EnviroMission Limited (www.enviromission.com.au) produced this 5 minute video on the pilot plant in Spain. It is an older video (2000) but gives a decent understanding of the solar tower concept.
EnviroMission, Ltd. (US Market: EVOMY, Australian Exchange: EVM) is a renewable energy developer of sustainable “green” energy solutions for the energy market. EnviroMission aims to be one of Australia’s leading producers of clean renewable energy. EnviroMission holds the proprietary rights to Solar Tower technology, a large-scale renewable energy technology based on simple fundamentals of physics — hot air rises. Solar Tower technology has the potential to offer competitive renewable energy with equal reliability to fossil fuel generators.
A single 200MW Solar Tower power station will provide enough electricity to power around 400,000 households. The energy output will represent an annual saving of more than 1,960,000 tonnes of greenhouse CO2 gases from entering the environment when compared to brown coal emissions in Victoria. The greenhouse savings equate to the removal of approximately 500,000 cars from the road. The Australian Solar Tower project consists of six distinct phases, the first two of which (project optimization and pre-feasibility commercialization) have already been completed. The third phase (final feasibility), paving the way for the implementation of the next three phases (final design, construction, and commercial operation).
Duration : 0:4:47
[youtube C-EvV90MeDY]
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
hecterrrrs
hecterrrrs
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
Spettacolare, altro …
Spettacolare, altro che nucleare!
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
I just have one …
I just have one thing to say , to all of you carbon reduction supporters , all of your numbers are way off , you never take in to account the amount for carbon it takes in the production of these Green power production plants , all the coal powered plants in 3rd world countries that supply the power to produce the parts ,I have nothing against other forms of energy . If it takes 900 tons of carbon to make and it only saves 100 tons per year and only runs for 7 years ? Is it really better ?
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
looks super!
looks super!
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
you’re right, lol, …
you’re right, lol, but I think the image of 150 something km/hour winds in a car park could be a bit of a question for health and safety people
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
chuck a couple in …
chuck a couple in the US deserts, a few more in the saharan….we’re be fiiiiiiiiiine. As for material all there is is some sheets of plastic and a chimney, a few less things required than for a nuclear reactor or a geothermal power plant. No I like this idea, but it seems like this is a one off, that german company needs to expand and diversify me thinks before this can have a chance of taking off…
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
its a good idea, …
its a good idea, but still the draw backs of space and material are still important.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
BP and Shell shook …
BP and Shell shook confidence in the UK industry when they abandoned all plans for developing wind farms in Britain last year in favour of the US, where the tax treatment and planning regime is considered far more favourable. The exit of Shell was a particular blow because it was backing the world’s biggest offshore wind farm, the London Array, off Kent.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
The power output of …
The power output of a car is so much less than the actual power output of the fuel. A petrol engine (of any kind) is VERY inefficient.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
Beautiful way to …
Beautiful way to make electricity
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
they should build …
they should build these above all the big parking lots we have.
tarmac -asphalt gets so hot. + all those hot cars. it would be very efficient.
*
and then collect the rain water at weight points, & use it locally if possible.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
holy cow! I read …
holy cow! I read about this in popular science! I didn’t know they ACTUALLY made one!
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
This apparently was …
This apparently was a pilot project built in 1982 and ran nonstop for seven years.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
Yes
Yes
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
According to a New …
According to a New Scientist article, growing crops underneath actually improves efficiency, if you irrigate. The water vapour lost from the leaves is less dense than air, and so strengthens the rising air effect. Plenty of water would be required though.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
I wonder how old …
I wonder how old this video is, because the turbines that the Germans are making now are so much better than the old ones. Surely, with the new turbines, the output would be even better. And I wonder if you could irrigate the land underneath to grow food, or whether that would interfere with the generator.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
What is the actual …
What is the actual function of the tower? I see that the air has a tendency to rise through the center where the generator is. Is the column of hot air then supposed to pull more air into the system as it rises?
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
Can we do this …
Can we do this while maintaining a steady enough state to generate electricity from it?
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
I think its Tedlar, …
I think its Tedlar, also used as backsheet for solar modules. Insulating & very resistant plastic.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
Plus, there would …
Plus, there would be efficiency losses as the air rises, because the fact that the air is rising means that its energy is going elsewhere, and not ultimately towards turning the turbines blades.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
Once the heated air …
Once the heated air reaches the tower, it will not have much less force than at the exit of the tower. Yes airspeed will be geater at the top, but the air density will be lower resulting nearly same force. From simplicity aspect, the turbin at the bottom will produce the cheapest electricty per KW.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
that is 30KW an …
that is 30KW an hour. Most homes use only 30KW a day. That would be at least 24 homes that can be powered from this tower.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
Just a thought. If …
Just a thought. If the upper atmosphere wind speeds are higher than the wind speed in the vertical wind tunnel why not use that to increase power.
Cap the top of the tower with a 90 degree hood that can rotate to match wind direction by use of a stablizer vains and bearings. As upper atmostphere winds are blown by the vent hood, an venturi effect is created increasing the total wind speed of the tower. This will increase the power of turbin below.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
it would be much …
it would be much harder engineering wise to put it at the top. It was just a test run.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:38 pm
between 1:15 – 1:20 …
between 1:15 – 1:20, What is the name of the material again that is use?