4 ms·
Looking this up. https://www.usbr.gov/lc/hooverdam/faqs/powerfaq.html https://www.usbr.gov/lc/hooverdam/faqs/powerfaq.html > Hoover Dam generates, on average,
by Gibbon1 3y ago
Looking this up.
https://www.usbr.gov/lc/hooverdam/faqs/powerfaq.html https://www.usbr.gov/lc/hooverdam/faqs/powerfaq.html
> Hoover Dam generates, on average, about 4 billion kilowatt-hours. And the lake covers an area of 1,495,806 acres
Rough estimate, 2GW worth of solar produces that much in a year. And requires I think 12000 acres of land. (Open to have phat fingered the calcs)
My take away is it's not even economic anymore and requires flooding 100 times more land then a solar plant.
- ZeroGravitas 3y agoDams still get built for non-power reasons, to manage water supplies, so adding turbines (and floating solar PV) to them might make sense, but yes I think we're now at the point where new hydro purely for energy production is going to struggle to make a case for itself against just deploying renewables and batteries and interconnects. edit: to add some context re the Hoover dam: > Upon becoming Secretary of Commerce in 1921, Hoover proposed the construction of a dam on the Colorado River. In addition to flood control and irrigation, it would provide a dependable supply of water for Los Angeles and Southern California.
- KptMarchewa 3y agoIt's not exactly relevant how much solar produces per year - it's very important _when_ the energy can be produced and how much you can control that.