daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old July 30th, 2008, 08:26 AM   #341
*UofT*
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,800
Likes (Received): 18

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reinsdorf Sucks View Post
I finally saw the segment on Modern Marvels. Very interesting! I think they said it would take 670 of these towers to power the United States.
670? even if each of these costs 2billion the total cost would be around 1Trillion, which is as much US has spent in its War in Iraq. So why not just build these solar towers instead of going for Iraq's oil.
*UofT* no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old July 30th, 2008, 08:56 AM   #342
droneriot
Urban Hermit
 
droneriot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cydonia Mensae
Posts: 4,659
Likes (Received): 2612

Quote:
Originally Posted by *UofT* View Post
670? even if each of these costs 2billion the total cost would be around 1Trillion, which is as much US has spent in its War in Iraq. So why not just build these solar towers instead of going for Iraq's oil.
Towers don't drive cars.
droneriot no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2008, 08:59 AM   #343
xXFallenXx
Registered User
 
xXFallenXx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Temecula, CA
Posts: 3,859
Likes (Received): 170

Quote:
Originally Posted by droneriot View Post
Towers don't drive cars.
They will shortly. Electric cars!
xXFallenXx no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2008, 07:41 PM   #344
sam-whit-kid
'what are digits?'
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: london...
Posts: 261
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by *UofT* View Post
670? even if each of these costs 2billion the total cost would be around 1Trillion, which is as much US has spent in its War in Iraq. So why not just build these solar towers instead of going for Iraq's oil.
i hate to think about things like that.

its like after a night of drinking, who would say 'that took me a whole day to earn enough money to get blind drunk and have a hangover'. When in fact its 'god we spent 1trillion dollars on a war instead of doing something 100% worthwhile...dayum!'
sam-whit-kid no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2008, 07:51 PM   #345
TallBox
Registered User
 
TallBox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,122
Likes (Received): 421

Quote:
Originally Posted by *UofT* View Post
670? even if each of these costs 2billion the total cost would be around 1Trillion, which is as much US has spent in its War in Iraq. So why not just build these solar towers instead of going for Iraq's oil.
That number is wrong. You'd need 3,839 280MW $2bn 650m-tall solar updraft towers to provide electricity to the US. That's nearly $8 trillion. Besides, Iraq's oil production hasn't even increased considerably since the US invaded.
TallBox no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2008, 08:30 PM   #346
nezzybaby
Look at my shiny ball
 
nezzybaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bristol
Posts: 8,767
Likes (Received): 2841

Just to explain why this will never happen, to generate 1 tonne of concrete requires 100kg of fuel. Haven't bothered to work out all the values, but did a while ago and have lost the data. Basically when you calculate the CO2 produced in building this thing the payoff is something like 250years. The life expectancy is less than 100, so it is a moronic, flawed concept.

For those that don't understand what i am saying, a coal power plant is better for the environment than this, we need to find other ways.... looking to the sea is the future!
__________________
"The thing that really annoys right wingers is: facts are left wing"
Graham Linehan
nezzybaby está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2008, 10:39 PM   #347
Gaeus
500-Internal Server Error
 
Gaeus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,498
Likes (Received): 87


Heard about the Nuclear Fusion? It is the "infinite" energy that empowers our sun and the stars. The only problem is in order for the Nuclear Fusion to work you need an ingredient called "Helium 3". Helium 3 is very rare to find here in our world but it is very abundant to our Moon and probably other planets as well. We just have to go there and mine it.
Gaeus no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2008, 11:07 PM   #348
droneriot
Urban Hermit
 
droneriot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cydonia Mensae
Posts: 4,659
Likes (Received): 2612

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaeus View Post

Heard about the Nuclear Fusion? It is the "infinite" energy that empowers our sun and the stars. The only problem is in order for the Nuclear Fusion to work you need an ingredient called "Helium 3". Helium 3 is very rare to find here in our world but it is very abundant to our Moon and probably other planets as well. We just have to go there and mine it.
Uhm, not quite. Helium-3 is an element deemed very suitable for nuclear fusion in theory, but it isn't some magic potion that would bring us any closer to getting the concept itself to work. We can mine the moon all we want, we'll still have to get the science to make it work done first.
droneriot no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 30th, 2008, 11:32 PM   #349
ZZ-II
I love Skyscrapers
 
ZZ-II's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Near Ingolstadt in Bavaria
Posts: 33,502
Likes (Received): 6525

please stay on topic guys
ZZ-II no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2008, 04:27 AM   #350
FlyFish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 352
Likes (Received): 83

Quote:
Originally Posted by *UofT* View Post
670? even if each of these costs 2billion the total cost would be around 1Trillion, which is as much US has spent in its War in Iraq. So why not just build these solar towers instead of going for Iraq's oil.


Uh because our enviros would say birds would hit them, our residents would say they were ugly and "you can't build it where I live", our congress would find some permitting issue and it would take 20 years to get approval let alone actually build them. That's why.


Oh and since we are off topic and this will be pulled anyway. Don't you think if we went to Iraq to get the oil we would have gotten it by now? God, man, think before you parrot someone elses stupidity.
FlyFish no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2008, 07:11 AM   #351
Capn Jef
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 175
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaeus View Post

Heard about the Nuclear Fusion? It is the "infinite" energy that empowers our sun and the stars. The only problem is in order for the Nuclear Fusion to work you need an ingredient called "Helium 3". Helium 3 is very rare to find here in our world but it is very abundant to our Moon and probably other planets as well. We just have to go there and mine it.
Uh...I think you might need to hit the books a little hard on nuclear fusion. Even at a conceptual level.
Capn Jef no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2008, 08:36 AM   #352
nazor
Perth
 
nazor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Perth
Posts: 1,656
Likes (Received): 635

yeah don't you need the heat generated from a nuclear fission reaction to generate a fusion reaction?
nazor no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2008, 11:44 AM   #353
nezzybaby
Look at my shiny ball
 
nezzybaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bristol
Posts: 8,767
Likes (Received): 2841

Ok there is a hell of a lot of confusion over the last 5 posts, so sorry zz-II but i feel i should ellaborate. HElium 3 is such a stupid comment, mining the moon??? you on drugs??

Fusion reaction is the future definatly, but the ITER project will not reach maturity for at least 20 years, and that will be the first tokomak ever to generate power rather than consume it. The fuel used for fusion generation is deuterium or tritium which are isotopes of hydrogen, both in vast quantities on earth but isolating them can be tricky. The overall process will generate power, so to summarise:

1) You do not need to mine the moon to achieve fusion,
2) You do not need a fission reactor to power a fusion reactor (although some initial power is required as it is with almost all power stations)
3) We cannot rely on a technology which will not be ready for 50 years, we need a solution in the mean time, ideally a clean one.

For further reading try this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER
__________________
"The thing that really annoys right wingers is: facts are left wing"
Graham Linehan
nezzybaby está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2008, 03:10 AM   #354
CULWULLA
Registered User
 
CULWULLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 62,732
Likes (Received): 10113

looks like namibia may get first tower?
wow 1.5km tall, 280m dia? like to see that.
website>
www.greentower.net
image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr




http://www.afriquenligne.fr/sa-firm-...807299785.html

Windhoek, Namibia - A South African intellectual property firm Hanh & Hahn says it is planning a US$ 150 million 400 mega watt solar tower in Namibia as it moves to plug the gap in energy supply in the electricity starved southern African nation.

The solar tower, named Greentower, will be 1.5 kilometres high and 280 metres in diameter and will work by causing an updraft to the drive turbines, generating 400 MW of electricity.

Air within the solar tower is heated in a large circular greenhouse like structure, and the resulting convection causes the air to rise and escape through the tower.

The moving air drives turbines, which then produces electricity.

Hahn & Hahn managing director Alan Dunlop said Tuesday that the project had been approved by the Namibian government, adding that national power utility is partially funding a feasibility study.

But a senior government official has denied knowledge of the project.

Joseph Iita, permanent secretary in the ministry of mines and energy, said that government was not aware of the proposed solar tower, adding that 'fly-by-night' investors were flooding government with applications for energy generation projects.

“We have so many offers but we are only prepared to work with serious investors and despite so many investors showing interest in the field of energy generation, we haven't seen any project taking off,” Iita said.

Iita also said that government had not made any commitment to fund the ambitious solar power project.

Earlier, Dunlop said that the base of the tower will incorporate a 37-km2 greenhouse, in which cash crops can be grown.

The greenhouse will be used to develop soil humus to transform barren land to fertile soil that retains moisture and nutrients to enable rapid plant propagation.

Dunlop says that studies have shown that plant-linked humidity does not reduce the uplift in the tower by which the turbines are driven, and even represents a store of latent energy that can be drawn on after sunset.

Water for the plants in the greenhouse can be supplied by desalinating sea water or purifying groundwater, using known technology and a supply of energy, which is only a small fraction of the energy generated.

Solar tower technology has been slow to develop over the years.

Between 1979 and 1989, a German engineer is reported to have designed a solar to wer 200 metres high, which was built in Spain and financed by a grant from the German government.

The tower ran trouble free for eight years, producing 50 kW of electricity until it was decommissioned.

Windhoek - 29/07/2008
__________________
__________________
Sydney Harbour Bridge -1932, Sydney Opera House- 1973, Sydney Tower- 1981, Crown Sydney- 2020.. https://www.buildsydney.com/forum
CULWULLA no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2008, 01:33 PM   #355
Jude12
Architecture Student
 
Jude12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Manila - Sydney - Hong Kong
Posts: 3,074
Likes (Received): 43

Woah. That's just massive. And its twins! wow!
__________________
My 3D Designs

USTArchitecture
Jude12 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2008, 04:07 PM   #356
jaaar
...en el arroyo
 
jaaar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sevilla
Posts: 1,833
Likes (Received): 5

:O
jaaar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2008, 04:17 PM   #357
Buyckske Ruben
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,968
Likes (Received): 214

Namibia unveils 1.5km high solar tower proposal!



Namibia has announced a new proposal for the construction of a R1bn solar tower, which is being backed by the government, that would generate 400 MW of electricity and would stand 1.5km high.

The government said it is prepared to stump up half of the pre-feasibility study costs, according to intellectual property firm Hahn and Hahn. The proposal indicates the tower would be 1.5 km high and 280m in diameter.

Solar tower technology first emerged in the late 1970s, when German engineer Jorg Schlaich built a 200m solar tower in Spain, but was largely forgotten until the announcement of a 1km high solar tower in Australia to be built by 2010.

The government has also proposed that the base of the tower will incorporate a 37km2 greenhouse that would be used to change the region’s barren soil into fertile soil, in which crops can be grown.

link: http://www.tradeinvestsa.co.za/news/687264.htm
Buyckske Ruben no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2008, 04:18 PM   #358
Buyckske Ruben
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,968
Likes (Received): 214

Solar Tower for Namibia.


A new proposal for the construction of a solar tower capable of generating 400 MW of electricity has been approved by the Namibian government.

The solar tower, aptly named the “Greentower” will be 1.5 km (about 5,000 feet!) high and 280 m (918 feet) in diameter. The tower functions like a chimney. Air heated in an apron around the tower becomes relatively buoyant and wants to rise. The only path is up the chimney. Turbines on the ground or near the bottom of the tower convert the updraft into electricity.

In 1982, a small-scale experimental model of a solar chimney power plant was built under the direction of German engineer Jörg Schlaich in Manzanares, Ciudad Real, 150 km south of Madrid, Spain; the project was funded by the German government. The tower ran trouble-free for eight years, producing 50 kW of electricity, until it was decommissioned.

In recent years there has been renewed interest in the solar tower concept, a 1 km-high solar tower, capable of producing 200 MW is scheduled to be constructed by 2010 in Australia. (Project Link)

Turbines can be installed in a ring around the base of the tower, with a horizontal axis, as planned for the Australian project, or, as in the prototype in Spain, a single vertical axis turbine can be installed inside the chimney.

He adds that the Australian tower, as well as its Namibian counterpart, will be built out of reinforced concrete, using technology developed for building high-rise buildings.

“Several thermodynamics, structural, wind loading and power generation experts have developed an executive summary for a prefeasibility study for the Namibian project,” says intellectual property company Hahn & Hahn MD representative Alan Dunlop.

This Namibian project may be eligible for carbon credits under the Kyoto Protocol and offers opportunities for countries to further develop solar tower technology.

Solar towers are relatively inefficient at converting sunlight to energy - about 1% of the sunlight falling on the apron is converted to electricity. Solar towers are inexpensive but inefficient.

(Disclosure: We are working on a solar tower design that is very efficient using concentrated solar power in a novel geometric configuration - we will be publishing schematics as soon as our lawyers give us the green light.)

Photo: Wikipedia

Via: Engineering News
Buyckske Ruben no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2008, 05:52 PM   #359
antovador
space wanderer
 
antovador's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Trantor
Posts: 1,075
Likes (Received): 240

only wait who first construct a solar tower, Australia, Spain or Namibia or another country
antovador no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2008, 08:52 PM   #360
buildmilehightower
NANI Luis Almeida Cunha
 
buildmilehightower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 3,421
Likes (Received): 240

Namibia? really?

They probaly have to use 60% of their national economical money for this entire project.
buildmilehightower no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
sevilla

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 11:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu