Alt energy landfill problems

[100%TtId]

Hydro just can't produce the amount of power we need even if we build a dozen new reservoirs. Not enough energy density and there are terrain and geographic challenges. Not every river in Texas has a suitable basin to flood to make a power plant dam possible. As Runnin4d mentioned, the power output is minimal. Texoma and Toledo Bend combined produce less than 200MW. Building that many new reservoirs would only be possible by massive imminent domain confiscation and that would face overwhelming opposition.

The better answer is a half dozen nuclear plants across the state with a couple on the coast dedicated to powering desalination plants. Then run a pipeline North on a parallel path with I-35 and pump the water to the cities.

No war needed.

[Tbar]

Let’s go nuclear

I don't know how long permitting takes but construction would be 20-25 years.

I'm all for it however long it takes.

[Runnin4D]

I think most understand what you are getting at. I don’t think you understand that it is not realistic. Let’s say enough hydro was built to supply Texas (ERCOT operation) with 1/3 of today’s demand. 70,000+MW.
Well call it 25,000Mw.
Hoover dam can put out 2000MW.
Where you plan on putting 12.5 Lake Meads, even in a state the size of Texas??!?! How you going to fill them? 65 hurricane Harvey’s in West Texas?

I’m all for a solution to your OP. Hydro ain’t it bro.

[Txhunter3000]

Show me the landfills full of waste from hydro.

As long as there are stats like this I'd say go with hydro. Show me one set of wind turbines or solar panels that broke even....or heck that are even slated to break even 10 -20 years down the road without subsidies.

"Hoover Dam was built for a cost of $49 million (approximately $760 million adjusted for inflation). The power plant and generators cost an additional $71 million. The sale of electrical power generated by the dam paid back its construction cost, with interest, by 1987"


And saying hydro is at the mercy of nature may be sort of true but if you built enough dams (for electric and flood control) you'd harness more and more flood water further upstream that would be controlled released down through each dam.

Imagine catching just 5-10% of those huge 10 or 20 year floods. That's crazy energy.

What do you guys want to do for water in the next 20 years, pipe in in from a great lake?

Not to sure there will be enough water for the population in 20 years

[RiverRat1]

This is Texas. One big rain would fill all the new lakes.

So we agree water will be a huge issue. But let's do nothing since building new lakes won't solve the energy problem 100% ok.

So lets imminent domain a zillion acres to run a pipeline from far up north all the way through Texas to get water.


I'm not opposed to nuclear either. I am opposed 100% to wind and solar. They had 30+ years of free money to make it work. It's obviously not going to ever happen without taxpayer money.

[brrdnk]

The future is Nuclear Fusion. Not the fission reactors we have now but fusion. They are close to making this a reality.

[OldRiverRat]

Also prepare your grand children for glass fiber storms when they grow up. They are also dumping all the windmill blades out in the desert and the UV radiation is dissolving the fiberglass into the environment.

Also carbon fiber which is made with poisonous chems
These things are going to contaminate a lot of water


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro