In article <__GC6.3083$hH3.328890@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
Shark <skyshark@att.SpamDefense.net> writes
>
> Simply imagine a huge above-ground swimming pool that is empty.

There has been such a station, on a large scale, at Dinorwig, in North
Wales, which has operated on a successful basis for many years now.

Remember, electricity demand goes up and down like a bride's nightie -
and such schemes are necessary, as power stations can't be cranked up
and down rapidly to meet this demand without loss of efficiency and
increased emissions. (Like cars produce most pollution in the stop-start
conditions of town driving, rather than in steady-state cruising on the
freeway.

Dinorwig is used to smooth out these daytime fluctuations, as well as
for overnight storage, and the small percentage loss in pumped storage
is greatly outweighed by the fact that it enables the man generating
stations to run at continuous output - and lower emissions.

A good analogy is your car battery, which takes in charge steadily when
you aren't using much 12 volt current, but is capable of providing huge
amounts of current for a short time when necessary - like starting, etc.

I'm told Dinorwig can, short-term, provide as much current as 3-4 main
generating stations!

>
> So again, the net effect is that the plant will store energy (in a lossy
>manner) so that they can release it later for financial gain.
>
There IS a loss, but there's a loss in ANY storage scheme - batteries,
etc.

>I believe that if California really wants their power issues to be resolved,
>they should focus on the following:
>
>A, find ways to use less resources to begin with,

er - "fewer" resources. "less" electricity.

>B, find more effecient usage of their current resources, and
>C, use more solar power. Solar energy is free and pollutionless.

Badly informed assertion. Solar energy is NOT free. There is a
tremendous capital cost per kilowatt - FAR larger than for normal
generation, and even for pumped storage.

And then you have further capital cost to convert the DC solar power to
AC, and transport it...and what about the ugly sight of all those acres
of panels?

Windmills are the current curse in UK - these "ecological" nutters are
trying to put them on every flying hill, it seems, thus uglifying every
natural landscape, destroying the sites for flying, ruining people's UHF
TV reception for miles (the blades cause picture fluctuation), and all
for a negligible amount of power that is only there intermittently.
(which means you have to have the normal power station there as backup
also - so you have TWICE the capital expenditure for the same power
generated - or, of course, a pumped storage scheme....)

And, by the way, what do your precious solar panels generate at night?
Bugger all, is what. So you need a pumped storage scheme.....which is
where we came in....


> I don't see
>a single person offering solar power solutions, nor any other solution for
>that matter. The silicon-valley corporations themselves should be scrambling
>to provide all kinds of solutions ranging from reduced-power PC's to more
>effecient heating/cooling units, but I see none. I only see political
>rigamarole.
>
True. Most western countries (and US in particular) waste energy
terribly, because it's so cheap. Well, it was in CA until recently, I
understand.

Perhaps the fact that the lights go off regularly will encourage many
firms to put solar panels on the factory roof, and batteries in the
basement, and look to their efficiency for a change - also eliminating
the need for unsightly power-distribution cables.

The demandthus created might bring down the cost of panels through m,ass
production and increased R & D.

I look forward to the day when all buildings use solar panels on their
roofs as a matter of course, supplemented by small fuel cells running on
piped natural gas or hydrogen for when the sun disappears.

This would mean that all those miles of ugly power pylons could be taken
down.

However, in the UK, where you can tell it's summer because the rain gets
warmer, I don't think solar panels would be of much use!

Perhaps in the semidesert of the SW USA, the prospects are better?

So, abandon the pumped storage scheme, and cover the E in solar
panels....or have I got it wrong?


- Rod Buck

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: Re: Save ELSINORE, Robert W. Cunningham
Next message: new CEN certification, Edu
Next message in thread: Re: Save ELSINORE, Edward Gerety
Previous message in thread: Re: Save ELSINORE, Robert W. Cunningham