Page 5 of 5

Re: $3B to turn Hoover Dam into a Massive Grid Battery?

Unread postPosted: Thu 13 Sep 2018, 10:55:59
by Subjectivist
KaiserJeep wrote:Potentially using Lake Mead as a pumped storage facility could be done for $3B. There would of course be significant changes to the way water levels fluctuate downstream. The factoid that is the pink elephant in the room: Lake Mead has already been below full for the last 34 years due to drought conditions in the seven Western states that use the water downstream. If additional water were to be impounded for energy storage, it would have to come from somewhere, and pumping that much water from the Ogalalla Aquifer would cause it to shrink much faster than it does today. Also, the larger the lake surface, the more water is lost to evaporation due to the increased surface area.

Nicely written with some great animated images:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/07/24/business/energy-environment/hoover-dam-renewable-energy.html



Needlessly Rube Goldberg solution IMO. If you want something that makes sense use the money to add wind/solar along the coast of Lake Meade and however much that offsets do not use from Hoover Dam. Over time this would allow the reservoir to refill much closer to full pool by not operating the hydroelectric plant for 6-9 hours a day. Treat Hydro as a power reserve instead of as baseload energy.

Re: $3B to turn Hoover Dam into a Massive Grid Battery?

Unread postPosted: Thu 13 Sep 2018, 11:44:02
by GHung
Subjectivist wrote:
KaiserJeep wrote:Potentially using Lake Mead as a pumped storage facility could be done for $3B. There would of course be significant changes to the way water levels fluctuate downstream. The factoid that is the pink elephant in the room: Lake Mead has already been below full for the last 34 years due to drought conditions in the seven Western states that use the water downstream. If additional water were to be impounded for energy storage, it would have to come from somewhere, and pumping that much water from the Ogalalla Aquifer would cause it to shrink much faster than it does today. Also, the larger the lake surface, the more water is lost to evaporation due to the increased surface area.

Nicely written with some great animated images:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/07/24/business/energy-environment/hoover-dam-renewable-energy.html



Needlessly Rube Goldberg solution IMO. If you want something that makes sense use the money to add wind/solar along the coast of Lake Meade and however much that offsets do not use from Hoover Dam. Over time this would allow the reservoir to refill much closer to full pool by not operating the hydroelectric plant for 6-9 hours a day. Treat Hydro as a power reserve instead of as baseload energy.



....a scheme that has been a proven solution for decades. If it didn't work, power companies wouldn't continue to use it! Jeez, if you want to continue to ignore the many proofs I, and others, have posted repeatedly, fine, but for-profit corporations generally wouldn't consider these solutions if they were losers. As for limiting generation to help increase lake levels, that is already being done, as has also been referenced, above.