Added: 5 years ago
From: djpole76
Views: 305,197
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (566)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • anno 2070

  • ready in 2012? bullshitter!

  • If the physics on the energy production calculations are correct, this could really be something. Especially when you could use it in a desert environment. Build this and a regular boiler style solar power tower along side each other. Boil sea water in the other, you get steam and energy.... condense the steam you get fresh water. This design takes advantage of needing cool ground temperatures, that would play right along with growing food crops... Desert + Fresh water = food in the desert.

  • @promethiusrising maintenance would be really high on the desalination side.

  • @darris321 for one thing, sell the salt. For the other, sell the food. Cost is relative.

  • Interesting concept. Not sure how far this will go. 2012 done? Unbelievable.

  • It'll be ready next year?I don't think so...

  • cockz

  • Wow this is a nice idea, until I read that it will only generate 200mw. Try convincing anyone to invest billions to building a 1000 meter tower that only generates 200 mw. Only an idiot will do that, instead for the same amount of money you can build a 5000mw wind farm or a 1000mw solar farm.

  • @REKLESXX THE THING IS THAT YOU CAN GENERATE A LOT OF SUB PRODUCTS UNDER THE SOLAR TOWER...

  • @REKLESXX you're completely right.

  • @REKLESXX @ 1:42 it says 200 MEGA WATTS. If the average home uses about 10kilowatts, that means this will power a small city.

  • @REKLESXX its millions not billions and if you do it right you don't even need to build a solid tower, instead you could build a vortex generator in its place, these generators create a funnel of hot air that can rise up for kilometers, so you don't need the giant tube.

  • The only moving part is the turbines? I like it! For any solar-exposed environment, it's almost like free energy :-)

  • See also Cloud-reflectivity-enhancement

    111160088936809

    facebook page

  • The glass where the heat of the Sun gets trapped do not reflect back. If they did it would simply be a matter of angle back into space thereby reducing global warming by increasing reflection. A commercial airline takes off today a white pattern gets dispersed called jet trail as intentional, governed by local authorities to generate reflection of the sun back into space just as clouds do.

  • we should have been building these until all of the southwest and more is powered up them instead of fighting these pathetic wars overseas.

  • I have a question. I am tired, so i hope it's not a stupid question.

    The reflector disc at the base doesn't adjust to direct all incident light to the tower as in the other type of solar farm. Therefore most light is reflected back to the atmosphere where it has another go at heating the atmosphere. (i know that usually the greater contributor to this is because the light has been converted to longer wave, but this still happens here.) So what is the contribution of this thing to global warming?

  • @balisticsquirel In this system, the disc you see at the base is not a reflector. The light go through and heat the ground and so the air which is between the ground and the glass, like a greenhouse. This heated air, lighter, goes up in the tower creating a wind. The part of light which is reflected goes back to where it comes from without heating the atmosphere as it conserves the same wave length: if you put a mirror on the surface of the Earth, then you don't have any greenhouse effect anymor

  • @DYLONayms Sorry, i realized that i hadn't understood it as i was waking up after i finally slept.

    However i also wondered about other heating related consequences of the tower. But the mirror effect of the glass will probably offset those small considerations. Thanks for the reply.

  • @balisticsquirel No worries mate. But you're right, a small amount of the incoming light will be reflected by the mirror effect: the clearest uncoated optical glass has 4% losses due to reflection on its surface. We can bring this up to >99.9% with dielectric coating... That's not too bad !!! And what is your wondering about heating related consequences of the tower ?

  • @DYLONayms The reflectance of glass is quoted for visible radiation, I think. And it will reflect a large proportion of the incoming solar Long Wave (which contrary to common approach is far from negligible). Now the earth would do something similar, actually absorb it and re-emit slightly different LW, but the consequences of each are a little different for net earth+atmosphere heating.

  • @DYLONayms

    I also might guess that the ground cover will be chosen to convert more visible light to LW than what might exist if there were no tower there.

    I also wondered about the effects of transporting the heat energy up in the atmosphere by the height of the tower before it's allowed to radiate. This might actually help it escape the atmosphere.

  • @DYLONayms

    One way or another, like these, the glass field is creating a greenhouse effect. Indeed, that's how I understand it can function at all. Surely a greenhouse effect under glass isn't functionally different from the effect spread over the whole atmosphere, as it would be say if the power were supplied by a CO2 emitting plant?

  • @balisticsquirel

    The glass absorbs v. little energy (that it re-emits as Long Wave (heat)), but it's more than if there were no glass. Also, the thermal radiation of anything (like the glass) depends on its temperature so that glass heated by the greenhouse below will emit a lot of energy as LW.

  • i liked

  • it looks like isengard lol

  • They had plans in Cali for these, and the fag fuckign environment cunts blocked it because they said it would kill lizards... More proof the green movement is 100% corporate owned.

  • The real reason we have utiites is that they rely on fuel combustion for power generation and they need to place powerplants outside civilized areas... As for solar energy, you dont need to place it far away from where we live, eat and sleep.. Utlities is in real trouble now.. Utlities is scrambling to cover or block any home grown ideas for own indivdual uses so they can continue to mail bill statements to you..

  • Done by 2012?! HA!

  • i remember when the articles came out about this in the australian news paper...i've still got the cutting in one of my books. however i have't been able to find much out about this lately last i heard a few years ago was they bought some land to build them. would love to know if the project is still operational?

  • @tittycarcar This project was canned after ten or so years of waiting. They're looking to do it in the US now.

  • This is GENIUS. Theres only a few moving parts and it can generate power at night. Also prototypes in Germany showed that grass, insects and other wild life was thriving under the cover that traps heat from the ground which was surprising.

  • thats right uncleshan, yet the best is to protect wealth by turning paper fiats to precious metals.And still most people are sleeping, unaware that they are being robbed through paper money.

    

  • Comment removed

  • @uncleshan You are so naive

  • Comment removed

  • @uncleshan You parroted political statements about money which is following basic inflationary guidelines that every currency ever has, cost indicative.

    Basically, you pawned off basic knowledge as something groundbreaking and relevant to the video above yet stated nothing earth shattering and, more importantly, nothing having to do with the video or it's message.. Nice

    But you did express the naive genius of repeating the propaganda of your political puppet-masters...... nicely done

  • Comment removed

  • @uncleshan wtf? Get back on your meds - you're whack ! btw open some windows also, you've inhaled too much CO2 and have become anemic. Another method of staying on point is to put your finger on ea. word you read, that way you don't lose your place.

  • @isldeur .

  • Welcome......To The Future, earthling. ;D

  • However, just out of curiosity, per tower how much will it cost to build, and how many homes will each tower supply with energy?

    these are my main questions to how efficient would they really be.

  • Very interesting. We should had focused more of our efforts into big and cool pro-green projects then on wars.

    wars in the middle east dont save lives

    green energy and innovation save+improve standard of living.

  • i could bet it is going to be a flop show

  • who is going to clean all those mirros. A lot of materials for how much energy at what percentage of the time?

  • pure genius

  • A stupid cartoon. what is the point?

  • @PocketSponsor Showing the people how they can help to save our planet perhaps.

  • Can the field at the bottom be a all season farm for food?

  • hmmm 20 c4 and its all gone. Seriously? I hope u leave army untis in he area and have pat dowsn fer each tourist.

  • Problem with all this is it always: 'lets build something' with your money... be a good tax slave and let your master in gov. who pay off the intellectual egg heads to hide truth..... all enjoy the socialism! Enjoy, enjoy! Don't mind the gun they hide in the room to back up their utopia plans..... just be a good collectivist... and obey your master's in the collectivist system....

  • Awesome .-... how much does it cost ??

  • @xerapoa These cost about the same as an equivalent coal fired plant. Minus the CO2, and other pollutants.

    BTW did you know coal is normally contaminated with various radioactive elements, and as a result puts more radioactive crap in the environment than most nuclear reactors?

  • It's great to see mega projects like these. I wonder if 3 medium sized (Smaller Towers) are equal to or easier to do than such a huge tower. I also urge people creating their own personal projects. Google "How to produce solar energy" You will find guides to help you do your own.

  • i wonder is that thing taller than the building in dubai

  • @blacksun2channel

    Wirkungsgrad eher 0,5%

  • That can't be feasible just next year. optimistic prediction in 2006..

  • That's great, but just like any centralized power design, 7% of the energy is lost in transmission. So, solar and wind need to be installed at point of use to be efficient. All centralized power planning should be scrapped and we must pursue distributed decentralized approach.

  • efficiency ?

  • Ready by 2012. hmmm maybe 3012, since theres no plan to ever start construction of this big white elephant.

  • has it begun production yet?

  • e ho capito ma quanto bisogna investire per costruirla??..

  • Invent a weeble toy tower against earthquakes!

  • According to the current events in japan this can become interesting - but what happens with the tower in an earthquake?

  • i think foer the size its a dumb idea we need thingsd that arent mounstruous but smart and simple this is a monster for what it will make

  • @badsign1980 but in austrelia there are mutch boundless spaces.Why don't they overwork that ground if we don't know other solutions yet?

  • This was posted just over 4 years ago, whats the status of this in the current economic climate?

  • The truth is, this is great, but most houses have the capability of producing all the electricity they need if they had solar panels, and a vertical windmill. If we mass produced these household devices, electricity production would be handled when building houses, and thats all. Modular devices are the future for 99 percent of energy production. The other 1 percent could be handled with wave power that can be produced with extremely cheap wave generators.

  • @MrRationalThink I think you are right that the inevitable future will, or should be, that people learn how to generate their own electricity. But it is clear that the demand for energy from power plants will still be necessary and incredibly influencial for a long time. Making energy is big business, and finding well performing companies that supply large amounts of 'green' energy is the key to the future because these companies will help us to create jobs/improve the economy/wean us off oil.

  • And they only cost 2 trillion dollars per unit to build. :)

  • Does anyone have its ERoEI data?

  • lame

    

  • sehr wichtig für unse Englisch Klausur, gruß an die GMs!

  • That thing is huge... The tower is 1000m high and the diameter of the greenhouse area seems to be something like 5 km. And it only makes 200 MW of power?

    When the reactor 3 at olkiluoto Finland will be ready it will make 1600 MW of electrisity. Eight times the amount of this beast.

    Just to put this at right perspective =P

    Inefficient...

  • @Exiletheheretic

    but sill, 200MW is a lot, that is 200000000 Watt. you can provide about 200.000 houses with electricity, and you can build this in the middle of the desert, and in the greenhouse, you can plant all sorts of tree's wich make O2 for us. i also doesn't damage the enviroment

  • @m82a1barret

    All companies producing electricity like coal power plants have to pay for CO2 emissions & these fees are included in electricity prices. Yet their electricity is still cheaper than greens'...

    I'm curious about ERoEI (energetic return or yield) that can tell us more...

  • @Exiletheheretic

    Magic word "when". When it was supposed to be finished?

    Olkiluoto is a quite overpriced project as well I think (but of course can easily beat this tower even in ERoEI competition).

    The size of needed area is not such a big deal... World is big... But I'm worried about ERoEI.

    Energetic return or yield is the most important thing.

    BTW Chinases had finished hydro power station that can produce 22 500 MW.

    Hydro has the best ERoEI (the cheapest electricity).

  • 2:05 My weed garden.

  • solar tower = size of my dick

    empire state building and below = ur dick

  • THE TOWER INDUBAI IS TALLER!!!!!!

  • It's just another good idea that will end up in the round file. Moron! A 3000+feet tower (1000mtrs) will create havoc with the weather for some dumb-butt a hundred miles downwind. Global warming at it's most efficient!

  • Why only 32 turbines? Why not place more, albeit smaller ones, inside near the base where the hot air is still moving fast. Oh I bet the enviroweenies are freaking out about essentially roasting huge swaths of land. Neat idea though.

  • I guess if you jump with a parachute in there you really won't descend at all.

  • seems like a dream coming true soon

  • no there neards that hug trees man nothing to be scared about

  • how much does thing cost, sure it makes alot of energy but whats the cost?

  • @pauleallen2 not that im for nuclear power but nuclear power generates like 4000 mw this generates 200 mw

  • @pauleallen2: yeah... but don't say that so loud or the "green power" guys will kick your ass, 'cause they only hold the "true". We're all ignorant. They only can talk about everything without any scientific proof; you just can't.

  • I like the use of parabolic reflectors or fresnel lenses to produce steam power better than this idea.

  • A flawed design. What is the tall tower doing here? It is not helping generate anything... I think they should turbines inside the tower to maximise escaping hot air.

  • LOL quite stupid project, IMHAO.

    A 1Km high tower, a few thousand squares area (so unusable soil) and 32 turbines, just to generate a maximum amount of 200Megawatt? Guys, that's insane.

    Did you've an idea of the CO2 amount that would be generated due the materials used in the building of that crap? And do you've an idea of the nominal avarage MW produced pro-day by this kind of solar-project? About 1700MW/day in normal weather condition, falling to ~1000MW (and less) in rain and bad weather days

  • SOLAR TOWER - Performance table (for installations in Southern Hemisphere)

    =======

    SUMMER (favor. weather): ~2020MW/day.

    SUMMER (adver. weather): ~1270MW/day.

    AUTUMN/SPRING (favor. weather): ~1325MW/day.

    AUTUMN/SPRING (adver. weather): ~685MW/day.

    WINTER (favor. weather): ~585MW/day.

    WINTER (adver. weather): ~370MW/day.

    These values are laughable, considering those of a traditional power station, which could generate a continous power, adjustable according to the requests, in all environments.

  • @DerAdler82 imho the true issue of this kind of system is its huge size. too big to produce so few power.

  • @jurrien88: that's what I'm saying, dude.This project it's a waste of soil and money, that 'll produce a small amount of energy,moreover influenced by the weather. That kind of environ-friendly experiments are a waste of resources and get so much attention by the people, 'cause they're presented as clean and revolutionary.

    Unlike, these projects 've no efficiency-vision and lead a very poor technology progress.

    Unfortunately, so many people eat shit like that without spending a second wondering.

  • @DerAdler82 huh huh. you're a real smart one, aren't you? yeah, all that DESERT LAND made unusable for farming.

    btw, the energy demand for building a concrete tower isn't very big. at least not bigger than for a bridge or any other large concrete structure.

    As for the power output, I'm guessing that smarter people than you have calculated that stuff. You know, people who know that energy output is measured in MWh and not MW.

  • @aseglkj: well dude..from my perspective, the one acting like "I'm the smart one" is you, commenting my post in such a way.

    First of all, I'm not an engineer; so, my post it's just a skeptic opinion.

    Second at 1:40 you can see the video refering to 200 Megawatts.

    Third: in the Internation System, Joule are used to rappresent energy production, as: watt = volt x ampere = (joule/coulomb) x (coulomb/sec).

    Fourth: it's intended as "desert limited"? Well,we need energy solutions not utopian projects.

  • oh, one more thing. Do you've any idea of what are u talking about? a 1Km tower?! Absolutely nothing like a bridge!

    Dude, the highest building ever built is ~700 meters tall and - believe me - the material required for something that hight, it's really A LOT.

    And they'll not use spit...so, concrete it's just a part of the huge amount of materials they'll use. And raw materials production, generate CO2. Not so negligible, as you think.

    The 5% of global CO2 emissions, are due concrete production..

  • @DerAdler82 The soil is not unused, you can see the plants in the video. BTW it is cost efficient to build this.

  • vi prego, potenti del mondo, salvate la terra e fate queste cose, i soldi li potete fare in altri modi, se la terra sparisce non avrete più niente da arricchirvi!!!

  • Is this actually going ahead?

  • 200 MI SEMBRANO POCHI!!!!!!!!!

    Saluti

    Rossano.

  • I love australian way for energy, i hate italian way for nuclear energy. It's bull shit!!! MV5*

  • Fantastico, ma da noi in Italia, il cielo e' sempre coperto dalle scie chimiche

  • the future is near!

  • Fantastic!!!

  • I like the 5 lights at the end... they remember me Beppe Grillo Five Stars

  • @salsatiberina

    ne staranno facendo 5?

    per un totale di 1000 mw..

  • here in Italy is impossible.... Berlusconi loves nuclear energy :^((((((

    ...may be later.... my children wil see solar tower energy... we will fight for it!!!

  • Only 200 MW????? Are you joking? A similar investment to produce only 200MW? With a surface covered of more than 1 square mile? And a tower 1000 m tall?

    I made some calculation and it seems to me really inconsistent

    I think it should produce at least 2 GW to be a reasonably affordable project.

    Guys, a square km covered in commercial photovoltaic panels produce more than 150 MW in the desert.

    Good video anyway

  • @faustoguglielmo perhaps 200 MW per turbine?

  • @giagend i dont't think so. air at 70°C has a very low energy density

  • @giagend No.The largest wind turbine built in the world is Enercon 126m rotor diameter which produce 6 MW of nominal power at 12 m/s if wind speed. To produce 200 MW you need a turbine of 723 m diameter!!!! Almost the height of the tower. I am very skeptical about this "project". I think it's just a nice rendering.

  • @faustoguglielmo: this crap..ahm..project, will use 32 turbines (LOL) working at an average wind speed of 15 m/s. They estimate about 200MW produced in optimal conditions, but the performance table I posted below, proof how insane this project is. Even in the best theorical environment, it will generate a maximum of 87MW, that falls to 15MW in the worst one. Considering the huge soil required, the tall tower to build up and all the costs related, a nominal 50MW generated, it's really ridiculous.

  • wowww..!

  • Is far beyond simple energy production. During the night it could be used as a atmospheric condenser for water and grow plants in a greenhouse effect. This project is amazing because contains 3 very important things: electricity, water and food. Nuclear is garbage compared to this. I LOVE THIS PROJECT, but we have to see it finished to understand how really effective it is.

  • WoW VERY GOOD PROJECT! In Italy the energetics projects are death with Berlusconi!

  • @prodigio1978: and your brain is dead alone..

  • @prodigio1978

    Nuclear power is better! It also has a cool badass logo, but solar is for gay pussies!

    Nuke the world and stop the suffering of life!

  • @prodigio1978 i hope that Berlusconi could kill you, stupid man.

  • @donatobilancia a' puttan d' memt ca su piggh 'ngoul d'e cavedd!

  • @prodigio1978 ah ecco sei un povero terone...adesso ho capito. ammazzati con la monnezza....

  • @donatobilancia e tu ammazzati col nucleare visto che ti piace così tanto. Stai vedendo il Giappone o fai finta? Spero ti piazzino una barra di plutonio nel culo!

  • @prodigio1978 This is not a good project. It is a stupid project. The main goal is the expectation that a strong wind will destroy the device so the construction company will get orders for building a new one.

    If one wants to harvest energy, why is everyone looking up into the air? Look down to the ground! There is more energy down there than the sun is emitting on the earths surface! 10.000 times the human energy demand per year. Geothermal energy is EVERYWHERE and weather-independent.

  • @MillyVanillification geothermal is nice but look at mars with a cooled iron core and no magnetisphere = no atmosphere . overly vent out core and we could suffer a fate far worse than useing every last drop of oil. provided it would effect it at all im not sure but just a concern if it were ever used on mass. just seems to me we should accept all alternative energy all at once and if it falls then we know the worlds built on the ashes of others failures.

  • @judgementIV Earth's core is powered by radioactive decay. In a sense, the earth is a neuclear power plant.

  • @bogusnachos

    Maybe so, but the earth's weather and ecosystem is driven by the sun.

  • @MillyVanillification You figure this out all by yourself? is that earth's core principle your new source of Energy? Aren't we moving in on the core already w/ fossil derivatives mining? Can there be a chance that the further destruction/disturbance of the mantle will be detrimental to our existence? Or, could heat pump principles be enjoined w/ above surface intelligence?

  • @prodigio1978 It is!

    This project is absolutely great! I knew about it some times ago on National Geographic! :)

  • Ha den Silvio!

    (every nation deserves it's politicians ;-)

  • It's just awesome. Great idea!!!!

  • there are so much retards comments in this video...

    good work austrlia, keep going!!

  • (Sorry for my bad english, I never had a good English teacher)

    I don't know which are costs for this kind of building, but onche it is builded it has no other costs apart the regular manteinance. You dont need fuel, you don't have radioactive scories tu stock, you don't have any kind of waste!

    It a so simple but so genial idea!

  • @ienaboard right!

  • That tower is HUGE!!! Would the energy output be worth all the money and land it takes up?

  • The height of the tower is what kills the idea. Far too expensive to build.

  • shouldn't there be turbines in the tower too?

  • Saw a model, it produced almost enough power to light up an led. I'd rather find a more compact energy source.

  • too expensive

  • Great! Pretty interesting.

  • would be so beast

    

  • There are thousands of square miles of desert, waiting for the greedy capitalist to pull the oil syringe from their arms and put the money toward the good of ALL.

  • Ullavat samapiina quoieassi projektoma nessilauamen dravizat billionea dollar impellistaavi. Arulaami sovayeat problemi energissa vuy bauloimeta sina dhoisa projektea vellioima

  • good but expensive

  • hahahahaha of course

  • LOL, 2012...

    ...Ummm don't think so. Not with the government we have now. Although, they are putting in a A$42 billion dollar broadband network (which they can't afford), so this seems concerningly plausible.

  • why not just build our PV towers up about five miles up, It would end solar sprawl which is a waste just like urban sprawl! We must produce PV panels that are 1 KW per panel, that would make them cost efficient, even if you were to put them on top of house, because if you have 3 to 5 on your roof you could power your whole house, and use any extra energy to produce hydrogen gas for the times when the sun is down, and when the wind does not blow if you have wind-turbines to power your home

  • 25 years ago, I told my college professor about this idea I had. I even drew it on paper for him to see. He wanted to fund it, just to see if it would work but on a smaller scale. but didn't have the money. I had many ideas and still one today that isn't being used, and a great way to bring power to the world.

    But anyway.. who am I? If I had (Dr). in front of my name I suppose someone would have listened.

    damn...

  • @gorgeousdzastr Exactly the same with me - The concept of making electricity isnt that hard - its just turning a magnet around copper in circles when you boil it down to the basics - all thats needed is something to turn the copper/magnet. Is it a coincidence that the Trillion dollar black gold industry has managed to last over 100 years so far without major change?

  • has anyone got a link to white paper with comparative analysis vs different technologies?

  • Comment removed

  • The solar chimney can operate AT NIGHT, as the ground is heated and that heat is used at night.

    The Green Tower people have designed enhancements to this effect that allows their tower to run at 89% at night, with 6 DAYS reserve, no plumbing needed.

    2/3 of the greenhouse area is suitable for farming with about a 170% increase in crop output.

    It could be a housing co-op, with about 3400 shareholders sharing the costs and profits. Who needs big investors? Same price as a coal fired plant.

  • check out the

    "COMPRESSED AIR MOTORCYCLE"

    /watch?v=pY-iLe5-T2M

    Compressed air can be used as fuel

  • @KOmaSHOOTER This is interesting except for a few small things..

    First, too many moving parts! This will break down often and be expensive to fix.

    Second that roaring noise is lost energy, lots of it.

    Third even using complicated compressors and motors for good efficiency you'll only get 27% of the energy out that you put in as electricity. Which still has to be generated, how? Solar? diesel? coal? For a solid explanation of the thermodynamics see theoildrum dot c o m /node/3473

  • I don't see that happening. problem is not how to produce power while the sun is shining, for there are simpler and cheaper ways already, but how to produce power constantly even during the night. 1000 meters worth of crap.

  • @RaphaelGodot

    maby you don't need to make power at night, because the daylight makes allready enough power

  • @KOmaSHOOTER well and how do you intend to save the energy? in a big AAA battery? I don't mean to be a jerk but it appears to me that there is generally little knowledge among the public and among politicians about renewable energy. Fact is: you cannot simply store power. While it is produced it also is consumed at the same time. Hence, coal and nuclear power plants are running around the clock.

    Btw, Australia is one of the major export nations of coal, do you think they would subsidise that?

  • @RaphaelGodot

    you could save the energy in compressed air.

    check out the Hula Hula engine :)

    /watch?v=NZ2CiIq64Lc

  • @KOmaSHOOTER Compressed air turns out to be an absolutely horrible way to try to store energy. FYI. Compressing the air is very very inefficient.

  • @Charlesincharge42

    Bist du dir da wirklich sicher?

    Schau dir mal den Film an /watch?v=msqt8LxY3Tg - A car that runs 200 miles on compressed air.

    Luft ist umsonst und auch dort wo kein Wasser oder Öl ist

    Luft ist umsonst :) Luft kostet nix