4 ms·

What is interesting is to look at the breakdown in increases of non-hydro renewables: Non-hydro renewables 149,652 +10.8% - of which wind 104,801 +10.5% - of

What is interesting is to look at the breakdown in increases of non-hydro renewables: Non-hydro renewables 149,652 +10.8% - of which wind 104,801 +10.5% - of which utility-scale solar 18,510 +33.6% This equates to: Type 2017 2018 difference Non-hydro renewables 135,065 149,652 +14,587 - of which wind 94,842 104,801 +9,958 - of which utility-scale solar 13,854 18,510 +4,654 In other words, utility-scale solar is increasing faster, but it is still falling behind. The increase in wind power is almost the starting point of utility scale solar. I would love to know how the residential scale solar numbers fit into this, but that isn't reported here.

specialist 8y ago
Aside: Figuring out (roughly) when we can start decommissioning hydro is on my todo list. Motivation: Restore habitat. Try to save the pacific salmon, humpback chub, others.
- snowwindwaves 8y ago
  british Columbia has been building half a dozen new hydro electric power plants per year for the last 20 years. It takes 3-6 years to do the environmental studies. Goats, insects, tadpoles, bears, eagles, fish, plants, you name it, everything is studied to see how it will be impacted. On a recent project they discovered a frog that was on the endangered list actually wasn't endangered at all as it was in every creek in the whole area. Impacts can be mitigated by creating new habitat. there are environmental monitors during all construction and weekly reporting to the goverment ministries of fisheries and forests during operation. The run of river plants only cause unnatural changes in river flows if human life is at risk. Some owners would rather destroy a bearing than kill a fish. My point is that hydro can operate without much impact on the environment. Flow releases and fish ladders might decrease the absolute amount of energy generated but that small decrease is in the big picture preferable to switching to natural gas for the entirety of the hydro plant capacity. I don't think any struggles of the pacific salmon or humpback chub can be blamed solely on hydro. Disclaimer: I program hydro plants for the last 15 years.
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    Great comment. One of the reasons I love HN.
  - specialist 8y ago
    Solely? No. Significantly? Yes. I'll google your new BC hydro, of which I know nothing. See what's what. But that doesn't change the situation with USA's dams. Further, any hope of restoring the pacific salmon runs requires removing hydro. Among many other measures. You didn't answer my question. So I'll try to restate it: At what point will we have enough solar and wind capacity to moot hydro? I can't speak to the chub situation.
    - snowwindwaves 8y ago
      I believe salmon runs that have been impacted can be helped without having to remove dams entirely, but I'm an EE not a biologist. I also don't defend all dams. Many dams have had terrible impacts on people and the environment. Hydro could be mooted when there is enough battery storage in MWH as there is stored in the potential energy in the water in the reservoirs of the dams. The economics on batteries aren't there yet. To be able to depend on having x MWH of energy in the battery in 5 years you need a battery that is 10x, or you buy a battery that is only 1.5x but then replace it every year. A project in Hawaii just chose pumped hydro storage over batteries. I'm more hopeful geothermal will become a strong resource but all of the drilling equipment and expertise is chasing oil.
      - specialist 8y ago
        We cool. After some quick googling, skim reading, it looks like your govt has tried harder to preserve your salmon runs. Honestly, that's pretty encouraging. And the restoration work on Vancouver Island is exciting. Since the Columbia (Basin) is also used for irrigation, agriculture, it's been hard, slow work balancing the needs of all the stakeholders. Just guessing: Maybe that's less of a factor for your govt. Aside: I do think we'll need to be build more reservoirs, cisterns. Higher up. As you know, the snowpack, which used to hold the water, has all but disappeared with climate change. We'll need something to replace that functionality, capacity. So even as an EE, you'll still have a lot of work in the future (assuming you stay with hydro). Peace.
- southern_cross 8y ago
  Are we just ignoring the flood control and other positive aspects of many of those dams these days?
gns24 8y ago
It's worth remembering that this data is for January - April. Solar is going to have a much bigger contribution in the following four months. I don't know about wind patterns in the US, but in Europe the wind also tends to blow less strongly in summer.
- innocentfelon 8y ago
  Don’t be so sure. Even though summer gives you more direct sunlight and longer days, it also knocks down your efficiency (and weather patterns in some areas will be more inclined to cloud over those months). In the US the same is true with wind as in Europe. Places with good summer wind resources are uncommon, but California has a few of them.

specialist 8y ago

Aside: Figuring out (roughly) when we can start decommissioning hydro is on my todo list. Motivation: Restore habitat. Try to save the pacific salmon, humpback chub, others.

snowwindwaves 8y ago
british Columbia has been building half a dozen new hydro electric power plants per year for the last 20 years. It takes 3-6 years to do the environmental studies. Goats, insects, tadpoles, bears, eagles, fish, plants, you name it, everything is studied to see how it will be impacted. On a recent project they discovered a frog that was on the endangered list actually wasn't endangered at all as it was in every creek in the whole area. Impacts can be mitigated by creating new habitat. there are environmental monitors during all construction and weekly reporting to the goverment ministries of fisheries and forests during operation. The run of river plants only cause unnatural changes in river flows if human life is at risk. Some owners would rather destroy a bearing than kill a fish. My point is that hydro can operate without much impact on the environment. Flow releases and fish ladders might decrease the absolute amount of energy generated but that small decrease is in the big picture preferable to switching to natural gas for the entirety of the hydro plant capacity. I don't think any struggles of the pacific salmon or humpback chub can be blamed solely on hydro. Disclaimer: I program hydro plants for the last 15 years.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  Great comment. One of the reasons I love HN.
- specialist 8y ago
  Solely? No. Significantly? Yes. I'll google your new BC hydro, of which I know nothing. See what's what. But that doesn't change the situation with USA's dams. Further, any hope of restoring the pacific salmon runs requires removing hydro. Among many other measures. You didn't answer my question. So I'll try to restate it: At what point will we have enough solar and wind capacity to moot hydro? I can't speak to the chub situation.
  - snowwindwaves 8y ago
    I believe salmon runs that have been impacted can be helped without having to remove dams entirely, but I'm an EE not a biologist. I also don't defend all dams. Many dams have had terrible impacts on people and the environment. Hydro could be mooted when there is enough battery storage in MWH as there is stored in the potential energy in the water in the reservoirs of the dams. The economics on batteries aren't there yet. To be able to depend on having x MWH of energy in the battery in 5 years you need a battery that is 10x, or you buy a battery that is only 1.5x but then replace it every year. A project in Hawaii just chose pumped hydro storage over batteries. I'm more hopeful geothermal will become a strong resource but all of the drilling equipment and expertise is chasing oil.
    - specialist 8y ago
      We cool. After some quick googling, skim reading, it looks like your govt has tried harder to preserve your salmon runs. Honestly, that's pretty encouraging. And the restoration work on Vancouver Island is exciting. Since the Columbia (Basin) is also used for irrigation, agriculture, it's been hard, slow work balancing the needs of all the stakeholders. Just guessing: Maybe that's less of a factor for your govt. Aside: I do think we'll need to be build more reservoirs, cisterns. Higher up. As you know, the snowpack, which used to hold the water, has all but disappeared with climate change. We'll need something to replace that functionality, capacity. So even as an EE, you'll still have a lot of work in the future (assuming you stay with hydro). Peace.
southern_cross 8y ago
Are we just ignoring the flood control and other positive aspects of many of those dams these days?

gns24 8y ago

It's worth remembering that this data is for January - April. Solar is going to have a much bigger contribution in the following four months. I don't know about wind patterns in the US, but in Europe the wind also tends to blow less strongly in summer.

innocentfelon 8y ago
Don’t be so sure. Even though summer gives you more direct sunlight and longer days, it also knocks down your efficiency (and weather patterns in some areas will be more inclined to cloud over those months). In the US the same is true with wind as in Europe. Places with good summer wind resources are uncommon, but California has a few of them.