High voltage DC lines lose about 3% per 1000km, so this project with 4300km of lines could theoretically be set up to lose 12% in losses. There’s also some experimentation with ultra high voltages that would be more efficient, but probably more complex to engineer.
Comment on Singapore Approves 2,600-Mile Undersea Cable to Import Solar Energy from Australia
Oneser@lemm.ee 2 weeks ago
Is there already extensive precedence of undersea, long distance power distribution? I could imagine the losses would be outrageous at that distance.
booly@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
5715@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
Maybe take a look at the North Sea Link with 730 km length, 1.4 GW power rating and estimated costs of €2 billion, becoming operational in 2021.
Sconrad122@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
12x GW*km at 9x the price is better than 1:1 performance/cost scaling. Obviously labor price and other factors make it not apples to apples, but that doesn’t seem like an awful scaling price premium
lnxtx@feddit.nl 2 weeks ago
How about reliability?
Example, SwePol, from the Wikipedia:
SwePol is a 254.05-kilometre (157.86 mi)-long monopolar high-voltage direct current (HVDC) submarine cable between the Stärnö peninsula near Karlshamn, Sweden, and Bruskowo Wielkie, near Słupsk, Poland.[1]
The annual maintenance of SwePol lasted 6 days in September. Additionally, SwePol had 10 other planned maintenance outages during 2021. There were 5 minor disturbance outages, of which one lasted more than 8 hours. SwePol was offline due to disturbance outages for 49 hours in total in 2021. [10]
mosiacmango@lemm.ee 2 weeks ago
HPDC cables don’t have the same losses as the more common AC cables.