TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Why is hydroelectricity unfashionable?

135 点作者 TeacherTortoise超过 2 年前

33 条评论

idiotsecant超过 2 年前
Obviously hydroelectricity is massively damaging to ecosystems. My day job includes designing hydroelectric control systems and even I can admit that. That&#x27;s a big part of the reason that hydro is a non-starter in much of the western world, which is probably a reasonably good thing (although there are certainly some exceptions where hydro development seems like a no-brainer to me but I digress)<p>What&#x27;s not so clear to me though, is why we aren&#x27;t pumping (pun intentional) massive amounts of money into hydroelectric pumped storage. These systems are capable of storing massive amount of energy cheaply, safely, and (relative to other methods) efficiently. Every single pumped storage project gets mired in protracted legal battles and they are impossible to build. Our modern energy ecosystem requires more and more storage, and somehow we are under the illusion that we can get there with overgeneration of solar and hooking up batteries. We can&#x27;t. We need storage and pumped storage is the only practical way to get there with current supply chains and technology.
评论 #33360668 未加载
评论 #33364649 未加载
评论 #33360957 未加载
评论 #33369805 未加载
评论 #33360841 未加载
评论 #33365067 未加载
评论 #33363883 未加载
评论 #33362550 未加载
评论 #33361295 未加载
评论 #33362000 未加载
评论 #33366210 未加载
评论 #33364944 未加载
评论 #33363974 未加载
评论 #33367631 未加载
评论 #33363244 未加载
评论 #33369137 未加载
评论 #33364064 未加载
评论 #33367931 未加载
评论 #33362440 未加载
评论 #33369971 未加载
评论 #33362246 未加载
评论 #33362515 未加载
评论 #33367720 未加载
评论 #33373527 未加载
评论 #33366359 未加载
评论 #33363737 未加载
评论 #33361974 未加载
评论 #33362920 未加载
onepointsixC超过 2 年前
Hydro isn&#x27;t unfashionable. We just don&#x27;t have reasonable places to keep daming, so there&#x27;s little really to talk about.<p>Nuclear is unfashionable, because there&#x27;s huge growth potential among wealthy industrial countries, but because it&#x27;s not &quot;liked&quot; there&#x27;s very little actual growth.
评论 #33360561 未加载
评论 #33362288 未加载
评论 #33366798 未加载
评论 #33360522 未加载
评论 #33362650 未加载
评论 #33360700 未加载
评论 #33360568 未加载
causi超过 2 年前
<i>I never understood why dams have suffered such a reversal of fortune.</i><p>Maybe if the author did even the slightest bit of due diligence he would&#x27;ve found out most potential hydro sites in the West already have a dam on them. Without significant technological improvement hydro is effectively tapped-out already. IEEE is starting to match Medium for &quot;I started and finished writing this article during the same session on the toilet&quot; submissions.
评论 #33371179 未加载
rgmerk超过 2 年前
Hydroelectricity is unfashionable because:<p>a) there aren&#x27;t that many places left to build conventional hydro.<p>b) of the places that are left, there&#x27;s been a lot of (IMO justified) opposition on the basis that flooding wilderness and disrupting river ecosystems is bad (also, flooding rainforest tends to result in a shedload of CO2 and methane, so the climate effects of conventional hydro are nontrivial).<p>c) Because of and b, new hydro is pretty much dead in developed countries and difficult to get funding for in the developing world.<p>d) until very recently, there&#x27;s been little need for more pumped hydro because it&#x27;s cheaper to build peaking gas plants, and a wash for the environment because the energy has (mostly) been coming from coal or gas anyway.<p>e) with the introduction of more and more wind and solar into the grid, the need for energy storage to match supply and demand has become much greater.<p>f) Hence, there&#x27;s increasing interest in new pumped storage projects around the world, or other changes to hydro to better match the peakiness of energy prices. These can be either completely new systems, or modifications to existing ones. For instance, rather than running a 100MW generator 24 hours a day, you might put an extra 300MW of capacity but only run it at peak times.<p>g) Pumped hydro isn&#x27;t the only game in town for energy storage. Aside from lithium-ion batteries (which is more economically competitive as a storage technology than some seem to think), there&#x27;s things like iron flow batteries, thermal storage, and, yes, hydrogen.
PedroBatista超过 2 年前
Off of the top of my head, a giant wall of concrete is not cheap nor &quot;green&quot;, immense negative impact on the ecosystems ( waterways, estuary downstream, fish and most species that depend on a river to survive )<p>Villages and cultural patrimony that sometimes must go underwater.<p>Droughts and only small part of the Earth has rivers with enough water to make a dam that can generate power regularly.
评论 #33360782 未加载
pavon超过 2 年前
This isn&#x27;t hard to understand.<p>* Most of the best sites for hydro (and geothermal) in western countries already have damns.<p>* Between climate change and growing population, fresh water is becoming more and more scarce, making hydro a less dependable source of energy.<p>* These projects take a long time to plan and build.<p>Between these there is little opportunity for hydro to play a significant role in our short-term decarbonization plans, even ignoring ecological and safety concerns.
评论 #33360548 未加载
latchkey超过 2 年前
I spent a couple years on a motorbike traveling all through Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos (15k+ kms). Water mostly flows from the north (China) to the south in that region. The Mekong River.<p>China and Vietnam have dammed up nearly all of the large rivers in those three countries, for hydro. There are countless projects constantly being built as well. The scale is pretty epic really. Vietnam has some of the largest number of hydro dams in the world.<p>Downstream, there are huge swaths of empty riverbeds. In the wet season, when the rains overflow the dams, there are major floods and people who have built too close to the river edge, get swept away.<p>Hydro certainly is green, but the effect it has on everything downstream, isn&#x27;t. Especially when it is poorly managed by countries that don&#x27;t really have very much ecosense. They claim they are removing dams. I&#x27;ve seen it, they aren&#x27;t... if anything they are just building more.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.hydropower.org&#x2F;country-profiles&#x2F;vietnam" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.hydropower.org&#x2F;country-profiles&#x2F;vietnam</a>
评论 #33360509 未加载
评论 #33360480 未加载
chewbacha超过 2 年前
I was hoping that the author would address the environmental concerns. But instead, they are mentioned and then dismissed without argument. The enumerations are many that are mentioned:<p><pre><code> They are blamed for displacing populations, disrupting the flow of sediments and the migration of fish, destroying natural habitat and biodiversity, degrading water quality, and for the decay of submerged vegetation and the consequent release of methane, a greenhouse gas. </code></pre> Yes, these all happen and are bad for the environment. Why should we still consider it to be green?
评论 #33367437 未加载
josefresco超过 2 年前
Green?!? Dams in my home state are being removed to great applause and rejoicing. Restoring fisheries and natural habitats destroyed by reckless dam building in the last century is a growing priority.
评论 #33360486 未加载
评论 #33360539 未加载
评论 #33360529 未加载
exabrial超过 2 年前
&quot;Green&quot;, if you exclude absolute sacrifice of an entire downstream ecosystem.
评论 #33360518 未加载
评论 #33360667 未加载
评论 #33365905 未加载
评论 #33362099 未加载
评论 #33360512 未加载
chungy超过 2 年前
It&#x27;s not very green at all. It&#x27;s known to kill large swaths of the ecosystem.<p>The true green yet unfashionable energy source is nuclear fission.
评论 #33360507 未加载
评论 #33360573 未加载
评论 #33361570 未加载
评论 #33362528 未加载
mszcz超过 2 年前
The Banqiao Dam failure [0] came to my mind the moment I read the title. The amount of deaths that single failure caused may have something to do with that.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure</a>
评论 #33360737 未加载
评论 #33360542 未加载
评论 #33360217 未加载
ZeroGravitas超过 2 年前
Vaclav Smil gets hyped up as one of the smartest men on the planet, but apparently he can&#x27;t google up the downsides of Hydro?<p>Or is he &#x27;just asking questions&#x27; to continue undermining solar PV and wind.<p>Yes, yes he is.
评论 #33360498 未加载
_uvv0超过 2 年前
While I&#x27;m happy he&#x27;s glad that we have reliable electricity, he should also reflect that this comes at a significant nonmonetary cost. Presumably he, like me, just hasn&#x27;t paid the price of this personally in the south.<p>The displacement of communities, loss of traditional lands, erosion of shorelines, and leached mercury into the water supply has been borne disproportionately by First Nations (indigenous) communities (1,2). This and ignorance of it is from a legacy of racist policy (at best apathy) and poor treatment of these communities. Take somewhere like Easterville that was relocated to the cheapest, least economically useful parcel of land with almost no local industry and wonder why there is poverty (3). Obviously it&#x27;s not the only factor but I go up to some of these places for health care and really enjoy the work&#x2F;meeting people, but it&#x27;s sobering. I can&#x27;t imagine it&#x27;s any better in China with their massive projects but don&#x27;t have any citations or experience there.<p>1 <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cbc.ca&#x2F;news&#x2F;canada&#x2F;manitoba&#x2F;manitoba-hydro-clean-environment-commission-report-1.4798560" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cbc.ca&#x2F;news&#x2F;canada&#x2F;manitoba&#x2F;manitoba-hydro-clean...</a><p>2 <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cen.acs.org&#x2F;articles&#x2F;94&#x2F;web&#x2F;2016&#x2F;11&#x2F;Dams-increase-mercury-exposure-Canadian.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cen.acs.org&#x2F;articles&#x2F;94&#x2F;web&#x2F;2016&#x2F;11&#x2F;Dams-increase-me...</a><p>3 <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Easterville,_Manitoba" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Easterville,_Manitoba</a> , can get free press article via google cache if you want
loehnsberg超过 2 年前
The potential for hydro-electricity is mostly exploited, and it does not offer a solution for the long-term storage of electricity for large parts of the world. Not all countries are like Norway (or Brazil or Canada). There is still space left, but it‘s simply not enough.<p>Instead, many systems with two reservoirs are now being equipped with pumps, again this is ok for short-term storage from hours to days, but no solution to store the Northern sun for the winter. Better produce hydrogen with cheap solar in the sun belt and ship it elsewhere, or move heavy industry to places where green energy is abundant (Iceland, Qatar, …?).
dottedmag超过 2 年前
Because the amount of places where dams could be built to produce electricity is quite limited, and most of them are already in use. So hydroelectric power is fine, but there is no way to significantly increase amount of it.<p>Edit: I was wrong, see <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20170329132409&#x2F;http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.iea.org&#x2F;publications&#x2F;freepublications&#x2F;publication&#x2F;hydropower_essentials.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20170329132409&#x2F;http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.iea.or...</a>
评论 #33360497 未加载
StanislavPetrov超过 2 年前
&gt;They are blamed for displacing populations, disrupting the flow of sediments and the migration of fish, destroying natural habitat and biodiversity, degrading water quality, and for the decay of submerged vegetation and the consequent release of methane, a greenhouse gas. There is thus no longer a place for Big Hydro in the pantheon of electric greenery.<p>Dams are blamed for displacing populations, disrupting the flow of sediments and the migration of fish, destroying natural habitat and biodiversity, degrading water quality, and for the decay of submerged vegetation and the consequent release of methane, a greenhouse gas because that is exactly what they do.<p>&gt;Instead, that pure status is now reserved above all for wind and solar. This ennoblement is strange, given that wind projects require enormous quantities of embodied energy in the form of steel for towers, plastics for blades, and concrete for foundations.<p>What does he think they build dams out of?
chc超过 2 年前
The word &quot;unfashionable&quot; seems a bit ill-defined here. The article itself makes the argument that hydro is popular and many places either have adopted it or are adopting it, so obviously that&#x27;s not what &quot;unfashionable&quot; means. It seems like the core complaint here is that some people have criticisms of excessive damming, and it has caused governments to weigh the potential impacts of hydro projects before going ahead — but surely that is a good thing. Overall, I just don&#x27;t really get the issue this article is trying to call attention to.
insane_dreamer超过 2 年前
I think the problem is the focus on huge dam projects, for which there are very few available opportunities not already taken or which would cause a great deal of damage. Small dams, as the type promoted by Smil in the article, would indeed be beneficial, though I haven&#x27;t seen a study on where such dams could be reliably placed and the projected outcomes.
评论 #33361726 未加载
kkfx超过 2 年前
Mountain hydro is <i>fantastic</i> but have an important issue: you need water and mountains, something not such rare but not so widespread either so it&#x27;s VERY good to have as much as mountain hydro, but hardly suffice for most countries in the world.<p>Sure some are luckiest like Norway or Swiss, but others are not, at least not for vast part of the country. That&#x27;s the real &quot;unfashionable&quot; part. The rest is just a matter of expectation: PRs have sold to many the idea we can bring with us energy in significant quantity, p.v. actually offer that in a vast area of the world, of course only when the Sun shine, while you can&#x27;t hardly have mountain hydro at home except veeeeeeeery few homes. Some also might fear dam incidents, oppose against not-so-small projects etc. That&#x27;s is.
ltbarcly3超过 2 年前
HyDrO-eLeCtRiC is NoT GrEeN - half the people on this thread, right before going back to having 95% of their power generated from fossil fuels and never bothering to even check.
Kukumber超过 2 年前
Because lobby<p>The day you come up with infinite and free aboundant energy will be the day you put to bankruptcy both the US, the Middle East and Russia, and they don&#x27;t want that<p>But it&#x27;s in the plan anyways, we are getting the taste of it right now, globally<p>Bonus:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=2WeoeJyJmN4&amp;t=455s" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=2WeoeJyJmN4&amp;t=455s</a>
评论 #33362588 未加载
评论 #33362639 未加载
GaryNumanVevo超过 2 年前
Has anyone seen rail-based gravity storage projects? Obviously they aren&#x27;t at the scale of hydro, but they have much less environmental impact, are relatively easy to build. ARES North America seems to have the patent rights on it, but it&#x27;d be interesting to see more large scale demonstrators.
shmerl超过 2 年前
It&#x27;s pretty damaging to the environment and ecosystems. So it hardly can be called &quot;green&quot;.
bArray超过 2 年前
My biggest problem with hydroelectricity is the same problem I have with all dams - you&#x27;re creating a structure that requires infinite maintenance. A dam does not fail gracefully.
astro-codes超过 2 年前
It&#x27;s not! In NZ at least. 57% of our electricity is hydro.
99_00超过 2 年前
Not enough potential profit to hire better lobbyists. And no easy way for politicians to profit from insider information.
halffaday超过 2 年前
I don’t think private investors can rake in fat subsidies off of hydropower.
throwawaylinux超过 2 年前
Same reason why nuclear is unfashionable. Because it presents a grave threat to fossil fuel industries funding the &quot;green&quot; movements that demonize them.
tb_technical超过 2 年前
Because of NIMBYs
wnevets超过 2 年前
Green has lost all meaning if we&#x27;re going to include dams
MrPatan超过 2 年前
Because it was never about solving the problem, it was about absolution.<p>Without suffering they won&#x27;t feel they deserve the absolution they crave, so every solution has some &quot;problem&quot;<p>- Electric cars still emit particles from the brakes!<p>- Nuclear reminds me of a scary TV show I saw!<p>- Solar doesn&#x27;t let plants grow under them!<p>- Wind turbines kills birds!<p>The solution will be to come up with a way this type of person can feel properly absolved. A few decades or centuries ago they accomplished this with just a wooden box and a black robe, but that&#x27;s not an option anymore. Not because it&#x27;s better or worse, it just doesn&#x27;t work today.<p>This is not a joke, this is a Very Hard problem, and also the one with the higest payoff for society. Can you imagine being able to make these people happy and letting the rest of the world get on with their lives? Golden age. Come on, nerd harder!
评论 #33369535 未加载
acheron超过 2 年前
Because &quot;greens&quot; are anti-progress, anti-humanity, and pro-hairshirting, so anything that allows humanity to thrive without suffering doesn&#x27;t count. The restrictions, suffering, and decrease in prosperity are the point.<p>&quot;Environmentalists make good movie villains because they want to make your real life worse&quot; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.washingtonpost.com&#x2F;opinions&#x2F;2019&#x2F;01&#x2F;03&#x2F;environmentalists-make-good-movie-villains-because-they-want-make-your-real-life-worse&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.washingtonpost.com&#x2F;opinions&#x2F;2019&#x2F;01&#x2F;03&#x2F;environme...</a><p>&quot;Environmentalists want to increase the costs of everyday goods and services by taxing carbon. They want you to fly less and to pay more, via offsets, when you do fly. They want you to stop eating meat. They want you to stop having kids. They want to deprive you of disabled-friendly plastic straws — and they’re coming for your delightful balloons next. They want to turn your corpse into food for plants because even the sweet release of death cannot save you from the environmentalist menace.&quot;
评论 #33360559 未加载