5 ms·
> The dams are all really old (50's and 60's) with low power output (about 20MW). This obviously raises the question of how much power output they could produc
by hannob 4y ago
> The dams are all really old (50's and 60's) with low power output (about 20MW).
This obviously raises the question of how much power output they could produce if you'd convert them to modern technology.
- Gare 4y agoNot much more, I'd presume. Hydrology is the limiting factor.
- nopenopenopeno 4y agolike nuclear
- londons_explore 4y agoThey couldn't produce more energy in a year, since that is limited by the rainfall and dam height. But with a redesign/upgrade, they could probably produce more power at peak times. That allows the dam to be used like a peaker plant, earning far more per MWh than a coal plant. As more wind and solar is deployed, the difference between the peak and average energy prices will only increase.
- Steltek 4y agoI could be wrong but I don't think hydro has a low enough spin-up time to be useful as a peaker plant.
- toomuchtodo 4y agoHydro ramp is very quick, only limited by the delay in mechanical inertia of the turbine and generator rotors. Most dams can be at peak output in ~10 seconds. With that said, these particular generators can be replaced with renewables and batteries trivially (and the costs are even more reasonable with the recent passing of the inflation reduction act) due to their smallish capacity (~200 acres of land for 20MW solar, small footprint for the storage system).
- BurningFrog 4y ago> these particular generators can be replaced with renewables and batteries trivially Renewables and batteries can be added trivially. I don't see how that means the dams should be torn down.
- toomuchtodo 4y agoBecause they’re detrimental to the biome in this case. Every evaluation will be different, each with nuance. EDIT: I think, importantly, that these decisions should require the replacement of generation capacity lost with clean generation and storage as part of the cost benefit analysis.
- bobthepanda 4y agoThat may not even be necessary. This demolition happened in Oregon. Despite a growing population and increasingly hot summers, Oregon’s electricity use peaked in 2000. https://www.oregon.gov/energy/energy-oregon/Pages/How-Oregon-Uses-Energy.aspx https://www.oregon.gov/energy/energy-oregon/Pages/How-Oregon... US energy demand has been plateauing for a while as well: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=38572 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=38572
- Retric 4y agoEV’s are likely to offset that long term trend. However, electricity is very low on the utility provided by dams. Reducing flooding and stabilizing the water supply tend to be vastly more valuable in most areas.
- londons_explore 4y agoEV's and heat pumps for building heating. Both are 'the future', and both will rather dramatically increase power grid demand. Luckily, I think 'smart' pricing and demand scheduling will mean that the infrastructure changes will be minimal and gradual despite the massively increased demand - there won't be rolling blackouts or emergencies anytime soon.
- heavenlyblue 4y agoI do not understand, what is quicker to spin up than a hydro power plant? Surely it's slower to heat up coal to the burning temperature than just opening the tap with water.
- LeifCarrotson 4y agoNatural gas turbines are quicker to spin up than a hydro turbine.
- poooogles 4y agoThat's not correct. Siemens energy turbines list the start up time as 10 minutes [1]. Pumped storage takes in the realm of 20 seconds [2]. 1. https://www.siemens-energy.com/global/en/offerings/services/performance-enhancement/modernization-upgrades/gas-turbines/sgo-sgt-4000f.html https://www.siemens-energy.com/global/en/offerings/services/... 2. https://www.power-technology.com/analysis/featuredinorwig-a-unique-power-plant-in-the-north-of-wales-5773187/ https://www.power-technology.com/analysis/featuredinorwig-a-...
- elihu 4y agoBatteries are effectively instantaneous. Hydro is slower than that, but compared to most other things it's very fast.
- wongarsu 4y agoPumped hydro is the textbook example of a fast peaker plant, with startup times measured in seconds, as opposed to the minutes of gas and hours of coal plants. You usually roughly follow the demand curve with hydro, coal and nuclear, fill in the gaps of their reaction time with gas (though preferably keeping the gas plant above their minimum load of ~40% during the day), and fill in the gaps of that mix with pumped hydro. Now if you want to there's no real reason you can't outfit a dam like a pumped hydro plant instead of the setup of a baseload plant. After all pumped hydro is just a reservoir you refill manually when electricity is cheap.
- kube-system 4y ago> They couldn't produce more energy in a year, since that is limited by the rainfall and dam height. Design also dictates the minimum water height that can be used to produce power, so a redesign could actually give a wider range of water heights at which power generation is possible. And turbine efficiency has improved over the years, so you can generate more energy with the same water.
- indymike 4y ago> This obviously raises the question of how much power output they could produce if you'd convert them to modern technology. Maybe 10-15%. AC generation technology has improved incrementally (1% here, 4% there), but gains since the 60s are not revolutionary leaps.
- mullen 4y agoThe problem is not the tech that is in the hydro-generators but the dams, themselves, silt up. They hold a lot less water and thus, less energy to drive hydro-generators. To restore a silted up dam, you would have to clean it out, which is a whole nother environmental issue in itself.