5 ms·

Unfortunately lots of windy locations in Europe are not good locations for hydro-works, too. I’m thinking Netherlands and Northern Germany (even though knowing

Unfortunately lots of windy locations in Europe are not good locations for hydro-works, too. I’m thinking Netherlands and Northern Germany (even though knowing the Dutch they might come up with something), and closer to me (I’m from Eastern Europe) the locations close to the Black Sea, which are excellent for wind farms yet are a poor choice for hydro solutions. Of course, you could let’s say transport the energy produced by wind farms from Northern Germany to hydro projects built in South Germany, but that opens a new can of worms: loss of energy because of the transport itself, extra costs, actually building the energy transport infrastructure (a huge task in a NIMBY world).

ben_w 5y ago
The transport losses are by far the smallest part of that. HVDC is available at 3.5% loss at 1000km as a standard product, but if building it at the required scale was trivial we’d be doing it rather than talking about it.
- lazide 5y ago
  Biggest issue lately seems to be right of way/approvals - most of the paths between hydro and wind sources are overland. Most of the existing HVDC interconnects are undersea. You don’t need to deal with 10k different landowners each wanting their own special deal if you’re connecting Tunisia and Spain, vs North and South Germany.
  - learc83 5y ago
    Not to say that what you’re saying isn’t a problem, but that’s what eminent domain is for.
    - adrianN 5y ago
      Using that is a good way not to get reelected, so politicians are a bit reluctant.
      - learc83 5y ago
        It happens very regularly. Roads and utility corridors are built and expanded every day. Eminent domain doesn't generally directly impact enough people to make a serious election issue, unless we are talking about either very local elections, or when the thing being built is something people feel strongly about like an oil pipeline.
        lazide 5y ago
        By very regularly, you mean ‘regularly tarpitted for a long time anytime there are a decent number of people near the work’? Bridge widening work on 101 has been delayed for decades by this in the Bay Area, CalTrain electrification was delayed by over a decade, etc. etc. Most utility corridors are in the middle of nowhere and already established (and people stay away because of this), so reusing an existing corridor is relatively easy - unless it widens into someone’s yard. Then it’s a matter of how much money that person has. For connecting previously not connected areas with a new line, especially if it goes through somewhere folks are living? Be prepared for the actual work making whatever you are doing to be a tiny tiny percentage of the time and costs involved.
        learc83 5y ago
        In most of the rest of the country we manage to build new roads and new transmission lines without the extreme issues you're describing. Over the last few years, I can think of hundreds of homes and businesses near me that were moved to widen existing roads or build new ones. A few people/businesses tried to fight it, they all lost quickly. You can't take the experience of a private citizen trying to clear some brush, bridge widening delays in one of the most regulation heavy states in the country, and oil pipeline opposition, and apply it to building HVDC between countries in Europe. Unlike your examples, HVDC lines have no real negative impact on anyone but the immediately impacted property owners. If you're building HVDC transmission lines between countries, you can also very likely reuse existing utility corridors for much of it, and build through lower density areas for most of the rest. The actual number of property owners directly impacted won't be high enough to make an impact on elections.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - lazide 5y ago
      Of course, and probably 50% or more of those landowners are going to fight you tooth and nail in court in that proceeding. Some so you’ll pay them more to settle/go away, some because they just hate you on an ideological level or refuse to budge [https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1XG1R4 https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/...] If you’re covering significant distances that people live in, you can expect to spend a decade or sometimes more in court before being able to build - if ever. Because of course there are the environmental reviews, the impact assessments, etc. and each of those will be hundreds to thousands of pages long, and you’ll likely have to fight over each page, also in court, with folks who don’t like that you’re going to dig up that random patch of flowers to install your power line or whatever. And that is assuming you’re lucky enough to not have any endangered species in the way, in which case you might literally not be able to build at all if it is in an area you have no choice to go through. So far no one is staking out patches of ocean floor, and generally even if they did, the topography is usually more forgiving there. So all you need is landing approval, which means one government and one compliant landowner on each side somewhere along each coast that is close enough to an existing grid that you can interconnect to it. Much more solvable. Still not easy or straightforward. In California it took me 4 years and $18k worth of professional help to get approval to do completely standard fuel reduction work on a completely uninteresting plot of land that was super overgrown with brush and dead trees - with no one objecting to it - in the middle of a historic wildfire crisis in California that actually expedited the process. I had to notify 10 something local native tribes (in case they maybe were somehow attached to the land, which they weren’t), had to do a detailed archeological survey, had to have a licensed biologist do a detailed walkthrough to look for endangered species (there were none). Meanwhile the 3 largest fires in the states recorded history burned nearby, and they wouldn’t let me clear brush and remove dead trees from a clear fire hazard area and it’s a miracle the place didn’t burn to the ground.
      - learc83 5y ago
        There's only so much a landowner can. Roads and utility corridors are built and expanded every day. It's a fairly common occurrence. Oil pipelines are bit different because there are tons of people and organizations outside of those directly impacted who are willing to join the fight.
Fordec 5y ago
If the was more interconnection between the Dutch and Norway to take advantage of Norways hydro storage that would mitigate some of that issue.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
rdiddly 5y ago
There is such a project already in the planning stage, called SuedLink, and consisting of high-voltage underground DC transmission lines from the north of Germany (where it will connect not only to German wind power but also hydropower in Norway via the existing NordLink project) to the south, where solar is the order of the day.
tuatoru 5y ago
> a huge task in a NIMBY world Yes, governments really need to pass laws to muzzle NIMBYs. This would increase democracy - no longer would small minorities be able to veto government actions for the benefit of all.
- ersii 5y ago
  How's that increased democracy? Muzzle is also an interesting choice of words. It reminds me more of totalitarian utilitarianism, fascism or communism when you suddenly don't care about objections or "the little/common man".
  - tuatoru 5y ago
    The opposite. I care about the"little man" as opposed to those with the wherewithal to mount sustained challenges just because the proposed action "disfigures" their local landscape. Like Trump vetoing a wind farm because it could be seen from one of his golf courses in Scotland.

ben_w 5y ago

The transport losses are by far the smallest part of that. HVDC is available at 3.5% loss at 1000km as a standard product, but if building it at the required scale was trivial we’d be doing it rather than talking about it.

lazide 5y ago
Biggest issue lately seems to be right of way/approvals - most of the paths between hydro and wind sources are overland. Most of the existing HVDC interconnects are undersea. You don’t need to deal with 10k different landowners each wanting their own special deal if you’re connecting Tunisia and Spain, vs North and South Germany.
- learc83 5y ago
  Not to say that what you’re saying isn’t a problem, but that’s what eminent domain is for.
  - adrianN 5y ago
    Using that is a good way not to get reelected, so politicians are a bit reluctant.
    - learc83 5y ago
      It happens very regularly. Roads and utility corridors are built and expanded every day. Eminent domain doesn't generally directly impact enough people to make a serious election issue, unless we are talking about either very local elections, or when the thing being built is something people feel strongly about like an oil pipeline.
      - lazide 5y ago
        By very regularly, you mean ‘regularly tarpitted for a long time anytime there are a decent number of people near the work’? Bridge widening work on 101 has been delayed for decades by this in the Bay Area, CalTrain electrification was delayed by over a decade, etc. etc. Most utility corridors are in the middle of nowhere and already established (and people stay away because of this), so reusing an existing corridor is relatively easy - unless it widens into someone’s yard. Then it’s a matter of how much money that person has. For connecting previously not connected areas with a new line, especially if it goes through somewhere folks are living? Be prepared for the actual work making whatever you are doing to be a tiny tiny percentage of the time and costs involved.
        learc83 5y ago
        In most of the rest of the country we manage to build new roads and new transmission lines without the extreme issues you're describing. Over the last few years, I can think of hundreds of homes and businesses near me that were moved to widen existing roads or build new ones. A few people/businesses tried to fight it, they all lost quickly. You can't take the experience of a private citizen trying to clear some brush, bridge widening delays in one of the most regulation heavy states in the country, and oil pipeline opposition, and apply it to building HVDC between countries in Europe. Unlike your examples, HVDC lines have no real negative impact on anyone but the immediately impacted property owners. If you're building HVDC transmission lines between countries, you can also very likely reuse existing utility corridors for much of it, and build through lower density areas for most of the rest. The actual number of property owners directly impacted won't be high enough to make an impact on elections.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - lazide 5y ago
    Of course, and probably 50% or more of those landowners are going to fight you tooth and nail in court in that proceeding. Some so you’ll pay them more to settle/go away, some because they just hate you on an ideological level or refuse to budge [https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1XG1R4 https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/...] If you’re covering significant distances that people live in, you can expect to spend a decade or sometimes more in court before being able to build - if ever. Because of course there are the environmental reviews, the impact assessments, etc. and each of those will be hundreds to thousands of pages long, and you’ll likely have to fight over each page, also in court, with folks who don’t like that you’re going to dig up that random patch of flowers to install your power line or whatever. And that is assuming you’re lucky enough to not have any endangered species in the way, in which case you might literally not be able to build at all if it is in an area you have no choice to go through. So far no one is staking out patches of ocean floor, and generally even if they did, the topography is usually more forgiving there. So all you need is landing approval, which means one government and one compliant landowner on each side somewhere along each coast that is close enough to an existing grid that you can interconnect to it. Much more solvable. Still not easy or straightforward. In California it took me 4 years and $18k worth of professional help to get approval to do completely standard fuel reduction work on a completely uninteresting plot of land that was super overgrown with brush and dead trees - with no one objecting to it - in the middle of a historic wildfire crisis in California that actually expedited the process. I had to notify 10 something local native tribes (in case they maybe were somehow attached to the land, which they weren’t), had to do a detailed archeological survey, had to have a licensed biologist do a detailed walkthrough to look for endangered species (there were none). Meanwhile the 3 largest fires in the states recorded history burned nearby, and they wouldn’t let me clear brush and remove dead trees from a clear fire hazard area and it’s a miracle the place didn’t burn to the ground.
    - learc83 5y ago
      There's only so much a landowner can. Roads and utility corridors are built and expanded every day. It's a fairly common occurrence. Oil pipelines are bit different because there are tons of people and organizations outside of those directly impacted who are willing to join the fight.

Fordec 5y ago

If the was more interconnection between the Dutch and Norway to take advantage of Norways hydro storage that would mitigate some of that issue.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

rdiddly 5y ago

There is such a project already in the planning stage, called SuedLink, and consisting of high-voltage underground DC transmission lines from the north of Germany (where it will connect not only to German wind power but also hydropower in Norway via the existing NordLink project) to the south, where solar is the order of the day.

tuatoru 5y ago

> a huge task in a NIMBY world Yes, governments really need to pass laws to muzzle NIMBYs. This would increase democracy - no longer would small minorities be able to veto government actions for the benefit of all.

ersii 5y ago
How's that increased democracy? Muzzle is also an interesting choice of words. It reminds me more of totalitarian utilitarianism, fascism or communism when you suddenly don't care about objections or "the little/common man".
- tuatoru 5y ago
  The opposite. I care about the"little man" as opposed to those with the wherewithal to mount sustained challenges just because the proposed action "disfigures" their local landscape. Like Trump vetoing a wind farm because it could be seen from one of his golf courses in Scotland.