Toshiba to participate in solar photovoltaic and wind power generation project in Aichi

There's plenty of energy in this world. Our problem is we can't store the energy

Zichi, I love your optimism. Why can't we go any faster? Tesla: "The World can only tolerate one change at a time"

This is great news. i'm glad to hear it Zichi. We need to stop charging money for it. Just make it already.

These batteries can store energy, then they can power refrigerators, greenhouses, purification centers. The world is in the worst shape ever and it's disgusting because we can do something about it.

The problem with storing energy with salt is that it can only be done with Thermal Solar Power - where mirrors focus the sun's light on a central point - providing heat to produce steam and so drive turbines. The same concentrated heat can be used to melt the salt, which can then be used to drive the turbines in overcast conditions or at night. These power stations need a lot of flat land, and operate well in hot, dry climates, i.e. deserts. They are non-starters in Japan.

Storing power in batteries or with pumped water storage is both very expensive, and inefficient - you have to put 2 kwhr in to get one back out again.

There are already some propellers like that in Tahara. It doesn't say how many more they are planning to put there exactly. Tahara is such a beautiful place with so many cabbage and rapeseed blossom fields, it would be sad to see them gone.

@ Zichi

Solar power can provide more than 15% of the power needed in the daytime period and with low light solar panels some thing of overnight power too.

For the first statement I'd need some facts and figures: how big of an area would need to be covered, the cost of the electricity, and whether the 15% is the minimum available throughout the year - or just the maximum achieved at some point in the year. As for the second statement about 'low light solar panels' - where did you hear that? We get around 700 W per square metre from the sun (at noon on a clear day). At night we get zero W per square metre - no solar panel is going to produce electricity when the incoming radiation is zero.

Is that 700W per day or per hour per sq. meter?

I believe that the majority of our power generation for domestic and daily needs can be taken care of by distributed renewable energy sources such as this, but what about high energy flux density projects such as space travel and water desalinization?

Combination of solar wind hydro and tidal could supply the whole of Japan in the future. New methods of harvesting and storing eco energy are being developed quite rapidly now as none renewable energy supplies diminish. Nuclear power especialy in the aftermath of two critical accidents on this our earth is hopefully on the decline. Time to move forward and ensure our childrens futures

Foxie Oct. 25, 2011 - 11:04PM JST

Is that 700W per day or per hour per sq. meter?

It's the power you get from the sun at noon, on a clear day, per square metre.

It doesn't account for the efficiency of solar panels, which at around 15% would give 135 W per square metre at noon.

Averaging solar energy received over 24 hours you typically get 140 W per square metre - so solar panels will only produce around 21 W per square metre.

Most solar power proponents emphasise the maximum possible output - in our case 135 W, versus the 21 W we get averaged over 24 hours.

futurebeast Oct. 25, 2011 - 11:12PM JST

I believe that the majority of our power generation for domestic and daily needs can be taken care of by distributed renewable energy sources such as this, but what about high energy flux density projects such as space travel and water desalinization?

I'm doubtful that the renewables will live up to the hype - lots of core and implementation problems are not being addressed by Japan's uncritical media. As for the high energy needs pick one: Oil, Coal, Gas, Nuclear Fission, and if we're lucky - Nuclear Fusion.

Christina O'Neill Oct. 26, 2011 - 05:44AM JST

Combination of solar wind hydro and tidal could supply the whole of Japan in the future.

Solar and Wind require massive areas of land to be set aside for them - and Japan's winter, rainy seasons, typhoons and lightning storms will cause big trouble for Solar, Wind and Tidal. Hydro capacity in Japan is small - but could be doubled according to a scientific paper I read (if you want the title I'll hunt for it).

New methods of harvesting and storing eco energy are being developed quite rapidly now as none renewable energy supplies diminish.

Well, there is bioenergy - harvesting and storage in one renewable package - but why on earth would we be burning more stuff to release more CO2 into the atmosphere in this era of global warming? As for other methods of storage: pumped hydro, compressed air, batteries - some are unproven, all are hideously expensive.

Nuclear power especialy in the aftermath of two critical accidents on this our earth is hopefully on the decline. Time to move forward and ensure our childrens futures

I don't want my child to have to endure 45 degree+ summers in Japan, so I'm for all power options which have drastically lower CO2 emissions - which includes nuclear power.

Judging from the almost instant dislikes it seems some people don't like having their over-rosy view punctured by reality. The fact is, the universe doesn't care about our aspirations - if we push for renewables without analysing the downside there'll be a world of pain for our children.

And, as usual, I call on those who gave me the thumbs down to tell me where I've made an error in my posts.

About Solar Panels

Is it possible to stack solar panels into a a column / pillar in order to always collect energy? I'm thinking vertically here. A column with a bloom mechanism that would allow the pillars to open up around noon into a flower shape and still collect energy.

The solar energy collectors don't necessarily need to be spread out. If we build vertically we could collect more energy. If buildings had solar collectors on the outside of the building instead of all glass we could collect and power the building itself.

Man, I love reading Star Vikings comments, he is very intelligent, or maybe she?? Keep up the great comments! As for me, I love the sun, we should have SOLAR everything! DOWN with Stupid Tokyo electric!!!

All of Tokyo and then the rest of Japan should go SOLAR ASAP!! The USA etc..should really try to clean up its act and go SOLAR too! Sorry Zichi, I know a lot a about cows, you want to kill them, feed them garlic! You want to kill all of us?? Try putting up with garlic farts and from cows?? OMG!

No idea who thinks Zichi lasts post was bad, I think it was very, very good, and informative, now if we can get all the Toshibas of the world behind clean energy like solar etc..and they can also make $$$$$$$$$ too! Time to shut all of the nuclear reactors down here in Japan and in many other parts of the world before it is too late. IMHO.

@zichi Oct. 27, 2011 - 12:35AM JST

While some pro nuclear power supporters will push the theory that nuclear energy is the only one which is zero C02, and therefore the only one capable of saving the planet from climate disaster, it's an incorrect belief and nuclear energy does create CO2, and other greenhouse gases.

A nice long post - but some facts an figures would be nice. Also, most of your points on how CO2 gets emitted in supporting Nuclear Power hold true for renewables too. If you look at the recent IPCC Report on renewables you find that Nuclear is lower in emissions than solar panels, biopower, equvalent to wind power, and better by a large amount than the fossil fuel plants. See http://srren.ipcc-wg3.de/report/srren-figures-spm/srren-figure-spm.08

Where do you get your facts Zichi?

Zichi,

the IPCC paper covers all CO2 emissions.

BTW, this this a news forum with comments on that. We are not required to write scientific papers. But I do extensive reading and fact checking first before I make any serious comments here.

Not asking you to write a scientific paper, but It would be good to know where you are getting your facts from. You note I do try and provide references.

Also, if you do fact checking - then why do you come out with things like:

and with low light solar panels some thing of overnight power too.

Are you more pro nuclear than just concerned about climate change. If there was no problem with the climate would you still hold the same views on atomic energy?

I would hold the same views, as I think the danger of nuclear power is over-hyped. As it is, with climate change - nuclear power is essential, along with the renewables that emit low levels of CO2 in their lifecycle.

To switch the question around - if you held the view (and you may do) that climate change is a massive threat to humanity, would you support nuclear power as a part of averting that danger?

Zichi, once again - where do you get your figures?

The CO2 released worldwide through electricity production accounts for only 9% of total annual human greenhouse gas emissions. In Japan the generation of electrical power by atomic energy has saved about 3% of the CO2 and greenhouse gases produced by the country. But that 3% was more than lost when it produced CO2 in the manufacture of complex machinery and vast complex power plants using a deadly and highly dangerous form of fuel. A vast capital wealth was used to create the nuclear energy industry. Japan didn't build nuclear power plants to save the planet from climate change but because with fossil fuels it had to rely on other countries to supply them.

I find those figures hard to believe - because when you compare Japan with another industrialised nation - the United States, you find that electricity generation produces 41% of the US CO2 emissions. The US drives and flies a lot, producing a lot of CO2 - and yet power production still takes up 41%. That would suggest Japan's emissions for power production would be even higher

Reference:http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/co2_human.html

According to their data, nuclear power production causes the emission of just 3 times fewer greenhouse gases than modern natural gas power stations.

And natural gas power stations are the lowest CO2 producing power plants, so nuclear power stations produce only a third compared to them? Sounds good.

Star-viking,

" I would hold the same views, as I think the danger of nuclear power is over-hyped."

I'll pass on your thoughts to all the good people of Fukushima and Tohoku, I'm sure they'll be happy to know that.

No need Zichi - I live in Tohoku.

There are solar panels in development which will operate in very low light. There is also solar power paints being developed.

Zichi, the limiting factor is 'low light'. You may have solar panels that can operate in low light - but they can not miraculously produce copious amount of energy when the sun is not above the horizon. It's basic science.

zichi Oct. 27, 2011 - 01:43PM JST

The CO2 released worldwide through electricity production accounts for only 9% of total annual human greenhouse gas emissions.

I tracked down this reference - it's from a information brochure produced by the Uranium Information Centre in 2001, called "SUSTAINABLE ENERGY - Uranium, Electricity and Greenhouse".

Even I'd want more solid facts than that.