The Noor Solar Complex - Morocco

Morocco has built the largest solar plant in the world.

The Noor Solar Complex does not use convention photovoltaics. Noor I, which is pictured, provides 160 MW of solar capacity. By 2018, the entire complex will provide 580 MW, enough to provide electricity for 1.1 Million Moroccoans.

By 2020, Morocco claims that they will get 42% of their electricity from solar. The Noor complex can operate at full load for 7-8 hours, without any sunshine, due to the melted salts from the solar concentrators. The temperature of the salt liquid can reach up to 400 degrees Celcius.

I'm sure we will hear much more about this in the coming years.

https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/20...te-solar-complex-is-a-great-model-for-africa/

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/08/africa/ouarzazate-morocco-solar-plant/index.html

 

That's about 1/2 a nuclear reactor. What is the total area involved in generating 580 MW ??

 

And no radioactive waste products are being created, that our future generations have to contend with, for hundreds of thousands of years. And even though they have to maintain this radioactive waste, they reap no reward whatsoever from it. What a great deal for our children, grandchildren, great.......

 

How many die from radioactive waste every year ?? But how many acres are used to generate this 580 MW ?? No curiosity ??

 

We don't know the answer to that question. We know that radioactive waste causes cancer. And cancer is the second leading cause of death. We also know that plants can uptake radioactive waste. We also know that radioactive particles can be ingested or inhaled. A friend of mine, who worked his career at the Los Alamos Radioactive Research facility, stated: "If a radioactive particle is ingested, and you're lucky, it will pass right through. Some aren't so lucky".

 

The answer is zero.

 

Well that's a lie. There have been plenty of deaths from acute radiation poisoning. Here's one, but there are plenty more. Chernobyl had a large number of deaths - read "The Voices of Chernobyl".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Slotin

Slotin was conducting a demonstration when he accidentally initiated a fission reaction, which released a burst of hard radiation. He received a lethal dose of radiation and died of acute radiation syndrome nine days later

 

Those are not deaths from radioactive waste. The Russian reactor design was a disaster waiting to happen - and it did.

 

Cause of death - acute radiation poisoning. The stuff kills! Show me something to the contrary, and I'll tell you it's FAKE SCIENCE. And if you don't want to link cancers to radiation, that's your problem, not that of science.

The cigarette industry used to say that nobody has ever died from tobacco either. I suppose you believe that too.

 

Cause of death unrelated to radioactive waste.

 

So, in your view, are cigarettes the cause of death, if a smoker dies of lung cancer?

 

What does that question have to do with radioactive waste from nuclear power plants ??

 

Smoking is known to cause cancer, as is radioactive waste. Smoking has caused cancer, as has radioactive waste, which has very definite correlations of cancer with increased exposures in certain areas.

 

Where has radioactive waste from nuclear power stations caused cancer ?? Name a victim.

 

Ironically solar collectors make a lot more sense in Africa, where the skies are clearer and the latitude is closer to the equator, than it does in cold cloudy northerly Europe.
Yet it's Northern Europe that has the money and cares about environmentally clean energy.

I don't know, maybe it would just make more overall sense for Northern Europe to fund solar energy projects in Africa and have fossil fuel power plants themselves.

 

Well that depends, are you including the area used to mine the uranium the plant needs to work? Are you including the land which has been polluted by radiation leaks and is unfit for human occupation in places like Fukishima and Chernobyl? Are you including the land used to store the nuclear waste?
Are you comparing the desert fit for little else which Noors occupies with land viable for habitation or agriculture that nuclear power plants take up?
Seems you are just repeating ignorant anti-renewable energy talking points without thinking about what you are asking.
Do you know that at current consumption the planet will run out of uranium before we even run out of oil?

 

The question of area refers to the solar plant - how much area is required to supply the electrical power output of 580 MW which is the end goal of the project ??

You can determine the answers to your question very easily if you are interested.

 

It is immoral to burden a third world African country with electrical power generation which does not generate 24/7/365. Keep the solar panels in the EU where the liberal progressives force the EU taxpayers to pay high rates for their energy (in Germany the price of electricity is triple that of the US) and provide inexpensive available 24/7/365 electrical energy from fossil fuels so that the third world countries can grow their economies and raise their standards of living which benefits low income families much more than high income families.

 

The US has solar-thermal plants similar to this one. Believe it or not, deserts have populations, and those populations are typically endangered animals. Solar thermal plants in the US have significantly underperformed, and faced FIERCE opposition from environmental groups.

 

Two partially-completed nuclear reactors were just cancelled in South Carolina, and it had zilch to do with any environmentalists. It was entirely about nuclear power costing way, way too much.

 

That's rich. ^^

 

There are story after story in Voices of Chernobyl, but first you name a victim that has died from cigarette related cancer. You're quibbling and skirting the issue.

 

I'm asking for names of persons who have contracted cancer from radioactive waste from nuclear power stations ??

 

And I'm encouraging you to read Voices from Chernobyl, and you'll get lots of long Russian names. There's a dump site in Berkeley, MO, where cancer rates in the neighborhood have skyrocketed. Look, if you don't want to admit that radiation causes cancer, fine. But why litter this thread with your views that are unsupported by every scientific study? BTW, this thread is about a solar power plant in Morocco.

 

And again this has nothing to do with radioactive waste from nuclear reactors.