[HN Gopher] Australia Fast-Tracks Plan to Send Solar Power to Si...
___________________________________________________________________
Australia Fast-Tracks Plan to Send Solar Power to Singapore
Author : riffraff
Score : 51 points
Date : 2020-08-07 05:12 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bloomberg.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bloomberg.com)
| iandanforth wrote:
| Can someone break down some numbers here for me? What kind of
| voltage do you need to move that distance? Will this create huge
| magnetic fields along the cable under the ocean? (Yes I know
| almost nothing about electricity :)
| bob1029 wrote:
| They're using HVDC technology.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-voltage_direct_current
| rjsw wrote:
| And Australia already has experience [1] of building that
| type of link.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basslink
| reaperducer wrote:
| _And Australia already has experience [1] of building that
| type of link._
|
| And according to your link, Australia's Basslink is owned
| by the government of Singapore. So that helps explain why
| they aren't afraid to do this. They've done it before.
| ggm wrote:
| Which had extended breakage: they ran it "hot" and
| remediation was expensive.
| andi999 wrote:
| I remember a lot of these hig voltage technology needs as
| insulator sulfurhexaflorid. Unfortunately the most potent
| greenhouse gas, so lets hope leackage is not too high.
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_hexafluoride
| threatripper wrote:
| I assume the use high voltage direct current (HVDC) power
| transmission using coaxial cables. Then the electric and
| magnetic fields are confined between the inner and outer
| conductors. The outer conductor basically acts as a shield that
| prevents electrical fields to escape. The magnetic fields also
| cancel out each other.
| jiggawatts wrote:
| Did anyone notice how cheap this is? Ten gigawatts at AUD $16B is
| roughly the same as 1 GW per USD $1B. Compare that to, say, a
| nuclear power plant, where a single 1 GW plant might cost five to
| ten billion after all of the approvals and the interest on the
| loan.
|
| If the price estimate is correct, Singapore would be crazy _not_
| to do it. The only issue I see is the risk of cable cuts and
| future geopolitical changes.
|
| Unfortunately, within Australia, coal is currently so cheap that
| even low-cost solar can't really compete.
| jeffbee wrote:
| 1 GW per billion dollars is dirt-cheap compared to solar power
| in America, too. Thinking of two of the largest PV
| installations in California. One was $2.4 billion for 550 MW
| and another was $1 billion for 130 MW.
| newyankee wrote:
| I wonder if a self sustaining solar plant can be set up in a
| desert with a factory powered by solar energy manufacturing solar
| panels with the sand and then being installed piece by piece. The
| stuff that will be needed to be brought from outside will be
| water (if a lot is needed), aluminum and concrete for the support
| structure and other metals in the solar panel. Surely a crazy
| project converting the hypothetical 100 miles x 100 miles square
| in Nevada or some other desert might be more feasible. It is okay
| even if this takes 10 years as long as the process is made
| sustainable to the extent possible.
| [deleted]
| 01100011 wrote:
| Why do you need concrete? Can't you just sinter the sand grains
| together?
| avmich wrote:
| Like this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptUj8JRAYu8
|
| A popular video a few years ago which demonstrate, uhm, a 3D
| printing of models out of sand.
| blargmaster33 wrote:
| Solar panels ARE NOT MADE FTOM SAND! The silicon used is forced
| from hyper pure mines and refined further from there!
| Manufacturing solar panels are one of the dirtiest industrial
| processes we have!
| grizzles wrote:
| This is a political project. It's difficult to consider it
| otherwise in a rational decision making context.
|
| Any engineer would take one look at this and go yep, let's put a
| nuclear reactor on one or more of Singapore's 64 surrounding
| islands.
|
| Singapore could get oodles of solar from Malaysia but they
| obviously aren't interested in doing that. Since the guys
| financing it have no qualms about fronting this project obviously
| Singapore is keen to fund this project as a customer but wants to
| be seen for some reason as a reluctant buyer.
| baybal2 wrote:
| > Singapore could get oodles of solar from Malaysia but they
| obviously aren't interested in doing that.
|
| And they are not interested in a cable to Indonesia either.
| Even an overland "transit" from a third country was refused by
| them.
| aaron695 wrote:
| This makes no sense, with Atlassian being involved I'd double
| down on that statement.
|
| But it's actually very cool. Like sending a person to the moon it
| pushes science forward. It's not another dumb shove more solar
| panels on houses idea.
|
| It allows Australia a lot of power over Singapore and the region
| which is good for them.
|
| I guess the question is what's the side ways difference between
| NT and Singapore? It's a one hour time zone difference. How much
| peak/off peak/day time advantage do they get with the the
| different sun times.
|
| Why this over Perth? (I'd guess it's a simple power lines in the
| ocean is cheaper)
| tomglynch wrote:
| Interesting point - laying cables along a circle of latitude
| with a 4 hour time difference would mean the peak solar power
| at one location would power the other locations peak usage (6pm
| - 9pm). However, a 4 hour time difference is pretty substantial
| in terms of length of cables. I wonder if Australia could do
| this between Perth and the South East (Melbourne, Sydney).
| jacques_chester wrote:
| > _Why this over Perth?_
|
| 1. Darwin is thousands of kilometres closer.
|
| 2. Laying submarine cables from Darwin to Singapore has been
| done more than once, it's a known route.
| aaron695 wrote:
| Sorry, I was in-specific, I meant if this is a good idea why
| not install the infrastructure in country from Darwin east or
| west to Perth or Cairns over Singapore.
| jacques_chester wrote:
| Out of potential markets in South East Asia or on the rim
| of the Indian Ocean, Singapore is the wealthiest and
| easiest to do business with.
| rbg246 wrote:
| Politics I would suspect would prohibit this sort of
| investment in infrastructure for Australian markets.
| iso1210 wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia%E2%80%93ASEAN_Power_...
|
| 10GW plant with a 30GWh battery. The enormous South Australia
| battery Musk put in is about 125MWh - 0.5% of that size.
| microcolonel wrote:
| Imagine if the whole United States had the geography of Nevada,
| and you'll see how attractive solar is to Australia.
| dylan604 wrote:
| I'd be willing to give up Vegas to turn Nevada into a giant
| solar farm.
| nitrogen wrote:
| Vegas is tiny compared to Nevada. You can have both. Nevada
| has lots of rocky terrain and winter snows, though, so much
| wouldn't be usable.
| gumby wrote:
| Not to say batteries aren't crucial, but you are comparing
| apples and oranges.
|
| That battery is only used for a very small peak / corner case
| and at least when I looked at the numbers last year hadn't yet
| paid for its cost, despite some breathless claims. I do expect
| it to pay off though.
|
| The entire demand for a battery _like that_ for a country like
| Australia is probably one unit. And it's no accident that it
| was installed in south Australia, not one of the more densely
| settled states.
|
| It was a good PR stunt, but doesn't really teach anything
| special.
| ggm wrote:
| It's been a lot more than a PR stunt, it's alerted the
| community to severe market distorting pricing practices and
| saved the state millions. It's already running in profit on
| the part which is not contracted to prevent bidding wars and
| it's being extended physically. It did have a huge PR element
| in its deployment but it's real, and it does a real job. It's
| role in frequency stabilisation stopped potential blackouts
| when long lines to NSW and Victoria died. (Islanding SA and
| potentially causing rolling blackouts from frequency
| instability)
| briffle wrote:
| It would be interesting to see those huge tesla batteries on a
| large ship,(like a retired oil supertanker) charging at one
| point, and discharging at the destination. Leave enough to
| power the ship back home, and just have several of them.
| Probably not as efficient as power lines, but could go to
| multiple destinations.
| throwaw4y-plate wrote:
| Could the battery power the boat?
| [deleted]
| teruakohatu wrote:
| Singapore is already supplied with energy from ships (natural
| gas). So energy density will determine how many ships would
| be required. Depending on conversion efficiency, we are
| talking 50-150x as many lipo ships as natural gas ships.
|
| If Singapore only needed one natural gas very large super
| tanker, we would need to increase the global feet of super
| tankers by 7-20% just to ship electrical energy to Singapore.
| baybal2 wrote:
| Lets do the math:
|
| Cheap LFP batteries get around 160-170wh/kg.
|
| Largest supertankers have net tonnage of around 250000.
|
| 250000000 * 170 = 42.5GWH.
|
| Quite respectable. Karadeniz (the biggest floating
| powerplant operator) has actually floated the idea.
| gumby wrote:
| Compare to DESERTEC, a plan to send power from North African
| solar farms under the Mediterranean to Europe with huge DC
| cables. They've been at it a while and I haven't seen any signed
| of progress in a decade.
|
| It's possible AU+SG May have more organizational success. Only
| two players, both OECD countries. But the technical hurdles
| remain immense.
|
| https://www.desertec.org/
| threatripper wrote:
| Problem is the fragile political situation in North Africa and
| the reluctance of the European militaries to ensure stability
| with force.
| baybal2 wrote:
| Have you been watching French moves in Africa as of late?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-08-09 23:00 UTC)