Way to go L-Mart. Not a brain inside of that company.

  22. The Side Effect's The Secret... by rmdingler · · Score: 1

    A byproduct of the process (that at present technology levels produces very little net electricity) is fresh water. If Mr. AC Clarke is correct, look for these to become much more cost efficient in the not too near future.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:The Side Effect's The Secret... by spitzak · · Score: 1

      You must be thinking of something else. According to the article the plant produces cold water but it is still seawater. (I believe they mean that it pumps cold water up from the bottom and it is still colder than the surrounding water even after the heat exchanger).

    2. Re:The Side Effect's The Secret... by rmdingler · · Score: 1

      Wiki the Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion article.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    3. Re:The Side Effect's The Secret... by spitzak · · Score: 1

      Interesting, did not know about the low-pressure boiling method. However the article pretty clearly describes the closed loop method which does not boil the water.

    4. Re:The Side Effect's The Secret... by rmdingler · · Score: 1

      Right, you are. The technology is still in it's infancy even though it's been studied for over a hundred years, leaving room for development in closed, open, and hybrid systems. According to the Wiki article, vast amounts of cheap petroleum stunted the growth of research into it. (Like many renewable energy sources) I merely suggest that if petroleum and fresh water simultaneously become scarcer, this is, at the very least, offtoperesting.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

  23. Re:OTEC is just a funding vessel for other technol by rmdingler · · Score: 1

    You're talking point seems to involve a closed system. The open system uses the warm surface water directly. No expensive pipes and there has been some limited successful electrical creation. I think the plant in the plant in Hawaii broke the Japanese record for net electrical generation.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

  24. Re:10 MW? by compro01 · · Score: 2

    An average nuclear reactor core (at least here in Canada) generates about 1000 MW

    And the NPD reactor only produced 22MW. It's called a prototype. You generally make one before you start scaling something up.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  25. Re:OTEC is just a funding vessel for other technol by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

    You think someone just pulled a nuclear 1000MW nuclear reactor out of his ass? These are tricky but my no means impossible problems to overcome.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  26. Global Cooling? by raymansean · · Score: 1

    So if we extract the energy from the ocean, we would be cooling the ocean.

    --
    insert inflammatory comment here!
  27. Re:8 easy steps by Ol+Biscuitbarrel · · Score: 2

    Deploy the Rainbow Bridge!

  28. Japan might also want to get into it. by BlueCoder · · Score: 1

    I wonder if plants couldn't be completely submerged to avoid bad weather.

  29. Agriculture usage: Irrigation by condensation by j-stroy · · Score: 1

    I recall reading a great article about a test site where the cold water was circulated through pipes that cooled soil& irrigated plants via condensation from ambient moisture, making hot volcanic soils viable for many crops that would otherwise be unable to grow. Chilled soil agriculture Fresh water was also produced by air condensers. This tech is not all about electricity, it can directly and indirectly produce other outputs.

  30. Weather Effects? by godel_56 · · Score: 3

    I've been wondering for a few years, if OTEC were implemented on a large scale (multiple GW), could this cause localized weather effects?

    You'd probably need to implement large scale OTEC in some kind of gulf stream, so that the newly cooled surface water would be carried away and replaced by new warm water. So you'd have a surface plume of colder water maybe tens of km long and wide situated in the center of a large area of warmer water. Could this act as a seed for some kind of major weather event, such as hurricanes, cyclones etc?

    1. Re:Weather Effects? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Take a look at rivers distant from the equator for some idea although at a much larger scale than one of these facilities is likely to ever be.
      In other words, try again, and try thinking instead of parroting something this time. Funny thing is the luddite playbook is written by people that don't know a lot of the world around them and you can do better than whatever party line you are following by just opening your eyes and paying attention.

  31. Re:And anybody who complains about the unsightly v by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    Hey! The US is still great! We have over $800 billion a year in annual regulatory burden!

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  32. Re:OTEC is just a funding vessel for other technol by dbIII · · Score: 2

    OTEC isn't a serious contender for green energy

    Nothing is really. Everything has consequences. We have to get away from this childish conception that some things don't (eg. the weirdness of calling nuclear "clean" despite the mining, enrichment and fuel rod manufacturing processess using some of the most toxic inorganic chemicals known).

    requires enormous pipes, which current materials technology can't deliver

    Where on earth did you get that rubbish from? It's not a space elevator, it's in water, and there's solid ground under that water that can be used to support weight.
    There's a pile of other things in the above post that are misleading or ignoring even 19th century steamship technology (algal growth on inlets etc).

  33. Re:And anybody who complains about the unsightly v by swampfriend · · Score: 1

    That will be great - by sucking nutrients out of the deepest parts of the ocean, we'll ensure that humanity causes extinction events at every level of terrestrial life we possibly can!

  34. Re:And anybody who complains about the unsightly v by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

    > That sounds very dangerous, what if that instead causes a large algae growth?

    Temporary large-scale algae growth (aka "Blooms") are a problem in small lakes/ponds/rivers. They are *NOT* a problem in oceans. Indeed, deliberate iron fertilization projects have been suggested http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_fertilization as a means of reducing atmospheric CO2. Algae are plants, and part of the photosynthesis process converts CO2+H2O into sugars.

    --

    I'm not repeating myself
    I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
  35. Re:And anybody who complains about the unsightly v by TheLink · · Score: 1

    10MW seems very small though. How many such power plants can you fit in 1 square km and still produce more than 9MW in power each?

    Coal and nuke plants are in hundreds of megawatts or even gigawatts.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_(power)#megawatt_.28106_watts.29

    --
  36. What About The Seebeck Effect? by Toad-san · · Score: 1

    I know it needs a much greater difference between "hot" and "cold" ends to generate electricity .. but it's VASTLY simpler (e.g., no moving parts at all)!

    I remember (vaguely) reading about this, a prototype plant down on one of Cuba's coasts, built in the 30's (?) by an American professor. It was basically a bunch of scrap iron (old hot water radiators?), cold end hanging down in a nearby handy ocean trench, hot end in some pools of water bulldozed out on the coastline, was just a test but generated 10KW .. presumably forever! (Or until the iron rusted away.)

    I think it was in an Analog Science Fact and Fiction article back in the 60's, but can't seem to find it. But it always struck me as a remarkably simple, foolproof way to generate electricity! You can find modules and devices available on the Internet, but with very small output, really only toys. And then these guys, http://tegpower.com/, at a somewhat larger (and expensive) scale.

    Odd that you don't hear more about it though, except for the occasional plutonium-powered satellite power supply and that sort of thing.

  37. Re:And anybody who complains about the unsightly v by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    They are *NOT* a problem in oceans. Indeed, deliberate iron fertilization projects have been suggested http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_fertilization as a means of reducing atmospheric CO2.

    .. and they have been tried - several times, on several scales - and IF they work at all, they are certainly not the rip-roaring runaway successes that they were talked up to be before the experiments were tried (by, it should be said, some of their more vocal proponents ; people with personal interests in promoting their runaway rip-roaring successes).

    These blooms are a nice idea. Why they didn't work isn't clear (to me ; I'm a geologist and my biology starts with the organism's fossilisation), but there are obviously more complex and subtle things going on than the original proponents expected.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  38. Re:And anybody who complains about the unsightly v by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    A fraction of a percent of That matter, if not brought up, would turn into oil, of which maybe one half we could extract, in a couple of hundred generations. It would be biologically wasted.

    Fixed that for you

    Of course, injecting some reality may sound like "pissing on the parade", but that doesn't stop it being reality.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  39. One wonders where ... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
    Hawaii (and to a similar extent Puerto Rica, also considered as a pilot plant site) has some pretty steep submarine gradients - up to a couple of degrees (note), making deep cool water relatively easily available relatively close inshore - under a megametre.

    But, where are they going to find such a gradient off the Chinese coast? Without getting into a territorial fight with Indonesia, the Philippines, or Taiwan? (The Gulf of Bohai is far too shallow to consider.)

    .
    (note) Yes, this should be of concern to people living on coasts facing Hawaii. And here I am sitting on a boat above the Storegga Slide headwall, whose tsunami washed into my home city a few thousand years ago. But the tsunami never got within 10m vertically of my new house, and I assess the odds of a repetition as being around 1% in my lifetime, so I'm cool with these risks. "of concern" does not equal "blind panic".

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  40. Re:And anybody who complains about the unsightly v by Optali · · Score: 1

    Oh NOES!!
    The Attack of the Gaint Shrimp!!!
    Now that they finally fixed the Tower of Tokyo after teh last Godzilla attack. It's not fair :(
     

    --
    -- 29A the number of the Beast
  41. Re:And anybody who complains about the unsightly v by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    Just injecting reality into your image of "organic debris in the sea = oil" ; you may have been joking, but I see so many nutcases in this line of work that it's hard to tell if someone really believes what they appear to be saying on that subject.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"