Daily Kos

Walkabout #14: Hydroponic Hydropower Blues

Sun May 04, 2008 at 03:32:02 AM PDT

   The Stranded Wind Initiative was formed to design, fund, and implement projects that can use renewable resources that are currently "stranded", or located in places where there aren’t enough people to use them and no way to get them out. Here in the U.S. that means primarily wind and we’ve got a good bit of sun, too, but as I’m traveling about New England what I see over and over is hydropower resources right next to towns that desperately need jobs.

 I’ve got a couple of associates with very big ideas on what to do to get us out of this iron triangle of energy, economy, and environmental problems. The rivers and falls of Massachusetts hill town country provide a nice backdrop for a discussion of such things ... but I wonder if people will allow it to happen in a timely fashion.

The curious municipal cluster of Shelburne Falls, containing the towns of Shelburne and Buckland, is located a few miles from farmerchuck’s farm, straddling the Deerfield River at the site of what has historically been called Salmon Falls.





 I say curious because what is now one town was once two; this 1908 trolley bridge connected them, lasting a mere twenty years before the automobile overmastered it in 1928. The citizens have converted it to a walking garden.








 Have another look at those falls; a little bit of construction, a little bit of turbine, and this city could have a five megawatt Haber Bosch ammonia plant, producing $4,000,000 in ammonia a year at today’s prices and enough heat to drive an acre of hydroponic greenhouse; food miles for this town of 2,000 would drop dramatically.

  Michael Garjian of E2M gets it. These guys are buying old factory buildings and turning them into what they call "city gardens". Greenhouse operations need heat which the older Haber Bosch process produces in abundance. I believe every old mill building in the area has some sort of hydroelectric resource that used to drive it. This would seem to be the perfect recipe for reducing food miles for the whole region and ensuring fresh fruits and vegetables year round.

 This is cool and it’s a regional changer, but what can be done globally? Lets talk about Grand Inga a thirty nine gigawatt hydroelectric project on the Congo River. Of course, anything of this scope couldn’t be built without some BANANAs carrying on about every little detail. Oh, sure, it’s a very corrupt part of the world and there are injustices, but understand what the perfectionism of those opposed to this will cost us; thirty nine million tons of ammonia a year in perpetuity. That’s a 300,000 barrel a day oil well that’ll never run dry. Total cost? $100 billion. Nine year of operation at current oil prices will pay it off and those numbers aren’t standing still.

  There are shipping and fishing businesses all around the African continent that would greatly benefit from ships powered by a clean, reliable fuel source in the region. Transport inland would benefit as well, although in many cases it will make more sense to electrify rail using the output of the dam rather than using ammonia as a hydrogen carrier to fuel trains. Oh, and let’s not forget ammonia’s first use these days – a basis for nitrogen fertilizers. The farmers of Africa can’t handle concentrated anhydrous for the most part, as that is a tractor and tank job, so there’d need to be a means to make urea, which can be safely transported and dispersed by hand.

 So ... one of the things I hope to accomplish while I’m here is instigating some of this anhydrous ammonia production with the attendant greenhouses, just like we’re trying to get done in Graettinger, Iowa. I bet the good folks of Greenfield, Massachusetts would like to have fresh hydroponic vegetables twelve months out of the year and a few hundred shiny new jobs to go along with the food security improvement. But will the lawmakers of Massachusetts see things as they are and bulldoze away the barriers to this much needed stabilization of our food and energy supplies?





Tags: Walkabout, Graettinger Pattern Greenhouse, Rescued (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 58 comments

    •  This diary was a treasure... (8+ / 0-)

      ... for the E2M link alone.  Sounds a lot like we are doing here in Milwaukee.  We just bought a tax delinquent brownfield industrial property from the City.  I just signed the paper work for the solar panel array and plans are moving forward on the rooftop vegetable garden and hydroponic greenhouse.  We are working with the local universities Dept of Urban Agriculture and hope to be a teaching resource.  One of our first projects is a 'give-one get-one' program (inspired by OLPC) with potted vegetable plants.  Buy one plant, and another will be donated to someone in the inner city.  All plants are non-hybrid, so their seeds can be used to start new plants.

      And yes, your Stranded Wind diaries have been one the inspirations for this project.  Thank you for that.  :)

      Treasure each day like it will be your last, but treat the earth like you will live forever. -me

      by protothad on Sun May 04, 2008 at 07:22:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  what about ammonia (4+ / 0-)

        Is there electricity at such a rate that you can do ammonia as part of the facility? Will the zoning permit it?

         I know I owe people some contacts back on our stuff but yours is the first time someone has come forward and said "Your work has been an inspiration" without me recognizing them. I am humbled ...

        •  The zoning is RT4 (3+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          gogol, Creosote, Serpents Sorrow

          Which means we can do residential, office, and a greenhouse... but not light industrial, which I suspect ammonia production would fall under.  This is an old industrial building that was engulfed by a residential neighborhood, so the city was adamant on rezoning it.

          One good thing; we have a really good deal here as far as incentives and buy back rates for solar power.  The local utility will actually buy back the power at double the rate we buy it for.  We should also get about half the cost of the panels reimbursed or credited back.  We are spending the money up front to get our heating and electrical costs down to zero.  With the plants we grow, it might actually mean that we have a negative carbon footprint.

          We've only just started repair work on the building (sandblasting, tuckpointing, roofing, etc).  The fun stuff with the greenhouse and solar panels etc will be a little later this year.  I'm taking pictures and will start a diary series soon (I keep promising that).

          We are not nearly as large a project as some I've seen (only 7000 sq ft warehouse 600 sq ft greenhouse), but I think we can be a great source of experimentation and inspiration for others in our city.  :)

          Later,

          Thad

          Treasure each day like it will be your last, but treat the earth like you will live forever. -me

          by protothad on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:49:44 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I don't understand (0+ / 0-)

        Why are people cheering this?  Hydro power is horrible for the environment.  In some cases, I'd almost rather prefer coal.  Hydro destroys river ecosystems (and the ecosystems dependant on the river) and ruins a huge deal of natural beauty, turning falls and rapids into flat water and, if associated with a sizable dam, eliminating gorges or lowlands and greatly increasing evaporation (water waste).    And to top it all off, dammed up rivers often increase GHGs relative to even coal power because they can lead to organic detritus decaying in an anoxic environment, producing methane instead of CO2 (methane is much worse for global warming than GHGs).  They also encourage the diversion of water for agriculture, leading to significant downstream consequences.  Oh, and the land use in reservoirs from dammed rivers is generally completely disproportionate to the amount of power produced in comparison to other sources -- usually around an order of magnitude worse than solar thermal, for example.

        You're not just cheering a hydro project on a dam at salmon falls, but you're cheering on the monster Inga project on the Congo?  How much worse of a hydro project could you have picked?

        Well, at least you're not falling for the "oil is needed to make fertilizer" myth.  In the case of the oft-cited one, ammonia (and its nitrate offspring), it is energy that is needed (more specifically, hydrogen, which takes energy to create) and there are countless clean ways to get energy.  I certainly would not call hydro one of them.

        And since when did the "ammonia economy" come to be accepted as "a good idea", anyways?  That seems to be the unspoken premise of this piece.  It's horribly inefficient and very toxic, and is all based around the hydrogen economy, which is a bad idea in its own right.

        I just don't get it.

        •  you'll starve and freeze (0+ / 0-)

           You'll starve and freeze, along with your parents, and any offspring, should you have reproduced.

           The attitudes you display won't keep this country all pretty and green, they'll ensure that the United States will look like a gigantic Haiti as oil and gas supplies run out.

           The time for environMENTALism is past. Humans don't just tidily fall down and die as fresh water and food run out, again I suggest you inspect Haiti to see what is coming. No need to visit, Google Earth will do nicely, and do compare it to the Dominican Republic - that would be the nice, green part of the island, opposite the environmental mess the Haitians have.

          I like hydro so much I'm putting an investment group together to buy a dam ... or two ... or three.

          •  Oil and gas aren't going anywhere (1+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            rehana
            Once more, peak oil hysteria serves to drive the destruction of the environment.

            Even if this was the case, the proposed solutions would still be the wrong ones.  The "ammonia economy" takes the hydrogen economy, which is already a grossly inefficient concept promoted by the oil industry, and requires monstrous capital investments, makes efficiency even worse, and adds in "deadly poisonous" to the mix.  If you want a clean alternative transportation solution, go for the one that's notably more efficient than gasoline, not one that's notably less efficient -- EVs.  Particularly those using spinel or phosphate variants of li-ion chemistry, since the raw incredients are effectively limitless and would be an insignificant portion of their price even if you had to use seawater extraction, and since they're nontoxic.  Electric power infrastructure is already everywhere across this country -- you don't even need to leave your home -- and even if you needed "fast charge stations" for long trips, those cost less than even an ordinary gas pump.  But the "efficiency" aspect is the really big one.  Without the lossy ammonia steps, the hydrogen economy requires 3-4 times as much energy as an electron economy using li-ion variants (which are nearly lossless).  Oh, and modern EV batteries have the same sort of overall energy density as ammonia vehicles, and can charge just as quickly -- and batteries are advancing rapidly while ammonia is staying the same.

            But if you want other reasons why any sort of hydrogen economy is bad, hydrogen loves to leak (ammonia leaks even in our current usage levels are bad enough), leaked hydrogen pools under overhangs (NASA requires buildings with potential hydrogen sources to have strong spark suppression and roofs that can be blown off) and likes to enter pipes and follow them to their destination, hydrogen destroys ozone, fuel cells use platinum and cost a fortune even when heavily subsidized, plus have lifespan problems and problems with the water "exhaust" freezing, hydrogen ICEs make the efficiency problem even worse, and on and on and on.

            Anyways, if you want to get back to alternatives to environmentally-horrible hydropower:

             * Wind: Well, with a name like "StrandedWind", I'm sure you already know about that.  In addition to the normal surface wind generation methods, there are about a dozen different high altitude wind projects, which are neat because not only do they allow for far higher windspeeds, but they're more constant -- it's closer to baseload generation.  Even google has some money in this.

             * Solar: Probably the fastest advancing energy tech out there, and while it's mainly confined to the desert southwest for now, at the rate things are going, it should be spreading like wildfire soon.  Solar thermal projects offering $0.05-$0.10/kWh are shooting up like weeds, each with a different approach.  Photovoltaics currently cost an average of $4.80/peak kW investment.  CIGS cells promise between $0.50 and $1.00, which would make solar cheaper than coal even in Alaska.  High efficiency cells are advancing silicon tech, meaning you need less silicon for the same amount of power, while sliver cells and silicon inks promise a fraction as much silicon demand.  Yet, with all of these reductions in silicon need and outright replacements for silicon need (like CIGS), silicon production is rapidly being scaled up -- enough CVD plants will be coming online in the next couple years to create a silicon glut without any reductions in silicon need.  And to top it all off, two companies are now building metallurgical silicon plants; they've found a way to make metallurgical silicon (picture molten, like steel) pure enough for solar cells.  This means a tiny fraction of the cost and a tiny fraction of the time to commercialization as CVD silicon.  Across the board, photovoltaic solar prices should crash in 3-5 years to cheaper than coal even in hospitable locations.

             * EGS (enhanced geothermal): This is a renewables tech that you could probably even get the oil industry onboard with.  It's basically just like drilling for oil, except you're drilling for heat.  You make multiple wells, then using pressure, solvents, etc, you open up old fractures in deep bedrock (ranging from a mile to half a dozen miles underground, depending on the region).  Once the fractures are open, you inject water in one well and get hot, pressurized steam out of the others.  Current estimates for EGS resources in the US place it as being able to generate over 10,000 times what we currently consume.  Oh, and it's baseload.

            •  it is better to keep your mouth shut (0+ / 0-)

              And let people think you're a fool, than to open it as you've just done and confirm it.

              You've got some wingnut site that purports to debunk peak oil, but a whole bunch of people who get paid to know what the markets do are funding a study aimed at electrifying rail on a national basis. You can guess which group I find to be more credible.

              •  That "wingnut site" (0+ / 0-)

                Is my personal website.  I posted everything there so I don't have to retype it over and over.  It's referenced out the wazoo, so if you have a problem with anything there, your problem is with references.  I.e., cold hard facts.  Just because you don't like the facts doesn't make them not facts.  If there's anything specific you'd like to debate, bring it on.

                What on earth does electrifying rail have to do with peak oil (link?)?  Electrified rail is a good thing on its own.  The overwhelming majority of Japan's rail is electrified -- it's so extensive that the word for train is "densha" -- "Electric car".  They even call the few diesel trains "densha"  ;)  Works great.

                Look, you're free to deny that hydro devastates river ecosystems all you want.  But you might want to be careful about posting comments about "looking like a fool" in the process.  Did you know that the Grand Canyon used to have otters?  Yeah.  Freaking river otters.  We've completely decimated the Colorado's ecosystem through our damming projects.  The Colorado no longer even consistantly reaches the sea; it terminates in a dessicated salt flat that used to be a nearly 2 million acre estuary filled with jaguar, beavers, deer, and coyotes.  It's about five percent of its original size, and far more saline.

                It's not just water diversion.  Dams, by their very nature, remove an oxygenating process (waterfalls and rapids), and replace it with anoxic, stagnant deep pools.  This leads to greenhouse gasses and reduces the ability for fish and other aquatic organisms to survive.  The trapped silt leads to downstream erosion.

                Hydro is about one of the most environmentally destructive forms of power you can use.  I find it appalling that you come on here and advocate for hydro, and then later in the comments section talk about how you've never really studied the environmental impacts.  Then why the heck are you promoting it?

                •  so you're a wingnut (0+ / 0-)

                   So you're a wingnut. I'm very happy for you. The veracity of anything else you might say is, well, not worth pursuing, because I've read your peak oil stuff and it's a crock. Referenced all over? Certainly not by anyone I'd consider to be credible on the matter. So ... well written peak oil denialist claptrap is ... still claptrap.

                   

                  •  Go be part of the fiction-based community (0+ / 0-)

                    Yeah, direct quoting of people to show what they're saying, citing major news organizations and trade magazines about news, and so on -- nothing credible there, no sirree!  

                    Look, deny reality all you want.  But if you can't argue anything specific with a contrary reference from a respectable source, you're living in a delusion, plain and simple.

                    Go strangle another river for your peak-oil cult.

  •  Thanks so much for all the inspiration! (8+ / 0-)

    This series is really wonderful.

    _______________________________
    Healing the universe is an inside job.

    by spotDawa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 03:37:05 AM PDT

  •  It's a breath of fresh air! n/t (5+ / 0-)

    "Those that know, don't say, those that say, don't know"... Tao te ching... Then why am I posting a comment?

    by zenmasterjack on Sun May 04, 2008 at 03:38:50 AM PDT

  •  Thanks for the forward thinking . . . (8+ / 0-)

    and far too uncommon sense.

    Coming on 1/20/09: the finest inaugural address since 1961, (or possibly even 1861). Set your Tivos now.

    by Rick in Oz on Sun May 04, 2008 at 03:42:23 AM PDT

  •  Mother Earth archives don't seem to googlewell (5+ / 0-)

    but the best idea I've seen since strawbale construction was a $4,000 solar/water heating panel built a little over a foot off the ground attached to an outbuilding/storage shed.  

    It appeared in an issue within the last three months, but the benefits (easy cleaning/no roof reinforcements necessary), made the payoff less than 5 years.

  •  Here's a nearby town's contribution (4+ / 0-)

    Wappingers Hydroelectric

    So much potential here in the northeast!

    "Human beings aren't rational, but rationalizing, animals." -Heinlein

    by the fan man on Sun May 04, 2008 at 04:02:47 AM PDT

  •  Not really sure what you're proposing (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Stranded Wind

    Wind turbines, a hydroelectric dam, what? I get the part about a nitrogen fertilizer plant, and the excess heat to use on hydroponic gardens, yes?

    "Ain't no time to wonder why - WHOOPEE! We're all gonna die!"

    by fourthcornerman on Sun May 04, 2008 at 04:17:19 AM PDT

  •  I asume low-head hydro n/t (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Neon Vincent, Stranded Wind

    "Ain't no time to wonder why - WHOOPEE! We're all gonna die!"

    by fourthcornerman on Sun May 04, 2008 at 04:20:44 AM PDT

  •  Low-head, high-head, and Pelton wheels (10+ / 0-)

    You can look up those for now to start on, but the first thing check into local EPA and/or US Forestry regulations, permits, etc. They called it "Salmon Falls" for a reason, I'm betting. And Atlantic salmon are protected fish. Plus there are water flows for sewage treatment, silt loads of the stream, even recreational needs that may be part of the equation. Wind for power is pretty easy because nobody owns the wind; water comes from somewhere, is going somewhere, and does certain functions along the way, and there are parties who count on that all along the watercourse.

    "Ain't no time to wonder why - WHOOPEE! We're all gonna die!"

    by fourthcornerman on Sun May 04, 2008 at 04:35:55 AM PDT

  •  The City I live in, early on, (5+ / 0-)

    created an offshoot of the St Marys River and runs it through the turbines where it empties back out in the St. Marys again. This year towards the end of June they hold an open house, and you can tour the place and watch those turbines at work. I have to make that scene this year.

    "Though the Mills of the Gods grind slowly,Yet they grind exceeding small."

    by Owllwoman on Sun May 04, 2008 at 04:42:02 AM PDT

  •  What Kind of Barriers DoThey Have... (4+ / 0-)

    in Massachusetts?

    In many states water boards of some kind regulate perenial streams.  Fresh water has become such a limiting factor in some areas that wind is a much better source.  

    Of course Massachusetts will not be seing any wind projects because of the Kennedys.

    •  damned NIMBYs (4+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      alizard, farmerchuck, Wino, Neon Vincent

      God, how I hate NIMBYs. The BANANAs I can forgive - it's obsession compulsive disorder in many cases, but the ones who feel they have some sort of extended lordship over all they survey are going to be the death of us.

       When rolling blackouts start it'll be way too late to talk remediation. Oh, wait, New York already has that??

      •  there really ought to be a Federal law (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        Stranded Wind

        that says small-scale energy projects (down to clotheslines in areas where local law/ HOA 'regulations' forbid them) can be built over the objections of municipalities / HOAs unless they can provide a real environmental case for stopping them.

        Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

        by alizard on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:56:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Small hydro ... (6+ / 0-)

    a resource that is, to say the least, underutilized ...

  •  S. Wind....the diaries are a wonderful resource.. (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    melo, Stranded Wind

    and once again...thank you for the continuing education.

  •  Awesome (3+ / 0-)

    As a member of a fledgling organization at the University of South Florida dedicated to community through improving our locality, this diary and the subsequent comments is absolutely wonderful!

    There are so many projects going on around the country right now that I, and my friends, have not even heard about and only happen upon by chance sometimes.

    The Green Revolution is too grassroots for its own good.

    We are starting a small farm near our campus in Tampa and are always on the lookout for ever more efficient and eco-friendly alternatives to conventional methods of doing things.

    Hopefully we'll be able to get in touch with some of these other organizations around the country and vastly improve and learn!

Permalink | 58 comments