Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|7127|67.222.138.85

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:


1. Nowhere on the planet is cloudy all the time, and even if it was, it too would be connected to the global grid - same with places near the poles would also be connected to the global grid - that's what global means.

2. How do you get data across the oceans? In little digital boats? No, by cables, that run across the ocean-floor. Not that many would be needed - most of the inhabited land masses are either all connected, or very close together.
1. Seattle?

2. High voltage power lines are a bigger deal than internet cables. Especially the global security risk they present.
What global security risk, when you've got a global energy grid?

spark wrote:

One of the reasons solar is so attractive is that it reduces - or even eliminates - the need for massive electricity grids.
You've still got to get the electricity to where it's needed when it's needed.
Gee I dunno, cut all the power lines between the major producers and the major consumers?

If everything was independent enough to make the damage from an attack negligible, the need for such a grid would be nonexistent.
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|7186|Cambridge (UK)

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:


1. Seattle?

2. High voltage power lines are a bigger deal than internet cables. Especially the global security risk they present.
What global security risk, when you've got a global energy grid?

spark wrote:

One of the reasons solar is so attractive is that it reduces - or even eliminates - the need for massive electricity grids.
You've still got to get the electricity to where it's needed when it's needed.
Gee I dunno, cut all the power lines between the major producers and the major consumers?

If everything was independent enough to make the damage from an attack negligible, the need for such a grid would be nonexistent.
Or interconnected enough - like the internet (well, thinking back to the last time I lost internet connectivity, maybe that's not such a great example, lets say the internet in principle (i.e. how it was originally designed)).
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|7127|67.222.138.85

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

1. Seattle?

2. High voltage power lines are a bigger deal than internet cables. Especially the global security risk they present.
What global security risk, when you've got a global energy grid?


You've still got to get the electricity to where it's needed when it's needed.
Gee I dunno, cut all the power lines between the major producers and the major consumers?

If everything was independent enough to make the damage from an attack negligible, the need for such a grid would be nonexistent.
Or interconnected enough - like the internet (well, thinking back to the last time I lost internet connectivity, maybe that's not such a great example, lets say the internet in principle (i.e. how it was originally designed)).
Would be a necessity over land, but gets very expensive overseas.
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|7095|Canberra, AUS
An international grid is simply not viable for a huge number of reasons.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|7186|Cambridge (UK)

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:


Gee I dunno, cut all the power lines between the major producers and the major consumers?

If everything was independent enough to make the damage from an attack negligible, the need for such a grid would be nonexistent.
Or interconnected enough - like the internet (well, thinking back to the last time I lost internet connectivity, maybe that's not such a great example, lets say the internet in principle (i.e. how it was originally designed)).
Would be a necessity over land, but gets very expensive overseas.
How so?

Not that many long distance connections would be needed - as I've already said, the majority of the inhabited land masses are, for all practical purposes, joined together.

Spark wrote:

An international grid is simply not viable for a huge number of reasons.
Also, how so?
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|7127|67.222.138.85

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:


Or interconnected enough - like the internet (well, thinking back to the last time I lost internet connectivity, maybe that's not such a great example, lets say the internet in principle (i.e. how it was originally designed)).
Would be a necessity over land, but gets very expensive overseas.
How so?

Not that many long distance connections would be needed - as I've already said, the majority of the inhabited land masses are, for all practical purposes, joined together.

Spark wrote:

An international grid is simply not viable for a huge number of reasons.
Also, how so?
To some degree, yes. That does not mean that every corner of the earth is easily accessible, or that a worldwide power grid would be cheap or protected in all areas.
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|7186|Cambridge (UK)

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:


Would be a necessity over land, but gets very expensive overseas.
How so?

Not that many long distance connections would be needed - as I've already said, the majority of the inhabited land masses are, for all practical purposes, joined together.

Spark wrote:

An international grid is simply not viable for a huge number of reasons.
Also, how so?
To some degree, yes. That does not mean that every corner of the earth is easily accessible, or that a worldwide power grid would be cheap or protected in all areas.
The hard to reach places tend not to have people living on them - due to them being hard to reach.

And, it would be as protected as the internet is now - do you know how hard it is to permanently disconnect, say, a whole country from the internet once it is connected?

It's virtually impossible, and getting harder every day.

The key is multiple-connectivity - each node in the network is connected to many others, so that, if any one node is taken out, the data (or electricity) just goes via a different route.
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|7095|Canberra, AUS

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:


Or interconnected enough - like the internet (well, thinking back to the last time I lost internet connectivity, maybe that's not such a great example, lets say the internet in principle (i.e. how it was originally designed)).
Would be a necessity over land, but gets very expensive overseas.
How so?

Not that many long distance connections would be needed - as I've already said, the majority of the inhabited land masses are, for all practical purposes, joined together.
The power losses over such a distance would be astronomical.

Plus, transmitting power through water? Think about it.

Spark wrote:

An international grid is simply not viable for a huge number of reasons.
Also, how so?
As I've said before, there are plenty of parts of the world I would not like to be on the same grid with.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7021|132 and Bush

Spark wrote:

One of the reasons solar is so attractive is that it reduces - or even elimates - the need for massive electricity grids.
Winrar
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|7095|Canberra, AUS

Kmarion wrote:

Spark wrote:

One of the reasons solar is so attractive is that it reduces - or even elimates - the need for massive electricity grids.
Winrar
You can even make money off them if it's very, very, very sunny yet not too hot (as it is now)
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|7186|Cambridge (UK)

Spark wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:


Would be a necessity over land, but gets very expensive overseas.
How so?

Not that many long distance connections would be needed - as I've already said, the majority of the inhabited land masses are, for all practical purposes, joined together.
The power losses over such a distance would be astronomical.

Plus, transmitting power through water? Think about it.
It's done now. Using sealed cables.

Spark wrote:

Spark wrote:

An international grid is simply not viable for a huge number of reasons.
Also, how so?
As I've said before, there are plenty of parts of the world I would not like to be on the same grid with.
WHAT??? Are you afraid they might contaminate your electricity with their foreignness?
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|7095|Canberra, AUS
No, I'm afraid that for periods of the day my electricity supply might become, say, unstable.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|7186|Cambridge (UK)

Spark wrote:

No, I'm afraid that for periods of the day my electricity supply might become, say, unstable.
How?
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7021|132 and Bush

Spark wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Spark wrote:

One of the reasons solar is so attractive is that it reduces - or even elimates - the need for massive electricity grids.
Winrar
You can even make money off them if it's very, very, very sunny yet not too hot (as it is now)
You sell it back... So I hear.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
some_random_panda
Flamesuit essential
+454|6811

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Spark wrote:

No, I'm afraid that for periods of the day my electricity supply might become, say, unstable.
How?
He means black-outs.

But as for transmitting electricity internationally, you'd need enormous voltages and tiny currents (really, really tiny currents seeing as you're doing it through oceans) and insulating these wires increases heat transmission, heat loss, and consequent resistance in wire.  Also, this loss means the voltage drops and you need to top it back up now and then.  It's really not practical.
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|7041|London, England
Meh. I'm getting sick and tired of reading about these awesome new energy reports. You never even hear about them ever again.
motherdear
Member
+25|7072|Denmark/Minnesota (depends)
the global net would only be interesting if we can continue the current technologies we have and make our (still prototype) 0 ohm resistance materials practical (at the moment they need to be very very cold and that is not really effiecient but it means no energy loss what so ever)
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|7095|Canberra, AUS

motherdear wrote:

the global net would only be interesting if we can continue the current technologies we have and make our (still prototype) 0 ohm resistance materials practical (at the moment they need to be very very cold and that is not really effiecient but it means no energy loss what so ever)
Superconductors are supremely expensive. If you find a cheap way to make them, tell me because that would solve a lot of problems.

And I'm pretty sure you still get some power loss even with near-zero resistance. Power loss as I remember was dependant on current.

Last edited by Spark (2008-08-03 04:44:18)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7021|132 and Bush

Mek-Stizzle wrote:

Meh. I'm getting sick and tired of reading about these awesome new energy reports. You never even hear about them ever again.
I offered plenty of disclosures in the OP. I released myself from all liability and disappointment.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|7127|67.222.138.85

Spark wrote:

motherdear wrote:

the global net would only be interesting if we can continue the current technologies we have and make our (still prototype) 0 ohm resistance materials practical (at the moment they need to be very very cold and that is not really effiecient but it means no energy loss what so ever)
Superconductors are supremely expensive. If you find a cheap way to make them, tell me because that would solve a lot of problems.

And I'm pretty sure you still get some power loss even with near-zero resistance. Power loss as I remember was dependant on current.
Yes, but by the time we have the need to make a global power grid, that might not be the case. At the very least we won't be using some shitty copper semi-conductor.

You will always have loss, but it can be minimized. As you said it is dependent on the current, so using transformers you lower the current as far as you can and conversely boost the voltage. Then at the other end you use another transformer to step it down. That's what we do right now, hence high voltage power lines.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7021|132 and Bush

FM works for Monster Cable.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|7127|67.222.138.85
Just an engineer dad who talked to me about this stuff when I was 8 during car rides haha.

Actually it would be interesting to see what CameronPoe has to say on the global power grid. He could get a promotion.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard