Talk:Desertec

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Description[edit]

Concentrating Solar Power without Solar Cells is proven nonsence, since Concentrating Solar Power with Solar Cells is much better. The second competes with conventional power plants, the first can not. --95.222.227.5 (talk) 08:48, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If it is "proven" please include quotes... Desertec cites severals studies which prove the technical feasibility (med-csp, trans-csp...)--84.143.74.79 (talk) 08:05, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Who benefits from this? What about Environmental issues!?!? Surely this has an impact on the african land! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.177.212.225 (talk) 13:40, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Desertec is an act of modern imperial colonization that looks upon the asset wealth of a neighbour with a jealous eye and seeks to possess that wealth for itself. In Hitler's book Mein Kampf, he detailed his belief that the German people needed Lebensraum ("living space", i.e. land and raw materials), and that it should be found in Eastern Europe. How disgusting and ironic is it that Germany would think to create a solar powered oven to steal from Africans.

The only good thing about this project is that it will fail. It will fail because there is no way that planet earth is going to let Europeans, especially German Europeans, march into Africa AGAIN and loot it for its land, labour and assets. No doubt that post will be classified as vandalism. How ironic, given that Lebensraum is the greatest modern cause of inter-cultural violence and and that 'The Vandals' were an East Germanic tribe who in 429 under king Genseric entered Africa and by 439 established a kingdom which included the Roman Africa province. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.28.72.52 (talk) 02:38, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reason for reverting critic section edit[edit]

(Old: Revision as of 2009-09-03T11:01:42)

The argument made seemed iffy, the one reference given linked to a "paper" apparently published by one guy in his own "online journal" (which has no other contributions than that author's articles). Within the paper, he even acknowledges a potential conflict of interest with the Desertec project. Also, concerning the IP that made the edit: The only other thing he/she worked on is the article about the guy in question. Seems reason enough to me to declare the source unreliable. Dreiche2 (talk) 23:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Section has now been reverted with no comment. Please comment here. Otherwise I will report a dispute.Dreiche2 (talk) 14:11, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Who holds what percentage of the ownership interest?[edit]

Who holds what percentage of the ownership interest in the consortium? In other words, who is providing what part of the ownership equity in the Desertec initiative? I don't see it addressed in the article. Is there any way of finding out? Or is it perhaps all being kept hidden under complex or secretive legal and political arrangements? Does anyone know? Cheers. N2e (talk) 18:40, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, but here is a report that goes into more detail about how to develop such a system by 2050:
  • Murray, James (2010-03-29). "Researchers conclude 100 per cent renewable electricity supply is feasible". BusinessGreen. Retrieved 2010-04-02.
  • "100% Renewable Electricity – A roadmap to 2050 for Europe and North Africa". PricewaterhouseCoopers. 2010-03-26. Retrieved 2010-04-02.
--Teratornis (talk) 06:16, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Claim to usage of water[edit]

The study AQUA-CSP by the DLR Aqua-CSP shows that the Project enables the desalination of seawater and therefore will improve the access to water instead of deteriorating it... I guess that should be included to answer the criticism in the critics section, especially the cooling of the turbine with fresh water would be very stupid an is in fact not intended, the reference project in morocco are cooled by large fans without using water...http://www.welt.de/die-welt/wirtschaft/article8628061/Desertec-Von-der-Vision-zur-Wirklichkeit.html

any objections? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.143.104.159 (talk) 09:04, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Claim of Hermann Scheer[edit]

Currently in Masdar a 100 MW CSP-plant has been contracted, this would not happen, if the technology would have failed to prove feasibility there, right? And I cannot find any original references to the claims Hermann Scheer is posing... Opposed to his claims, CSP Plants in the Mojave Desert have proven since 1981, that they function very well in deserts... The claim, that only PV would be used now in Masdar now is wrong, as can be seen from the contracted csp plant... PV was part of Masdar from the beginning, but it does not exclude CSP... Hermann Scheer certainly is biased because of his concept of decentralized renewable energy production... anyways, some original references to the Masdar issue would be helpful for discussion, if anyone could contribute them...Beachie1 (talk) 15:56, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is matching reference (interview with Hermann Scheer by correspondent de:Stefan Schulze-Hausmann, TV contributions "Zukunftsstadt Masdar" and "Desertec", de:nano (Sendung), 3sat, 10. May 2010). Due to national regulations the broadcasted television interviews need to be taken off the web after a few weeks. I guess that I do still have the recording (dvb-s mpeg2) somewhere - but you need to understand a fair bit of German if you want to check the reference yourself. Let me assure you that the information was given in that way, on the other hand the world moves on and the technology might have changed in the meantime (personally I have heard of new coatings that are more resistant to sand winds but I had not seen a definite reference on that so far). Guidod (talk) 09:24, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but are there other sources than that interview? Because I cannot find where Hermann Scheer has the information from, he certainly was an expert, but he also is biased in his oppinion... Maybe one should vary the critics in order to make clear what is his oppinion, what is proven to be wrong (Masdar is not using only PV) and what is proven critics...Beachie1 (talk) 10:14, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Masdar information was not directly in the interview but the whole TV report had a section about Masdar city - the interview was right following the report thereby asking Scheer about the what and why. Given that he is an expert, you know (... has been an expert at the time, he died a couple of weeks ago) Guidod (talk) 19:34, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, he is an expert, but also experts err... the claim Masdar would only use PV is wrong as can be seen here: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2010/06/abengoa-total-get-100-mw-masdar-csp-deal
Beachie1 (talk) 08:38, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since there seem to be no objections, I will delete the reference to Masdar and leave his general concern...Beachie1 (talk) 08:59, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry that I do not have time to work on this. Sometimes the technology changes faster than a Wikipedia article can evolve. There was just a TV report covering the results of Novatec Biosol "PE 1" being good enough that they are in the process of constructing a 30 MW "PE 2" to be finished in April 2012. The interesting piece was that they use Linear Fresnel Reflectors which are actually flat. The TV report did highlight the sand problem and they showed a small robot with brushes running along the lines of LFRs panels. They used water to be heated in the absorber which is later reused by simple air cooling. Along with a resistant reflector coating this seems to be a viable solution to the sand problem as well as the water supply problem - I can even imagine that these flat panels could be abraded from time to time. In any case, the technology problems for Desertec can be well solved within the next two years. Guidod (talk) 16:19, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
is that TV report somehow accessible? WOuld love to see it :) Beachie1 (talk) 12:01, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It was aired just a few days ago so it should be accessible in the 3sat.de/nano mediathek as a web stream. Look for http://www.3sat.de/page/?scsrc=2&date=2010-11-10&division=nano&cx=60 "Fresnel-Kraftwerk - Sandfeste Solarkraft" (Fresnel-powerplant - sand-resistant solar power). Guidod (talk) 11:23, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!Beachie1 (talk) 08:42, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Transmission[edit]

"Transmitting energy over long distances has been criticized[who?], with questions raised over the cost of cabling compared to energy generation, and over electricity losses. However, the study and current operating technology show that electricity losses using High-voltage direct current transmission amount to only 3% per 1,000 km (25% per 10,000 km).[65]"

First, I don't see the need to reply to the criticism like is done here. Secondly, for an expert, it would be obvious that the replier here does not quite grasp the complexity of this issue. Having the technology to build adequate transmissions lines is not the same as actually having them in place. It's a bit like someone saying that fuel consumption of cars is a problem, an someone replying "No, there are many solar powered cars". Therefore, I don't think the second line belongs there. It could possibly be moved to some separate technology section.130.243.207.18 (talk) 00:09, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, nothing is in place yet. I think the point being made there is that it can be done. --U5K0'sTalkMake WikiLove not WikiWar 10:32, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Permission for extensive editing[edit]

How can Dii GmbH have conceptualized a concept that existed for years before it was set up in 2009? There is lots of detail in the following TREC and DLR section below about the extensive research that had already been undertaken by different organisations. It seems to me that all the major points - the abundance of solar power in the desert, harnessing renewable energy where it is most abundant, regional power markets, power for MENA, export of excess power to Europe - were already in place. You could say Dii have provided an update or a reinterpretation but the present article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nuncledarn (talk • contribs) 16:02, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I posted the above "Permission for extensive editing" section at the top of the page before. I didn't realise it should be posted at the bottom of the page. As I hadn't heard anything I went ahead and made the changes suggested and added a little content emphasising the global nature of DESERTEC's proposed solutions. Hope that's alright. Let me know if not.

Reasons for revertion of talk section[edit]

The section is reverted as the previous edit to the talk section removed all critisism of the project. It is to be noted that the IP location of the revert on 13/may/2014 is :

IP address lookup

IP Address 85.180.16.24

Address type IPv4

Hostname e180016244.adsl.alicedsl.de

ISP Hansenet

Connection type Dsl

Timezone Europe/Berlin (UTC+2)

Local time 01:19:47

Country Germany

State / Region Hamburg

City Hamburg

Coordinates 53.606, 10.0199

Whereas the address of Desertec itself is : -

DESERTEC

Rosenstr. 2

20095 Hamburg

Germany

Judge for yourself

Desertec solar power project shareholders jump ship?[edit]

So says the Graun: An ambitious project to harness and export solar power generated in Middle East and African deserts has all but folded [1] William M. Connolley (talk) 20:56, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The large scale version has been dead since ages, I wasnt allowed to call it like that in the deWP renewable article years ago. Reality check ;) The parallels to Atlantropa are even more striking now. Enhanced use of renewables in the maghreb and arab countries seems to be a positive effect. Serten (talk) 00:10, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The guardian page was deleted, the cached version is at [2]. --tickle me 22:33, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Desertec. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:34, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Desertec. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:28, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Past tense?[edit]

The lede says that Desertec "was" a project, but I don't see that the project was cancelled. So why the past tense? -- DevSolar2 (talk) 08:57, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Desertec. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:11, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Desertec&oldid=1201473751"