Might solar power be the new oil?

[greenvert]

I recently read this article http://www.enn.com/business/article/40650, about how solar panels are being set up in the Sahara to provide Europe with solar power. While I do see this as a good thing, it got me thinking: one of the political problems facing energy usage is that we (both the US and Europe) are dependent on foreign oil. Solar energy is certainly more plentiful (and won't run out) than oil, but by locating solar panels abroad, what's the risk we're setting ourselves up for more oil-like problems?

[bent1]

I recently read this article http://www.enn.com/business/article/40650, about how solar panels are being set up in the Sahara to provide Europe with solar power. While I do see this as a good thing, it got me thinking: one of the political problems facing energy usage is that we (both the US and Europe) are dependent on foreign oil. Solar energy is certainly more plentiful (and won't run out) than oil, but by locating solar panels abroad, what's the risk we're setting ourselves up for more oil-like problems?

The Sahara Solar to Europe will require running power lines the entire distance. If we install power panels "abroad", it might be difficult to run the cables thru the atlantic ocean to here. What would be better to do in the U.S. is first update the power grid that will allow the alternate power sources (solar, wind, geothermal. garbage dump methane, algea, etc) to power the U.S instead of just a region.

The Chinese are investing in Texas wind farms, but they are doing it for the profits, not to supply power in China.

[acvicari]

I recently read this article http://www.enn.com/business/article/40650, about how solar panels are being set up in the Sahara to provide Europe with solar power. While I do see this as a good thing, it got me thinking: one of the political problems facing energy usage is that we (both the US and Europe) are dependent on foreign oil. Solar energy is certainly more plentiful (and won't run out) than oil, but by locating solar panels abroad, what's the risk we're setting ourselves up for more oil-like problems?

Perhaps, but I doubt it. First, if another country builds panels and tries to sell power to us, then later decides to use it domestically instead... no big deal. Someone, either us or them, builds more. Second, if we build panels in another country to sell the power back to ourselves, and something goes wrong where they won't let that continue, we can sell to them instead. Or, we can disassemble and move a solar panel installation somewhat more easily than other kinds of power plants.

More importantly, solar power is not, at present, fuel supply constrained. Not even close. Nor must it be sourced from a small number of regions. Yes, sunny climes with clear skies are the most reliable and least expensive sites to develop, but just about anywhere humans live would do. This is substantially different from oil.

[MikeZ]

As a practical issue, until transportation used more electricity or natural gas then solar would have no impact on oil consumption After all only 3% of us electrical generation comes from oil. Oil is almost exclusively used as a portable transportation fuel (cars, trucks, planes, etc) so electricity in and of itself cannot replace oil in these functions. For solar to replace oil would require that either cars, trucks or planes be power by electricity or solar displaced natural gas (which makes up ~20%) of US power generation and that gas be used to power cars, trucks, planes.

[outsidethebox]

I think solar anywhere would be great we can't get enough of it at this time in history.

[tigerlily78]

I think there is some risk of a group attacking the "pipeline" or the electric corridor used to channel the energy from one region to another, but that risk also exists in the movement of oil and natural gas.

It is not a new risk, but one that could be minimized by keeping electric generation from renewables as local as possible. (Isn't this the conclusion we keep coming back to no matter the renewable discussion?)

[GreenLivingDave]

Is there really a need for solar power from abroad? It seems that we should be able to use available land for that. And I don't really mean solar farms on virgin land either. I mean on roof tops and over parking lots, etc.

[WiredForStereo]

The Sahara is a good idea because Europe isn't a particularly good place to collect solar power. In the US for instance, we could expand installations in the southwest desert and have plenty of power, same with wind in the Rockies or plains.

But I don't see solar power as the new oil because I can make solar power in my back yard, wind power too, but I can't make oil. Sure, Saudi Arabia has oil, and I don't have any, but I have decent solar availability, Saudi Arabia has better. It's a yes versus no and a some versus more situation. The great thing about renewable energy is that just about everyone can make some of their own if they were so inclined.

There are just too many differences to really place the two on the same level. So to answer the original question, no.

[bent1]

The Sahara is a good idea because Europe isn't a particularly good place to collect solar power. In the US for instance, we could expand installations in the southwest desert and have plenty of power, same with wind in the Rockies or plains.

I was reading in the latest Discover magazine that in Texas, at night, they often shut down their windmillls because they can't use the excess electricity. We need to upgrade our grid at a faster rate then put in more solar/wind.

[WiredForStereo]

Similar thing happen in Europe, however the grid is more interconnected there so countries don't have to shut things down, just sell it at cheaper rates. It's what we should be doing in the US.

[motornature]

It happened in Spain quite a few times last summer. There were a few days where electricity consumption was really low all over Europe, and as the windmills are the most modern electricity sources, they are the easiest do disconnect.

I've been reading about hydrogen and electricity production in the Sahara for years, but I don't see it happening anytime soon.

[Stagewalker]

We might wish to consider using land that has been destroyed by mining activities as a place to locate solar collection facilities. In Polk County Florida alone there are 300,000 acres of land that is not arable due to phosphate mining. The new FPL DeSoto plant in Arcadia, Florida which was built on scrub land not really suitable for pasture is 184 acres. it provides enough power for 3,000 homes. 300,000 acres which could be claimed without additional deleterious environmental impact since they are already destroyed could power 4.89 MIllion homes. There is a major high power line that runs from the Crystal River Nuclear Plant along the northern edge of Polk County to Orlando and another to Tampa and points south.

While the Sahara may not be the answer, Florida certainly could be part of the solution.

How much non-arable land is there in Texas?

[GreenLivingDave]

Using otherwise non-usable land for solar is an excellent idea.

[WiredForStereo]

Like the story recently with the solar panels suspended on cable bridges over canals.

[Andreja]

Yes it might. But who cares? It is good for the environment. If we all truly cared about environment we would all move southwards in winter anyway.