Talk:Ultra-high-voltage electricity transmission in China

Explanation
"UHVDC, referring to +/-800KV". Is this a three-wire system with an earthed neutral, one pole at +800KV and the other at -800KV? Biscuittin (talk) 21:55, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it is a mid-earth system, but without an earth wire, see High-voltage_direct_current. Biscuittin (talk) 08:58, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Explanation needed
"UHVDC 12 pulses bipole circuit". Could we please have an explanation of this? I am puzzled by the use of pulsed DC because it would have similar characteristics to AC, so why not use AC? Biscuittin (talk) 08:39, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, it refers to the rectification circuit, see High-voltage_direct_current. Biscuittin (talk) 08:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Place names
I am not very familiar with Chinese place names. If I have made any errors in the links, please correct them. Biscuittin (talk) 17:15, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Experimental 1333 kV powerline at Celilo Converter Station
Who knows more about this? Was it designed for a voltage of 1333 kV between conductors or for such a voltage to ground? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.46.252.251 (talk) 12:56, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

efficiency
This sentence is not necessarily correct: "Another issue is efficiency. Using combined heat and power at user end is more energy efficient than using power from long distance transmission lines." You could equality argue that you just want electricity, and you use that electricity to run a heat pump. If the heat pump has a COP of more that 3 and the loss in the line is about 10% then a heat pump is more efficient that central heating. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vifteovn (talk • contribs) 21:45, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Remove controversy section
I've removed the controversy section and placed it here, unformatted.

Portions are ungrammatical, I found it to read as sophomoric meditation, it has been flagged as perhaps OR since 2017, it's overly general, it's likely now dated as well, and I see little worth salvaging.

Controversy over UHV
There is controversy over whether the construction proposed by State Grid Corporation of China is a strategy to be more monopolistic and fight against the power grid reform.

Prior to the Paris Agreement, which made it necessary to phase out coal, oil and gas, there has been controversy over UHV since 2004 when the State Grid Corporation of China proposed the idea of UHV construction. The controversy has been focused on UHVAC while the idea of building UHVDC has been widely accepted. The most debated issues are the four listed below.


 * 1) Security and reliability issues: With the construction of more and more UHV transmission lines, the power grid around the whole nation is connected more and more intensively. If an accident happens in one line, it is difficult to limit the influence to a small area. This means that the chances of a blackout are getting higher. Also, it may be more vulnerable to terrorism.
 * 2) Market issue: All other UHV transmission lines around the world are currently operating at a lower voltage because there is not enough demand. The potential of long-distance transmission needs more in-depth research. Although the majority of coal resources are in the northwest, it is difficult to build coal power plants there because they need a large amount of water and that is a scarce resource in northwest China. And also with the economic development in west China, the demand for electricity has been booming these years.
 * 3) Environmental and efficiency issues: Some experts argue that UHV lines won't save more land compared to building extra railroads for increased coal transport and local power generation. Due to the water scarcity issue, the construction of coal-fired power plants in the west is hindered. Another issue is transmission efficiency. Using combined heat and power at the user end is more energy efficient than using power from long distance transmission lines.
 * 4) Economic issue: The total investment is estimated to be 270 billion RMB (around US$40 billion), which is much more expensive than building a new railroad for coal transportation.

As UHV offers the opportunity to transfer renewable energy from remote areas with much potential for large installations of wind power and photovoltaics. SGCC mentions a potential capacity for wind power of 200 GW in the Xinjiang region.

Of course, if anyone feels so moved, please bring this up to date, focus the narrative, and restore it to the article. &mdash; MaxEnt 00:29, 23 June 2024 (UTC)