<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: New Findings on Hydro Power Could Shake up Renewable Policy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cleantechnica.com/2011/08/01/new-findings-on-hydro-power-could-shake-up-renewable-policy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2011/08/01/new-findings-on-hydro-power-could-shake-up-renewable-policy/</link>
	<description>Clean Tech News &#38; Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. &#38; More.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2014 17:08:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Washington State Considers Including Hydro as a Renewable Under RPS &#124; CleanTechnica</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2011/08/01/new-findings-on-hydro-power-could-shake-up-renewable-policy/#comment-103471</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Washington State Considers Including Hydro as a Renewable Under RPS &#124; CleanTechnica]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 05:13:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=29340#comment-103471</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] rotted in reservoirs, making hydro a dirtier kind of clean energy (a supposition that is now under reconsideration, incidentally). Nuclear is also excluded in state RES mandates because of the ongoing requirement [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] rotted in reservoirs, making hydro a dirtier kind of clean energy (a supposition that is now under reconsideration, incidentally). Nuclear is also excluded in state RES mandates because of the ongoing requirement [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2011/08/01/new-findings-on-hydro-power-could-shake-up-renewable-policy/#comment-102531</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2011 15:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=29340#comment-102531</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#039;s a good place to start - 

http://www.usbr.gov/power/data/1834/Sec1834_EPA.pdf

This report presents the data for a study that looked at 871 existing dams on federal lands.  They found that 66 of those dams are outside restricted areas (national parks, for example), have adequate head (height), adequate inflow, and are close enough to existing transmission lines to make the potential producers of power.  

That&#039;s about 7.5% of existing dams on federal land.  We&#039;ve got somewhere around 80,000 dams in the US.  If even 3% of them were usable we&#039;d have an enormous new power source.  No need to build more dams, it would seem.

What was not measured was the number which could be used for pump-up storage.  All the existing dams with adequate head and somewhat close to transmission lines.  There should be thousands and we probably need dozens.

What to store?  Solar during the day once prices fall under $2/watt installed.  Store midday sun for late afternoon, early evening use.  Store late night wind for daytime use.  Store extra for those times when neither the sun nor wind are cooking....]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here&#8217;s a good place to start &#8211; </p>
<p><a href="http://www.usbr.gov/power/data/1834/Sec1834_EPA.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.usbr.gov/power/data/1834/Sec1834_EPA.pdf</a></p>
<p>This report presents the data for a study that looked at 871 existing dams on federal lands.  They found that 66 of those dams are outside restricted areas (national parks, for example), have adequate head (height), adequate inflow, and are close enough to existing transmission lines to make the potential producers of power.  </p>
<p>That&#8217;s about 7.5% of existing dams on federal land.  We&#8217;ve got somewhere around 80,000 dams in the US.  If even 3% of them were usable we&#8217;d have an enormous new power source.  No need to build more dams, it would seem.</p>
<p>What was not measured was the number which could be used for pump-up storage.  All the existing dams with adequate head and somewhat close to transmission lines.  There should be thousands and we probably need dozens.</p>
<p>What to store?  Solar during the day once prices fall under $2/watt installed.  Store midday sun for late afternoon, early evening use.  Store late night wind for daytime use.  Store extra for those times when neither the sun nor wind are cooking&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Electric38</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2011/08/01/new-findings-on-hydro-power-could-shake-up-renewable-policy/#comment-102506</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Electric38]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2011 07:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=29340#comment-102506</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sounds good. How many solar farms can be set up to pump the water back to the uphill source? Maybe using them only during a low demand period could paint a brighter energy picture. Once the initial install is paid for, the free energy from the sun takes over. Any where there is open space below a dam could be utilized. No, its not perpetual motion, but the cost after ROI is FREE!
Looking for battery sources may not need to include contaminating materials, just re-form or rethink our existing sources.

Don&#039;t get me wrong, I am just like the next guy when it comes to cheering on the developers of swappable batteries for electric vehicles and promoting citizen owned (rooftop or carport) solar infrastructure. But, letting an energy source sit there pumping FREE of cost becomes quite tempting. I&#039;m sure it&#039;s probably not as lucrative as some of the latest solar assisted factories that are using primarily robotics, but it may have its place in the future energy picture....

Any engineer with a sharp pencil and  a solid internet link should be able to figure how many dams are out there, and how much sunlight east-to west could be made available. Even a low efficiency solar ink product could be proved to be useful.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sounds good. How many solar farms can be set up to pump the water back to the uphill source? Maybe using them only during a low demand period could paint a brighter energy picture. Once the initial install is paid for, the free energy from the sun takes over. Any where there is open space below a dam could be utilized. No, its not perpetual motion, but the cost after ROI is FREE!<br />
Looking for battery sources may not need to include contaminating materials, just re-form or rethink our existing sources.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t get me wrong, I am just like the next guy when it comes to cheering on the developers of swappable batteries for electric vehicles and promoting citizen owned (rooftop or carport) solar infrastructure. But, letting an energy source sit there pumping FREE of cost becomes quite tempting. I&#8217;m sure it&#8217;s probably not as lucrative as some of the latest solar assisted factories that are using primarily robotics, but it may have its place in the future energy picture&#8230;.</p>
<p>Any engineer with a sharp pencil and  a solid internet link should be able to figure how many dams are out there, and how much sunlight east-to west could be made available. Even a low efficiency solar ink product could be proved to be useful.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: d.</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2011/08/01/new-findings-on-hydro-power-could-shake-up-renewable-policy/#comment-102501</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[d.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2011 01:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=29340#comment-102501</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An inconvenient truth for climate modelers. Now they have jigger their other CO2 inputs to bring the apocalypse on schedule as planned.

We&#039;re all still gonna fry! Let the hysteria recommence!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An inconvenient truth for climate modelers. Now they have jigger their other CO2 inputs to bring the apocalypse on schedule as planned.</p>
<p>We&#8217;re all still gonna fry! Let the hysteria recommence!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
