News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Reducing CO2 emissions by targeting the world's hyper-polluting power plants. Parent comment

Re:Reducing CO2 emissions by targeting the world's hyper-pol... by layoutIfNeeded on Monday July 26, 2021 @11:43AM (#27960845)
Pretty easy to solve. We know that electricity can go around the Earth 7 times in a second. Now, if Germany has excess electricity during the day, they can simply pospone that electricity by wrapping a long cable 302 400 times around the globe (12h * 3600s/h * 7/s = 302 400). During the day they feed the excess electricity into one end of the cable, and then 12 hours later at night, electricity comes out the other end at just the right time, when they need it!
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Reducing CO2 emissions by targeting the world's hyper-pol... by ben_w on Monday July 26, 2021 @12:40PM (#27961609)
IIRC, antopodal HVDC would have resistive losses of either 70% or 30% — I’d have to recalculate from scratch to find out which, but it doesn’t matter much either way: the real issues are “How much does the line cost?” and “what are the political implications of that size power line in all the places it has to pass through?”

Batteries and HVDC to your nearest major desert are what I expect to be the solutions.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Reducing CO2 emissions by targeting the world's hyper-pol... by nicoburns on Monday July 26, 2021 @05:10PM (#27965522)
70%, seriously? That's actually really low. What kind of voltage would that require?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Reducing CO2 emissions by targeting the world's hyper-pol... by ben_w on Monday July 26, 2021 @06:05PM (#27966070)
The following claims HVDC transmission losses of 3.5% per 1,000 km @ 800kV, therefore 20,000 km is 100% - ((100% - 3.5%)^20) ~= 51% loss; I guess my previous calculations were a different voltage, but as I’m asserting that even the difference between 30% and 70% doesn’t matter, neither does this :)

https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/J...

[ Parent | on HN ]