microhydro for RE portfolio standards [RE-wrenches]

Sun Mar 25 20:38:32 PDT 2007

<x-flowed>

HI Bob-O and Eric and all,

Actually, I think that there is a significant amount of 5-100 KW 
micro-hydro that is undeveloped.  But as you point out - whether it 
can be ecologically developed is the key.

The massive hydro development that swept the country and dammed all 
the rivers in 100 years leading up to the 70's didn't worry about too 
much stuff in the 5-50 KW range and missed a good number of the 
50-100 KW range.  Or like here in New England the old water wheel 
sites that were developed -many in the 5-50 KW range have since 
fallen apart but the dams are still largely intact.

We did a feasibility study on a typical "mill creek" in MA on 
installing a 24 KW Francis scroll turbine.  Though the economics 
aren't stellar at that size - they still easiily beat PV in payback. 
And remember 24 KW of hydro produces about 180 MWH/year - about the 
same production as a 150 KW PV plant (here in MA).

And our design called for the addition of a only a 30"' high "weir" 
like "dam" with a Coanda screen that let's the fish by just fine. 
Siphon intakes can also be used to utilize existing partially falling 
down dams without having to rebuild them or penetrate them and the 
equipment is removable.

So I actually think that in terms of MWHours of available energy that 
there are many parts of the country that would benefit from RPSs that 
included some small microhydro.  BUT developing them in ecological 
ways would take a lot of care and regulation that only low-impact 
ways be utilized.

There is a movement here in New England to remove the old dams from 
all the mill creeks.  If it weren't for that force on top of the 
regulatory hassles and ecological risks, I'd be advocating for more 
micro hydro here.  We identified hundreds of similar mill creek dams 
to the one in our study in New England.  So the potential is 
significant - but for now I'm focusing on PV.

Jeff Clearwater
Village Power Design

>Eric,
>Fair question.
>I don't know the answer but I have some guesses.
>
>As you say, microhydro has the stink of big dam hydro on it.  Big 
>Dam hydro is our not-much-talked-about environmental nightmare. If 
>you think that's not true, ask a fish. I think it's partly because, 
>unlike most of the nastier ways we make electricity, it doesn't give 
>tens of thousands of people asthma, make our bodies mutate until 
>they begin to eat themselves, or drain our youth and treasure for 
>energy wars. By comparison to all that, it's benign as hell. And, 
>it's localized so that the disaster is remote and NIMBY. So it's way 
>down the list of priorities.
>On the other hand, we (speaking as a society, not as an individual) 
>really don't want to "encourage" it anymore either. The reality is, 
>pretty much all hydro involves damming to one degree or another. 
>Doesn't necessarily mean that a small dam and diversion has a 
>serious impact on local fish or flora, but some do. Who makes the 
>call? Based on who's version of what science? Run of river? You ever 
>hear of high water? Bad investment.
>Even if it were encouraged via an RPS, there just aren't that many 
><100KVA (the usual definition of micro) hydro sites that can be 
>developed anymore. Put  all the potential 1-5KVA systems that are 
>possible together and what does it add up to? 1 MW? 5MW? In the big 
>scheme of things, big deal.
>Then there's the money.
>California does not allow microhydro systems to be net metered. My 
>understanding is that the original net metering bill which started 
>it all in CA contained a provision for micro as well. The final law 
>did not. I don't know for sure why not, but I can guess that the 
>utilities didn't want to "pay" (by offsetting) retail for excess 
>power generated in the middle of the night when they can't make a 
>profit on it.
>Good Luck getting past all that jazz.
>Bob-O
>
>On Mar 23, 2007, at 11:11 PM, Eric Youngren wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Why is microhydro not considered "renewable energy" in most of the states
>>that have passed mandatory renewable energy portfolio standards (RPS) for
>>utilities?
>>
>>
>>
>>http://www.awea.org/legislative/pdf/State_RPS_Fact_Sheet_UPdated.pdf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>In my mind a well designed and installed microhydro system connected to the
>>utility grid is producing electricity that is just as renewable and
>>non-polluting as a wind generator or a landfill gas plant or CSP array.
>>
>>
>>
>>Is anyone working on developing a standard for truly low impact microhydro?
>>I know there is the Low Impact Hydropower Institute with their certification
>>program but those guys are dealing with major dams on navigable rivers.
>>I'm talking about the really small stuff on creeks in the headwaters.  Run
>>of the river systems of less than a certain kW rating, maybe.
>>
>>
>>
>>Obviously hydropower has a troubled history when it comes to environmental
>>damage.   Dams can really screw up an ecosystem.     But I'm not talking
>>about dams.   Well designed and installed run of the river systems are no
>>more impacting to the environment than a wind farm or a big methane
>>digester.
>>
>>
>>
>>In some parts of the country the available resource for distributed
>>generation of firm power from micro and pico hydro is pretty huge.    Direct
>>grid connection with induction motor/generators is simple and robust or
>>rectified DC fed into a Windyboy or similar batteryless inverter is an
>>off-the-shelf configuration available now with a UL sticker to make the
>>inspector and utility happy.
>>
>>
>>
>>Inclusion on state and federal incentives, tax credits and portfolio
>>standards would make a lot more installations cost effective and provide
>>more work for those of us who like to drag pipes around in the woods.
>>
>>
>>
>>Is there anybody else out there who is doing anything about this?
>>
>>
>>
>>Eric Youngren
>>
>>Rainshadow Solar
>>
>>Orcas, WA
>
>
>- - - -
>To send a message: RE-wrenches at topica.com
>
>Archive of previous messages: http://lists.topica.com/lists/RE-wrenches/read
>
>List rules & how to change your email address: 
>www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/etiquette.php
>
>Check out participant bios: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/
>
>Hosted by Home Power magazine
>
>Moderator: michael.welch at homepower.com

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jeff Clearwater
Village Power Design
Sustainable Energy & Water Solutions for Home & Village
http://www.villagepower.com
gosolar at villagepower.com
NABCEP (tm) Certified Solar PV Installer

530-470-9166
877-SOLARVillage
877-765-2784
65 Schoolhouse Rd
Amherst, MA 01002
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`~

- - - -
To send a message: RE-wrenches at topica.com

Archive of previous messages: http://lists.topica.com/lists/RE-wrenches/read

List rules & how to change your email address: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/etiquette.php

Check out participant bios: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/

Hosted by Home Power magazine

Moderator: michael.welch at homepower.com
--^----------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to: michael.welch at homepower.com

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bz8Qcs.bz9JC9.bWljaGFl
Or send an email to: RE-wrenches-unsubscribe at topica.com

For Topica's complete suite of email marketing solutions visit:
http://www.topica.com/?p=TEXFOOTER
--^----------------------------------------------------------------

</x-flowed>