|Chronology||Current Month||Current Thread||Current Date|
|[Year List] [Month List (current year)]||[Date Index] [Thread Index]||[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]||[Date Prev] [Date Next]|
I"m curious, could you elaborate more on the environmental costs ofmostly
hydroelectric power. I've been mostly under the impression that its
aesthetic (you ruin the hatch-hatchie gorge), or not as renewable as one
thinks, the reservoir silts up and prevents fish spawning. And then the
usual cost of running the power lines everywhere (true of most power
plants); and the impact of the immediate construction of the dam.
In my mind, while these effects aren't negligible they tend to be smaller
than many other alternatives; so I'm gathering there are some significant
effects I haven't thought of.
The largest defect is that it can't satisfy the needs.
From: Michael N. Monce [mailto:mnmon@CONNCOLL.EDU]
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 7:56 AM
Subject: Re: Fuel Cells and "green" energy
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Dr. Tom Wayburn wrote:
Party, for example,
P.S. This type of thinking completely eludes the Green
which hung up the phone in my ear whilst I was explainingthis spot of
bother. Hang-the-messenger still applies.I just recently got hung out to dry by a student group and
after they announced they had convinced our Board to pay 20%
more on our
electric costs for 30% of our electric needs by buying the
a so-called "green" coop. This coop supposedly supplies the elctricity
from only hydro, solar, and wind. I asked the question as to
college had really researched the environmental costs of each of these
so-called green sources; citing the impossibility of skirting
Second Law. The geophysicist in our department, whose specialty is
hydrology, also complained bitterly about the consequences of
hydroelectric. We were chastised quite a bit for pointing out such
issues. There's a lot of physics education to be done with
the public in
the energy arena.