Forbes: Giant Floating Solar Farms Could Extract CO2 From Seawater, Producing Methanol Fuel.

[Okie + 83]

Forbes: Giant Floating Solar Farms Could Extract CO2 From Seawater, Producing Methanol Fuel.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottsnowden/2019/06/14/giant-floating-solar-farms-could-power-co2-extraction-from-seawater-producing-methanol-fuel/

I always expected that this was one of the next innovations: building islands on the coasts for more living space, collecting energy, growing crops and converting seawater to drinking water.

[NickW + 2,714]

1 hour ago, Okie said:

Forbes: Giant Floating Solar Farms Could Extract CO2 From Seawater, Producing Methanol Fuel.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottsnowden/2019/06/14/giant-floating-solar-farms-could-power-co2-extraction-from-seawater-producing-methanol-fuel/

I always expected that this was one of the next innovations: building islands on the coasts for more living space, collecting energy, growing crops and converting seawater to drinking water.

Interesting. Floating solar farms also have the advantage that they can be easily rotated to follow the direction of the sun which increases their output significantly. 

[markslawson + 1,042]

11 hours ago, Okie said:

Forbes: Giant Floating Solar Farms Could Extract CO2 From Seawater, Producing Methanol Fuel.

There's nothing really wrong with the idea except that its another idea in a field full of ideas. The article states that it grew out of a request from the Norwegian government to push existing fish farms further out to sea, so it might be best to wait until the fish farms are out there and successfully established. After all the installations have to be built to withstand the North Atlantic. Even in comparatively sheltered spots that's a big ask. Then there would be the problem of storing the methane for later retrieval. I couldn't see how that was to be achieved in the basic proposal. A thought.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

9 hours ago, markslawson said:

After all the installations have to be built to withstand the North Atlantic. Even in comparatively sheltered spots that's a big ask.

Mankind has succeed in building offshore oil installation is some pretty unwelcoming places... why not other types of installations? 

[NickW + 2,714]

14 hours ago, markslawson said:

There's nothing really wrong with the idea except that its another idea in a field full of ideas. The article states that it grew out of a request from the Norwegian government to push existing fish farms further out to sea, so it might be best to wait until the fish farms are out there and successfully established. After all the installations have to be built to withstand the North Atlantic. Even in comparatively sheltered spots that's a big ask. Then there would be the problem of storing the methane for later retrieval. I couldn't see how that was to be achieved in the basic proposal. A thought.

None of the areas proposed are anywhere near the North Atlantic. Look at the map. 

[markslawson + 1,042]

7 hours ago, NickW said:

None of the areas proposed are anywhere near the North Atlantic. Look at the map. 

I wasn't talking about the proposed area but the fish farms off the Norwegian coast.. as for the map many of the areas would be far worse.. or at least better for most of the time until a cyclone goes through.. leave it with you...

[markslawson + 1,042]

12 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Mankind has succeed in building offshore oil installation is some pretty unwelcoming places... why not other types of installations? 

Oh sure, I'm not saying its impossible, just a lot of effort for not much return. To repeat, there's nothing wrong with the idea but I don't see the cost-return working out. Those oil rigs can extract billions of barrels of oils and the semi-submersibles can be shifted to other fields.