Skip navigation
Share conversation: Share via:

James Lau

Apr 16, 2019


1 |
Share via:

This is obviously not a serious proposal because the whole proposal is one sentence. OTEC typically is for ocean thermal energy conversion. It is true that cost effectivr design should place the OTEC power plant off shore at water depth of 1000 meter or more. Some OTEC promoters try to use onshore OTEC plants and I am sure onshore plants cannot be cost effective.

I previously try to get ClimateColab to look into OTEC (energy supply contest). The procedure to submit proposal is bad. If you are still interested to know about cost effective OTEC, write to me at I can provide you with good information.

Within geoengineering work space, there are two proposals similar to OTEC. Jim Baird has "Thermodynamic geoengineering: a fiurth way. I talked to Jim Baird before. This chemist doesn't know OTEC well. He insisted to place  hot end heat exchanger at ocean depth, thinking that this arrangement will bring thermal energy to the depth. He ignored the fact that warmer sea water with lower density will rise to the surface. The overall effect would be the same as some thermal energy is converted into electricity and move away from the ocean.

The other proposal is ocean cooling machine. This proposa was proposed by Bill Gates also. There is no energy source to bring the surface sea water to the depth or deep water to the surface. Proper OTEC design achieve the effective mixing with electricity generation. The sun provide solar energy to earth at 173,000 Tera-watt, 5000 times global energy demand. Initially, more than 80,000 tera-watt is absorbed by the global ocean as thermal energy. OTEC is renewable energy with sufficient capacity to solve the energy problem completely.

Hope to hear from you soon.