7 ms·
> "Dyke" is a wholly different noun. I advise against its use until you understand it better. Perhaps you could refrain from making snarky comments about minor
by VBprogrammer 4y ago
> "Dyke" is a wholly different noun. I advise against its use until you understand it better.
Perhaps you could refrain from making snarky comments about minor spelling errors which clearly didn't impact your understanding until you understand dyslexia better?
> The bottom of the reservoir needs to be impermeable. It is well understood by civil engineers how to achieve this.
Understood isn't the same as economically feasible. It's not a trivial issue.
> Earth-moving equipment is very good at getting to places you would not want to try driving your car into
Earth-moving equipment isn't designed to make long distance overland journeys. They are typically delivered to a work site at most hundreds of yards from where they are needed.
> Generation and pumping equipment remains at the bottom of the hill
You still need to get the equipment there so the bottom of the hill needs to be near a road. And you don't want miles of penstock because that will reduce the dynamic head pressure due to friction losses.
The point is there are constraints which you are pretending just don't exist.
- pencilguin 4y agoThere are always constraints. But technology for building roads adequate for transporting heavy machinery, and for building hilltop reservoirs using it, is extremely mature. Dozens were built in California's Sierra Nevada range in the 1920s using pulley-operated equipment. Those were actually hydro power reservoirs feeding penstocks that have since had pumps attached. Power loss from flow in penstocks is typically negligible.