'Run of River' energy projects sounded clean, but corporate greed has a different purpose.
"What do you think?" a friend asked regarding a certain company.
What's your question? I see no 'vision statement' that is any different than others. And now I have more questions:
"a tailrace where the water is returned to the stream above — or as close as possible to — a barrier to fish movement." http://www.cloudworksenergy.com/article.php?n=19
... Above what? You can't return water to the starting point (0 net energy gain). So above what? Why does it get less well-written at the most important part?
These projects have gone into pristine river valleys cut down old growth to set up infrastructure and sometimes leave the river dry as the water is diverted. When it comes down to fish dieing or the lights going out in Victoria, the trees will continue to die and so will the rivers. Like ethanol, it was an interesting idea in theory, but we didn't think this through.
The question is this- if all things go as planned, in a compassionate, green, conscious way- what are the effects where the river is diminished? Where that environment is compromised? That's if all things go as planned.
What do you think?
another opinion
http://www.straight.com/article-201859/gwen-barlee-private-runofriver-power-projects-make-no-sense-bc
Posts
