Posted on 05/13/2009 2:55:08 PM PDT by shove_it
Increasing reliance on renewable energy from wind and solar farms might not necessarily mean the construction of thousands of new transmission towers stretching across the American landscape.
Cold Cables (American Superconductor Inc.) That’s because of a technology called superconducting cable, that could be the recipient of federal assistance that would speed its deployment.
Superconducting cable has for at least two decades struggled to prove its mettle and win big utility contracts from the power industry, which is notoriously slow to adopt new technology.
But the technology won a powerful friend this week when House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer’s introduced on Tuesday two bills (HR 2347 and HR 2348) that authorize the federal government to cover half the cost of high-voltage transmission projects, at least 300 miles in length, that employ advanced cable technology. Mr. Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat, also would offer accelerated depreciation (five years, not 20) and special incentives for domestic manufacturing of advanced cable systems.
[...]
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.wsj.com ...
Cool. The technology too.
A certain amount of power is needed to keep these lines cold. For that reason I would think that small and variable amounts of power, as from wind farms, are not suited to this technology. It is better for large, reliable sources such as nukes.
Complicating something makes it more prone to failure. Nikola Tesla got it right the first time, IMO.
Superconducting cables have ZERO resistance. That’s the good part. The bad part is that they have to be kept a few hundred degrees F below zero to be superconducting and that takes energy. It’s not cost effective if the power to cool the lines per foot exceeds the IR losses per foot using standard technology. How you do that with high voltage lines (up in the wind???) is a mystery to me. Also - why would you use high voltage (and low current) when the IR losses are ZERO? Why not low voltage and high current?
If this were good and had a positive cost:benefit ratio it would be done and not languisihing for two decades.
It is expensive, requires power and is unreliable. The concept is sound but unworkable. No business designs to not make more profit and if this concept were workable and profitable it would be done.
I wonder what the “good” congresscreep was promised or paid to push this agenda. Sounds just like the stupidity of GPS tracking cars to tax the miles instead of or in addition tot he gasoline ...just another payoff of a crooked politician.
I’m not current on this subject.
They go undergound.
Probably so. But if that was cost effective they would be doing it with standard HV long distance power and, AFAIK, they don't.
When an influential rat like Hoyer boosts it, I perk up.
Ever think it is a bad investment since it can’t make money without taxpayer subsidy or special tax treatment?
Ever think it is a parasite on society since it can’t pay its own way?
Ever think that the inventors may have been inspired technically but just lousy businessmen?
Ever think that you are looking for your own government bailout?
Nice!
Possibly because WHEN the cryogenic system fails, if the line is carrying high currents, one ends up with a 300 mile trail of metal vapor. Kind of like one of those glass Buss fuses, just miles in length.
It would probably be pretty at night. And loud.
1. Building large transmission cable towers across that waterway for conventional large scale power distrubtion created all kinds of problems for air and especially sea navigation.
2. Weather in the area created numerous opportunities for knocking this transmission line off-line, especially in the winter and spring.
Most places don't have these types of issues, and can't begin to justify the same cost per mile. Of course, with all the subsidies offered by Congress for windmill power, what's a few more subsidy dollars for super-cooled cable?
See these articles for more information. The second link describes the Long Island installation mentioned above.
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/07/cryogenic_super.html
http://www.amsc.com/products/htswire/LIPAHTSCableProjectBrief.html
You are ignoring the advances in SC materials over the past few years.
Thanks for posting those links.
>> I’m not current on this subject.
ohm, maybe because you’re too resistant...
A cost savings should cost less.
There have been some recent innovations that support the feasibility of warmer temperature conductors using a proposal whereby the wave travels faster through the boundary between two different materials than along the materials themselves at the same temperatures. I’ll see if I can find the article I saw it in.
If the materials are feasible in mass quantities then it could provide a superconductor without the temperature issues.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.