Solar Panels in the Sahara Could Meet All Europe’s Energy Needs
Experts say only a fraction of the Sahara, probably the size of a small country, would need to be covered to produce enough energy to supply the whole of Europe. Written by David Adam at the Guardian.
- » See also: SAB Miller Uses Brewery Waste from Alrode Brewery in South Africa to Reduce Carbon Footprint
- » Get EcoWorldly by RSS or sign up by email.
European countries could transform their electricity supplies within a decade by investing in a giant network of solar panels in the Sahara desert, an expert told a global warming conference in Copenhagen today.
Dr Anthony Patt of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Africa said some £50bn of government investment was needed over the next decade to make the scheme a reality. That would convince private companies that power from the Sahara was both feasible and an attractive investment, he said.
In the long term, such a plan, combined with strings of windfarms along the north Africa coast, could “supply Europe with all the energy it needs”.
He said technological advances combined with falling costs have made it realistic to consider north Africa as Europe’s main source of imported energy.
“The sun is very strong there and it’s very reliable. There is starting to be a growing number of cost estimates of both wind and concentrated solar power for North Africa….that start to compare favourably with alternative technologies. The cost of moving [electricity] long distances has really come down.”
He said only a fraction of the Sahara, probably the size of a small country, would need to be covered to produce enough energy to supply the whole of Europe.
The results are the first findings of a major research effort, together with experts at the European Climate Forum and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, to judge whether such a Sahara solar plan is realistic.
Patt said the team was looking at questions of security and governance, as well as ways to pay for the technology. The full results will be presented to governments later this year.
He said sunshine in the Sahara is twice as strong as in Spain and is a constant resource that is rarely blocked by clouds even in the winter.
The scheme would use mirrors to focus the sun’s rays onto a thin pipe containing either water or salt. The rays boil the water or melt the salt and the resulting energy used to power turbines.
Unlike wind power, which usually has to be used immediately because of the cost of storing the electricity generated, the hot water and salt can be stored for several hours.
Trials of such concentrated solar power plants are planned for Egypt, Morocco, Algeria and Dubai, but Libya and Tunisia could also be considered.
Patt said that starting such a scheme would not be all plain sailing though. There would likely be opposition from local communities across Europe who unhappy about transmission cables installed near their homes. Piecemeal national transmission networks could also pose a problem.
The findings were revealed at the Copenhagen Climate Congress, a special three-day summit aimed at updating the latest climate science ahead of global political negotiations in December over a successor to the Kyoto treaty.
*This article was written by David Adam and shared with EcoWorldly as part of the Guardian Environmental Network.
Image credit: (desert) steve phillips via Flickr, under a Creative Commons license.
Editor’s note: The following comment was moderated and inappropriate or offensive language was deleted. However, the comment as a whole was not deleted so as to try and preserve the commenter’s main point.
Sure, invest billions of [deleted] money in [deleted] countries so they can hold us hostage to solar power instead of oil !
It isn’t bad enough that the [deleted] blackmail us and exhort money in the largest transfer of wealth in human history since 1973, or that [deleted] Putin tried to hold Eastern Europe hostage to his natural gas shutoff, now let’s make us more vulnerable again!
What a breakthrough !
This is a great opportunity, but if someone will allow this to happen?
Great Idea - but who’s going to clean and maintain them? Sand is one of the most abrasive substances known to man - you’ll be forever replacing solar panels. Not to mention the problem of keeping the sand OFF the solar panels so that the sun can shine ON them.
This is a non-starter - or if it does start, it will be seen as the biggest boondoggle the world has ever seen as costs far outweigh benefits.
BTW - How do you get transmission lines across the Mediterranean?
Interesting, but unrealistic. The study practically handwaves downtime in an area known for violent sandstorms. Sandstorms are very damaging to glass and electronics.
The “only a small country” thing sounds great until you realize that you are talking about an area larger than most cities. The order of magnitude here defies imagination. You aren’t talking a few thousand people. It would take a large army (> 1 million men) of trained technicians to maintain them and a larger army (>10 million?) of diggers to keep them unburied by sand. Then it would take another large army to keep those first two armies supplied. This ignores the problems with transmission, political instability, the two combined (what better way to start a war than cutting power to all of Europe?), and getting power during the night.
This isn’t a cut-and-dry sure-fire idea. In fact, it is probably one of the most expensive alternatives available.
I have not seen a single evaluation that has had even a reasonable order of magnitude for maintenance costs.
As socialism/fascism fails it often ends in war. I guess we can expect the EU to invade northern Africa once more, this time to rob it of another natural resource, the sun. History does repeat.
The first criticism is just racist but the other level interesting considerations. Please though let’s not undermine a group of people who are dedicating their professional lives to tackling the current energy crisis. Also lacking in the critique was a show of preferece for the limited alternatives 1) Nuclear fusion, 2) Nuclear fission (unsustainable), 3) A more localised project of wind, solar and wave technology.
Easy to criticise, hard to invent.
Nick
There are a bunch of problems with this plan. One that has not been spoken of is a change in climate due to the extracted energy (the desert is cooling of). This can be positive, but it is also highly unpredictable and could cause several species to go extinct at least.
In the long run we have to either cut down our power needs or take a risk at one of those extreme ideas.
Europe needs to generate its own energy. You can’t just go into Africa and set up miles of solar panels. Its destroying the fragile arid environment and we can’t forget that solar panels require water for cooling. This might speed up desertification there. Plus its an eyesore. This is ugly green development and we still need to cut our energy consumption because miles of solar panels are not a desirable option for anyone except for maybe a greedy energy company.