€400bn energy plan to harness African sun

Kieran · Post by **Kieran** » 12 Jul 2009, 13:35

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 42768.html

DominicJ · Post by **DominicJ** » 12 Jul 2009, 21:31

Yet Germany's largest solar energy company, SolarWorld, argues that North Africa is too risky a location. "Building solar power plants in politically unstable countries opens you to the same kind of dependency as the situation with oil," said Frank Asbeck, the firm's managing director.

Probably worse.
No doubt the good old taxpayer will invest all the money required.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 13 Jul 2009, 04:05

She did a good turn on the Jonathan Ross Show on the BBC on Friday night on the subject.. she had asked to go on the show to talk about it. As soon as she was off Rossie was back to his usual self, though.

corktree · Post by **corktree** » 11 Aug 2009, 15:57

If there is €400bn available to invest, then surely we should be looking at technologies that don't increase dependence on countries that already hold us over a "barrell"?

Surely if there is €400bn available we can look at harvesting wave energy off the west coast of Europe where the political climate is more stable?

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 12 Aug 2009, 11:31

"...the countries of North Africa," he said last week. "So far these countries have either not been involved in the dialogue at all or only at a very limited level."

I've been in a bit of a divertissement with other lists about this project: yes the technology's good, yes the aims are noble, but yes so was the case with the Groundnut Scheme, not to mention a shedload of Hydro projects dotted about the world. And it seems I'm in good company: Mr Scheer the German Solar guru has his doubts also.

I think the best approach would be a gradual one: start in Spain (who have lots of unemployed builders and engineers languishing in the sun) and work outwards from there.

One thing not mentioned (and possibly made-up) is the alternative: it might be that in the absence of a big renewables project like this, lots of North Africa would be much more likely to go nuclear. If so, then as the captain in Master and Commander said, we must always choose the Lesser of two Weavils.

Post by **adam2** » 12 Aug 2009, 11:44

I too would be very reluctant to be reliant on electricity produced in politicly unstable areas, and transported over great distances.

If African nations wish to use large scale solar within theire own countries, or perhaps for export to near neighbours, then this is clearly a good thing and might reduce demand for coal or nuclear, which is desirable.

I would be very reluctant to see our money being "invested" in such schemes, most of it will be stolen by corrupt officials, and if the plant ever gets built it will soon be nationalised or confiscated.

I can imagine local politicians, and the Brittish left, saying "why should African children die for want of electricity for hospitals or water pumping, when that electricity is being exported to power widescreen TVs and halogen lights !"

fifthcolumn · Post by **fifthcolumn** » 21 Aug 2009, 22:06

On the other hand, though they can withhold the power (ala russia during the winter with gas), they can hardly sell it to someone else.
Seems to me that you can have the power IF you station a whole bunch of troops there.
Sound familiar?
Welcome to the resource wars of the 21st century.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 22 Aug 2009, 02:54

I think it is a good project to get involved with, perhaps starting in Spain as Candy suggests, but we shouldn't rely on this sort of thing to "SAVE US." An Energy Decent Plan for GB is the best way of keeping the G in GB but perhaps it will need to be a small g in the future: as in "great to live here".

Then again, perhaps we shouldn't publicise that fact, although it seems to be quite well known judging by the queues at Calais for the boat trip.

Aurora · Post by **Aurora** » 04 Nov 2009, 05:42

The Ecologist - 02/11/09

The German-led Desertec initiative believes it can deliver power to Europe as early as 2015

A $400bn (£240bn) plan to provide Europe with solar power from the Sahara moved a step closer to reality today with the formation of a consortium of 12 companies to carry out the work.

The Desertec Industrial Initiative (DII) aims to provide 15% of Europe's electricity by 2050 or earlier via power lines stretching across the desert and Mediterranean sea.

Article continues ...

Quintus · Post by **Quintus** » 04 Nov 2009, 13:49

DominicJ wrote:
Yet Germany's largest solar energy company, SolarWorld, argues that North Africa is too risky a location. "Building solar power plants in politically unstable countries opens you to the same kind of dependency as the situation with oil," said Frank Asbeck, the firm's managing director.
Probably worse.
No doubt the good old taxpayer will invest all the money required.

In the long-term perhaps North Africa will be asked to make assorted changes (governance, human rights etc) and will end up in the EU. It would mean investment and expertise meets population and resources. If you keep in mind that some EU economists are saying that the EU will need 50m (or more) extra workers by 2050 to make up for the demographic slump, there is a sort of BAU logic.

Andy Hunt · Post by **Andy Hunt** » 04 Nov 2009, 22:35

How did our sun get to be over their sand?