Quote:
Originally Posted by Hersbird
I'm not going to buy hydro power is anywhere near fully tapped when so many rivers are free flowing...
This is an interesting study on the total potential, but the final conclusion is only maybe 4-5 times "current" capacity is possible.
https://gigaom.com/2011/12/23/how-mu...gy-can-we-get/ |
Interesting link. It doesn't conclude that there is enough on the table to cover our energy needs though.
Quote:
For technical feasibility, these same sources estimate 1.6–2.3 TW globally. Economic feasibility (in today’s economic climate) drops this to 1.0–1.4 TW. Environmental restrictions (in today’s climate) reduce this number further. Thus, having developed 0.4 TW worldwide (using average annual output for proper comparison to studies), the world may be able to expand by a factor of 2–5. This is a large range: a factor of two isn’t that much, while a factor of 5 is a pretty big jump. Where is it, really?
For the U.S., the Idaho National Laboratory estimates a gross potential of 0.3 TW, and a technical potential of 0.17 TW. The latter was determined after a study of 500,000 potential sites, out of which 130,000 made the cut. It is also estimated that existing dams with no hydroelectric capacity could add 0.013 TW (13 GW).
So here in the U.S., we could expand by a factor of 5 according to this report—ignoring economic and environmental barriers. Such a boost would bring hydro up to 5 percent of our gross energy, or 12 percent if we correct for the heat-engine effect (40 percent of our electricity). I have seen other reports less optimistic about our expansion potential, coming in closer to a doubling of current capacity —likely factoring in economic and environmental considerations, and consistent with the lower end of the range estimated for global potential...my mind is not much eased by the joint facts that it falls far short of our current demand
|
I learned that the #1, #2, and #4 highest generating dams in the US are all on the Columbia river. Everyone knows about Niagra and Hoover, but the Columbia river alone provides 40% of US hydropower. No wonder why our electricity is so cheap out here.
Don't know why everyone visits Hoover when it produces 1/3 the power as Grand Coulee. I might have to make a trip someday to look at it.
Anyhow, there is no electricity generation method that the extreme environmentalists accept, and since they are very noisy, somehow their complaints get an inordinate amount of media/public attention. They'd be happy to demolish a dam for the sake of fish without realizing that just means we'll be burning more fossil fuels to make up the difference.
I'm a big fan of hyrdo power. Back when HomePower magazine was in its prime, I read about micro hydro generation at home. When internet content got extensive enough, I found formulas online to calculate the generation potential of 2 sources on my parent's property. Sadly, my conclusion was that 75w wasn't worth the effort and change in landscape to implement micro hydro there. That amounts to about $65 in electricity per year.