My biggest problem with hydroelectricity is the same problem I have with all dams - you're creating a structure that requires infinite maintenance. A dam does not fail gracefully.
Why is hydroelectricity unfashionable?
81–90 of 397 posts
Re: Why is hydroelectricity unfashionable?
#82Obviously hydroelectricity is massively damaging to ecosystems. My day job includes designing hydroelectric control systems and even I can admit that. That's a big part of the reason that hydro is a non-starter in much of the western world, which is probably a reasonably good thing (although there are certainly some exceptions where hydro development seems like a no-brainer to me but I digress) What's not so clear to…
I've wondered for a while if we couldn't build a pipeline between the ocean and the Salton Sea in SoCal and store quite a bit of energy that way. The Salton Sea is already kind of a wasteland so at least use it for something.
Re: Why is hydroelectricity unfashionable?
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
Looks like I was wrong! This report puts current usage to 20%: https://web.archive.org/web/20170329132409/http://www.iea.or...
Nice find! Most interesting is to see potential in Africa and Asia/Pacific, where there is the greatest need for clean energy as consumption grows as a result of both population growth and industrialization.
Not so rosy for Asia: northern Asian Russian rivers that comprise a sizable chunk of the potential are very far from any inhabited places.
I don't know where Chinese rivers with untapped potential are located, but I'd guess they are in Tibet.
Re: Why is hydroelectricity unfashionable?
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
For what it's worth; Included among Smil's admirers is Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, who has read all of Smil's 36 books. "I wait for new Smil books the way some people wait for the next Star Wars movie," Gates wrote in 2017. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaclav_Smil
Yes, Smil appears to be the main reason Bill Gates has been actively unhelpful on climate matters. Constantly talking about how renewables aren't enough and that we need to invent new tech to save us, rather than just roll out the amazing tech we already have as fast as possible. https://www.theregister.com/AMP/2022/10/26/gates_green_inves... Smil was also an EV skeptic.
Some of the "renewables aren't affordable" people are just out of date. They ran the numbers back in the early 2000s and came to the conclusion that it wouldn't be economical to switch to wind and solar. But prices, especially on solar, have been in collapse for the past 20 years. Previously unaffordable battery based grid storage quietly became a thing. EVs also dropped down to mainsteam prices. The solution to climate change is economies of scale.
Re: Why is hydroelectricity unfashionable?
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
Too little, too late unfortunately. The amount of storage available from these projects is tiny and even though it's accelerating it's not accelerating at nearly the level required for the physics of a primary renewable grid to work. Chemical storage of energy is expensive and requires a long supply chain. It's huge that the costs are trending in a favorable direction and maybe eventually we can do all our load balan…
Is this supported by the report though? We have yet to build most of the solar we need, and IIUC almost half of new solar is now being built with storage: > At the close of 2021, there were more than 670 GW of solar plants in the nation’s queues; 285 GW (~42%) of this capacity was proposed as a hybrid, most typically pairing PV with battery storage (PV+storage represented nearly 90% of all hybrid capacity in the queu…
[deleted]
Re: Why is hydroelectricity unfashionable?
#86Obviously hydroelectricity is massively damaging to ecosystems. My day job includes designing hydroelectric control systems and even I can admit that. That's a big part of the reason that hydro is a non-starter in much of the western world, which is probably a reasonably good thing (although there are certainly some exceptions where hydro development seems like a no-brainer to me but I digress) What's not so clear to…
My impression as a layperson is that the economic feasibility of pumped hydro is very location-dependent, and our electrical grid isn't so fungible that storage in one region can meaningfully store energy generated in another region. Is my understanding correct? And if so, how do we tackle that?
Re: Why is hydroelectricity unfashionable?
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
When I was in school for power systems planning the the accepted notion was that pumped hydro storage is cool and great, but like hydropower, it is extremely geographically dependent, and we have basically developed all of the places where it would work (at least in the US), or at least, by order of magnitude, there are not enough remaining untapped hydro-related resources to make a dent in projected storage demand.…
Entirely wrong. All pumped storage requires is a big high spot and a big low spot*. Take a look at this, for example: https://www.gordonbuttepumpedstorage.com/ There are a lot of good pumped storage sites out there. *exaggeration, but close enough.
> All pumped storage requires is a big high spot and a big low spot
I think that's what the GP meant by "extremely geographically dependent." Finding a 1,000 ft height difference (using the Gordon Butte Project as an example) between reservoirs will be really challenging in huge swaths of the United States and elsewhere.
Re: Why is hydroelectricity unfashionable?
#88It's not very green at all. It's known to kill large swaths of the ecosystem. The true green yet unfashionable energy source is nuclear fission.
Nuclear is very expensive and even increasing in price.
Re: Why is hydroelectricity unfashionable?
#89Obviously hydroelectricity is massively damaging to ecosystems. My day job includes designing hydroelectric control systems and even I can admit that. That's a big part of the reason that hydro is a non-starter in much of the western world, which is probably a reasonably good thing (although there are certainly some exceptions where hydro development seems like a no-brainer to me but I digress) What's not so clear to…
> We need storage and pumped storage is the only practical way to get there with current supply chains and technology. This really cannot be enphasised enough - this is the only game in town. The solutions are needed yesterday, and must be built on a massive scale - there is no time for a 20 year R&D to production cycle of a miracle technology. Only hydro does not require any new minerals and mining. The only other c…
> Only hydro does not require any new minerals and mining.
Why is mining a major obstacle, provided it is economical and the environmental costs are some orders of magnitude less than those of climate change?
Re: Why is hydroelectricity unfashionable?
#90Obviously hydroelectricity is massively damaging to ecosystems. My day job includes designing hydroelectric control systems and even I can admit that. That's a big part of the reason that hydro is a non-starter in much of the western world, which is probably a reasonably good thing (although there are certainly some exceptions where hydro development seems like a no-brainer to me but I digress) What's not so clear to…
Forgive me my lack of understanding of the englisch language, but I do not understand the distinction you make.
Hydroelectricity: Is this power you obtain by placing turbines behind a huge concrete wall of a large river? If so, how is the scenario of building a large concrete dam in the mountains where water is pumped up a hill to covert it into kinetic energy any more better?
I understand that hydroelectricity is used to supply the basic power need, say 80% and a water reservoir with turbines to cover power peak needs.