Slashdot Mirror
Should We Fill the Sahara With Solar Panels? (bbc.com)
An anonymous reader writes: A panel of experts at the BBC discuss the possibility of re-purposing the Sahara Desert. Instead of having over 9 million square kilometers of barren sand, we could start a massive project to gradually fill it with solar panels. The remarks are illuminating: "The technology is good. It's matured a lot in the last few years in terms of thermal storage. And the Sahara desert is so big that if there is cloudy weather, it's localized, and with thermal storage, it can provide absolutely reliable power." The difficulties turn out to be mostly political: "The biggest potential pitfall is that it's politically complicated. You're not going to develop solar energy in the Sahara unless you have a very strong state involvement, both on the side of the consumers and the project developers." And one of the panelists points out that Africa must have a large share of the benefits: "Things have changed. Africans are self-confident now, they want to participate in their development, and they want to have part of their resources, they are not just there to always give to the rest of the world and remain poor."
Solar panels don't like sand storms.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
One of the benefits of switching to renewables is to move the energy source away from muslim controlled countries. This clearly does not have that advantage.
The Sahara has some benefits (right weather, low cost land), but probably has more costs than make it worthwhile. As the article says, there are significant political issues. They will require huge bribes, either directly to the politicians involved or to organizations that 'represent the people' (that don't really). When someone says that Africa must have a large share of the benefits, you know that means that lots of people need to be paid off.
Sadly, it makes more sense to do it someplace with a better political system, better technical infrastructure, and closer to where the power will be used. The overall cost will turn out to be lower.
The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
It will improve but if you were to put a billion dollars into solar panels, you would see a fifth the amount of solar actually built there which changes the cost/benefit equation substantially.
Plus it becomes a massive target for attacks and blackmail over attacks. You could patrol and militarize the region but that would cost money and change the cost/benefit again.
And... some of the dunes in the sahara are 75 stories tall and they drift around and could cover your facility if left unchecked.
And finally, creating that much shade under the panels would probably change the microclimate. You might see changes under the panels- life taking a foothold in the shade. Not sure what unintended consequenes that might have.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Truly. Don't underestimate the "some people just want to watch the world burn" types. Groups like Boko Haram exist to destroy things they think are "too western," and are happy to slaughter whole towns full of people just to keep their profile up. As Islamic fundamentalism spreads through Africa, large and long-term projects like this - fragile things with a huge attack surface - will become favorite targets of the medieval-minded theocracy crowd.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
I do not see the word “albedo” in this article. This is worrying. A lot of ecologist militant consider solar and wind energy as free energy just there for the taking. This is mostly true, but not entirely true.
Covering a large area of land with solar panels (even assuming they are thermal panels, not too fragile and with not too much fabrication byproducts) would change the albedo of that area, i.e. the proportion of solar light that is reflected by the ground. This will in turn change the climate of the area, and if the area is large enough, change the climate of the whole planet by changing the trade winds. It is entirely possible that in this particular instance the change would be for the good, but it is very hard to predict.
The same applies to large farms of wind turbines: they capture energy from the wind, and therefore weaken prevailing winds. Any large-scale localized change to elements of the climate has very complex consequences.
This a good plan; there is no other justifiable purpose for Saskatchewan
Does the EU even have enough troops to protect something that massive in such an unstable region? Nine million square kilometers and surrounded by notoriously unstable countries with weak governments? Without a WWII-sized massive military force to protect it, every tinpot mercenary leader and dictator will be demanding perpetual extortion not to sabotage it.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
As Islamic fundamentalism spreads through Africa...
There's a reason why the most virulent movements spawn in the most backwards areas, where comfort, safety and security are at their lowest.
According to THIS, it's well-educated engineer types who are most likely to embrace terrorism.
See also the recent terrorist attack in California. The male attacker (at least) was a well-educated, well-paid, long-term resident. He and his wife had a brand new baby, and the innocent people who they slaughtered had given them a baby shower earlier this year. That new baby is an orphan because the parents decided that slaughtering innocent people was more important than living their very successful lives and raising their child.
Islam is different..
If you're going to build a massive solar installation, it makes sense to start with somewhere like nevada or arizona - politically stable, infrastructure already in place and plenty of nearby demand.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Solar panels don't like sand storms.
Sandblasting mirrors is bad too.
Actually, sand blasting is much worse for mirrors than for flat-plate photovoltaic panels. Sandblasting the surface of a photovoltaic panel had very little effect-- it roughens the surface, but roughened glass still lets light through. Roughened mirrors, however, while they still reflect light, reflect it diffusely, which is useless for concentrating sunlight.
Dust is a more of a problem, because it sticks, but there again, it's worse for concentrating systems than for flat plate panels, since much of the scattering by dust particles is forward scattering.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com