3 ms·

Power lines are built from hydro power plants in the mountains to the cities. Obviously you know that so I don’t understand what you were trying to say.

EdwardDiego 6y ago
TBH, I'm confused about what you were trying to say. Unless you live in the coastal lowland countries of Europe, pretty much every country has some geography conducive to hydro. And what does the "sparse" (which implies thinly distributed, FYI, hence the person who replied to you specifying that it's actually quite dense in a localised area) population have to do with hydro or not?
- lightgreen 6y ago
  > TBH, I'm confused about what you were trying to say. Amount of hydro power capacity per capita in Scotland is much higher than say in Wales. > pretty much every country has some geography conducive to hydro This is simply not true. Availability of hydro in Switzerland is much better than for example in Lithuania.
  - EdwardDiego 6y ago
    > Amount of hydro power capacity per capita in Scotland is much higher in Scotland than say in Wales. Is it? Because most of Wales is mountainous. And nearly all of its inhabitants don't live in the mountains. Still confused about why the population distribution is important, especially as Wales and Scotland are part of the UK electrical grid, so per-capita is ultimately meaningless unless both declare independence and sever that grid connection. > This is simply not true. Availability of hydro in Switzerland is much better than for example in Lithuania. I did say "some geography". I also said "coastal lowland countries of Europe" which would include Lithuania also, yeah? It's coastal, it's highest point is 294m ASL, which is pretty lowland in my book. And 20% of its generation capacity is from hydro. So yeah... obviously not all countries are going to have the same hydro capacity, but it'd be damn hard to find one that has geography that prevents any hydro capacity.
    - lightgreen 6y ago
      > Is it? Because most of Wales is mountainous It's hard to me to say right now mountainousness of these two countries compare (but looking at the map, looks like Scotland has more and higher mountains https://maps-for-free.com/ https://maps-for-free.com/). But Wales population density is three times as low as in Wales. So even if mountain availability would be the same (which I claim it is not), then hydro power capacity is three times lower in Wales. > Still confused about why the population distribution is important Distribution is not important, density is. > per-capita is ultimately meaningless unless both declare independence and sever that grid connection If it was meaningless, we would not discuss the BBC article in the first place. > it'd be damn hard to find one that has geography that prevents any hydro capacity Well, technically one can build hydro power plant virtually everywhere where there are rivers, but in many places (with only few mountains) building hydro power plants is prohibitively expensive and leads to too much land wasted for water storage.

EdwardDiego 6y ago

TBH, I'm confused about what you were trying to say. Unless you live in the coastal lowland countries of Europe, pretty much every country has some geography conducive to hydro. And what does the "sparse" (which implies thinly distributed, FYI, hence the person who replied to you specifying that it's actually quite dense in a localised area) population have to do with hydro or not?

lightgreen 6y ago
> TBH, I'm confused about what you were trying to say. Amount of hydro power capacity per capita in Scotland is much higher than say in Wales. > pretty much every country has some geography conducive to hydro This is simply not true. Availability of hydro in Switzerland is much better than for example in Lithuania.
- EdwardDiego 6y ago
  > Amount of hydro power capacity per capita in Scotland is much higher in Scotland than say in Wales. Is it? Because most of Wales is mountainous. And nearly all of its inhabitants don't live in the mountains. Still confused about why the population distribution is important, especially as Wales and Scotland are part of the UK electrical grid, so per-capita is ultimately meaningless unless both declare independence and sever that grid connection. > This is simply not true. Availability of hydro in Switzerland is much better than for example in Lithuania. I did say "some geography". I also said "coastal lowland countries of Europe" which would include Lithuania also, yeah? It's coastal, it's highest point is 294m ASL, which is pretty lowland in my book. And 20% of its generation capacity is from hydro. So yeah... obviously not all countries are going to have the same hydro capacity, but it'd be damn hard to find one that has geography that prevents any hydro capacity.
  - lightgreen 6y ago
    > Is it? Because most of Wales is mountainous It's hard to me to say right now mountainousness of these two countries compare (but looking at the map, looks like Scotland has more and higher mountains https://maps-for-free.com/ https://maps-for-free.com/). But Wales population density is three times as low as in Wales. So even if mountain availability would be the same (which I claim it is not), then hydro power capacity is three times lower in Wales. > Still confused about why the population distribution is important Distribution is not important, density is. > per-capita is ultimately meaningless unless both declare independence and sever that grid connection If it was meaningless, we would not discuss the BBC article in the first place. > it'd be damn hard to find one that has geography that prevents any hydro capacity Well, technically one can build hydro power plant virtually everywhere where there are rivers, but in many places (with only few mountains) building hydro power plants is prohibitively expensive and leads to too much land wasted for water storage.