phart Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 I thought this was interesting. Obviously this is due to favourable conditions but it does seem the way to go, especially with it lowering rates. "Costa Rica got 100 percent of its energy from renewables for 75 days straight this year, the state-run Costa Rican Electricity Institute (ICE) announced this week. The Latin American country hasn’t had to use fossil fuels at all so far in 2015, due to heavy rains that have kept hydroelectric power plants going strong. Wind, solar, biomass, and geothermal energy have also helped power the country this year. “The year 2015 has been one of electricity totally friendly to the environment for Costa Rica,” ICE announced in a press release in Spanish this week. This reliance on renewables has prompted the country to lower electricity rates by 12 percent. ICE predicts that rates will continue to drop for Costa Rican customers in the second quarter of the year." http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/03/21/3636823/costa-rica-renewables/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wine bibber Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 I thought this was interesting. Obviously this is due to favourable conditions but it does seem the way to go, especially with it lowering rates. "Costa Rica got 100 percent of its energy from renewables for 75 days straight this year, the state-run Costa Rican Electricity Institute (ICE) announced this week. The Latin American country hasn’t had to use fossil fuels at all so far in 2015, due to heavy rains that have kept hydroelectric power plants going strong. Wind, solar, biomass, and geothermal energy have also helped power the country this year. “The year 2015 has been one of electricity totally friendly to the environment for Costa Rica,” ICE announced in a press release in Spanish this week. This reliance on renewables has prompted the country to lower electricity rates by 12 percent. ICE predicts that rates will continue to drop for Costa Rican customers in the second quarter of the year." http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/03/21/3636823/costa-rica-renewables/ Great Post .So much conflicting information around about renewables i'm not sure what to believe.This is some good actual concrete evidence of what can be achieved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brant grebner Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 biomass = shit burning Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobydoo Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 I think the report is a bit skewed. " Hydroelectric plants supply the bulk of that electricity — 68 percent — while geothermal plants provide about 15 percent, wind power provides 5 percent, and solar and biomass also contribute slightly to the country’s energy mix." If you have a large capacity for Hydro power then you can generate huge amounts, like Norway can. Unfortunately lots of countries can't have hydro power and would need other methods of producing 'clean' power. Also the amount of rainfall is attributed now to climate change which is primarily caused by polluting power stations. No Polluting power stations, no large rainfalls, less hydro power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobydoo Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 biomass = shit burning Biomass is a bit of a con. I was speaking to an old friend in Germany and he had said that in some places people are (were) given huge subsidies to have solar panels and produce Biomass energy. Not surprising the fermers were all over it and built massive sheds, not to store anything but to put solar panels on and claim subsidies. They also started growing maize so they could burn it and sell the power they produced. They could produce two maize crops a year I believe. The German power generation business is now up shit creek. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShedTA Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 I think the report is a bit skewed. " Hydroelectric plants supply the bulk of that electricity — 68 percent — while geothermal plants provide about 15 percent, wind power provides 5 percent, and solar and biomass also contribute slightly to the country’s energy mix." If you have a large capacity for Hydro power then you can generate huge amounts, like Norway can. Unfortunately lots of countries can't have hydro power and would need other methods of producing 'clean' power. Also the amount of rainfall is attributed now to climate change which is primarily caused by polluting power stations. No Polluting power stations, no large rainfalls, less hydro power. Scotland has huge further potential for hydro schemes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted March 23, 2015 Author Share Posted March 23, 2015 I think the report is a bit skewed. " Hydroelectric plants supply the bulk of that electricity — 68 percent — while geothermal plants provide about 15 percent, wind power provides 5 percent, and solar and biomass also contribute slightly to the country’s energy mix." If you have a large capacity for Hydro power then you can generate huge amounts, like Norway can. Unfortunately lots of countries can't have hydro power and would need other methods of producing 'clean' power. Also the amount of rainfall is attributed now to climate change which is primarily caused by polluting power stations. No Polluting power stations, no large rainfalls, less hydro power. i think it mentions later on it's due to exceptionally high rain fall, I was just totally unaware any country had progressed so far. Although i understand the topography lends itself to hydro. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jailender Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Scotland has huge further potential for hydro schemes. Agreed, but the problem is going to be getting approval for them, as they require major engineering work, such as dams, and SNH and the wilderness protection lobby will object. Sadly the Scottish Government seems to have a bigger hard on for wind power than hydro, which is far more reliable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShedTA Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Agreed, but the problem is going to be getting approval for them, as they require major engineering work, such as dams, and SNH and the wilderness protection lobby will object. Sadly the Scottish Government seems to have a bigger hard on for wind power than hydro, which is far more reliable. yeh seems to be that way. the thing is especially in scotland with all its rain hydro is very reliable and long lasting. but to keep everyone happy these schemes need to be done properly. always thought there should have been far more hydro schemes throughout the highlands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobydoo Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Scotland has huge further potential for hydro schemes. Not really on the scale of other countries and depends what you mean by huge. The Scottish ones will mostly be pump storage whereas the other countries just let the water go naturally on it's course after being through the turbine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobydoo Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Making a dam would not only cost a fortune but also has huge environmental issues with it that people sometimes forget. The two key ingredient of the dam, concrete and steel are two of the most expensive and power hungry materials you can get. Each plant would require expensive machinery, like turbines, transformers and pumps and their connection to the grid means its cost effectiveness would plummet. Added to that they will require another similar sized storage at the bottom to hold all the water that has been released during the day so they can pump it back up the hill at night. For a country the size of scotland and it's relatively small population it's a non starter IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobydoo Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 (edited) i think it mentions later on it's due to exceptionally high rain fall, I was just totally unaware any country had progressed so far. Although i understand the topography lends itself to hydro. Norway is almost 100% hydro. http://www.statkraft.com/energy-sources/hydropower/ Edited March 23, 2015 by scoobydoo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biffer Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Foyers, Cruachan and Coire Glass projects are all at different stages of development. About 1.4GW of generation between them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jailender Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Longgannet has lost out on the contract to supply the grid, and is to close early next year. Bad news for folk that work there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunchy Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 I think more hydro would be great for Scotland but how economical would it be with the levies we have to pay to connect to the grid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld_Reekie Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 I would love to see more hydro. Bigger the better meaning that the environmental impact is contained to fewer areas. The connection charges to the grid are a major hindrance, and Im not sure how we could afford it given we have a fixed budget and cant borrow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.