And yet folks still scream how good Jagdeo was for the economy.

caribny posted:

And yet folks still scream how good Jagdeo was for the economy.

Actually me scratching me head.  BBce Bridge, Skeldon!!!  Ok ok, we got Marriott and we got the Stadium!!  Dem two wukking out good!!

Large hydropower dams 'not sustainable' in the developing world

Problems at the Oroville dam in California in 2017 saw 10,000 people evacuated

A new study says that many large-scale hydropower projects in Europe and the US have been disastrous for the environment.

Dozens of these dams are being removed every year, with many considered dangerous and uneconomic.

Thousands of new dams are now being planned for rivers in Africa and Asia.

Hydropower is the source of 71% of renewable energy throughout the world and has played a major role in the development of many countries.

But researchers say the building of dams in Europe and the US reached a peak in the 1960s and has been in decline since then, with more now being dismantled than installed. Hydropower only supplies approximately 6% of US electricity.

Dams are now being removed at a rate of more than one a week on both sides of the Atlantic.

The problem, say the authors of this new paper, is that governments were blindsided by the prospect of cheap electricity without taking into account the full environmental and social costs of these installations.

More than 90% of dams built since the 1930s were more expensive than anticipated. They have damaged river ecology, displaced millions of people and have contributed to climate change by releasing greenhouse gases from the decomposition of flooded lands and forests.

"They make a rosy picture of the benefits, which are not fulfilled and the costs are ignored and passed on to society much later," lead author Prof Emilio Moran, from Michigan State University, told BBC News.

His report cites the example of two dams on the Madeira river in Brazil, which were finished only five years ago, and are predicted to produce only a fraction of the power expected because of climate change.

In the developing world, an estimated 3,700 dams, large and small, are now in various stages of development.

On the Congo river, the Grand Inga project is expected to produce more than a third of the total electricity currently being generated in Africa.

"The nice goal of rural electrification has become completely subverted by large-scale interests who are pushing this technology, and governments are open to being convinced by them that this is the way to go."

In Brazil, which gets 67% of its electricity from hydropower, the response to reduced water capacity because of climate change is to build more dams.

With the election of Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, a temporary halt to building new hydro projects is likely to be overturned. Plans for 60 new dams are already in place.

The study has been published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

So wtf should people do. Solar is still expensive.  You can find a case for and against anything!  Hydro has been the answer for over 100 years!

Hydro was the solution in the past. But drought and climate change has put water security in doubt. Add the cost of the dams and infra structure. Solar and wind energy has become cheaper to implement by the day. It will satisfy our needs with just 600K of people.

Mr.T posted:

Hydro was the solution in the past. But drought and climate change has put water security in doubt. Add the cost of the dams and infra structure. Solar and wind energy has become cheaper to implement by the day. It will satisfy our needs with just 600K of people.

Guyana could do with one hydro dam given the amount of rapids and falls and the amount of downpour which creates flooding.

Baseman posted:

So wtf should people do. Solar is still expensive.  You can find a case for and against anything!  Hydro has been the answer for over 100 years!

He is right. Large Hydro destroys the environment, change the climate, and present an ever present danger to people downstream of the lake. 

The alternative is mini hydro, wind, solar. It is not what has been the answer but what is proven to have ruined complete eco systems. The Colorado is dry for most of its length and everything downstream that relied on it is dead. 

Baseman posted:

Mr.T posted:

Hydro was the solution in the past. But drought and climate change has put water security in doubt. Add the cost of the dams and infra structure. Solar and wind energy has become cheaper to implement by the day. It will satisfy our needs with just 600K of people.

Guyana could do with one hydro dam given the amount of rapids and falls and the amount of downpour which creates flooding.

Any 20% slope over a mile can be used to create a dependable micro hydro if the flow rate is reliable. 

Baseman posted:

Guyana could do with one hydro dam given the amount of rapids and falls and the amount of downpour which creates flooding.

not sure what THAT has to do with the rapacious, overpriced 165 MW sk0nt baby that Fip Motilall and Jagdeo stitched up and presented to the Guyanese people

ronan posted:

Baseman posted:

Guyana could do with one hydro dam given the amount of rapids and falls and the amount of downpour which creates flooding.

not sure what THAT has to do with the rapacious, overpriced 165 MW sk0nt baby that Fip Motilall and Jagdeo stitched up and presented to the Guyanese people

I’m not saying that, I’m saying in general.   Guyana could do with one midsized and few smaller ones to satisfy regional needs.  They could also double as flood control.

Baseman posted:

ronan posted:

Baseman posted:

Guyana could do with one hydro dam given the amount of rapids and falls and the amount of downpour which creates flooding.

not sure what THAT has to do with the rapacious, overpriced 165 MW sk0nt baby that Fip Motilall and Jagdeo stitched up and presented to the Guyanese people

I’m not saying that, I’m saying in general.   Guyana could do with one midsized and few smaller ones to satisfy regional needs.  They could also double as flood control.

that's obvious

ronan posted:

Baseman posted:

Guyana could do with one hydro dam given the amount of rapids and falls and the amount of downpour which creates flooding.

not sure what THAT has to do with the rapacious, overpriced 165 MW sk0nt baby that Fip Motilall and Jagdeo stitched up and presented to the Guyanese people

Amalia falls was a disaster waiting to happen and now that it is shelved the Guyanese people were spared a lot of misery. Who the hell guarantees 19 percent returns on investment over 40 years! Note the expected build started at four hundred million US and ballooned to almost 2 billion without a stone being turned. The access road is an example of this porkbarrel spending. That started with builder with not even a foul coop building experience at 15 million. That ended up being over 30 million US after the inevitable happened; the builder defaulted. At max the plant was rated at 165 Megawatt. At most it would only deliver 128 Megawatt at peak