Nature magazine has a fascinating article on meeting the power needs of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa with an ambitious network of renewable energies across the region titled “DESERTEC.” In a word, the Sahara Desert would be peppered with with solar thermal power plants and transmitted through massive grids, in addition to other renewable energy sources.

The DESERTEC scenario foresees a mix of renewable energies, from wind to geothermal to biomass.
The “DESERTEC” concept could help the EU meet its apparently binding target to get 20% of its energy from renewable sources by 2020. Of course, it wouldn’t be cheap—the current price tag is €400 billion (US$595 billion). And European politicians are reluctant to be dependent on Africa. But if oil continues its rise from $100 a barrel, we can only wonder how long it will be before pushing alternative energies can finally be justified financially.

Comments to this entry
ramjet
December 3, 2007
8:05 pm
And I'm wondering how europe could depend for solar energy from the same countries from wich depends for oil.
Geopolitically speaking, europe would depend even more from external sources than now.
IJ
December 3, 2007
9:15 pm
Very interesting news. We'll have to turn to renewables eventually.
The Guardian published a review yesterday. Drawbacks were said to include the uncompetitive cost of electricity produced. Secondly, some of the countries for the plants are politically unstable. Improvements in technology will lower the cost, but national politics is once again the key obstacle to keeping the lights on.
It is a very iffy project: [i]The European Parliament has asked Desertec to propose short-term demonstration projects.[/i]
Lexington Green
December 3, 2007
10:06 pm
As long as the human population of those locations is what it is, this thing is a pipe dream.
subadei
December 3, 2007
11:34 pm
Lexington Green
December 4, 2007
12:00 am
More a matter of NIMBYism, probably. That is probably enough to stop it in the USA.
This stuff does not really sound too unfriendly to the environment.
Michael
December 4, 2007
12:46 am
Alfred Russel Wallace
December 4, 2007
1:36 am
Thomas
December 4, 2007
9:20 pm
bitsenbloc » Blog Archive » Enllaços del.icio.sos
December 6, 2007
12:32 am
Vinay Gupta
December 14, 2007
2:39 pm
Hussein Badakhchani
August 29, 2008
3:49 pm
Firstly a large network grid is inherently more robust than bilateral pipelines or cables. While it is arguable that most of the MENA countries are not politicly stable (you can say the same of some of the new EU counties as well) by sourcing energy from all of them the risk to EU energy supplies will be significantly reduced.
The second is the vast quantities of energy that are available and the number of routes that can be used to import that energy mean that no single supplier will have overall control of the supply, further reducing risk of disruption.
Finally I would advocate energy self sufficiency for the supplier states first, funded by the World Bank. Once the infrastructure is mostly working for the suppliers new infrastructure to allow export to the EU will not be seen as colonialism rather an expansion of the suppliers reach to new markets.
IJ
August 30, 2008
9:16 am
Last month, The Guardian published more information on renewable energy for Europe.
A European grid for renewable energy is now thought crucial, regardless of the types of renewable energy eventually chosen by individual nations.
The grid proposal, which has won political support from both Nicholas Sarkozy and Gordon Brown, answers the perennial criticism that renewable power will never be economic because the weather is not sufficiently predictable. Its supporters argue that even if the wind is not blowing hard enough in the North Sea, it will be blowing somewhere else in Europe, or the sun will be shining on a solar farm somewhere.