CARLY CASSELLA
31 AUG 2019
If all the hydro-power dams in the United States were removed and replaced with solar panels, it would take up a fraction of the land and produce substantially more electricity, according to a new analysis.
The idea is ambitious, and for now, it’s really just a thought experiment. Today, hydropower is a significant source of renewable energy in the US, accounting for roughly six percent of the country’s total electricity output.
Removing all 2,603 hydro dams in America would leave a huge energy void behind, but it could also provide room for greener opportunities.
While it’s true that hydropower dams are a renewable source of energy, they still produce large amounts of greenhouse gases and can be environmentally destructive and costly to maintain in the long term.
In recent years, these criticisms have led to a growing dam removal movement. And although it’s theoretical, a massive investment in solar power might be able to cushion that loss.
To cover for all the hydro dams currently in use, scientists estimate we would need nearly 530,000 hectares of photovoltaics (PV). While this sounds like a lot, it’s a “surprisingly modest” amount compared to the combined size of most reservoirs, which cover nearly 4 million hectares nationwide.
In fact, the new analysis suggests that substitute solar panels could match the total energy output from hydro dams while using just 13 percent of the same land.
“I think that’s pretty astonishing and tantalising too,” John Waldman, an aquatic conservation biologist from the City University of New York, told Carbon Brief.
“I’m hoping this presents a different mindset for people who think about our energy futures.”
The potential land sitting under reservoirs right now is immense, and if only 50 percent of that surface is drained and used for solar panels, it could greatly improve energy efficiency, producing nearly three-and-a-half times the amount of energy hydropower currently generates.
Even in a more conservative hypothetical, where only a quarter of that drained land is used for solar farms, Waldman and his colleagues calculate energy production could increase 1.7 fold.
In some states, this has the potential to free up huge swathes of land for other purposes, including wildlife habitat, recreation, and agriculture. In Florida, for instance, scientists calculated a solar farm the size of New York’s Central Park (341 hectares) could replace 26,520 hectares of the state’s hydro dams.
The new analysis focused on solar power because it is easily scalable, but the authors argue the same logic can also be applied to wind power on a reservoir’s surrounding ridges and hydrokinetic turbines in a newly-flowing river.
“Also, potentially expensive and difficult-to-permit electrical lines that transmitted the hydropower already exist at these locations and could potentially be repurposed to carry electricity from alternative sources,” the authors argue.
Published findings in Nature Sustainability here.
HT/ozspeaksup
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Dams are rarely single purpose, they serve as flood control devices and (drinking) water buffers, recreational water bodies etc. Moreover not dependent on day-night on off regime so pretty useless analysis.
From the US Bureau of Reclamation:
Manages, develops, and protects water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public.
Is the nation’s largest wholesale water supplier, operating 338 reservoirs with a total storage capacity of 140 million acre-feet (an acre-foot, 325,851 gallons of water, supplies enough water for a family of four for one year).
Provides 1 out of 5 (or, 140,000) Western farmers with irrigation water for 10 million farmland acres that produce 60 percent of the nation’s vegetables and one quarter of its fresh fruit and nut crops.
Is the second largest producer of hydropower in the United States and operates 53 hydroelectric powerplants that annually produced, on average, 40 billion kilowatt-hours for the last 10 years.
Delivers 10 trillion gallons of water to more than 31 million people each year.
https://www.usbr.gov/main/about/fact.html
This entire article is too stupid to waste time responding to all the reasons why they are UN-smarter.
If they are ‘Tantalized’ by Draining Every Hydropower Dam in The US For Solar Panels then they are NOT scientists…
Grand Coulee literally costs less in today’s dollars than the largest solar farm in the US – $600,000,000 less – produces 1,300% more energy and can do it at night, has a longer lifespan than the solar farm by more than 100 years, and creates power grid stability throughout most of western North America.
Not to mention that most large scale hydro is within steep valleys where the lake surface area isn’t that much greater than the river’s. Consider that, the extra area you’d need from less well sited solar farms i.e. Arkansas, the area needed for battery storage, and the extra area for all the transmission lines, roads, and maintenance buildings, then you probably break even in land area. You just increase power cost by about 1,000%, create grid instability, increase river flooding, and decrease recreation – the death cult’s dream.
So you drain a reservoir, lose the hydro power that was being provided from the reservoir, and to make up for the lost power you install a solar installation in the flood plain you just created?
Smaaart!!!
“The idea is ambitious, and for now, it’s really just a thought experiment. ”
Not sure if it’s a thought experiment to see if anyyone is stipid enough to believe it, or an experiment with little thought?
A though experiment with VERY rough math, assuming 20% efficiency on average (which is optimistic). We use (call it) 20 to 30 Terawatts—continuous power for global consumption and want to replace it with solar?
If we assume about 1 KW incident total energy impinging on each square meter (on the surface of the Earth, a bit over 1300W on orbit), and an output at each panel of 200 watts—right there, not half way around the world. That’s 100 billion to 150 billion square meters, assuming clear skies—300 billion to 450 billion square meters for margin of error, heat inefficiencies, transmission of energy, and weather—at all times, orthogonal to the direction of sunlight. To cover the Earth as it rotates would require multiples—not always in convenient locations.
Solar is a low density energy source. Good for certain applications where you can’t string a wire. That’s its strength.
Best ider I herd in awhile…but after draining just let the trees grow. Leave the solar panels in China and make the below water line land park lands.
charles the moderator / 6 hours ago September 2, 2019
From Science Alert
CARLY CASSELLA
31 AUG 2019
If all the hydro-power dams in the United States were removed and replaced with solar panels, it would take up a fraction of the land and produce substantially more electricity, according to a new analysis.”
__________________________________________________________
CARLY CASSELLA is free to remove all of his own hydro-power dams in the United States and replace them with solar panels to produce substantially more electricity, according to a new analysis.
And charles the moderator is free to find bank credits for CARLY CASSELLA so that he can build up a profitable business on the increased energy yield.
Just keep it up, CARLY CASSELLA and charles the moderator! Courage.
Show us!
…. Ummmm, what ?
My dear friends:
Do not stop your enemy when he is making a mistake.
If we just keep quiet, this idea will catch on among our elites and be incorporated into the New Green Deal. Every D will have to endorse it.
Please. Encourage them. Don’t mock them… yet.
I’d really like to see a forthcoming paper where Waldman collaborates with Jacobson of Stanford, whose pathway to 100% reliable renewable was to increase instantaneous hydro generation capacity by something like five or ten times.
Because… if getting rid of all the dams is a “thought experiment” I’m really interested to find out what happens when it merges with what must be an anti-thought experiment.
How many of these “hydropower” dams also serve as flood control and water storage?
I’m sorry but those numbers really don’t add up. 15 Watts per square foot, 107,639 Sqft in a hectare, that comes out to about 550 Mega Watts. Hoover Dam has a capacity of 2080 Mega Watts. So the number is off by about a factor of 4 just for the Hoover Dam. Those are knowable numbers, easy to look up. So why the BS 341 hectare number?
…The left can’t do math ?
Donald Hanson
Surely you aren’t suggesting that Carly Casandra has problems with arithmetic, too?
“In Florida, for instance, scientists calculated a solar farm the size of New York’s Central Park (341 hectares) could replace 26,520 hectares of the state’s hydro dams.”
First I want to make my ignorance clear, I am not an engineer a geologist or a hydrologist. I haven’t visited every square inch of Florida. But, the square inches I have visited seem to be woefully lacking in dams. I have NOT seen a dam in Florida. I have lived in Florida since I was 3 years young. Silly me! I have always thought dams would have water that would flow down hill to power the generators. I stay in Lake County which has the 5th highest elevation in Florida of 312 feet above sea level, Sugarloaf Mountain. I can without a doubt, claim there is no dam anywhere near Sugarloaf Mountain. In the Florida panhandle is the highest elevation in Florida, Britton Hill, at 345 feet above sea level. Anyone care to bet there aren’t any dams at Britton Hill? So where are the dam 26,520 hectares of Florida’s hydro dams, dammit? Inquiring minds NEED to know.
They used the example of Florida because Florida has very little topography and so even the few dams that do provide some power do not provide much, especially when compared to the aerial coverage of the water impoundment areas.
Since none of the reservoirs in Florida is especially deep, they cover large areas.
Example: Lake Okeechobee is counted as a reservoir since without the earthen dike surrounding it, it would drain.
There are some hydro dams in Florida, and can be found with a search, but the dams in Florida are not primarily for the purpose of power.
In fact, no dams that I know of are primarily for power.
Flood control, water retention, irrigation…these are the primary purposes.
The proof is that most hydro plants only release as much water as is needed or can be justified for stream flow or to fill dams downstream.
But one only has to learn about the history of these structures to know their primary purposes.
And what occurs without them.
Are we meant to just ignore they want to replace large lakes and all the wildlife and flora they support, with vast denuded areas where nothing can grow without interfering with the unreliables?
“… and for now, it’s really just a thought experiment.”
So this is what passes for research now? Come up with the most bonkers idea possible with research based off a lazy half hour of Wikipedia and cover your credibility with the disclaimer of “Just a thought experiment”.
Honestly can anyone offer up another industry or profession that could get away with this sort of casual idea salad?
Law Enforcement? – Just as a thought experiment, what if we brought in the legal system of Judge Dredd and let our police officers shoot criminals on the spot?
Education? – Just as a though experiment, what if separated all the dumb kids from the smart kids at age 8 and sent them to training camps for manual labour?
National Defence? – Just as a thought experiment, what if, in our national interest, not only invaded everyone who annoyed us, but also ripped up all those pesky conventions that prevent us from burning their cities to the ground?
Energy? – Just as a thought experiment, what if we just ignored the EPA and built power plants where we wanted?
Marriage Rights? – Just as a though experiment, what if we formally defined ‘Traditional Marriage’ as a new legally recognised concept that only ‘traditional’ couples were allowed to take part in?
Type Setters and proof readers? – Just as a though experiment, what if we condensed LTGBQWERTY back down to a single letter in order to save space in documents?
Conservative Government? – Just as a though experiment, why don’t we ready the Arts budget by 1% next year?
Honestly, even as a Thought Experiment these people would be doxed on Twitter before their coffee had gotten cold with protest groups calling for their imprisonment before close of business. HOW DARE they say something so offensive!?
If anyone else went off script with an abstract Thought Experiment their careers would be over, but somehow the junk science community thinks they can publish their bonkers ideas as actual legitimate discussion and research.
ROFL – This was a joke – right?
Replacing the ONLY good green energy (if you exclude nuclear) with a completely variable one (it’s variable EVERY SINGLE DAY without energy storage) that is a massive toxic waste issue waiting to happen is about as STUPID an idea as I have ever heard… AOC will be all over this one – writing it into some kind of mindless pledge for her New Green Energy Deal.
Surely this was a joke. No one is this idiotic. NO ONE.
Maybe they can invent little rubber duckies covered in solar power cells that somehow radiate their power to collectors along the shore – then they can have their lake and solar power too. Or…or…just use cold fusion technology on the lake water (using the little rubber duckies)!
Just put the solar panels on pontoons.
The article illustrates the appeal the topic has on the publish-or-perish pressure of academics. So they enter a topic they don’t really understand but peers will give the “green light” and not ask too many questions.
Ah well, most have already shot holes in the “dam-” paper so what’s to add?
Okay that last line “electrical lines that transmitted the hydro-power already exist at these locations and could potentially be re-purposed” does not sound viable to me. From what is known about the increased flux caused by solar variability, such infrastructure has to be renewed in most cases or at least a significant part of it. Something they’re already discovering in places where more and more private properties move to solar on block level. This extra expense is starting to jack the prices up or if not acted upon, weaken the reliability of local and regional power grids, causing black-outs more regularly. Warnings can be heard from the engineers managing the local grids.
What madness is this?
Nobody is going to drain dams and put solar in their place…
they just float solar on the dam reservoirs. There are dozens of such installations already in use!
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11954334/United-Utilities-floats-3.5m-of-solar-panels-on-reservoir.html
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2015/01/150116-floating-solar-power-japan-yamakura/
At a mine!
https://weather.com/forecast-change/marketing/news/2019-08-29-floating-solar-panels-helping-mining-company-save-water
A twist: solar with a dam (not on it!)
https://www.idtechex.com/en/research-article/dewa-to-use-solar-to-power-new-pumped-storage-project/18042?donotredirect=true
on a lake
https://www.pv-tech.org/news/south-koreas-biggest-floating-pv-project-sails-to-construction-launch
But..But…But if the purpose of eliminating Hydro Electricity is to eliminate the CO2 and CH4 they produce just standing there, then the intent IS to remove the dams and return the environment to Pre Dam state.
You obviously didn’t read the sourced article in Science Alert or the first paragraph of this posting…
“If all Hydro Dams were removed and replaced with solar panels…” Draining and removing the Dams and putting Solar Panels in their place (implied) was the entire purpose of the article.
Griff, who is kidding now – they just float solar on the dam reservoirs! ( as already done)
What for then publishing an article.
Why replace ? Put the solar on floating devices. Have both. Install pumps and there is a huge source. Then get subsidies.
A much better idea would be to install floating solar panels on the dams and then you have both!
Now where’s my grant?
I have not seen anyone mention real estate value.
So what if the land was low cost before the dams were built?
I live in a community near a lake built by Duke Power (one of 3 in series).
This lake is 26 miles long and has 300 miles of shoreline, virtually all of it “buildable”. Many of the homes are million dollar properties.
Who reimburses the property owner if their home is now adjacent to a solar industrial site (don’t ever call them “farms”)?
I would not be surprised if Carly suggested seizure by Eminent domain. It would be for the “common good” of course.
Better yet, imagine how wonderful it will smell if and when they drain those lakes.
I guarantee it will not be pleasant.
Renewable Energy (Wind and Solar) would be a great idea except they have no way to provide long term power storage. So basically these people who cant do math or engineering are proposing removing hydro which can provide long term power storage. Without long term power storage renewable energy does not work. Period. I am defining long term power storage as more than hours. The only low carbon ways to provide long term power storage are geothermal, hydro, and nuclear. And except for geothermal greens seem to be against all of them and seem to be insane.
It is not a great idea.
There is nothing great about it.
The more we learn the worse it is.
BTW…we do have some great ideas when it comes to power, and even renewable power.
They are FFs, dams, and nuclear.
“Progressivism”, the leftist regressive form is like a perpetual motion machine, except instead of creating energy it creates stupid.