This discussion was good but vastly oversimplified. Talking about relicensing and permitting taking 10 years etc (thats a decade!) and then not talking about why that is. Hydro seriously messes up rivers and their associated ecosystems. Hydro messes with the flows of rivers in terms of timing and water quantity. Even run of the river projects. Hydro prevents connection and migration in riverine ecosystems. Fish, among other species, cannot bypass hydro. Then we build fish ladders so fish can move above a dam. Then we put fish in boats (yes, you heard that right) so fish can move below dams (better than going through the turbines and being turned into fish bits). Spilling water over and through dams leads to gas supersaturation of water, which kills fish and other species. If anyone wants a window on these things in real life, just look to the Lower Snake River dams on the Snake River that are threatening extinction of all salmon and steelhead in Idaho (yes, Idaho has salmon and steelhead because it is connected to the Pacific Ocean (800 mile migration). With all this, I have not even gotten into water rights. Who owns water for what use? In the western US, this is one of the preeminent laws that drives everything. As they say, “Whiskey is for drinking, water is for fighting”. Appreciate conditions are different in different places. And hydro has some good benefits re:climate/carbon. But like nuclear, it must be looked at VERY CAREFULLY. Next thing we need to do is remove the four lower Snake River dams. THAT action is how hydro can demonstrate it can be adaptable and correctable.
This was a hugely one-sided and irresponsible episode. As others have noted, dams on rivers are wildly disruptive to river ecosystems and there have been long-standing efforts to remove dams to restore free flowing rivers and to bring back salmon runs and save them from extinction.
Honestly, I'm really surprised and disappointed that this aired as-is and I think your listeners deserve a follow up episode that presents a balanced and accurate perspective on dams and hydropower as it's currently implemented in the U.S.
We can use twice as much hydropower quite easily in USA. Reconductoring the grid. New design wire moves 3x more power and it's not expensive in Europe or Asia. But it's now how grandpa did it so USA hadn't heard of it.
There is no transition to renewables! There is a need to draw down GHG to a safe level. That requires increasing clean generation from all safe clean sources. Especially things that haven't been invented yet. We don't know how a nuclear reactor works if it's built in a 2024 factory. Don't assume the half century old design is up to date!
Much as I appreciate the hydropower portfolio we in the Pacific Northwest benefit from, there are at least two caveats to this bounty.
One, dams disrupt river ecosystems.
Two, dams aren't forever. Concrete ages, and eventually cracks or otherwise fails.
Can we develop even more sustainable forms of hydropower technology? I believe we're already going that. Google "small scale hydropower" and "run-of-river hydropower." There is also tidal power.
I'm assuming that, in x number of years, major dams will fail -- and before that happens, finding better ways to harness hydropower should be a top priority.
Environmental tolls of hydro were largely ignored because they were on wild life habitat and remote and Indigenous communities. Here is Canada there is a very sad history of this so there are finally second thoughts going into hydro, and new projects are Indigenous lead or have substantial input. That said, these are the defenseless communities also impacted most by climate change so the GHG emissions reduction benefits should not be thrown out with the bath water. I am also not so sanguine about drought impacts: there is a reason China panicked. I asked ChatGPT to do a breakdown of all the energy sources out there for perspective (encourage this at home) and the conclusion was clear: wind and solar are fastest, cheapest, cleanest. We just need to beef up storage. I think crypto and servers should do it themselves and not take from households.
I'm surprised that neither the interview (or the comments) address the human toll inflicted by man-made reservoirs. Typical dams displace not only river ecosystems, but all the people who lived there. Sometimes entire towns ended up under water. Not surprisingly, disenfranchised populations suffered the most. It seems naive (and perhaps heartless) to ignore the social equity facets of hydropower and its reservoirs.
Im making over 13k BUCKS a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do....quicksrich.blogspot.com
This was a very helpful episode. Learned a lot. I was surprised to hear that hydropower is likely to increase in the U.S. / West in the next 50 years. That’s not what this study (also with multiple researchers from National labs) found. They found that hydropower declines in most of their climate projections, although it did increase in a few.
Fascinating topic, clearly explained, thank you as always. I thought the great threat to hydro was drought. Nothing in here about dead pool levels in the lakes behind the dams. Should we be concerned?
This discussion was good but vastly oversimplified. Talking about relicensing and permitting taking 10 years etc (thats a decade!) and then not talking about why that is. Hydro seriously messes up rivers and their associated ecosystems. Hydro messes with the flows of rivers in terms of timing and water quantity. Even run of the river projects. Hydro prevents connection and migration in riverine ecosystems. Fish, among other species, cannot bypass hydro. Then we build fish ladders so fish can move above a dam. Then we put fish in boats (yes, you heard that right) so fish can move below dams (better than going through the turbines and being turned into fish bits). Spilling water over and through dams leads to gas supersaturation of water, which kills fish and other species. If anyone wants a window on these things in real life, just look to the Lower Snake River dams on the Snake River that are threatening extinction of all salmon and steelhead in Idaho (yes, Idaho has salmon and steelhead because it is connected to the Pacific Ocean (800 mile migration). With all this, I have not even gotten into water rights. Who owns water for what use? In the western US, this is one of the preeminent laws that drives everything. As they say, “Whiskey is for drinking, water is for fighting”. Appreciate conditions are different in different places. And hydro has some good benefits re:climate/carbon. But like nuclear, it must be looked at VERY CAREFULLY. Next thing we need to do is remove the four lower Snake River dams. THAT action is how hydro can demonstrate it can be adaptable and correctable.
This was a hugely one-sided and irresponsible episode. As others have noted, dams on rivers are wildly disruptive to river ecosystems and there have been long-standing efforts to remove dams to restore free flowing rivers and to bring back salmon runs and save them from extinction.
Honestly, I'm really surprised and disappointed that this aired as-is and I think your listeners deserve a follow up episode that presents a balanced and accurate perspective on dams and hydropower as it's currently implemented in the U.S.
Yes. Exactly. This is the first time I've been surprised and disappointed by a Volts episode.
We can use twice as much hydropower quite easily in USA. Reconductoring the grid. New design wire moves 3x more power and it's not expensive in Europe or Asia. But it's now how grandpa did it so USA hadn't heard of it.
There is no transition to renewables! There is a need to draw down GHG to a safe level. That requires increasing clean generation from all safe clean sources. Especially things that haven't been invented yet. We don't know how a nuclear reactor works if it's built in a 2024 factory. Don't assume the half century old design is up to date!
Much as I appreciate the hydropower portfolio we in the Pacific Northwest benefit from, there are at least two caveats to this bounty.
One, dams disrupt river ecosystems.
Two, dams aren't forever. Concrete ages, and eventually cracks or otherwise fails.
Can we develop even more sustainable forms of hydropower technology? I believe we're already going that. Google "small scale hydropower" and "run-of-river hydropower." There is also tidal power.
I'm assuming that, in x number of years, major dams will fail -- and before that happens, finding better ways to harness hydropower should be a top priority.
J.C. (John Clifford) Armbruster
Editorius Environmental Communications
360-250-2619
Very interesting conversation, but i kept waiting for you to discuss methane emissions from hydro. Please see this article: https://savetheworldsrivers.org/public-education-about-how-dams-cause-climate-emissions/#:~:text=The%20article%20used%20statistical%20models,with%20the%20same%20electricity%20output, which makes the case that in some cases, mostly tropical, dams produce as much GHG emissions as coal.
Environmental tolls of hydro were largely ignored because they were on wild life habitat and remote and Indigenous communities. Here is Canada there is a very sad history of this so there are finally second thoughts going into hydro, and new projects are Indigenous lead or have substantial input. That said, these are the defenseless communities also impacted most by climate change so the GHG emissions reduction benefits should not be thrown out with the bath water. I am also not so sanguine about drought impacts: there is a reason China panicked. I asked ChatGPT to do a breakdown of all the energy sources out there for perspective (encourage this at home) and the conclusion was clear: wind and solar are fastest, cheapest, cleanest. We just need to beef up storage. I think crypto and servers should do it themselves and not take from households.
I'm surprised that neither the interview (or the comments) address the human toll inflicted by man-made reservoirs. Typical dams displace not only river ecosystems, but all the people who lived there. Sometimes entire towns ended up under water. Not surprisingly, disenfranchised populations suffered the most. It seems naive (and perhaps heartless) to ignore the social equity facets of hydropower and its reservoirs.
Im making over 13k BUCKS a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do....quicksrich.blogspot.com
This was a very helpful episode. Learned a lot. I was surprised to hear that hydropower is likely to increase in the U.S. / West in the next 50 years. That’s not what this study (also with multiple researchers from National labs) found. They found that hydropower declines in most of their climate projections, although it did increase in a few.
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2022EF003220
Fascinating topic, clearly explained, thank you as always. I thought the great threat to hydro was drought. Nothing in here about dead pool levels in the lakes behind the dams. Should we be concerned?