In a recent development, the Biden administration, in concert with environmental groups and Native American tribes, has set in motion a plan that could lead to the removal of four hydroelectric dams in Washington state. This decision, ostensibly made to protect salmon populations, raises significant concerns about the stability and reliability of the western power grid, particularly in terms of grid inertia and energy supply.
The White House, in coordination with Native American tribes and environmental groups, announced actions Thursday that provide a pathway for breaching, or removing, four hydroelectric dams in Washington state to protect salmon.
As part of the announcement, the federal government entered into a legal agreement with the Pacific Northwest tribes and environmental organizations filed earlier in the day in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. Under that agreement, the tribes and eco groups — which had sued the federal government in an effort to forcibly breach the dams — agreed to stay the litigation through 2028.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-admin-creates-pathway-eco-groups-shutter-energy-source-serving-millions-americans
Understanding Grid Inertia and Stability
Grid inertia is a critical aspect of power system stability. It refers to the resistance of the electrical grid to changes in frequency, which is essential for maintaining a steady and reliable power supply. Traditional power sources like coal, gas, and hydroelectric dams contribute significantly to grid inertia due to their large rotating generators. These generators store kinetic energy, which acts as a buffer against sudden changes in power supply or demand, thereby stabilizing the grid.
The initiative explicitly recommends that dams are breached within two fish generations, or approximately eight years. While there isn’t an explicit plan to breach the dams — an action that the White House has acknowledged would require congressional approval — the agreement does include commitments to begin replacing the services provided by the dams.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-admin-creates-pathway-eco-groups-shutter-energy-source-serving-millions-americans
And opposition to this extra legal back door deal is growing.
“Congress — and Congress alone — can authorize removal of the dams on the lower Snake River. Bureaucrats, activist litigation, nor this administration’s radical agenda will determine the fate of any of the Northwest’s federal dams,” Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, said in a statement to Fox News Digital.
“This litigation effort was useless: It occurred behind closed doors, between two parties who wanted the same end result — to tear out our dams, and it completely excluded Idahoans who rely on the River System for its energy, transportation, agriculture and recreation benefits,” he continued. “I will continue to fight any breaching efforts, and, at every turn, I will reject the Biden administration’s efforts to usurp Congressional authority.”
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-admin-creates-pathway-eco-groups-shutter-energy-source-serving-millions-americans
The hydroelectric dams in question are not just sources of renewable energy; they are also vital contributors to grid inertia. Their removal, as proposed in the Biden administration’s plan, poses a direct threat to the stability of the western power grid. The dams currently provide about 8% of Washington state’s electricity and have a total capacity of 3,000 megawatts. This is not just about losing a significant chunk of power supply; it’s about eroding the grid’s ability to withstand and quickly recover from power disturbances.
A grid with reduced inertia is more susceptible to fluctuations in power frequency, which can lead to blackouts and other reliability issues. As we transition to more renewable energy sources like wind and solar, which do not inherently provide inertia, the importance of maintaining other sources of inertia, such as hydroelectric power, becomes even more critical. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has highlighted the evolving role of inertia in maintaining grid reliability, especially as the energy mix changes (NREL).
The Irony of Green Energy Initiatives
The irony in this scenario is palpable. While the intention to protect salmon runs has some merit, the removal of these dams could lead to increased reliance on fossil fuels to compensate for the lost power and grid stability. This move could inadvertently result in higher carbon emissions, as replacing hydropower with natural gas generation would increase carbon emissions by up to 2.6 million metric tons per year.
The Agricultural and Economic Impact
Apart from the electrical implications, there’s also the agricultural angle. The dams facilitate the transportation of about 60% of Washington’s annual wheat exports via barges. Removing them could disrupt this supply chain, impacting both local and national agricultural markets.
In light of these considerations, it is imperative that decisions affecting our power infrastructure be made with a full understanding of their implications on grid stability, energy supply, and the broader environment. While the protection of salmon populations is important, it needs to balanced with the expense of grid reliability and the broader ecological and economic stability.
In conclusion, the Biden administration’s plan to remove these hydroelectric dams is a short-sighted approach that overlooks the broader implications on grid stability, energy supply, and environmental impact. A more balanced approach that considers all these factors is crucial for ensuring a stable, reliable, energy future.
Sounds much like a stupendous opportunity for a catastrophic own goal
Only 3000MW that’s a Diablo Canyon NPP with a third unit. Put the whole thing on 50 acres and generate 3.3GW of clean energy all year round
Power production is only one of four uses of the dams – the other uses include flood control, navigation, irrigation, and recreation.
Do you seriously think that a 3,000 MW nuclear power plant can
— obtain the regulatory permits for new construction
— establish the necessary long-term financing (of about $30 billion or more*)
— obtain the land for the plant site (must be situated near a large body of water for cooling)
— obtain the environments permits
— construct the nuclear reactors and all needed infrastructure
— construct the electrical grid transmission lines from the plant
— obtain safety inspection sign off of the as-built power plant
— perform initial testing showing the plant is operating as intended,
all in the space of eight years???
Dream on.
*The 3400 MW nameplate capacity Vogtle nuclear power plant being built in Georgia is now projected to cost more than $30 billion at completion. Construction of its first two nuclear reactors began in 1976. Its last reactor (Unit #4) MIGHT begin operation in the first quarter of 2024 . . . that would represent an interval of more than 47 years just to get the power plant to full capability. OUCH!
Well then, they’d better get started. With Biden sinking Trillions into 19th century tech that can’t power a 21st Century society and go belly up at the slightest hiccup, a few billion would be chicken feed with the Right President in office
In a June 2023 Pew Research poll, they found that 69 percent of Americans favored the steps to become carbon neutral by 2050. Even 42 percent of Republicans favored it.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/09/what-the-data-says-about-americans-views-of-climate-change/
Stated preference is not revealed preference.
I didn’t read it closely but I didn’t see any mention of how much individuals would be prepared to pay to change the climate.
From memory, wasn’t $5 a month to change the course of humankind considered too much?
I think the answers to the polls depends on what questions are asked. You can pretty much get the answer you want by the way the question is worded.
And when it comes to personal sacrifice over climate change policy, the polls show most people are not that enthusiastic.
Poll results are worth exactly what one pays to get them.
What percentage of Americans do you think would respond favorably to this poll question:
“Would you be willing to pay 20% more or $10,000 more—whichever is less dollars—in Federal taxes each year to build nuclear power plants as the most straightforward means to become carbon neutral by 2050?”
Push polls are great for giving you the answer you want.
Are there polls that say differently?
Well, there are plenty of polls which show that Americans consider lots of other problems as being much more important.
And Nuclear IS carbon neutral isn’t it. In fact the Concrete used in construction is far less than an equivalent nameplate capacity of Wind Turbine Footings for the same GW production.
3000 GW of wind (1500) 2MW turbines uses about the same amount of concrete as the 3300 MW 3 unit NPP would but with the 36% capacity factor considered, the wind turbines would need to have almost 4500-2MW turbines installed
Ok, we get it: Many Republicans are misinformed about human-caused climate change, according to this poll.
Do those polled understand the implications of “carbon neutral”? Do they know that dams are “carbon neutral” energy sources?
scvblwxq
Reply to
Bryan A
December 18, 2023 10:18 am
W
O
W
That’s a really big percentage. Probably 97% are hypocrites who don’t want to stop using FF themselves. If they were truly stalwart in their adherence to what they say others or the government should do and completely severed their dependence on FF without the need for government edict, the FF industry would go bankrupt for lack of customers… or not😙
“— obtain the land for the plant site (must be situated near a large body of water for cooling)”
Like the Palo Verde nuclear power plant in the middle of the Arizona desert?
Actually, Palo Verde is the only U.S. nuclear plant that’s nowhere near a body of water, large or otherwise. It uses sewage water from surrounding communities as its source of cooling water.
I didn’t mean to be (too) snarky, only to note that at least this one engineering problem has been overcome in one specific instance.
You’re right about the unlikelyhood (is that a word?) of a nuke replacement for 3 GW of power any time in our lifetimes. But this is strictly a politically self-inflicted problem in the United States of America. One of a great many.
Did I say that the large body of water needed to be a natural feature?
I’ve attached an overhead shot of the Palo Verde nuclear power plant showing two large artificial water reservoirs built near the reactor complex (the two dark features in the upper right of the photo).
For scale, the lower, somewhat circular reservoir is about 0.4 miles in diameter. The trapezoidal-shaped one appears to have about 70% of the area of the near-circular reservoir. I have no idea of the water depth in each of these. Their blackness is likely reflecting a liner used to prevent the contained water from leaking into the surrounding sand/soil.
One is free to judge whether or not these reservoirs comprise “large bodies of water”. I believe they do . . . they dwarf any of the buildings, parking lots and roads associated with the power plant.
Yes, these reservoirs were mostly filled and then sustained with treated effluent from the Phoenix’s 91st Avenue Wastewater Treatment Plant (it provides about 90% of the water used to fill and top-off the reservoirs).
Oh, BTW, the source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Verde_Nuclear_Generating_Station states that
“Up to 26 billion US gallons (~100,000,000 m³) of treated water are evaporated each year . . . At the nuclear plant site, the wastewater is further treated and stored in an 85-acre (34 ha) reservoir and a 45-acre (18 ha) reservoir for use in the plant’s wet cooling towers.”
So,
1) that’s a massive amount of water evaporation daily (used for nine separate mechanical-draft cooling towers for the three reactor units), hence the need for the large reservoirs, and
2) the smaller reservoir at 45 acres is only 53% of the area of the larger, near-circular reservoir, so I erred in my eyeball estimate of the relative size of the smaller one.
(100,000,000 m^3/yr)/[(130 acres* (4049 m^2/acre)]/(365 days/yr) = 0.5 m/day decline of total reservoir water depth unless replenished.
WOW!
Is this one of the few potential pumped storage sites?
Could a small nuclear plant be placed at the dam?
Ecosystems have grown up around these dams and this is one of those ideas where an environmental impact assessment has already been made – what results the policy declares will ensue.
Environmentalism/speciesism seems to be predicated on some strange values – their compassion appears to be gauged by how cuddly, cute, or intelligent a species is deemed to be.
Take onshore and offshore wind…..
A thorough and very professional EIS commissioned by the Army Corps of Engineers in the late 1990’s identified several environmental risks associated with removing these four dams.
The principle environmental risk would be too quick of a release of the accumulated sediment behind each dam while the breaching process is being executed. It’s my opinion that the dams could not be removed concurrently. It would have to be done one dam at a time over a period lasting from ten to fifteen years.
The late 1990’s EIS determined that 48 years would pass after removal of the final dam before salmon runs through that stretch of the Snake River were restored to pre-1960 levels — salmon runs which had already been seriously impacted prior to the 1960’s by dam building upriver in Idaho in the 1930’s, 1940’s, and 1950’s.
The basic argument now being made is that removing the four Washington state dams is the one key action which can be taken which can keep the Snake River salmon runs from going extinct altogether. But removing these four dams is a not a guarantee that salmon extinction can be prevented.
Focusing on the Washington state dams bypasses the issue that the best salmon spawning grounds for Snake River salmon were historically located upstream in Idaho before being flooded by construction of the Idaho dams, especially the Hells Canyon Dam.
If this is so, why are the Idaho Snake River dams not being targeted for removal as well, given that their additional removal all but guarantees that Snake River salmon runs can be preserved?
George Daddis: “Is this one of the few potential pumped storage sites?”
The four dams are designed to be run-of-river. The high & low elevations of the operating pools behind these dams span a mere three feet. Pool elevations and flow rates are managed in real time by a computer located far downstream in Portland, Oregon, which balances the competing needs of salmon preservation, power production, and agricultural irrigation. And so it is not technically feasible to change the operational focus of these four dams i order to support pumped storage as their primary mission.
George Daddis: “Could a small nuclear plant be placed at the dam?”
Proposals have been made to add SMR’s to some of the Columbia River dam sites such as Priest Rapids and Wanapum. Grant PUD in central Washington state and X-Energy were exploring the possibility of adding some 100 MWe SMR’s to the Grant PUD’s energy mix. That deal fell through when X-Energy signed an agreement with Dow Chemical to place their first SMR at a chemical plant in Louisiana. I myself don’t expect the Louisiana project to deliver a working SMR facility until the mid-2030’s. There is just too much competition for the industrial resources and the funding needed to deliver X-Energy’s first SMR reactor on an earlier schedule.
What about the suggestions of a South African nuclear scientist Dr Kelvin Kemm? He speaks of being able to build a reactor in 5 to 6 years.
https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/HTMR-100-team-aim-for-PBMR-SMR-in-South-Africa
If Dr. Kemm is seeking to build his reactor design in 5 to 6 years, he needs access to:
— A reliable source for large quantities of money, one which is willing to fund the project through thick and thin in the face of ever-changing political and economic winds.
— An 90% complete reactor facility design, including balance of facility structures and systems, from which an honest and reliable time and cost estimate can be developed.
— Access to a variety of QA-compliant nuclear component suppliers capable of properly supporting his design on his desired time and cost schedule.
— A project management team with deep-bench experience in managing large industrial construction projects, ones which are subject to strong cost and schedule pressures.
— An on-site work force which has the experience and the training needed to deliver QA compliant structures and systems on Dr. Kemm’s desired cost and schedule.
Forgive me for saying this. In the face of growing worldwide competition for nuclear construction industrial resources, Dr. Kemm would have a hard time gaining access to what he needs if he was building his reactor design in the United States, let alone in South Africa.
Dr Kemm refers to the success in the UAE where over 100 South African engineers have helped them build reactors within their time frames. They probably did not have to wade through the regulatory swamp found in countries like the USA. He also speaks of the amount spent on wind and solar over the course of the past number of years in South Africa being equivalent to the cost of one and a half reactors but essentially producing very little electricity. Politics and activists blocked the nuclear project.
If Dr. Kemm is referring to “building” a nuclear reactor in 5 to 6 years in the United States, he obviously has not included the 5-10 years it will take to obtain an acceptable Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) . . . you know, one that satisfies/pays off all the NIMBY and eco opposition.
They’re actually not “run of river” plants, which are very low head and operated only as diversions and do not block the entire stream flow. These dams block the entire river to create pools. Pools that are used for a variety of uses, including navigation, irrigation, flood control, and recreation.
A lot of the pro-breachers and others do not realize that these four dams provide navigation from the Pacific Ocean inland to Lewiston, Idaho, which is a major shipping location for grains, peas, lentils, and other agricultural products to ship them to other US as well as foreign destinations. Lewiston is the highest seaport in the US, serving the breadbasket of the Pacific Northwest. Take out the dams and Lewiston and all of the infrastructure that has been there for decades become suddenly useless, and the cost of transporting agricultural products from the Pacific Northwest would skyrocket.
The Columbia and Snake River system is the transportation equivalent in the Pacific Northwest to the Mississippi River system.
I did not label the four dams as run-of-river “plants”. I labeled them as run-of-river “dams” because their pools are managed within a very narrow range of just three feet, even if the depth of the pools can be as much as 120 feet at the center of each pool’s navigation lane.
The dam(n) breachers are well of the role the Snake River plays between Portland and Lewiston as a navigable waterway for barge traffic to and from the inland Northwest.
The breacher preachers argue that expanded rail transport could easily handle the volumes of agricultural products now being shipped by river barge and at a similar cost. As we might expect, these claims and the studies which purport to justify these claims are strongly disputed by opponents of dam breaching.
“Run of river” is used to classify hydro power plants, not dams. As I wrote, run of river power plants do not use dams that block the entire river channel, though they may involve weirs that raise the level of water up stream. How much the water level varies does not determine what type of power plant is used. It is rather a function of how the reservoir is managed, and the differential between in flows and out flows. Run of river plants do not use elevation head , or significant differential elevation head to drive the turbines but rather just utilize the velocity head of stream flows thru the river (hence, “run of river”).
I appreciate the informative reply!
No – these are not high dams. Generally only the high dams with large changes in pool elevation to discharge elevation are of value as pumped storage
Madness! Have they done a cost-Benefit Analysis? Obviously not.
It sure seems Biden’s moves are meant to make life more expensive and difficult and for government to not only make dying easier but to also directly assist in it.
We are witnessing an ‘all of government(s)’ effort to collapse market economies and (classical) liberalism in order to advance the Left’s relentless march towards socialism. Dam busting is just one example of their throwing as much crap against the wall to see what sticks. The 2024 elections loom large in the US – I hope the Republicans can get their act together.
69 percent of Americans, 42 percent of Republicans, favor the steps to become carbon neutral by 2050.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/09/what-the-data-says-about-americans-views-of-climate-change/
The more times you post this doesn’t make it more true.
Once was sufficient.
I was replying to someone who doesn’t seem to realize that politicians usually follow the polls.
I notice that the question in the poll was “Do you oppose/favour the US taking steps to become carbon neutral by 2050?” It didn’t ask people what steps they might oppose/favour.
For the record, you appended the same meaningless poll to a comment I made on December 6th:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/12/06/turning-food-into-jet-fuel/#comment-3826583
They’ll just say that the salmon are worth trillions. You know, for spiritual reasons.
“The great Salmon-spirit resides in these waters, this is his home, we could not possibly tolerate this interference with his people. Unless you happen to have a spare $3-5 bn anywhere handy. Cash is preferred.”
For the massive amount of money that will be wasted to remove the dams and then build replacement electrical generation facilities, wouldn’t it be much better to construct the finest salmon fish ladders in the world?
I am NOT making one of my usual snarky comments. These are low-head dams, I would think some creative engineering on fish ladders would have a huge ROI for all of the people in the region compared to the alternative.
Fish ladders, no matter how well designed, are seldom useful in preserving salmon runs. For one, the reservoirs, which are essentially lakes, are warmer than free run rivers and this can be problematic for salmon smolts. Two, without the current, salmon take longer to return to the sea. In addition, fish like walleye can do well in the reservoirs, and can eat a lot of young salmon. There are many other issues as well. But removing the dams does not guarantee the salmon will return. Just like it would be impossible today to have millions of free range bison on the prairies, it is, I think, misguided to try and turn back the clock and recreate ecosystems that have been fundamentally altered. Times change.
Some of your points are valid, but certainly in Scotland where dams have had fish ladders incorporated in the initial build salmon have adapted to them just fine.
Pitlochry is a good example.
Could be the species of salmon. Pacific salmon are considerably different wrt habitat requirements and lifestyle than Atlantics. And, every situation, river and dam is different.
I am not familiar with the dams and fish ladders in Scotland … but the issue with the Columbia-Snake River dams is not just a single fish ladder, but rather the cumulative effects of 8 dams and their fish ladders. It is known that salmon runs are attenuated by each successive dam and fish ladder, so the more dams the fish must pass, the lower the survival rate.
I looked it up, and the Pitlichry fish ladder is just a single ladder, not a sequential series of 8 separate dams and fish ladders on the Columbia-Snake River system.
With multiple ladder fish runs as few as 3% of the migratory fish that start the journey to their native spawning waters actually make it to those waters,
Leftists are very much into nihilism.
I think they’re into the French version
D’Nihilism
It’s not just a river in
EgyptWashington state!Two-thirds of Republicans under the age of 30 and 42 percent of Republicans overall along with 90 percent of Democrats overall support the so-called “climate change” agenda.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/09/what-the-data-says-about-americans-views-of-climate-change/
The propaganda has been very inclusive and effective.
Stated preference is not revealed preference.
…..
Only useful if you’re willing to throw the can at him and he doesn’t duck.
Waste of a good Hawiaan breakfast.
But seriously, the “under 30” bit tells you everything. Not 35, not 40, etc. That’s because those don’t give the answer they are fishing for.
They also went through the school system prior to CC indoctrination and forced inclusion in every facet of education.
English…must include CC and SJ tie in
Math…must include CC and SJ tie in
History…must include CC and SJ tie in
Social studies…must include CC and SJ tie in
Geography…must include CC and SJ tie in
Geology…must include CC and SJ tie in
Foreign Language… Must include CC and SJ tie in
Home Ec…must include CC and SJ tie in
Even PE must include CC and SJ tie in
Regardless of the class, teachers must include tie ins to CC and SJ in their lesson plans
Schools have become indoctrination centers
Sorry, but what are CC and SJ again?
Climate Change and Social Justice
It is a SINGLE issue poll thus highly misleading when it is part of a wide ranging list of issues it would quickly plummet to the bottom part of multiple issue polls.
Is see that, accirding to that poll, only 31 percent of Americans favour “phasing out the use of oil, coal and natural gas completely, relying instead on renewable sources.”
Then we come to the question about the federal government “encouraging” the production of wind and solar power. “Encouraging” could mean anything from saying nice words to footing the entire bill. How about a question asking how much extra tax Americans would like to pay towards the federal government “encouraging” the production of wind and solar power?
Why can’t salmon ladders be added now?
But anyway, if Salmon haven’t been able to get past these dams for many years, there won’t be any who have been born upstream so where will the new salmon come from?
Oh, I forgot, they will be immigrants.
I was thinking the same thing about salmon ladders. The bureaucrats obviously have another agenda than saving salmon.
Those dams have all been there since the early 1970s. All the salmon that once bred in the Snake river must surely be long expatriated. What’s the cost benefit of removing the dams just to repopulate a small river with bear food? Let’s see the numbers in terms of dollars per fish.
“Why can’t salmon ladders be added now?“
The salmon have ladders, but the impounded water covers the habitat
that they need.
Using Google Earth or similar images, you can see the ladders. For the dam
shown, the ladder — V-shaped — is between the bright white turbulence and
the black water of the lock for barge and boat traffic. All on the top, or north side.
Not very good, but see:DVIDS – Video – Ice Harbor Dam’s Fish Passage Unit (dvidshub.net)
There are plenty of Salmon getting through the dams via the ladders and through the specially designed turbines that allows many Salmon get through safely. the damage was the FLOODING of the old spawning grounds which is a significant reason for the decline and that the shift of cold waters along the Washington/Oregon Coast moved north back in the 1970’s which has part of the Salmon go north as well thus another cause of the decline.
Ice Harbor Dam is the biggest dam on the Snake River and one I have visited for decades when I go to Charbonneau Park for picnics and swimming which is just about 2 miles upstream the dam taking it down would badly damage the grain shipping of the region as there are large grain storage there for distribution to the markets downstream.
They could take out the two smaller dams far upstream to recreate the spawning grounds but lose some flood control in the process I really don’t think the tradeoff will work anyway.
Well, one can envision that just-born/juvenile salmon known as alevins (aka “fingerlings”) could be transported to lakes, rives or streams upstream of any dam that was retrofitted with salmon ladders, such that they would be imprinted with their “home” waters/location prior to beginning their first migration.
The salmon runs today are vastly smaller than they were before the dams were built starting in 1938. Prior to that salmon runs were in a range of 10-16 million per year, while in recent years their numbers have plummeted to around 10 thousand per year. Most biologists would call that a “collapse”.
There are contributing causes in addition to the dams, including over-fishing and loss of spawning habitat upstream. But it is very hard to dismiss the cumulative effects of 8 successive dams which are known to reduce the successful spawners to as little as 3% of those who start the journey below the dams.
There are only two ways to make large amounts of reliable and inexpensive electricity that do not involved burning anything, and so of course the people who claim that CO2 is causing the planet to broil, and is going to wipe out humanity, also want to get rid of every dam and every nuclear plant.
…and 90% of the human population?
Yes.
When human CO2 emissions were cut by 6% in 2020 according to the IEA due to the start of the pandemic the increases in CO2 didn’t even slow down.
https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-2020/global-energy-and-co2-emissions-in-2020
https://www.co2.earth/monthly-co2
Spam !
As a patriotic Brit the sight of Sleepy Joe destroying the most competitive economy in the world is semi-amusing. It’s a regrettable fact however that what happens first in the US happens next in…..
Check out what your (UK) universities are pushing today if you really want to know what’s coming down the pike.
Politicians go where the votes are.
In a June 2023 Pew Research poll they found that 69 percent of Americans favored the steps to become carbon neutral by 2050.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/09/what-the-data-says-about-americans-views-of-climate-change/
SPAM !!
Spambot!
HA HA HA HA HA politicians rarely follow the voters desire these days your naivete is revealing are you about 12 years old skipping school today?
Another case of pandering to special interests in word, when in deed it can’t be accomplished. The deception is so politically driven, not just by the Democrats, typical of election year nonsense. In reality the politicians understand it gains them votes if they say it, but loses them votes if they do it ..
A form of “Sue and Settle” to avoid legislative action?
Institutions, like the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, exist by the federal government signing contracts to operate and manage them, in this case with the partnership of Battelle and MRIGlobal, operating as the Alliance for Sustainable Energy LLC. .
The Alliance for Sustainable Energy will be present at North America’s own version of COP28 in April at Washington, D.C., the ICR 24 community get-to-gether. There probably won’t be as many enthusiastic Greens present as at the Dubai affair but the results may differ. Better reserve a hotel room now.
Just noticed that this is the first time a new essay wasn’t posted exactly 4 hours after the last one. Run out of writers?
I mischeduled one before I went to bed for 2 pm instead of 2 am.
Cool that you notice the four hour schedule. I work hard to maintain that.
No, it is hard work running a big Blog once in a while something gets missed which is quickly corrected Anthony and Charles are doing a great job of it!
Well, now I know how Nick Stokes was the first to reply to the “NASA GISS” post of December 17.
He must be paying attention whenever WUWT updates every four hours.
There’s an email list subscription in the right sidebar. It’s not hard to be notified.
Enviros think all water is holy. You musn’t ever disturb any wetland or river. Dams must come down to liberate the river. There must not be any pumped storage projects. Pray to the water gods for forgiveness. Water is hold. CO2 is evil. The science is settled. /sarc
In 6th GRADE we learned the three crucial elements for photosynthesis:
1.) Water
2.) CO2
3.) Sunlight
Yet all of the “smartest” people like Kerry, Gore, Thunberg, etc. want to reduce the CO2, reduce access to water resources, and block out the sun with geoengineering schemes.
I therefore assume, that none of our thought leaders on “Global Warming” are smart enough to pass 6th grade.
Warmth! Plants also need warm temperatures – below a certain temperature plants go dormant, what do you think happens in a glaciation? Less higher plants, less CO2 – it can be a vicious cycle and can take a long time to recover.
Sorry, but I also learned that chlorophyl was needed. So 4 things to synthesize sugars from CO2 and H2O.
The war on energy is a war on humanity. No oil, no coal, nu nuclear, gas or hydroelectric power allowed. Just “free” energy from the wind and sun permitted.
This is a war against capitalism, consumerism, agriculture, single-family homes, privately owned automobiles, etc. etc. And a war on children, too, for who will be able to feed, clothe and shelter children when there isn’t enough electricity to keep the lights on 24×7 or enough food to keep everyone nourished.
Ecocide
The rich who own the media and have brainwashed more than half the country, liberals and conservatives alike, are planning on making trillions from so-called “climate change.” They also own the politicians through their campaign contributions, and the universities through their grants.
Bloomberg’s green energy research team estimates it will cost $US200 trillion and the rich are planning on getting a good portion of that.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-07-05/-200-trillion-is-needed-to-stop-global-warming-that-s-a-bargain#xj4y7vzkg
Unfortunately, a Grand Solar Minimum with less solar output has just started and may lead to Little Ice Age-type conditions.
‘Modern Grand Solar Minimum will lead to terrestrial cooling’
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7575229/
Bnice please hand me that tin of Spam, it’s my turn to throw it at him.
“The war on energy is a war on humanity.”
Yes, it is.
A better plan is…..the Removal of Biden Plan….impeach him…prosecute him….lock him up!
And what about his controllers?
His controllers, too.
They are all going to be under scrutiny if Trump gets elected, and/or sufficient Republicans are elected to Congress.
The previous administrations of Obama and Biden are going to come under investigations and rightfully so, as they have been subverting the U.S. Constitution in their efforts to illegally attack their political opponents, using the power of the federal government against their political opponents (DOJ, FBI, CIA) to try to keep themselves in power.
The bad actors in the Obama and Biden administrations are basically the same people, they just have a different president at the head.
I would say at least several dozen Obama/Biden officials should go to jail for subverting the U.S. Constitution, along with the presidents they served. And this should include Hillary Clinton and her minions, too, as she is as guilty as any of them. She is the one who instigated the whole criminal conspiracy against Trump with her Russia, Russia, Russia lie/scam. Then Obama and Biden and their administrations rans with this lie, knowing it was a lie, and their still running with this lie.
And a Republican investigation not revenge, as the Democrats would have us believe, but rather it is seeking justice for past corrupt and criminal activity by the Democrats, affecting the personal freedoms of every American. Criminal activity should be punished, otherwise it will continue.
There are a lot of criminals in Washingto DC that need to be exposed for what they are.
“The previous administrations of Obama and Biden are going to come under investigations and rightfully so, as they have been subverting the U.S. Constitution in their efforts to illegally attack their political opponents, using the power of the federal government against their political opponents (DOJ, FBI, CIA) to try to keep themselves in power.”
Tom do you have any evidence of this?
Evidence for what, that Obama and Biden knew the Russia Hoax was a lie from the beginning?
Yes, there is that evidence. The president and vice president were briefed on this by the CIA Director in their daily briefing.
The CIA director at the time is another criminal that should be going to jail for trying to subvert the U.S. Constitution. When Trump wins, we’ll start at Hillary and work our way down the list of traitors and criminals.
Everyone in the presidential briefing knew about the Hillary Clinton Russia hoax.
I’m surprised you don’t know this since you seem to keep up with events pretty good, but maybe you just keep up with leftwing events and listen to leftwing talking points that don’t mention that Obama and Biden are criminals of the first order. They are trying to steal our country away from us, even as I write.
I suppose you want proof of that, too. Open your eyes, it’s right in front of you.
Obama and Biden and their cronies are the Bad Guys, not Trump.
Trump looks awful strong. Get ready to be disappointed. His favorability ratings climbed seven more points in the last month.
Under normal circumstances, the next election should be a disaster for the Democrats (and a great boon to the rest of us).
We’ll just have to see how good the radical Democrats are at cheating on this next presidential election night, because cheating is the only way they are going to win.
Tom
it is not an offence to investigate potential crime. Trumps team had connections to Russia as the Republican who investigated it found out. He just couldn’t be sure. But there were a number of convictions came from Muellers investigation. You can read about it here… or by just typing what did Mueller find out?https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/breakdown-indictments-cases-muellers-probe/story?id=61219489
And as far as I am aware Biden had nothing to do with the Russia enquiry. Maybe you have other info.
I agree Trump is looking good in the polls. But there is a long way to go.
“We’ll just have to see how good the radical Democrats are at cheating on this next presidential election night, “
So do you genuinely believe the Dems cheated despite the mountains of evidence saying they didn’t? You seem like a smart man Tom, but…. I mean look at just this week. Rudy found guilty of defaming those poor workers who he accused of cheating. 148 million he owes now. How much evidence would change your mind?
“I agree Trump is looking good in the polls. But there is a long way to go.”
Breaking news from Colorado. Trump can’t run for president in that state. What does that mean for Trump from here?
Write in candidacy
Steal it
Sell it to foreign interests
And burn the Constitution
I appreciate your optimism.
Yes, that’s the best plan. Remove the guy causing the problems.
“A better plan is…..the Removal of Biden Plan….impeach him…prosecute him….lock him up!”
Lock him up for what?
Subverting the U.S. Constitution is one reason to lock Biden up.
Taking bribes from the foreign enemies of the United States is another good reason.
Refusing to stop the flow of illegal immigrants at U.S. borders is another good reason to remove Biden from office for dereliction of his duties.
Biden is dangerously stupid, which is another good reason to lock him up and keep him away from society.
Worst president evah! Without a doubt. He has demonted Obama to second-worst president evah!
“Subverting the U.S. Constitution is one reason to lock Biden up.”
How… when?
“Taking bribes from the foreign enemies of the United States is another good reason.”
There is no evidence of that despite the accusations from the usual suspects.
“Biden is dangerously stupid, which is another good reason to lock him up and keep him away from society.”
Hmmm…. I don’t believe that is true. Anyway at this stage….you can’t lock someone up for the intellectual performance.
“Worst president evah! Without a doubt. He has demonted Obama to second-worst president evah!”
Well that’s your opinion. Cspan has Trump in last place for the last 100 years.
https://www.c-span.org/presidentsurvey2021/?page=overall
Biden has difficulty stringing together more than one word into a coherent statement let alone sentence
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GO9Jvn4gSRs
He often gets “Lost” when entering or exiting the stage
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8uFNyWYcVpc
And he often gets the Hush Rush from press conferences when he goes off script.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SsDoK1WKsy0
The Big Man (Joe Biden) gets his 10% of all the Little Mans (Hunter Biden) business dealings with China and Ukraine
Harris is no better option and so likely the reason for her choice. You don’t want to get rid of Biden and face the Potential Harris Nervous Laughter as replacement.
Its 25th amendment time for Biden/Harris. He really isn’t fit to continue and she isn’t fit to ascend.
“Biden has difficulty stringing together more than one word into a coherent statement let alone sentence”
Maybe that’s true. But he has always had a stutter. Google it. But then Trump is no better. Garbled sentences repeated is his go to.
“He often gets “Lost” when entering or exiting the stage”
Yep and Trump thought he ran against Obama and that he stopped world war two.
“And he often gets the Hush Rush from press conferences when he goes off script.”
As did Trump when he thought he was in one place but was actually in another.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oxhAjdrRRU
And that’s the problem. They are both too old. Honestly the republicans best chance is Nikki Haley. She is kicking Biden’s arse in the polls.
Did Biden have classified documents, simon?
Yes as did Pence. But unlike Trump, they both gave them back. There lies the big difference.
Corvette?
No thanks.
At least Trumps were Locked in a closet, Biden’s were just lying around out in the open in his garage with the door up on numerous occasions and accessible to anyone
“At least Trumps were Locked in a closet,”
Toilet…..
Don’t believe every flush story the legacy media puts oit
That’s very good.
gave them back
I KNEW you were going to say that!
The statute regarding illegal removal of classified documents says absolutely nothing about “giving them back”.
By your reasoning, if a thief steals stuff, but gives it back, they should not be prosecuted for theft. Do you agree that thieves who return what they stole should not be prosecuted for theft?
“By your reasoning, if a thief steals stuff, “
But he didn’t steal them. They were his work docs. All presidents and VP’s have docs given to them so they can do their job.
Again, the difference here is Trump refused to give back the docs that were not his to keep. He then lied and said he had. Biden and Pence gave them back on request. Huge difference. If you can’t see that then there is no point in discussing this further.
He removed them, which is flat-out against the law. It doesn’t matter that he returned them. The law applies to removal of those documents from where they are supposed to be kept.
to quote “If you can’t see that then there is no point in discussing this further.”
Your hypocrisy and partisan blindness is beyond astounding.
Also, please enlighten me:
Exactly what job was he doing from 2017-2021 that required access to classified documents?
Stupid is as stupid does
or
Biden is as stupid does
or
Stupid is as Biden does
Maybe Joe and his dumb chums can sit at the bottom of the dam and use their thoughts to hold back the water – with al of that brain power it shouldn’t be a problem 😉
Stupid Biden does is as.
Gonna be tough to charge all those new EVs that are being mandated w/o the power of hydro in the western states. And replacement facilities will take decades to catch up – assuming they are allowed to be built and there is money to pay for them. (There’s even doubt in some circles that the US has lost the knowledge, as well as manufacturing capability, to build such facilities.)
Don’t worry, the Chinese will step in.
They got the idea from ‘somewhere else’
(Only one guess allowed)
There are a lot of stories/videos surrounding this but I can’t find the one I originally saw.
It was about the Coho salmon and how they were going to be soooooo improved by taking down the dams on Klamath River.
Fact is that the salmon NEVER ventured far enough upstream to where the dams are – never in their entire existence did they go more that 25 miles upstream
And the ranchers they interviewed, those who used water from the dams, were reduced to tears.They simply couldn’t get their heads around the stupidity of it all.
The Official Story (have a sick bag ready/handy. Not a loaded firearm, you may use it on your computer screen)
Also
https://apnews.com/article/klamath-dam-california-removal-restoration-473a570024584c2e02837434e05693da
The video I wanted to show you was about the Irongate Dam, one of the 4 involved here.
It’s coming! The economic destruction- GM and Ford and others have shot them selves in both feet and are pulling back and running for the hills( the execs business and political will take their golden parachutes with them after they have left a endless trail of destruction ) But it’s possible angry mobs with torches and pitch forks might make a come back.
Running for the hills rather than using one of their EV’s – yes it makes more sense.
Salmon ladders are cheap and easy to construct, and they are popular tourist attractions wherever they are open to public viewing. A simple solution to preserving the salmon in more or less their natural state. But that’s not what’s really driving this issue, which is twenty-first century “tear-it-all-down and destroy civilisation” environmentalism.
Indigenous groups are often used as useful you-know whats to front for Big Green, which provides funding and publicity to promote “indigenous knowledge and way of life” as camouflage for their own agenda. It plays on the sympathy of well-intentioned folk who feel guilt about the way such populations have been treated in the past. It’s been well documented in Canada, and seems to be popular wherever there are populations that can identify as “indigenous”.
“Indigenous” basically means “conquered, slaughtered, enslaved and/or assimilated any pre-existing societies in their territory”. That was the normal cycle of human history until the last few centuries – when Euro-colonialism started to see local peoples as sources of labour and, more lately as consumers.
And indigenous “ peoples” were not immune from doing atrocities during time of war with other local tribes and migrating groups long before the Whitman arrived.
That being the case, what’s all the concern about Putin sending some explosives to Ukraine? Isn’t it just carrying on a tradition of many centuries?
The US, Russia, and the UK vowed to defend Ukraine in 1994 if Ukraine would give up its nuclear weapons, which Ukraine did.
The US has violated every treaty signed with the various native american groups. Now what? Should the Russians send them jets and artillery?
Slave labour is not a new thing.
One of my ancestors (UK) from the 16th century is listed as a slave. Romans had slaves. as the Egyptians, and most likely every period since our species first appeared.
The problem is fish ladders aren’t very effective.
They were certainly “all in” on the masking, jabbing non-sense. Noticeably, the Casinos were not nearly as restricting. I wonder why not?
Are they dumb enough to do that ? Oh wait, in 2018 Macron announced the closure of 14 nuclear reactors by 2035. 5 years later he announces the construction of 14 new nuclear plants … he must have crashed against the brick wall of realities … so will undoubtedly do the Biden’s administration.
The Biden Administration cannot accomplish many of their goals during the time they are in office but they may be able to create situations through legislation and regulation that will seriously impede any efforts to return to more rational paths.
President Biden has so little work to do that he has to keep coming up with brilliant plans like opening the borders wider, withdrawing from Afghanistan, depleting the strategic oil reserves, reducing oil and gas drilling, getting involved in wars in Ukraine and Gaza, and anything that helps him keep spending like a drunken sailor.
Did some research before commenting. All four of these lower Snake River dams have multiple functioning fish ladders. Moreover, adjusting fisheries rules has led to increases in adults returning to spawn each of the past few years. So removing the dams isn’t really about the salmon. It’s about being green.
The photo is of Ice Harbor Dam.
Ice Harbor Dam – Wikipedia
This page says the PNW could exist without the power.
Other NW politicians say before breaching, replace the power.
There are 4 more dams on the Columbia, downstream from Ice Harbor.
Those may be able to increase their output, and flood protection.
I don’t see statements to this, but I haven’t read the proposals.
Dam removal has been going on for quite some time:
If you Google “dam removal in the united states” This pops up:
According to the non-profit advocacy organization American Rivers, 1,951
dams were removed in the United States between 1912 and 2021. The peak
year was 2018, which saw 111 removals. Pennsylvania removed 364 dams
in this period, more than any other state.
How many of those were hydro-electric?
Often these are small, derelict, filled with sediment, and dangerous.
Search-up this one for education an entertainment:
Elwha River Dam Removals
“How many of those were hydro-electric?”
_________________________________________________
https://www.americanrivers.org/resource/the-practitioners-guide-to-hydropower-dam-removal/
Notice that the ecological and population impact of shore-to-shore gill nets weren’t considering relevant in the study?
The endless stream of nuttiness from “Gonzo Joe” . If it wasn’t for the hydro
electric dam on the Columbia we couldn’t have produced the aluminum used
for the aircraft used to defeat the Japanese in WW2. Bottom line was we
made planes faster than they could shoot them down all because of those
dams.
It struck me about ten years ago, the absolute environmental devastation caused by damming a river.
I grew up on the lower American River in Sacramento. The American River drainage is 1,900 square miles, most of that in the Sierra Nevada range and it’s foothills. Every spring and fall—there used to be two salmon runs. Every fall—and spring before the Chinook Salmon went extinct here—the river banks would be thick with rotting salmon carcasses, the byproduct of the spawning.
Nimbus dam, creating Natomas Lake at the town of Folsom, hosts a fish hatchery, and is the top of the current native salmon run. Since the construction of this dam in 1955, no salmon make it upstream of this point.
My Dad often reminisces about working as an apprentice in Placerville—upstream in the American River drainage. After work, he and friends would fish for steelhead trout in Mosquito Creek in downtown Placerville. This got me to thinking that if there were steelhead, there would also be salmon. But salmon would be pretty beat up by this time. However if there were steelhead trout, and salmon in Placerville, there would also be salmon going far above these locations, probably all the way to the Rubicon and the highest reaches of the drainage, which if you don’t know, is just a hop, skip & jump from Lake Tahoe.
Then I considered all the salmon going that way, hundreds of thousands, if not millions. Millions of fish spawning along the rivers, creeks, and streams of the high sierra. The adults dying, their carcasses feeding bears, skunks, opossums, mink, martin, etc. That must have been the major food source for those animals to fatten up for the winter. This all stopped in 1955; think of the devastation to these animals. Then think about all the detritus from the bodies decaying in the streams, feeding the life of those creeks, streams, rivers, all the crayfish, worms, bugs & whatnot biota depending upon those resources. Then consider the fry, hundreds of millions, if not billions of fry hatching, living in the protected large rock sanctuaries, again, those fry feeding the snakes, trout, frogs, aquatic mammals, etc.
Think about the devastation when the salmon were cut off.
Yes, I know the economic gains brought by Nimbus Dam & Natomas Lake, Folsom Dam & Folsom lake: power, water storage, recreation, flood protection. I’ve swam and boated in both, enjoyed both, enjoyed the almost free electricity from both. But is this the right thing?
Why have no fresh water salmon been planted? They’re in the Great Lakes and in the
Northern Rockies and they are thriving. One things loss is another things gain. Take
a drive to Southern California and see what the Colorado River looks like and
give us your view on that.
Building a dam will likely effect the old ecosystem but a new one will develop.
Beavers do it all the time.
Returning to the post topic about removing established dams for reasons that have to do with a dam’s effect on the old ecosystem, what will removing the dam do to the newer ecosystem?
Destroy it?
Senator Risch is absolutely correct – only Congress can make this decision under our Constitution and existing laws.
Whether the dams should be removed or not is a complicated matter, best resolved with Congressional debate and consideration. There are some arguments for removing (breaching the dams, and some arguments for retaining the dams. The arguments for are mostly about environmental impacts and the effects on the salmon runs, which is where the Indian tribes get involved, as well as environmentalists. The arguments against are not just about hydro power capacity, but also the other aspects including navigation, flood control, irrigation, and recreational uses.
The Biden admin will never get a filibuster proof Senate vote in favor to breach, which is why the pro-breachers tried the litigation route. But the Supreme Court is not going to allow the executive branch to bypass Congress.
So many things that would have been unconstitutional have been cemented into the legal framework of the Union because of declarations of emergency that have since become permanent parts of the legal framework.
Not so. SCOTUS has repeatedly overturned executive agency decisions and executive orders on constitutional grounds, as recently as this year and last year.
This!
Translation: Joe Biden: “We don’t need oil or gas. We don’t need coal. We don’t even need dams. All anyone needs to do for electricity is just plug into a wall outlet.”
Politicians usually go where the votes are.
In a June 2023 Pew Research poll, they found that 69 percent of Americans favored the steps to become carbon neutral by 2050.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/09/what-the-data-says-about-americans-views-of-climate-change/
“Let me write the questions and choose who gets asked those questions, and I can give you any poll results you want.”
Hydroelectric power is one of the few “renewable” resources that can yield substantial amounts of energy, wherever there is a large river with a large change in elevation. Tearing down dams means that the missing power would have to be generated from another source, most likely natural gas, which would INCREASE CO2 emissions compared to leaving the dams in place. A giant step in the wrong direction.
If the Biden administration is really worried about salmon, they should consider “salmon ladders”, where the salmon can jump up a series of pools with small changes of elevation for each step. They can also be fenced in to prevent over-fishing by grizzly bears!
Grid inertia is very important for our system today but I wouldn’t go as far as saying that replacing these dams with renewable energy threatens the western interconnection. One of the only reasons our grid uses grid forming frequency control with rotating generators currently is because those types of generating plants were built first. Would we do the same system if we built it from scratch today? Probably not. Grid forming inverters and current innovation in power electronics make the loss of inertial generators much less drastic than it would have been decades ago. NREL has interesting research on not only the reaction of the grid to loss of inertia, but also to the increased penetration of grid forming inverters. It’s actually pretty fascinating to see that the same “slow response” to frequency that is afforded to us through inertia can affect recovery of the system in the same way. Sure, stability is offered by not dropping in frequency as quickly but that same inertia means the grid can’t recover as quickly. A grid full of power electronics would allow full control of the response and recovery of the system which could make the whole system more reliable and more robust.
I can’t comment on the possibility of that but with the first system, the inertia control is a by product of the generation and has worked well for over a century. With the second it is an extremely expensive add-on that is probably more fragile.
Presently, the river flow that these Dams are already required to follow to meet EPA regulations dictates the operating schedule of the Columbia NPP, which must decrease power so as to make the Dams profitable as they make these releases and the allowable flow rate, which of course, makes Columbia NPP less profitable and the reason the Columbia NPP has a lower Capacity factor.
Another problem with eliminating dams is that these generators are necessary to provide the necessary VAR’s to move electricity from Washington St to California. When they are eliminated, the Wind Turbines and/or Solar available in the North West states (AW & ID) will be insufficient to provide the necessary VARS ** to “Push” the energy from WA to CA.
Worse none of the people talking about Wind/Solar ever mention (Obviously have no knowledge of) the fact that the more “Renewables” that are placed on the grid the harder it is going to be to “Push” the power they generate to the area that needs electricity greatly increasing BLACKOUTS. Imagine how difficult it is going to be to control the VARs of the output power on several million Wind Turbines and multi Million solar panel Transverters. These transverters can NOT follow the VARs at their Grid connection – your meter – for home panels.
All of this means a highly sophisticated system will need to be designed, built and programed to adjust the VARS at the WA state Wind turbines to the correct VAR value to push that power to CA. The decommissioned generators in the Dams will be useless.
Also, the elimination of Coal, NG, NPP and Hydro plants means that Electric Utilities will need to spend Billions, individually, to make the VARS on their Grid/Distribution system as close to 100% Resistive as possible or they will be wasting power on reactive loading. That means that YOU, Anyone that uses electrical power, will see their electric bill increase by 50 to 100% over the next ten years to buy the necessary capacitors to eliminate the increased Reactive load cause by the elimination of the Coal, NG, Hydro and even NP plants from the elimination of these large spinning generators which presently provide capability to reduce Reactive loads on the grid.
** [VAR – Volts Amps Reactive. Basically the phase relationship of the peak of the sine wave of generated Voltage & Amperage. VARS need to be + or ahead to push and — or behind to adsorb the generated power. Presently, this is controlled by the Utility Dispatcher adjusting the power of the generating stations. Decimal Fractions of difference are needed to move electricity; and decimal fractions to large or of the wrong phase means BLACKOUTS. ]
For More Info – http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8353190/
The level of power generated from the Columbia Generating Station on any given day — what you call the Columbia NPP — is determined by the Bonneville Power Administration according to its own requirements on any given day. The station’s power level is either 60% or 100% depending on what the BPA wants that day in managing its response to power grid demand.
In recent years, the number of 60% days has been steadily declining; and the number of 100% days has been steadily increasing. IMHO, as the northwest’s supply of coal-fired and gas-fired capacity continues to decline without adequate replacement, the number of 100% days will continue to increase until eventually, the station is always running flat out all day long for every day of its scheduled up time.
The plant’s NRC license has been extended by 20 years from its original 40 years to 60. We should have every reason to believe the station’s service life can be further extended to 80 years, which now seems probable even if most of us won’t be around when that decision is made.
https://transmission.bpa.gov/Business/Operations/Wind/baltwg.aspx
The color of the line for nuclear is called Cobalt – one of 3 lines in the lower part of the chart. Older eyes may need to zoom-it to about 200%.
?
https://www.fossilconsulting.com/blog/power-plant-fundamentals/vars-explained-in-300-words/
Correction, if there is no impact on the political class then who in policy circles cares? It’s another case of hear no evil, see no evil.
Balanced – balance isn’t necessary – the time for debate is over, the science is settled.
I see Deb Haaland, Sec of Interior, all over this. If so, one thing is certain: very little of this has been thought through.
She’s the sort for whom the gesture is everything; results and adverse consequences be damned.
This could seriously harm the prosperity of Native Americans and others in the region and she would not care.
It seems crazy, but sea lions have learned to swim all the way up the Columbia river to the Bonneville dam, just to feast on salmon at the fish ladders. There is currently a big fight over shooting the sea lions. Here’s an article for those interested: https://www.columbian.com/news/2023/feb/17/sea-lions-threaten-northwests-salmon/
tom
Hydro power is essential to reestablishing frequency stabilization after an event.
The problem is that dams work. They provide electricity, store water & prevent floods. The toxic greens hate everything that works, which is why these dams have to go.
I have no knowledge of these dams or the local salmon situation. May be the dams are causing a problem for the salmon. However, the hydro-electric dam at Pitlochry in Scotland has a fish ladder which allows the salmon to move without restriction. Maybe the US and the Scottish situations are very different. Maybe the local circumstances would not be suitable for the Pitlochry solution. But, if so, it would be interesting to know why.
There are no words foul enough to describe this profane action or the dark hearts of the promoters.
Plain and simple: dams serve load, wrecking them creates room on the system for wind energy.
The claims about salmon have been debated for many decades. The only thing is that different now is that a financial winner has figured out how to profit.
I’m all for dam removal to be honest. But I love fish and know the value of wild, naturally reproducing populations. But replace the power generation first with reliable nuclear, natural gas, or coal. Then remove the dams.
No, no… solutions come last in the sequence.
Biden’s puppeteers are trying to systematically dismantle our power grid and deny access to any form of reliable, affordable energy. They envision us living in sod huts, burning bison chips to stay warm and cook whatever food we can find. No wait, cutting sod will be outlawed by the EPA, and gathering bison chips will be a felony, since they are a product from what will be deemed a protected species. So go ahead, starve and freeze, you peasants. We have to save the planet from the scourge of “useless eaters”.
Won’t the Bison be ‘long gone’? Don’t they fart, creating methane (or something)?
As a long time resident of Washington State, I can tell you those dams don’t just generate power, but also provide irrigation, and support a massive amount of barge traffic in and out of the Port of Lewiston. Massive amounts of wheat, apples, and timber are shipped out of the Port. All that would have to be moved by trucks to the next nearest port, requiring massive upgrades to I 84. There must be a better way to cope with salmon than removing these dams. Whatever the answer is, it should be arrived at through discussion and debate, not back-door fiats. Read all about the Port here: https://portoflewiston.com/
For those of you who want to take a deep dive into the deep waters of the Snake River dam breaching controversy, here is the US Army Corps of Engineers EIS and Record of Decision from the year 2002:
Lower Snake River Juvenile Salmon Migration Feasibility Study (‘2002 LSR Study’)
Here is the 2002 LSE/EIS summary from the USACE Walla Walla District web page:
More than two decades ago, I attended several of the public comment meetings held in 1998 and 1999 concernig this EIS while it was in draft form.
One meeting that I went to was a well-attended talk given by a National Marine Fisheries senior biologist out of the Portland office concerning the major scientific facets of Snake River salmon survival. To say the topic is complex is putting it mildly.
It was this talk where I learned that producing an absolute guarantee of Snake River salmon survival required the removal of Hells Canyon Dam in Idaho and probably other dams on the Snake River in Idaho, in addition to removing the four lower Snake River dams in Washington state.
We should have no doubt that the Biden administration has put intense pressure on the Corps of Engineers and on other federal agencies such as National Marine Fisheries to reverse the Record of Decision published in 2002 and to decide that dam breaching is now the preferred alternative.
WA is also getting rid of fossil fuel plants and mandating electric vehicles. They’re going to need more electricity.