6 ms·

The three gorges dam was recently built; and closer to SV, Site C is under construction in British Columbia. There's definitely folks alive who know how to buil

The three gorges dam was recently built; and closer to SV, Site C is under construction in British Columbia. There's definitely folks alive who know how to build dams. I think the issue is less the lack of knowledge, and more the lack of political will to meaningfully tackle the problem.

bullen 6y ago
The problem is you need to burn alot of dead trees to make a dam and EROEI is dwindling too fast for this to become a viable option. Nuclear and hydro will never be rebuilt to the same level we have now.
- cbmuser 6y ago
  Nuclear is being built in China like crazy. They‘re currently constructing 12 plants at the same time.
  - bullen 6y ago
    China has less reactors than france with 20x the population. They would need 1000 reactors to match. For a commodore user you are very optimistic about things getting better! More nuclear plants are getting closed than built.
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    It's still a far cry from the 70's. My quick counting showed the US opening around 40 from 70-75.
  - ryanmarsh 6y ago
    I hope they're better at running nuclear power plants than they are at running infectious disease labs.
  - natmaka 6y ago
    Not really. In short: ((by 2035)) nuclear generating capacity ((will be)) 7.7% out of predicted total electricity generating capacity. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_China#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_China#History They, however, built renewables like crazy.
- varjag 6y ago
  Nuclear has its own decommissioning and long term disposal problem.
  - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
    If anything nuclear's problem is even more political than practical. We could fulfill the world's nuclear waste storage needs with a couple landfills if the will was there (though any geologist will tell you are better options than near surface storage). From an ecological perspective nuclear is the best option by a mile because the amount of stuff you need to pull out of the ground, move around, use and dispose of is so small per energy produced.
    - varjag 6y ago
      It's the same for hydro, the lack of political stakeholders in decomissioning process. I wasn't suggesting that it's physically impossible.
      - bullen 6y ago
        Nuclear has 1.000.000.000x the energy density of batteries so yes, but you need dead trees to build and maintain power lines, the power grid cannot be remade after it's current decline. Tiny local hydro (with natural dam) is the future, but getting a building permit is near impossible. (I leave it to the reader to guess why) We need to switch off electricity for everything except (low power) computers and networks. = hand pumped water, wood stove for water heater, earth cellar as fridge! Mass transports are completely over, grow/breed/preserve your food locally!
        bzbarsky 6y ago
        > wood stove for water heater Even ignoring the CO2 aspect, the particulate emissions from this would be quite problematic in any sort of dense area. Not to mention what fraction of those particulates would end up inside the house... Also, you don't mention heating (houses, not water). That is a huge part of energy consumption in many parts of the world.
bregma 6y ago
Capital spending and construction are far more friendly to electoral politics than ongoing maintenance and operating expenditures. People see what a good job you've done getting a dam built or a bridge constructed, they vote for you. People don't vote for you because they didn't suffer the consequences of reduced maintenance. People vote against you if you raise taxes to pay for maintenance or if they're inconvenienced by shutdowns while they repair your dam or bridge. The problem is systemic.
- HenryKissinger 6y ago
  Reject democracy, embrace technocracy.
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    You can have a democracy that operates largely like a technocracy if you make it an actual democracy and align incentives.
  - srswtf123 6y ago
    Your username is relevant?
Arrath 6y ago
I'm currently on a project in California to repair and rehab a dam to extend its service life, working for a contractor that just finished a dam rehab job and is bidding on two more in the future. The work is being done, probably not at a scale or pace big enough to meet the needs of the infrastructure (see: all those old and ailing bridges across the country) but it is being done at some level.
Kluny 6y ago
> Site C is under construction in British Columbia. Not sure if this is a good example of "know how to build dams". It's a dam foolish design, built on an earthquake fault zone that's been made unstable by the excavation that's being done to build the dam. The design has been changed to include this ridiculous earthfill section (https://www.sitecproject.com/about-site-c/site-c-project-components https://www.sitecproject.com/about-site-c/site-c-project-com...) to compensate for the weirdness of the geography there. It's probably going to fail catastrophically at some point and destroy a lot of homes downstream from it, and the controversy over the project basically caused the downfall of BC's last government.
- remote_phone 6y ago
  My friend does some auxiliary work for Site C. He said everything is over budget and a mess. The initial contractor underbid because they thought they could get migrant workers in. But now they are dealing with union workers so the contractors messed it up badly.
  - dleslie 6y ago
    Somewhat relatedly; I have PEng friends who worked on the budgeting for Transmountain before the Grits bought it. The true cost will be somewhere around 3x the expected, in the long run. They lied through their teeth to offload the lemon onto the feds.
- dleslie 6y ago
  All of BC's dams were built in an earthquake zone. That's sort-of a given. Huge portions of the Comox Valley and Coquitlam are precarious; a strong shake will send a wave of water that will wipe out thousands of homes.
  - Kluny 6y ago
    We're not just talking about natural earthquake risk. The fracking that's happening near the dam is actively making the earthquakes worse. https://thenarwhal.ca/fracking-induced-earthquakes-buffer-zones-site-c-dam/ https://thenarwhal.ca/fracking-induced-earthquakes-buffer-zo...

bullen 6y ago

The problem is you need to burn alot of dead trees to make a dam and EROEI is dwindling too fast for this to become a viable option. Nuclear and hydro will never be rebuilt to the same level we have now.

cbmuser 6y ago
Nuclear is being built in China like crazy. They‘re currently constructing 12 plants at the same time.
- bullen 6y ago
  China has less reactors than france with 20x the population. They would need 1000 reactors to match. For a commodore user you are very optimistic about things getting better! More nuclear plants are getting closed than built.
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  It's still a far cry from the 70's. My quick counting showed the US opening around 40 from 70-75.
- ryanmarsh 6y ago
  I hope they're better at running nuclear power plants than they are at running infectious disease labs.
- natmaka 6y ago
  Not really. In short: ((by 2035)) nuclear generating capacity ((will be)) 7.7% out of predicted total electricity generating capacity. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_China#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_China#History They, however, built renewables like crazy.
varjag 6y ago
Nuclear has its own decommissioning and long term disposal problem.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  If anything nuclear's problem is even more political than practical. We could fulfill the world's nuclear waste storage needs with a couple landfills if the will was there (though any geologist will tell you are better options than near surface storage). From an ecological perspective nuclear is the best option by a mile because the amount of stuff you need to pull out of the ground, move around, use and dispose of is so small per energy produced.
  - varjag 6y ago
    It's the same for hydro, the lack of political stakeholders in decomissioning process. I wasn't suggesting that it's physically impossible.
    - bullen 6y ago
      Nuclear has 1.000.000.000x the energy density of batteries so yes, but you need dead trees to build and maintain power lines, the power grid cannot be remade after it's current decline. Tiny local hydro (with natural dam) is the future, but getting a building permit is near impossible. (I leave it to the reader to guess why) We need to switch off electricity for everything except (low power) computers and networks. = hand pumped water, wood stove for water heater, earth cellar as fridge! Mass transports are completely over, grow/breed/preserve your food locally!
      - bzbarsky 6y ago
        > wood stove for water heater Even ignoring the CO2 aspect, the particulate emissions from this would be quite problematic in any sort of dense area. Not to mention what fraction of those particulates would end up inside the house... Also, you don't mention heating (houses, not water). That is a huge part of energy consumption in many parts of the world.

bregma 6y ago

Capital spending and construction are far more friendly to electoral politics than ongoing maintenance and operating expenditures. People see what a good job you've done getting a dam built or a bridge constructed, they vote for you. People don't vote for you because they didn't suffer the consequences of reduced maintenance. People vote against you if you raise taxes to pay for maintenance or if they're inconvenienced by shutdowns while they repair your dam or bridge. The problem is systemic.

HenryKissinger 6y ago
Reject democracy, embrace technocracy.
- sudosysgen 6y ago
  You can have a democracy that operates largely like a technocracy if you make it an actual democracy and align incentives.
- srswtf123 6y ago
  Your username is relevant?

Arrath 6y ago

I'm currently on a project in California to repair and rehab a dam to extend its service life, working for a contractor that just finished a dam rehab job and is bidding on two more in the future. The work is being done, probably not at a scale or pace big enough to meet the needs of the infrastructure (see: all those old and ailing bridges across the country) but it is being done at some level.

Kluny 6y ago

> Site C is under construction in British Columbia. Not sure if this is a good example of "know how to build dams". It's a dam foolish design, built on an earthquake fault zone that's been made unstable by the excavation that's being done to build the dam. The design has been changed to include this ridiculous earthfill section (https://www.sitecproject.com/about-site-c/site-c-project-components https://www.sitecproject.com/about-site-c/site-c-project-com...) to compensate for the weirdness of the geography there. It's probably going to fail catastrophically at some point and destroy a lot of homes downstream from it, and the controversy over the project basically caused the downfall of BC's last government.

remote_phone 6y ago
My friend does some auxiliary work for Site C. He said everything is over budget and a mess. The initial contractor underbid because they thought they could get migrant workers in. But now they are dealing with union workers so the contractors messed it up badly.
- dleslie 6y ago
  Somewhat relatedly; I have PEng friends who worked on the budgeting for Transmountain before the Grits bought it. The true cost will be somewhere around 3x the expected, in the long run. They lied through their teeth to offload the lemon onto the feds.
dleslie 6y ago
All of BC's dams were built in an earthquake zone. That's sort-of a given. Huge portions of the Comox Valley and Coquitlam are precarious; a strong shake will send a wave of water that will wipe out thousands of homes.
- Kluny 6y ago
  We're not just talking about natural earthquake risk. The fracking that's happening near the dam is actively making the earthquakes worse. https://thenarwhal.ca/fracking-induced-earthquakes-buffer-zones-site-c-dam/ https://thenarwhal.ca/fracking-induced-earthquakes-buffer-zo...