5 ms·

> The losses you take are zero. Sure, but transission losses are generally a low single digit percentage-- eliminating those will not have much impact, but on

> The losses you take are zero. Sure, but transission losses are generally a low single digit percentage-- eliminating those will not have much impact, but on the other hand your superconductor is EXTREMELY unlikely to be even close to cost competitive with aluminum/steel core wire. Even if you could achieve critical currents comparable to conventional high-temperature superconductors at ambient temperature (which appears *highly* doubtful!), keeping high power transmissions lines at human-survivable voltages would be a tremendous waste of super-conducting material. And even inside homes it seems quite farfetched to me to scale down voltages-- nobody wants to use plugs and switches rated for 200 amps just for their cheap toaster...

sz4kerto 3y ago
> Sure, but transission losses are generally a low single digit percentage Around 6-8% per 1000 km. That's a lot.
- Doddler 3y ago
  I can't imagine any scenario where using 1000 km of superconducting material would ever be worth it to save 6-8% though.
  - hwillis 3y ago
    NordLink flows 1400 MW. Wholesale electricity in Germany is roughly $105. 365x24x(1400x.07)x105 = $90 million per year. Adds up to the cost of the total project every 17-22 years. Over 20 years it's $1.8 million per km. If the superconductor is 20 kg/m (2.4" or 6.2 cm width, huge), that's $90 per kilogram. 10x the cost of copper.
jacquesm 3y ago
A typical HVDC line is a work of art, I wouldn't compare it with a chunk of aluminum or steel wire.
- myrmidon 3y ago
  I was not comparing to HVDC; aluminum with steel core is what's typically used in generic overhead power lines.
  - jacquesm 3y ago
    Yes, and for short haul that works fine. But for really long haul it doesn't, hence HVDC so that's what you compare with: the situation where it makes a difference such that extra cost incurred doesn't immediately invalidate your option. HVDC is much better comparison material than your average overhead powerline. For the same reason we don't compare bicycles with trucks for long haul cargo but we do compare bicycles with cars for shorter distances and personal travel.

sz4kerto 3y ago

> Sure, but transission losses are generally a low single digit percentage Around 6-8% per 1000 km. That's a lot.

Doddler 3y ago
I can't imagine any scenario where using 1000 km of superconducting material would ever be worth it to save 6-8% though.
- hwillis 3y ago
  NordLink flows 1400 MW. Wholesale electricity in Germany is roughly $105. 365x24x(1400x.07)x105 = $90 million per year. Adds up to the cost of the total project every 17-22 years. Over 20 years it's $1.8 million per km. If the superconductor is 20 kg/m (2.4" or 6.2 cm width, huge), that's $90 per kilogram. 10x the cost of copper.

jacquesm 3y ago

A typical HVDC line is a work of art, I wouldn't compare it with a chunk of aluminum or steel wire.

myrmidon 3y ago
I was not comparing to HVDC; aluminum with steel core is what's typically used in generic overhead power lines.
- jacquesm 3y ago
  Yes, and for short haul that works fine. But for really long haul it doesn't, hence HVDC so that's what you compare with: the situation where it makes a difference such that extra cost incurred doesn't immediately invalidate your option. HVDC is much better comparison material than your average overhead powerline. For the same reason we don't compare bicycles with trucks for long haul cargo but we do compare bicycles with cars for shorter distances and personal travel.