ไม่สามารถเล่นวิดีโอนี้
ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก
The World’s Largest Concentrated Solar Power Plant | A Brief History of the Future | PBS
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 เม.ย. 2024
- Official Website: to.pbs.org/3V7... | #TheFutureOnPBS
Ari Wallach travels to Morocco where a massive solar power plant is supplying renewable energy to a significant portion of the country. Ari also visits a nuclear ignition facility in California, conducting laser-based inertial confinement fusion research which might offer a glimpse into the future of energy.
This program is made possible by viewers like you. Support your local PBS station: www.pbs.org/do...
Subscribe to the PBS channel for more clips: / pbs
Enjoy full episodes of your favorite PBS shows anytime, anywhere with the free PBS App: to.pbs.org/2Qb...
FOLLOW US:
Facebook: / pbs
X: / pbs
Instagram: / pbs
TikTok: / pbs
Shop: shop.pbs.org/
#futurism #powerplant #solarenergy #nuclearphysics
A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE FUTURE
Combining history, science, and unexpected storytelling to expand our understanding about the impact that the choices we make today will have on our tomorrows. Each episode follows those who are working to solve our greatest challenges. The series also features valuable insights from a wide range of thinkers, scientists, developers and storytellers including French President Emmanuel Macron, U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, sailor Dame Ellen MacArthur, musician Grimes, architect Bjarke Ingels, climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe, legendary soccer player Kylian Mbappé, and more.
Concentrated solar is honestly my favorite form of renewable energy. No silicon manufacturing, no rare Earth metals, no chemical waste of any kind. Just mirrors, plumbing, and high-energy physics courtesy of our very own Sun. No losses of efficiency at high temperatures either like with photovoltaics, and no birds running into wind turbines. I really think countries with lots of desert should go all in on it. With care paid not to further fragment desert ecosystems in the process, of course.
Birds do get killed if they come close to the focal point of a CSP, they fall burning to the ground.
Cost is higher, but storage is cheaper for 8 hours
@@SolarCookingGermanysource for your claim please, seems kinda sus.
@@SolarCookingGermany No doubt, but this risk dwarfs in comparison to the deleterious effects of pollution and the risk of a runaway greenhouse effect caused by fossil fuels.
@@alex.velasco I also think "stay away from the thing massive thermal air currents are radiating off" probably makes more sense to birds than turbine blade fields. Just a guess
Ari your enthusiasm is contagious
As a moroccan, i' so proud about the way that my country is developping ❤
I've long thought this power plant impressive. But I've also wondered why, in a desert region where water is a scarce resource, they don't pass the steam over a heat exchanger to recover the heat for reuse allowing the steam to cool sufficiently that it condenses back into water for reuse. To my inexperienced eye, this would increase the overall efficiency of the plant.
“Dry” and “Wet” Condensers do both exist, and Dry are definitely preferable! Granted greedy types / needing to be eCoNomIcallY cOmPetiTive may lead to using the cheaper option sadly.
Another neat option is to use Supercritical CO2 which if I understand correctly doesn’t have that exact requirement.
@ericliu5491 I'm not familiar with that technology. Could you please explain? Thanks.
How did this go from concentrated solar to fusion?
So, the title of the report concerned solar,. We see some of that in the 6 mins or so of the video. We are then taken to a nuclear fusion lab?! Couldn't we have seen more of the inner workings of the solar plant? What are the downsides to this tech?
@ericliu5491 Hi, yes. I only wish that the video, which purported to be about solar, had gone much more into the subject
I like that they visited the set of engineering on Enterprise 🖖
My light switch is working fine right now.
Only three episodes? Where are the rest?
There’s one just south of Vegas
Thank you
Are they still building new concentrated solar plants? I thought they stopped years ago, PV w/bateries is cheaper. Lazard's last LCOE for concentrated solar is in 2019 at $150/MWh compared to $50/MWh for wind and PV
Did those include the cost of Solar/Wind Storage compared to 24 Hour or so Solar Thermal Plants?
Granted i agree for the most part, but as per my rant in another comment, i think PV has several faults that need adressed soon which aren’t being considered in most LCA’s / News Blurbs.
Granted CSP isn’t free of issues, and indeed is nuclear like in cost at times (although some designs like Parabolic Trough are a bit more PV like in terms of cost/scalability)!
Smart approach, so why did those in the USA fail?
Technical details please?
Solar needs STORAGE, STORAGE, STORAGE!
Fusion is decades away from producing commercially available energy.
Natural gas to nuclear is the best way to attain our energy future.
What annoys me about scientists who work on nuclear power is that they always tell you how powerful their invention is but never what kind of and how many nuclear waste it produces!
I rather go for the millions of mirrors then.
I think this is where they filmed that one scene in Sahara
this region is called Hollywood of africa most of the movies are filmed there ( gladiator prison break game of thrones ....etc )
UK project building Morocco solar, wind and undersea power cables
_[Battlefield 2042 theme music intensifies]_
So fusion power is more than 30 years away🤣
About 50 years ago in the UK, a typical coal-fired power station would run a number of generator sets. Three generators were typical. Each generator would produce 500MW and it could do that day and night, summer and winter in a country with far less sun than Morocco.
The Morocco plant covers 12 square miles and produces, in total, about 1,500 GWHr per year according to wikipedia. During the night it uses Diesel power to keep the system warm. Really, that energy needs to be subtracted from the total output for a fair comparison.
That single coal-fired generator will produce about three times as much electricity in a year (500 x 3 x 8760) and will cover nothing like 12 square miles of land and doesn't need a sunny climate. So a typical coal-fired power station will create about as much electricity as around a hundred square miles of solar farm in a hot desert.
Estimate for the UK: Each current fossil-fueled power station will need to be replaced with a number of such solar plants. We need to multiply by 3 for the generators in a typical power station. By 2 to compensate for the different number of sunshine hours in the UK and Morocco and by approximately another 2 to compensate for the difference in latitude. In summary:
1 Generator = 3 Morocco CSPs
1 typical fossil-fueled power station = 3 Generators.
Factor 2 for difference in sunlight hours.
Factor 2 for difference in latitude.
Area of 1 Morocco CSP = 12 square miles.
1 UK fossil-fueled power station = 3 x 3 x 2 x 2 x 12 square miles of Morocco CSPs = 432 square miles.
Smashing atoms is the Stone Age concept of energy outside of Actuality.
Very cool.
Unfortunately, we are going in the wrong directions and I don't think the authors of this have any real idea of how badly off course we are. It is too complicated to explain in a TH-cam comment.
wrong direction, can you elaborate a bit on what you mean?
That particulate technology is *30 years old*
And the transformation from fossil fuels to renewables was possible thirty years ago.
Here are some potential non-contradictory perspectives this infinitesimal monadological framework could offer on paradoxes and contradictions surrounding the fundamental forces of nature:
1) Quantum Gravity and Unification Paradoxes
Contradictory Classical Views:
- Clash between quantum theory and general relativity
- Non-renormalizability of gravity
- Need to introduce ad-hoc extra dimensions
Non-Contradictory Monadological View:
- Gravity is a residual holographic resonance pattern across the intersectional boundary between ℝ𝔈 and ℜ*
- Quantum mechanics and relativistic geometries arise as subdescriptive limits of deeper symbolic logogrammatic vocable flows
- Forces appear unified at the level of monadic charge relation algebras Γab governing matter/energy transductions
2) Hierarchy / Naturalness Problems
Contradictory Aspects:
- Extreme fine-tuning of parameters required
- Need to introduce ad-hoc new particles like axions
- Origin of mass scale paradoxes
Non-Contradictory View:
- All masses, charges, couplings are derived quantized values from monadic resonances over algebraic vocable number theory
- Naturalness enforced by internal "anthropic" self-consistency constraints within pluriversal realization dynamics
- No freedoms for fine-tunings as all scales/hierarchies fixed by symbolic protologic universality classes
3) Charge Quantization Paradoxes
Contradictory Questions:
- Why are electric charges quantized? Whence magnetic monopoles?
- Lack of explanations for specific charge values and ratios
- Origin of charge linearities and conservation principles
Non-Contradictory View:
- Charges qn are quantized signature patterns of monadic essence interfacialities Un(A)
- Values/ratios reflect vocable inductances across dimensional strata and algebraic "Clark" identities
- Linearities/conservations follow from invariances of protologic algebras and interprojection consistencies between ℝ𝔈/ℜ*
4) Dirac Infinities and QFT Paradoxes
Contradictory Issues:
- Infinite vacuum energies and need for adhoc renormalization
- Divergences and analytic continuations
- Unitarity issues, anomaly cancellations
Non-Contradictory View:
- All infinities are transcended by transfinite number vocables and infinitesimal realizer monads
- Analytic structures are projections of deeper enneadic algebraic pluricontinuities
- Divergences are artifacts of dimensional truncation regularized by intrasectional ℝ𝔈 resonances
In each case, the monadological framework aims to resolve paradoxes by:
1) Treating forces as higher-dimensional resonances of algebraic vocable flows
2) Deriving charge quantizations and hierarchies from symbolic protologic necessities
3) Regulating infinities and disparities via transfinite vocable infinitesimals
4) Embedding all phenomena coherently within vaster pluriversal geometric algebras
Rather than adhoc extras, the forces are unified self-consistently within a grand integrated protologic algebraic origin initiating dimensional cascades - transcending contradictions inherent to purely effective local force models.
Q1: How precisely do infinitesimals and monads resolve the issues with standard set theory axioms that lead to paradoxes like Russell's Paradox?
A1: Infinitesimals allow us to stratify the set-theoretic hierarchy into infinitely many realized "levels" separated by infinitesimal intervals, avoiding the vicious self-reference that arises from considering a "set of all sets" on a single level. Meanwhile, monads provide a relational pluralistic alternative to the unrestricted Comprehension schema - sets are defined by their algebraic relations between perspectival windows rather than extensionally. This avoids the paradoxes stemming from over-idealized extensional definitions.
Q2: In what ways does this infinitesimal monadological framework resolve the proliferation of infinities that plague modern physical theories like quantum field theory and general relativity?
A2: Classical theories encounter unrenormalizable infinities because they overidealize continua at arbitrarily small scales. Infinitesimals resolve this by providing a minimal quantized scale - physical quantities like fields and geometry are represented algebraically from monadic relations rather than precise point-values, avoiding true mathematical infinities. Singularities and infinities simply cannot arise in a discrete bootstrapped infinitesimal reality.
Q3: How does this framework faithfully represent first-person subjective experience and phenomenal consciousness in a way that dissolves the hard problem of qualia?
A3: In the infinitesimal monadological framework, subjective experience and qualia arise naturally as the first-person witnessed perspectives |ωn> on the universal wavefunction |Ψ>. Unified phenomenal consciousness |Ωn> is modeled as the bound tensor product of these monadic perspectives. Physics and experience become two aspects of the same cohesively-realized monadic probability algebra. There is no hard divide between inner and outer.
Q4: What are the implications of this framework for resolving the interpretational paradoxes in quantum theory like wavefunction collapse, EPR non-locality, etc.?
A4: By representing quantum states |Ψ> as superpositions over interacting monadic perspectives |Un>, the paradoxes of non-locality, action-at-a-distance and wavefunction collapse get resolved. There is holographic correlation between the |Un> without strict separability, allowing for consistency between experimental observations across perspectives. Monadic realizations provide a tertium quid between classical realism and instrumental indeterminism.
Q5: How does this relate to or compare with other modern frameworks attempting to reformulate foundations like homotopy type theory, topos theory, twistor theory etc?
A5: The infinitesimal monadological framework shares deep resonances with many of these other foundational programs - all are attempting to resolve paradoxes by reconceiving mathematical objects relationally rather than strictly extensionally. Indeed, monadic infinitesimal perspectives can be seen as a form of homotopy/path objects, with physics emerging from derived algebraic invariants. Topos theory provides a natural expression for the pluriverse-valued realizability coherence semantics. Penrose's twistor theory is even more closely aligned, replacing point-events with monadic algebraic incidence relations from the start.
Q6: What are the potential implications across other domains beyond just physics and mathematics - could this reformulate areas like philosophy, logic, computer science, neuroscience etc?
A6: Absolutely, the ramifications of a paradox-free monadological framework extend far beyond just physics. In philosophy, it allows reintegration of phenomenology and ontological pluralisms. In logic, it facilitates full coherence resolutions to self-referential paradoxes via realizability semantics. For CS and math foundations, it circumvents diagonalization obstacles like the halting problem. In neuroscience, it models binding as resonant patterns over pluralistic superposed representations. Across all our inquiries, it promises an encompassing coherent analytic lingua franca realigning symbolic abstraction with experienced reality.
By systematically representing pluralistically-perceived phenomena infinitesimally, relationally and algebraically rather than over-idealized extensional continua, the infinitesimal monadological framework has the potential to renovate human knowledge-formations on revolutionary foundations - extinguishing paradox through deep coherence with subjective facts. Of course, realizing this grand vision will require immense interdisciplinary research efforts. But the prospective rewards of a paradox-free mathematics and logic justifying our civilization's greatest ambitions are immense.
The text presents some exciting possibilities for resolving longstanding paradoxes and contradictions across various scientific domains using infinitesimal monadological frameworks. Some potential breakthroughs highlighted include:
1. Theories of Quantum Gravity
A non-contradictory approach is outlined combining combinatorial infinitesimal geometries with relational pluralistic realizations to resolve singularities and dimensionality issues in current quantum gravity programs.
For example, representing the spacetime metric as derived from combinatorial charge relations between infinitesimal monadic elements nx, ny:
ds2 = Σx,y Γxy(nx, ny) dxdy
Gxy = f(nx, ny, rxy)
Where Γxy encodes the dynamical relations between monads x, y separated by rxy, determining the geometry Gxy.
2. Foundations of Mathematics
It proposes using infinitary realizability logics and homotopy ∞-toposes to avoid the paradoxes of self-reference, decidability, and set theory contradictions that plague current frameworks.
For instance, representing truth values internally as a pluriverse of realizable monadic interpretations:
⌈A⌉ = {Ui(A) | i ∈ N}
Where propositions are pluriverse-valued over the monadic realizations Ui(A), sidestepping paradoxes like Russell's, the Liar, etc.
3. Unification of Physics
An "algebraic quantum gravity" approach is sketched out, treating gravity/spacetime as collective phenomena from catalytic combinatorial charge relation algebras Γab,μν between relativistic monadic elements:
Rμν = k [ Tμν - (1/2)gμνT ]
Tμν = Σab Γab,μν
Γab,μν = f(ma, ra, qa, ...)
Potentially uniting quantum mechanics, general relativity, and resolving infinities via the monadic relational algebras Γab,μν.
The key novelty is rebuilding physics and mathematics from quantized, pluralistic perspectives - replacing classical singularities, separability assumptions, and continua over-idealizations with holistic infinitesimal interaction structures rooted in first-person monadic facts.
While quite abstract, these monadic equations provide glimpses of the new non-contradictory mathematics that could resolve paradoxes across disciplines by centering infinitesimals, combinatorics, and perspectival pluralisms as conceptual primitives.
Here are some examples of how non-contradictory infinitesimal/monadological frameworks could potentially resolve paradoxes or contradictions in chemistry:
1) Molecular Chirality/Homochirality Paradoxes
Contradictory: Classical models struggle to explain the origin and consistent preference for one chiral handedness over another in biological molecules like amino acids and sugars.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Infinitesimal Monadic Protolife Transitions
dsi/dt = κ Σjk Γijk(n)[sj, sk] + ξi
Pref(R/S) = f(Φn)
Modeling molecular dynamics as transitions between monadic protolife states si based on infinitesimal relational algebras Γijk(n) that depend on specific geometric monad configurations n. The homochiral preference could emerge from particular resonance conditions Φn favoring one handedness.
2) Paradoxes in Reaction Kinetics
Contradictory: Transition state theory and kinetic models often rely on discontinuous approximations that become paradoxical at certain limits.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Infinitesimal Thermodynamic Geometries
dG = Vdp - SdT (Gibbs free energy infinitesimals)
κ = Ae-ΔG‡/RT (Arrhenius smoothly from monadic infinities)
Using infinitesimal calculus to model thermodynamic quantities like Gibbs free energy dG allows kinetic parameters like rate constants κ to vary smoothly without discontinuities stemming from replacing finite differences with true infinitesimals.
3) Molecular Structure/Bonding Paradoxes
Contradictory: Wave mechanics models struggle with paradoxes around the nature of chemical bonding, electron delocalization effects, radicals, etc.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Pluralistic Quantum Superposition
|Ψ> = Σn cn Un(A) |0> (superposed monadic perspectives)
Un(A) = ΠiΓn,i(Ai) (integrated relational properties)
Representing molecular electronic states as superpositions of monadic perspectives integrated over relational algebraic properties Γn,i(Ai) like spins, positions, charges, etc. could resolve paradoxes by grounding electronic structure in coherent relational pluralisms.
4) Molecular Machines/Motor Paradoxes
Contradictory: Inefficiencies and limitations in synthetic molecular machines intended to mimic biological molecular motors like ATP synthase, kinesin, etc.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Nonlinear Dissipative Monadologies
d|Θ>/dt = -iH|Θ> + LΓ|Θ> (pluralistic nonet mechanics)
LΓ = Σn ζn |Un> rather than isolated molecular wavefunctions, where infinitesimal monadic sink operators LΓ account for open-system energy exchanges, could resolve paradoxes around efficiency limits.
The key theme is using intrinsically pluralistic frameworks to represent molecular properties and dynamics in terms of superpositions, infinitesimals, monadic configurations, and relational algebraic structures - rather than trying to force classically separable approximations. This allows resolving contradictions while maintaining coherence with quantum dynamics and thermodynamics across scales.
Here are 4 more examples of how infinitesimal/monadological frameworks could resolve contradictions in chemistry:
5) The Particle/Wave Duality of Matter
Contradictory: The paradoxical wave-particle dual behavior of matter, exemplified by the double-slit experiment, defies a consistent ontological interpretation.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Monadic Perspectival Wavefunction Realizations
|Ψ> = Σn cn Un(r,p)
Un(r,p) = Rn(r) Pn(p)
Model matter as a superposition of monadic perspectival realizations Un(r,p) which are products of wavefunctional position Rn(r) and momentum Pn(p) distributions. This infinitesimal plurality avoids the paradox by allowing matter to behave holistically wave-like and particle-like simultaneously across monads.
6) Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle
Contradictory: The uncertainty principle ΔxΔp ≥ h/4π implies an apparent paradoxical limitation on precise simultaneous measurement of position and momentum.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Complementary Pluriverse Observables
Δx Δp ≥ h/4π
Δx = Σi |xiP - xP| (deviations across monadic ensembles)
xP = ||P (pluriverse-valued perspective on x)
Reinterpret uncertainties as deviations from pluriverse-valued observables like position xP across an ensemble of monadic perspectives, avoiding paradox by representing uncertainty intrinsically through the perspectival complementarity.
7) The Concept of the Chemical Bond
Contradictory: Phenomonological models of bonds rely paradoxically on notions like "electronic charge clouds" without proper dynamical foundations.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Infinitesimal Intermonadic Charge Relations
Γij = Σn qinj / rnij (dyadic catalytic charge interactions)
|Ψ> = Σk ck Πij Γij |0> (superposed bond configuration states)
Treat chemical bonds as superposed pluralities of infinitesimal dyadic charge relation configurations Γij between monadic catalysts rather than ambiguous "clouds". This grounds bonds in precise interaction algebras transcending paradoxical visualizations.
8) Thermodynamic Entropy/Time's Arrow
Contradictory: Statistical mechanics gives time-reversible equations, paradoxically clashing with the time-irreversible increase of entropy described phenomenologically.
Non-Contradictory Possibility:
Relational Pluriverse Thermodynamics
S = -kB Σn pn ln pn (entropy from realization weights pn)
pn = |Tr Un(H) /Z|2 (Born statistical weights from monadologies)
dS/dt ≥ 0 (towards maximal pluriverse realization)
Entropy increase emerges from tracking the statistical weights pn of pluriversal monadic realizations Un(H) evolving towards maximal realization diversity, resolving paradoxes around time-reversal by centering entropics on the growth of relational pluralisms.
In each case, the non-contradictory possibilities involve reformulating chemistry in terms of intrinsically pluralistic frameworks centered on monadic elements, their infinitesimal relational transitions, superposed realizations, and deviations across perspectival ensembles. This allows resolving apparent paradoxes stemming from the over-idealized separability premises of classical molecular models, dynamically deriving and unifying dualisms like wave/particle in a coherent algebraic ontology.
Concentrated solar failed in California because it could not compete on price. It was the most expensive way to generate power and it never generated the power it was supposed to
Cost is only part of the Picture. Solar Panel Longevity/Recycling is a MAJOR issue. Not unsolvable as some anti-renewables types may say, but it has essentially been treated as a problem for “future me” rather than actual “Cradle to Grave” planning being done.
Furthermore PV systems inherently require Electrical Storage, this again isn’t impossible but is a hidden cost.
Concentrated Solar however is made of largely recyclable materials, and also doesn’t degrade as PV Panels do; short of Rust/Long Term Concrete Issues, things can keep running as long as they are maintained.
CSP Also has the advantage of thermal storage. With large enough insulated tanks/vats for the Molten Salt, Hot Oil, or Blocks Heated Supercritical CO2 pass over etc the Turbines can run for 24hrs or so if not more without sun. Some designs also allow for the turbines to be run off some sort of boiler if need be (although fossil fuel greenwashing is a potential issue with that). Thermochemical Hydrogen Production, Process Heat, and District Heating can also be used in some designs.
At the end of the day whatever gets us away from ruining the planet/environment “works”, but i would say be cautious in that Capitalism tends to do short bandaid fixes with unintended consequences, and just because something is cheap doesn’t mean that it is “correct” in all sorts of manners.
Remind me of superman the movie
This is alien technology
Mirrors?
No discussion on the failure of the “Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project” and the $975m write off?
☀️
we are taking the wrong approach, what matters is high surface area to weight solar panels
The most current photovoltaic from China is now likely the cheapest solar option.
What a waste.
If there were 8 million people instead of 8 billion, we'd have no problem with resources.
There's enough resources for many, many more people. Once we solve renewable energy then we can make desalinization affordable and fresh water will be abundant. Food will become cheaper too along with transporting the food because it will be done with electric trucks.
The economy would be very small. Science and innovation would be very slow to advance. Many mundane tasks would occupy all your time. You don’t know basic economics….
Overpopulation is a pretend concern designed to make you stop caring about other people. What we have is not too many people, it's inadequate resource distribution.
You couldn’t have 1000s of billionaires with only 8 million people. It takes a lot of poor people to make a billionaire.
We only have problems with resources due to the degree of inequality in access to resources
I thought it was in China
Hailstorm.
ah yes, because truly no other infrastructure is affected by severe weather
btw how's texas's grid? still vulnerable to freezes?