Building A $2 Billion Subsea Solar Power Cable From Chile To China

[Meredith Poor + 883]

Chile, because Australia and Argentina are on China's ****-list.

[nsdp + 449]

1 hour ago, Meredith Poor said:

Chile, because Australia and Argentina are on China's ****-list.

Argentina makes no sense since it  is on the wrong side of the Andes and the solar resource in Argentina is pretty weak.

[markslawson + 1,042]

1 hour ago, Meredith Poor said:

Chile, because Australia and Argentina are on China's ****-list.

MP - I didn't see a story attached but are you being serious.. try $200 billion, or maybe $2 trillion.. there have been proposals to link renewable energy projects in Northern Australia to Singapore which is a fraction of the distance and the headline cost on that project is $A16 billion ($US11.6 billion) .. there are plenty of sub sea power cables but the distance from China to Chile is many times any distance attempted so far and would cross some very deep ocean indeed..   

[Meredith Poor + 883]

3 hours ago, markslawson said:

MP - I didn't see a story attached but are you being serious.. try $200 billion, or maybe $2 trillion.. there have been proposals to link renewable energy projects in Northern Australia to Singapore which is a fraction of the distance and the headline cost on that project is $A16 billion ($US11.6 billion) .. there are plenty of sub sea power cables but the distance from China to Chile is many times any distance attempted so far and would cross some very deep ocean indeed..   

Someone posted an article with that title on the main OilPrice page. I have no opinion on it's viability, other than I doubt anything will actually happen. China could just as easily import power from Kazakhstan and/or Russia and/or Tajikistan.

The southern half of Argentina has enough wind power to run the entire world, at least technically.

[nsdp + 449]

I think it is a matter of costs of who manufactures the cable and how they treat costs. Remember China can manufacture the cable  and Chile has the copper.  So real costs will be hard to pin down.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

8 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

Chile, because Australia and Argentina are on China's ****-list.

A 2s search on der google shows ... https://www.pv-magazine.com/2021/11/15/chile-wants-to-export-solar-energy-to-asia-via-15000km-submarine-cable/

It is from Chile and the $2B is for what they claim is 1300km of cable for 3GW.  Or ~$30B for 3GW to cross the Pacific. 

[Rob Plant + 2,608]

3 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

A 2s search on der google shows ... https://www.pv-magazine.com/2021/11/15/chile-wants-to-export-solar-energy-to-asia-via-15000km-submarine-cable/

It is from Chile and the $2B is for what they claim is 1300km of cable for 3GW.  Or ~$30B for 3GW to cross the Pacific. 

Why dont China just build a new nuclear power station for a lot less money and have full control on the power supply?

I know it would take a few years but even so.

Better still why not build a huge solar farm in the Mongolia desert, I'm sure Mongolia would be happy with the infrastructure and the revenue. They have on average 260 sunny days per year at 10 hours of sun per day and the land is not used for anything.

Its also borders China!

[notsonice + 1,067]

As of August 2020 Chile had diverse sources of electric power: for the National Electric System, providing over 99% of the county's electric power, hydropower represented around 26.7% of its installed capacity, biomass 1.8%, wind power 8.8%, solar 12.1%, geothermal 0.2%, natural gas 18.9%, coal 20.3%, and petroleum-based capacity 11.3%.....Why would Chile be exporting power to China ????? the already have to import the nat gas, coal and oil to produce 50 percent of their electricity today . Electricity is not cheap in Chile around 20 cents per KWH....no surplus of cheap solar or wind power in Chile at all.

Edited November 19, 2021 by notsonice

[Meredith Poor + 883]

4 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Better still why not build a huge solar farm in the Mongolia desert, I'm sure Mongolia would be happy with the infrastructure and the revenue. They have on average 260 sunny days per year at 10 hours of sun per day and the land is not used for anything.

Its also borders China!

Mongolia has vast amounts of wind power. Wind would make more sense than solar. I agree 100% otherwise, that would make the most sense.

[Meredith Poor + 883]

8 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

A 2s search on der google shows ... https://www.pv-magazine.com/2021/11/15/chile-wants-to-export-solar-energy-to-asia-via-15000km-submarine-cable/

It is from Chile and the $2B is for what they claim is 1300km of cable for 3GW.  Or ~$30B for 3GW to cross the Pacific. 

It would certainly take a lot of copper. Perhaps there is a not-so-hidden agenda with that proposal.

[NickW + 2,714]

15 hours ago, markslawson said:

MP - I didn't see a story attached but are you being serious.. try $200 billion, or maybe $2 trillion.. there have been proposals to link renewable energy projects in Northern Australia to Singapore which is a fraction of the distance and the headline cost on that project is $A16 billion ($US11.6 billion) .. there are plenty of sub sea power cables but the distance from China to Chile is many times any distance attempted so far and would cross some very deep ocean indeed..   

Is this Chile - China power cable thing some late April fools joke?

China has direct access to Tibet - with some of the best solar resources on the planet due to its altitude and at a fraction of the distance, plus its overland and all in their territory. 

[NickW + 2,714]

1 hour ago, Meredith Poor said:

It would certainly take a lot of copper. Perhaps there is a not-so-hidden agenda with that proposal.

Why?

They have extremely good solar resources in Tibet - pretty much year round production at 1900-2000kwh/Kw.per year

At a fraction of the distance, overland and most importantly all within their territory. 

[NickW + 2,714]

5 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Why dont China just build a new nuclear power station for a lot less money and have full control on the power supply?

I know it would take a few years but even so.

Better still why not build a huge solar farm in the Mongolia desert, I'm sure Mongolia would be happy with the infrastructure and the revenue. They have on average 260 sunny days per year at 10 hours of sun per day and the land is not used for anything.

Its also borders China!

Better still Tibet (in China)

Using this JRC Photovoltaic Geographical Information System (PVGIS) - European Commission (europa.eu) you get the following figures for a site at the eastern end of the southern edge of the Tibetan plateau

Monthly output on a fixed plane south facing 1KW solar panel - Jan - Dec

158,141,173,171,163,155,141,148,169,202,175,182

1978 kwh per KW per year (+/- 110) 

[Starschy + 211]

Obviously after that Glasgow Conference "Visions" appear for Projects. That Cable Project wouldn't happen if the distance is one third. The Chinese could build a few Nuclear Power Stations. in 1/3 of the Time of this "Visions" Project.

[Piotr Berman + 82]

I think that Xinjiang (East Turkestan) is the best bet for China, they already build factories of solar power there, and there are many thermal power stations in the province.  Takla-makan desert is as dry and sunny as you may want.  Conceptually, if you have enough thermal power stations in the system, whatever solar or wind you add, it will decrease the coal consumption without any need for storage.  Until you exceed some proportion of the total supply, say, 30%.  Then you may think about storage technologies.  Xinjiang has some small rivers that flow down a lot, so hydro storage should be easy, and if the solar power is send east, the local potential for peak hydro seems very large.

I would think that Chile project is not real but an idea to excite the "green minded" -- a very innumerate crowd.

Of course, Chile has very good hydro potential in the south, and solar potential in the north, and the capital region in between, copper smelters that need electricity, if they can produce solar electricity profitably, they can use it themselves.

 

 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

On 11/19/2021 at 7:24 AM, NickW said:

Why?

They have extremely good solar resources in Tibet - pretty much year round production at 1900-2000kwh/Kw.per year

At a fraction of the distance, overland and most importantly all within their territory. 

Magician pulls out of his hat....

1. Night
2. Winter
3. Your welcome for these awesome observations on physical realities of solar

[NickW + 2,714]

10 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Magician pulls out of his hat....

1. Night
2. Winter
3. Your welcome for these awesome observations on physical realities of solar

Again troll you are changing the perspective

The comment I made was about accessing Chilean solar. Even if it was feasibIe to build a trans pacific cable the point I was making is they have high grade solar in Tibet

In terms of Tibet month to month output is pretty consistent because there are closer to the equator so your seasonal comment is nonsense

This is monthly average out put for a location in Southern tibet (Jan - Dec). Feb is an anomaly as its a short month. Infact Autumn - winter output is moderately higher. 

158,141,173,171,163,155,141,148,169,202,175,182

Day time solar takes demand off other assets during day time peak demand.  Those assets  can be brought into play in the evening and overnight. 

 

[NickW + 2,714]

34 minutes ago, Piotr Berman said:

I think that Xinjiang (East Turkestan) is the best bet for China, they already build factories of solar power there, and there are many thermal power stations in the province.  Takla-makan desert is as dry and sunny as you may want.  Conceptually, if you have enough thermal power stations in the system, whatever solar or wind you add, it will decrease the coal consumption without any need for storage.  Until you exceed some proportion of the total supply, say, 30%.  Then you may think about storage technologies.  Xinjiang has some small rivers that flow down a lot, so hydro storage should be easy, and if the solar power is send east, the local potential for peak hydro seems very large.

I would think that Chile project is not real but an idea to excite the "green minded" -- a very innumerate crowd.

Of course, Chile has very good hydro potential in the south, and solar potential in the north, and the capital region in between, copper smelters that need electricity, if they can produce solar electricity profitably, they can use it themselves.

 

 

Tibet is better - output is about 30% higher with less seasonal variation as its closer to the equator. It also work hand in hand with much of the Hydro resource east of there in SW China. 

High altitude Tibet is also cooler both of which increase output. 

However no reason to not deploy solar in both regions. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

34 minutes ago, NickW said:

Again troll you are changing the perspective

they have high grade solar in Tibet

 

Physical NIGHT reality is trolling in your universe?   So, do bank loans give you money you never have to pay back in your universe too?

Thank God you do not vote in my country.  We have enough delusional fanatics as it is. 

[NickW + 2,714]

19 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Physical NIGHT reality is trolling in your universe?   So, do bank loans give you money you never have to pay back in your universe too?

Thank God you do not vote in my country.  We have enough delusional fanatics as it is. 

Look at the the title of this thread. read it if you can

Here you go (in bold just to be sure) 

'Building A $2 Billion Subsea Solar Power Cable From Chile To China'

All I was simply saying is if China wants to access solar resources they are much closer to home in Tibet & Xinjang. 

[nsdp + 449]

10 hours ago, NickW said:

Look at the the title of this thread. read it if you can

Here you go (in bold just to be sure) 

'Building A $2 Billion Subsea Solar Power Cable From Chile To China'

All I was simply saying is if China wants to access solar resources they are much closer to home in Tibet & Xinjang. 

Yes but they are in the same time zone and not as high quality. The Atacama desert is as close to 360 days a year in full sunshine as you can get. It is 20 degrees from the equator compared to 30+degrees for Tibet  and 40+ Xinjang.  Chile is 10 time zones ahead and as any one who has experience in electric power dispatching that is like having 10 hours of free battery storage plus an extra 20% output.

[nsdp + 449]

On 11/22/2021 at 4:02 PM, Piotr Berman said:

I think that Xinjiang (East Turkestan) is the best bet for China, they already build factories of solar power there, and there are many thermal power stations in the province.  Takla-makan desert is as dry and sunny as you may want.  Conceptually, if you have enough thermal power stations in the system, whatever solar or wind you add, it will decrease the coal consumption without any need for storage.  Until you exceed some proportion of the total supply, say, 30%.  Then you may think about storage technologies.  Xinjiang has some small rivers that flow down a lot, so hydro storage should be easy, and if the solar power is send east, the local potential for peak hydro seems very large.

I would think that Chile project is not real but an idea to excite the "green minded" -- a very innumerate crowd.

Of course, Chile has very good hydro potential in the south, and solar potential in the north, and the capital region in between, copper smelters that need electricity, if they can produce solar electricity profitably, they can use it themselves.

 

 

Piotr, Xinjang is too far north to have high quality solar. The Atacama is 20 degrees from the equator and Xinjang is about 4000 kilometers from where the power is needed.

Chile can do both. export and melt copper.

[NickW + 2,714]

4 hours ago, nsdp said:

Yes but they are in the same time zone and not as high quality. The Atacama desert is as close to 360 days a year in full sunshine as you can get. It is 20 degrees from the equator compared to 30+degrees for Tibet  and 40+ Xinjang.  Chile is 10 time zones ahead and as any one who has experience in electric power dispatching that is like having 10 hours of free battery storage plus an extra 20% output.

The solar resource in Tibet is comparable to Chile (its a bit better there)  and year round too - I have already posted the figures on this thread

The 1.4GW North Sea link (worlds longest interconnector) cost 2 billion Euros to lay a set of cables 450 miles with transformers at either end. The North Sea is very shallow. 

Care to extrapolate those  costs and apply to a >10,000 mile cable across an ocean over 10,000 metres in depth in places?

Considered the costs of doing a repair on a cable at that depth? 

Considered the transmission losses even with HVDC? 

The reason Tibetan solar is potentially viable  as a resource and chile is pie in the sky is:

• Its relatively close
• Its on home turf
• It can be backed up with Hydro & peaking plant. 
• Doesn't require the worlds entire copper supply to build it. 
• While China is on the same time zone geographically Tibet is 2-3 zones behind the eastern coastal areas. This means the Tibetan solar will be producing after nightfall in the East. 

 

 

 

 

[notsonice + 1,067]

10 hours ago, nsdp said:

Piotr, Xinjang is too far north to have high quality solar. The Atacama is 20 degrees from the equator and Xinjang is about 4000 kilometers from where the power is needed.

Chile can do both. export and melt copper.

You should invest in the Chile to China dream cable....I am sure the guy that dreamed up the scheme could use your hard earned money financing his pipe dream.

[NickW + 2,714]

On 11/19/2021 at 5:57 AM, footeab@yahoo.com said:

A 2s search on der google shows ... https://www.pv-magazine.com/2021/11/15/chile-wants-to-export-solar-energy-to-asia-via-15000km-submarine-cable/

It is from Chile and the $2B is for what they claim is 1300km of cable for 3GW.  Or ~$30B for 3GW to cross the Pacific. 

1.4GW North Sea link (longest interconnector in the World) is 450 miles long and cost 2 billion Euros