"pyotr filipivich" wrote in message
...
I skipped the meeting, but the Memos showed that "Jeff R."
wrote on Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:06:30 +1100 in
rec.crafts.metalworking :
pyotr filipivich wrote:
I skipped the meeting, but the Memos showed that Andy Asberry
wrote on Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:27:50 -0600 in
rec.crafts.metalworking :
Water district pumps water from a lake 75 miles south to a local lake
405 feet higher. They propose to build a hydro generation plant on
the end of this pipeline before dumping it in the lake.

Am I missing something here?

Yes.

Unless you believe that they believe they can recoup all the costs
of pumping the water up 405 feet.

Standard practice in the Snowy Mountains Hydro scheme (NSW Australia) is
to
use cheap off-peak power to pump low water up high for use later on (peak
period) for power generation.

The water is simply stored energy.

Yes - they *do* do it.

Ah, "cost" - they charge extra for the electricity delivered by
the pumped water. But does the amount of electricity produced equal
or exceed the amount consumed in the pumping?
--
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

Pumped storage in well-engineered, utility-scale applications typically
recovers over 70% of the energy consumed. So, economically, it's at least as
good as other large-scale load-balancing approaches, which, in most cases in
the US, is otherwise done with gas turbines.

Those big steam-turbine generators absorb pretty big losses in startup and
shutdown, so the utility companies gain, also, by keeping them running at
high capacity all night long.

--
Ed Huntress