Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hydroelectric power's dirty secret revealed
New Scientist ^ | Duncan Graham-Rowe | Duncan Graham-Rowe

Posted on 02/24/2005 7:47:51 AM PST by samtheman

Contrary to popular belief, hydroelectric power can seriously damage the climate. Proposed changes to the way countries' climate budgets are calculated aim to take greenhouse gas emissions from hydropower reservoirs into account, but some experts worry that they will not go far enough.

The green image of hydro power as a benign alternative to fossil fuels is false, says Éric Duchemin, a consultant for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). "Everyone thinks hydro is very clean, but this is not the case," he says.

Hydroelectric dams produce significant amounts of carbon dioxide and methane, and in some cases produce more of these greenhouse gases than power plants running on fossil fuels. Carbon emissions vary from dam to dam, says Philip Fearnside from Brazil's National Institute for Research in the Amazon in Manaus. "But we do know that there are enough emissions to worry about."

In a study to be published in Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Fearnside estimates that in 1990 the greenhouse effect of emissions from the Curuá-Una dam in Pará, Brazil, was more than three-and-a-half times what would have been produced by generating the same amount of electricity from oil.

This is because large amounts of carbon tied up in trees and other plants are released when the reservoir is initially flooded and the plants rot. Then after this first pulse of decay, plant matter settling on the reservoir's bottom decomposes without oxygen, resulting in a build-up of dissolved methane. This is released into the atmosphere when water passes through the dam's turbines.

"Drawdown" regions

Seasonal changes in water depth mean there is a continuous supply of decaying material. In the dry season plants colonise the banks of the reservoir only to be engulfed when the water level rises. For shallow-shelving reservoirs these "drawdown" regions can account for several thousand square kilometres.

In effect man-made reservoirs convert carbon dioxide in the atmosphere into methane. This is significant because methane's effect on global warming is 21 times stronger than carbon dioxide's.

Claiming that hydro projects are net producers of greenhouse gases is not new (New Scientist print edition, 3 June 2000) but the issue now appears to be climbing up the political agenda. In the next round of IPCC discussions in 2006, the proposed National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Programme, which calculates each country's carbon budget, will include emissions from artificially flooded regions.

But these guidelines will only take account of the first 10 years of a dam's operation and only include surface emissions. Methane production will go unchecked because climate scientists cannot agree on how significant this is; it will also vary between dams. But if Fearnside gets his way these full emissions would be included.

With the proposed IPCC guidelines, tropical countries that rely heavily on hydroelectricity, such as Brazil, could see their national greenhouse emissions inventories increased by as much as 7% (see map). Colder countries are less affected, he says, because cold conditions will be less favourable for producing greenhouse gases.

Despite a decade of research documenting the carbon emissions from man-made reservoirs, hydroelectric power still has an undeserved reputation for mitigating global warming. "I think it is important these emissions are counted," says Fearnside.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: climatechange; energy; environment; globalwarming; greenhouse; hydroelelectric
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-75 next last
So fossil fuels aren't so bad after all. As the Beav would say: "Who would have thunk?"
1 posted on 02/24/2005 7:47:56 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: samtheman

just dam !


2 posted on 02/24/2005 7:51:44 AM PST by sure_fine (*not one to over kill the thought process*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

The real truth of the nut case left is they are so entrenched in self loathing they long for the elimination of the human race.


3 posted on 02/24/2005 7:52:27 AM PST by satchmodog9 (Murder and weather are our only news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: satchmodog9

They want us to live in caves.


4 posted on 02/24/2005 7:57:30 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: satchmodog9

Actually, the nutcase left is also against building dams. But not because they cause greenhouse gas (most of the nutcase left didn't know about this previously) but because anything that aids in the economic development of the human race is evil to the nutcase left, and the nutcase left wants to destroy.

It is true, though, that nutcase left opposition to nuke power and fossil fuel power has made building dams more attractive than it might otherwise have been.

Ah, the nutcase left. Were would we be without them? I know! Way up there. Way far ahead of where we are now.


5 posted on 02/24/2005 7:58:28 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


6 posted on 02/24/2005 7:59:24 AM PST by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

"This is because large amounts of carbon tied up in trees and other plants are released when the reservoir is initially flooded and the plants rot."

Gee, how about letting them harvest the trees first ?

( As if those plants and such were never going to die and release their methane at some point anyway... )


7 posted on 02/24/2005 8:01:10 AM PST by RS (just because they are out to get him doesn't mean he's not guilty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

Let's see... they deride atomic energy (why? I have no real clue, we all know what they SAY)...

Burning things is out of the question (though I believe it makes up something like 70% of our energy)

Now hydro-electric energy is dangerous.

Next thing you know they'll tell us wind power decapitates endagered owls, and claims against solar power will include overheating the area around the solar cells.

The only thing we'll be left with is riding bikes to charge batteries! I think at that time, however, I will be instead strapping these libs to the wires, and not a battery.


8 posted on 02/24/2005 8:03:40 AM PST by MacDorcha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

Omigod!! We are doomed!!

That evil Kelp (millions and millions of square miles of it!) in the ocean that grows and dies and decays and releases carbon dioxide and methane in the air...those billions of trees in the forests, those massive rivers like the Mississippi, the Amazon, those miles and miles of grain that the cattle eat and turn into methane - they are killing us and turning our planet into a tropical Hell!!

Oh Woe is me. Woe is me. We must drain all the rivers and lakes, destroy all the trees, stop all the grain and grass from growing, fill the oceans with Roundup...!!

We are doomed. (Unless mebbe we could all hold our breath for one minute out of every five to reduce the CO2 from being released into the atmosphere.)


9 posted on 02/24/2005 8:04:03 AM PST by Rhetorical pi2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

said Philip Fearnside from Brazil's National Institute for Research in the Amazon in Manaus

guess there are alot of dams in the amazon


10 posted on 02/24/2005 8:04:29 AM PST by mamalujo (don't bother me, I'm posting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

Hydroelectric seems to kill more people (directly, anyway) than other forms of power production.


11 posted on 02/24/2005 8:05:12 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: farmfriend


12 posted on 02/24/2005 8:05:17 AM PST by Libertarianize the GOP (Make all taxes truly voluntary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RS
(As if those plants and such were never going to die and release their methane at some point anyway... )

Ya THINK?!?!?

13 posted on 02/24/2005 8:05:38 AM PST by null and void (They aren't character flaws, they're character embellishments...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

The left should just do the honorable thing and Hunter Thompson themselves. Since they hate life so much, then they should make a statement to prove it.


14 posted on 02/24/2005 8:15:06 AM PST by sleepy_hollow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

Yet-another-reason-for-more-nuclear-power-plants bump.


15 posted on 02/24/2005 8:15:18 AM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

I'd like to ride my bike to work, but all that peddling gives me gas and that would be "BAD" for the environment, being that methane is a "Green House Gas' and all.


16 posted on 02/24/2005 8:15:49 AM PST by Falcon4.0
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sure_fine

LOL!


17 posted on 02/24/2005 8:16:35 AM PST by Yo-Yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: satchmodog9
The real truth of the nut case left is they are so entrenched in self loathing they long for the elimination of the human race.

It sounds more like they're opposed to ALL carbon-based lifeforms, animal and vegetable alike.

Man, as a conservative, I have a very strong pro-life philosophy.
But I don't think it's possible to achieve zero-emissions by legislating a ban on death, decay and decomposition of all biological matter.

18 posted on 02/24/2005 8:19:00 AM PST by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

The enviro-nazis will control every aspect of your lives including how many beans you consume and how many craps you take and how many squares of paper you use on each wipe.


19 posted on 02/24/2005 8:26:25 AM PST by Fitzcarraldo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green

Is this 'New Scientist' or Scrappleface.com?


20 posted on 02/24/2005 8:26:57 AM PST by shamusotoole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-75 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson