What actually is the benefit of superconductors? as I understand them it allows you to transfer electrical current from point A to B with far greater efficiency then currently. You can normally only do this near absolute 0 because it's a problem of entropy that energy is always lost in transfer. Is that correct?
How much more efficient is energy transfer from point to point with superconductors compared to normal conductors?
Total electricity lost in transport from powerplant to the home is about 10%. There is a test project for a superconductor 50km powerline in South Korea.
I don't think it will ever be cost and ressource-effective to switch electricity to that. It's also a nightmare scenario for cooling system failures causing very long blackouts.
Everything about repairing a broken cable will be alot more complex and expensive.
We're headed into a Competence crisis. Switching energy distribution to something so highly complex and delicate is begging for major fuck-ups.
High-voltage transport loss are small, 2% to 4%, the biggest loss is after the switch to low-voltage for close distribution.
You need to use alot of energy to cool the superconductor. Is it going to break-even? Scrape some energy after counting cooling? How is that going to justify the costs?
For now, under very high pressure, there is a superconductor under 92°K, which means it can be cooled to that state with liquid nitrogen (Nitrogen (edit :) boiling point is 77°K ), making its use financially accessible.
The need for very high pressure limits use.
Superconductors are already used for high definition Magnetic Resonance Imaging
CERN's Large Hadron Collider ( scientific research )
What actually is the benefit of superconductors? as I understand them it allows you to transfer electrical current from point A to B with far greater efficiency then currently. You can normally only do this near absolute 0 because it's a problem of entropy that energy is always lost in transfer. Is that correct? How much more efficient is energy transfer from point to point with superconductors compared to normal conductors?
Total electricity lost in transport from powerplant to the home is about 10%. There is a test project for a superconductor 50km powerline in South Korea.
I don't think it will ever be cost and ressource-effective to switch electricity to that. It's also a nightmare scenario for cooling system failures causing very long blackouts.
Everything about repairing a broken cable will be alot more complex and expensive.
We're headed into a Competence crisis. Switching energy distribution to something so highly complex and delicate is begging for major fuck-ups.
High-voltage transport loss are small, 2% to 4%, the biggest loss is after the switch to low-voltage for close distribution.
You need to use alot of energy to cool the superconductor. Is it going to break-even? Scrape some energy after counting cooling? How is that going to justify the costs?
For now, under very high pressure, there is a superconductor under 92°K, which means it can be cooled to that state with liquid nitrogen (Nitrogen (edit :) boiling point is 77°K ), making its use financially accessible.
The need for very high pressure limits use.
Superconductors are already used for high definition Magnetic Resonance Imaging
CERN's Large Hadron Collider ( scientific research )
There are applications for nuclear energy.
A few short powerlines for testing technology.
Thanks, are you a bot though?
Not a bot, just an akward human.
Cheers.
Here’s the best list I found :
https://twitter.com/alexkaplan0/status/1684044616528453633
Here’s a more skeptical analysis:
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2016/ph240/mclaughlin1/