Wouldn’t distributed generation reduce the need for long transmission lines and increase reliability by diversifying supply?
Even with slightly higher line loss there would be much higher efficiency when the thermal output can be put to productive use (district heating, absorption cooling, etc.).
This would have a much lower net cost: probably why the utility companies with their guaranteed rate of return do NOT want to pursue this concept.
Lee Parker
Although total losses in transmission and distribution are 7 percent or 8 percent, the figure for transmission is only around 3 percent. Unless we get to room temperature superconductors, I am doubtful that the energy required to cool the superconducting line would be less than the average losses. There are specific applications for high temperature superconductors that make a lot of economic sense, but replacing bulk long-distance lines with superconductors does not make sense to me.
Also, a small point, transmission lines are made of aluminum and steel, not copper.
Ross Baldick
Copyright © 1996-2006 by CyberTech, Inc. All rights reserved.