Skip to main content

Keeping Your Toes Cool in Dubai

Palazzo Versace We’re not terribly critical of energy end users, though our father certainly could be if we let out the air conditioning by leaving the front door open too long.

But even we might find our limit. This caught our eye while we were working on a story about the proposed 123 agreement between the U.S. and UAE (we’ll have more on that later):

Versace, the renowned fashion house, has defended its proposal to build the world’s first refrigerated beach in Dubai...

Why defend the indefensible? Just plow ahead and hope for the best.

The beach, next to the new Palazzo Versace hotel overlooking Dubai Creek, is expected to be artificially cooled to avoid Dubai’s searing summer temperatures.

Proposals have included a cooling system under the sand and blowing in cooled air from the Versace hotel.

That last part would really make Dad holler. One has to wonder how cold they’d have to keep the hotel to share its cooling with an open beach.

As you might guess, this hasn’t gone over very well and you scarcely need an environmentalist to point out its flaws. None the less:

Prominent Dubai-based environmentalist, Nils Al Accad, founder of Dubai Organic Foods and Café … slammed the proposals.

“If it was sand beside a swimming pool, you might have some chance, but cooling a whole beach is completely wasteful, a disaster,” he said.

But of course, so much can be spun, if not always plausibly, greenly:

He [Al Accad] made his comments after Soheil Abedian, the founder and president of Palazzo Versace’s developer, Sunland, told the London Sunday Times that he wanted to create an environmentally sustainable cooled beach.

Good luck on that! Let’s get the nuclear energy plants built first. Abedian does let slip, like the dogs of war, the more likely reason behind this:

“This is the kind of luxury that top people want.”

So if you want it, you get a little energy class warfare to toy with. Truly, this is a story with multiple angles, all of them a different shade of ghastly. We suspect Versace will let, uh, cooler heads prevail, but in the meantime, the entertainment value here is boundless.

A room at the Palazzo Versace in Dubai. We suspect this is called the Orange Room. Maybe orange is a color “top people” like.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I thought about this a little bit and realized it could potentially be a really good idea. What we forget in our haste to condemn the rich residents of Dubai is that this "refrigerated beach" is sitting right next to an unlimited thermal heat sink--the ocean.

In that dry desert air, an evaporative cooling system would be exceptionally effective, and seawater could be evaporated in a way that would chill a working fluid that would be circulated under the beach.

In a similar manner, the much-derided "indoor ski resort" in Dubai also makes a lot of sense. Using relatively cold ocean water for the heat sink, the refrigeration system for the ski resort becomes VERY effective. With that huge indoor volume, the volume-to-surface-area ratio also becomes highly favorable, which minimizes the heat leak within.

When one considers how many airplane flights (with their associated carbon emissions) are being prevented by the local ski option there in Dubai, it's entirely likely that this whole scheme could end up being a real net benefit for the planet!
Ray Lightning said…
you have got some good points Kirk. The ocean can be used very well as a heat sink, and we need to develop technologies to do some natural air-conditioning, if you will..

But Dubai is not the place to think about global warming, CO2 emissions and the like. They transform petrol to drinking water by desalination plants (and sometimes use this water for horticulture and agriculture). Sustainable and Dubai are not to be mentioned in the same sentence. The attitude is more like "let's party until the oil lasts".
Anonymous said…
Using oil to power desalination is insanely wasteful. Why not use nuclear or solar power (the latter if they're worried about another Osirak)?

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...