Ron,
Your argument does not hold water. LOL
The Scandinavian countries produces less that 10% of their electricity with
Hydro power and have nearly nothing of small hydro power. The Scandinavian
countries have gone very far to make their large hydro power to have the
lowest possible environmental impact on both nature and wild life. It is a
moratorium on further expansion of large hydro power, to keep the remaining
rivers in an original state. It is also quite a large potential for non
intrusive small hydro power, which is untapped.
The largest percentage of hydro power contribution is Brazil (35%) and
their largest hydro power complex is San Paolo (35% of total). This is a
large number of dispersed turbines that utilizes the natural high
difference between two natural plates and therefore less intrusive than
many other projects. Vietnam has also a large portion coming from hydro,
but their 200 km deep dam is maybe more of the example of what you mean,
but it is a very important contribution to the development of the country.
I do not know of "hydro for a big city", most of large hydro will
distribute on a national grid. The existence of a national grid, opens up
large potentials.
http://energysavingnow.com/hydroenergy/
Renewable energy, do not mean low impact energy. It simply mean that the
energy is RENEWABLE and not finite, in opposition to fossil reserves that
is FINITE and will be consumed and depleted. I think that many renewable
energy alternatives can have low or high impact and it is also an
evaluation in the eyes of the beholder, look at the debate around Cape Cod.
LOL
Do not create a debate by introduce definitions that do not exist, it only
display your own ignorance.
Hakan
At 02:05 PM 10/5/2004, you wrote:
>
> Reading below --
>
> John Kerry on the environment:
> An exclusive Grist interview.
> By Amanda Griscom
> 23 Sep 2003
> http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2003/09/23/griscom-kerry/
>
> mentions his Harley, Mini Van and why, amoungst other things.
=================================================
Mr. Kerry mentions renewables and uses California as an example. Well, you
can take that example and in fact some of the countries in Europe
(Scandanavia) and knock a good precentage off what's regarded as an
environmentally friendly renewable...because of the Hydro mix.
In general, Hydro is bad. Pure and simple. It alters and/or destroys the
environment. To use Hydro as an environmentally friendly renewable is
preposterous. Please don't bring up 1KW user turbines. I'm talking about
hydro plants for a big city.
Ask the Native Americans in Manitoba about what they think about Hydro.
Ask the Sierra Club what they think about Hydro.
Ask....
Ron B.
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
