- Joined
- Dec 29, 2015
- Messages
- 45,404
- Reaction score
- 11,746
- Location
- Olympia Wa
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Will suck up excess green electricity and store it in the dam....$3 billion they say to do this so make it $5.
Is there any chance this is a good idea?
Why let the water run 20 miles?
tyvm
https://www.utilitydive.com/news/lo...-pumped-storage-project-at-hoover-dam/528699/
Bad idea, except what little extra the dam can handle.
Juggling the books this way to make green power look cheaper, is a mirage. To make the green power cost effective, it would mean maintaining normal dam levels lower than optimum for power generation, to have reserve for wind and/or solar water to be pumped up. A lower average level means less power from the generators due to a smaller mass of water driving them. If the dam average level is 10% lower to maintain reserved space for reverse pumping, then we only get 81% of the water power generation vs. before.
Am I hearing you right that California is desperate for some way to store power so that they can have their green energy dream...that maybe actually the tech is not ready?
I'm thinking there's going to be a lot of downstream people who will be demanding their water rights are not impacted.
Let the wheeling and dealing begin!
Keep in mind that most our dams were built not caring about maximum flows of water to capture, because they all had spillways to lose extra water with. Too many times of the year, most dams we have built in this nation will be at nearly or over maximum power capacity. When this happens, these are times of the year the project goes into the red. These will be times the power has no place to go, and still wasted. Cost projections need to remember that this will be a cyclical event of no return on the money.
Are you trying to create a downside to hydro power?
Are you trying to create a downside to hydro power?
Are you saying there's not?
He's asking if the objections are significant.
The short answer is no.
Thus will allow a more flexible response to the need for power.
He needs numbers to show that it wouldn't work, or that it would be excessively expensive. That he doesn't have.
Mycroft had the only good negative point I've seen. This will wind up in courts over the Water Rights. I'd be surprised if this didn't get to the SC, the stakes are high.
Currently is seems that the biggest squawks are coming from folks who use the river objecting to huge pipes ruining their viewshed for 20 miles.
Are you saying there's not?
Bad idea, except what little extra the dam can handle.
Juggling the books this way to make green power look cheaper, is a mirage. To make the green power cost effective, it would mean maintaining normal dam levels lower than optimum for power generation, to have reserve for wind and/or solar water to be pumped up. A lower average level means less power from the generators due to a smaller mass of water driving them. If the dam average level is 10% lower to maintain reserved space for reverse pumping, then we only get 81% of the water power generation vs. before.
Yeah, it's the worst source of electricity, after all the others.
You realise it's caused more deaths and environmental damage than nuclear, right?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?