Solarial solar blimp concept takes the power where its needed
From time to time, an idea pops up which causes you to say, "Why didn't I think of that?" Often, these concepts seem to make so much sense that they absolutely must be implemented as soon as possible. Andrew Leinonen's concept for a floating solar-powered power station may just be one such idea. Using a lighter-than-air vessel, like a blimp, which can be maneuvered pretty much over anyplace in the world, power could be granted to disaster areas and other needy places using solar cells embedded all over the blimp which would turn the suns rays into electricity. It's possible that a vessel such as this could be tethered to the ground using "power boxes" which would be deployed from the airship using long power-carrying cables. The concept features twelve one-hundred-twenty volt outlets along with two two-hundred-forty volt outlets which would be able to offer power where it's needed most.
[Source: Pull The Sky Down via Engadget]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
iHero 7:26PM (5/16/2008)
Why couldn't they just be based on the ground -- which wouldn't use the precious energy to stay aloft -- also save on cable. I'm sure an inexpensive modular ground based unit could be airlifted.
Using a balloon to extend line of site communication between emergency workers would be a plus.
Reply
Dave 7:30PM (5/16/2008)
My thoughts exactly, i Hero.
Unless the blimp is tethered high enough to be above the clouds, I don't see an advantage.
A better system could be delivered and set up faster by a cargo plane and parachutes.
Reply
Chris M 2:01AM (5/17/2008)
It is bouyancy, not energy, that keeps a blimp aloft. The only energy needed is to construct the blimp and move it to the site, once in place it produces, not uses, energy.
The big advantage is getting above fog, smog, and low lying clouds, that means a fairly long power cable/tether. A long cable means using high voltage for transmission, with stepdown transformers at the ground. Another advantage is that solar cells become more efficient at lower temps, it gets real cold up about 15,000 feet! A wind generator can be added for extra power.
Disadvantages include cost, potential damage from wind or storms, and potential aircraft hazard.
Reply
Kevin Nugent 1:31AM (5/17/2008)
I have to give them some credit its not all blasfomy it makes some sense
Reply
iHero 7:19AM (5/17/2008)
It takes energy to fill the thing /produce the gas and the picture shows a prop too.
And yes it would have to be a high voltage line otherwise the cable would have to be thick -- it would likely have to be too long & heavy anyway to get over cloud cover.
And you also need inverters too -- to go from DC solar panels to the AC power line and inverters are heavy
And lets hope it doesn't get too windy
And if it crashes it is destroyed
I'm not saying it is impossible, I can just think of a more more practical modular ground based solution, which included windmills and possibly an ethanol mill which would consume local vegitation
Reply
mike 10:25AM (5/17/2008)
If it's a workable idea, it'd be great for cities during summer heat waves.
Reply
sick o jiggy 3:22PM (5/17/2008)
test post
Reply
sick o jiggy 3:23PM (5/17/2008)
test post
Reply
tankd0g 1:31AM (5/19/2008)
It's highly mobile, never in the shadow of anything and a floating billboard so you can extract money to pay for it from corporate interests. I hope they have a dozen built already.
Reply
Chris M 2:54AM (5/19/2008)
iHero: It takes energy to build it (and that includes filling it with helium, extracted from natural gas) but once built, filled, and put in operation the only energy needed would be for maintenance. No energy is required to keep it aloft. That "prop" is actually a wind generator.
It might not be necessary to use an inverter on the blimp, solar cells can be wired in series to obtain high voltages, and we now have high voltage DC power transmission technology. A high voltage inverter would still be needed on the ground if AC power is required.
Reply