It’s the manufacturing and they’re already setting up shop
It’s only a hydroelectric generation facility & the plant is >50mw so no longer classified as “green”. That means it’s evil & needs to be purged from existence.
Wow…what a joke!
Hoover isn’t in ca so the green rule doesn’t apply. I deal with that attitude all the time though.
If they’re below 50% lake level then an OE-417 has already been submitted with according plan. I’ve submitted a few of these already this year as well for stations under my control.
Guess the wind power lobbyist are paying more than the hydroelectric lobbyists
I’d probably look closer to the owners of the generation type. At least in CA
There’s not much privately owned hydro.
Look into who owns PV & Wind. Then who they are associated with.
If you’re talking about Nevada, it makes news but it’s not an exceptionally thoughtful or political population to begin with, so not a lot of panic about anything ever.
In terms of power production, Hoover Dam is only 5% of our grid; most of it goes to AZ & CA. we worry more about water consumption, since the Colorado River is our primary source, as is true for most of the Western US.
We’ve done maybe a dozen threads here in the past about people/companies causing problems collecting rainwater & otherwise rerouting Colorado River sources; those threads always go south because people who don’t live here & aren’t politically active don’t get it.
I see lots of solar farms in the south valley
Hoover will supply the LV area with as much energy as required at that time. Power flows along tie-lines according to resistance. MVAR or reactive power doesn’t travel well & is supplied closest to load centers. Generators are the primary source of reactive power & LV is a large load center.
There is also a large interconnection substation near you where NV Energy, SCE, LADWP & the feds all inter-tie. Since the western grid is interconnected, power flows distributed through that station(&all others) will change with demand & system conditions or configuration.
FWIW, I generally only schedule a few mwh per day from Hoover into my jurisdiction. There are plenty of others scheduling flows along inter ties from Hoover energy & not everyone takes their allotment hourly.
I’m just repeating what NV Energy reports for annual consumption, not getting into the nuts & bolts of what could happen or did happen at any given moment. Visitors think because we’re next to the dam that it’s our primary source, but we’re 90%+ natural gas with a little bit of everything else.
NVE very well may not purchase much of the energy offered from Hoover, I do see them listed in the daily contract but not the quantities purchased.
The market isn’t setup complete either insofar as the reactive power is an obligation by turbines. That energy is “free” even though it takes capacity on the lines & fuel to produce. LV will receive the MVAR produced it’s just not metered. MVAR is used for voltage control of the system & is consumed by the field of inductive motors. Only MW are metered.
Anyway, desert operations will be interesting this year for sure
You on the west coast? From you SN I’m guessing you know your shit
IIRC NVE reports ~300 MW from the dam for all of NV.
FWIW I lived across the street from the Edward Clark generating station for a while, which is ~1100 MW for Henderson. There’s another one just like it in North Las Vegas & a half dozen smaller ones throughout the county. Then several solar arrays outside of town I doubt we even get a taste of, & Reno has its own shit.
Since we’re on nuts & bolts…
EDIT: Originally wrote “city” where I meant “county”. The county is huge & several of these plants aren’t anywhere near the city.
Oh, & all the bullshit Elon Musk abandoned consumers with on their houses after the government subsidies went away.
I’d be surprised if the greater LV area had less than 10,000mw of load during peak times. You’ll most definitely see that Hoover energy.
You’re watching too I see
Yeah. I’m in CA. Grew up in the Central Valley, lived on the Central Coast for 20yrs but now am in the greater Sacramento area.
Eco-fascist public policies. They’re basically dumping all of their runoff water into the ocean to improve fish habitats rather than keeping the reservoirs topped off for an emergency.
CA reservoirs were designed to provide a steady five year supply for all users, and were filled to the top in June 2019
Diener, a California water expert and farmer, has been warning steadily that water is unnecessarily being let out to sea as the state faces a normal dry year.
“Are we having a dry year? Yes,” Diener says. “That is normal for us. Should we be having water shortages in the start of our second dry year? No. Our reservoirs were designed to provide a steady five year supply for all users, and were filled to the top in June 2019.”
Don’t believe her?
“You’re looking at our largest reservoirs less than two years ago. They were absolutely teeming with water from 107% to 145% of average!” Diener says. “Our reservoirs held enough water for everyone who relies on them for their water supply, for 7 years. We are barely into our second dry year. WHERE DID IT GO?”
“Where did it go” indeed. According to the California Legislative Analyst’s Office, statewide water use averages 85 gallons per person per day. But it’s always urban/residential water users ordered to conserve water: let lawns turn brown and landscaping die, limit showers and baths, wash clothing and dishes less frequently, and other absurd “helpful tips.”
“Before our magnificent reservoir projects were built, California never had a steady and reliable supply of water. Now water is being managed as if those reserves don’t exist, by emptying the collected water from storage to the sea, rather than saving it for our routinely dry years,” Diener says. “Our water projects were designed to be managed for the long term providing a minimum five year supply, but California has now put us on track to have a man made drought crisis every time we don’t have a wet season.”
Even San Francisco is suing the State Water Board. Diener explains:
The State Water Board’s 40% unimpaired flows plan is too radical. Requiring 40% of the Tuolumne River water to flow directly to the ocean without being used for anything else on its way, severely limits that river’s supply to Hetch Hetchy—the main water source for San Francisco.
The State Water Board has become the Department of Fish and Wildlife?
The Water Board has said they want to experimentally see if over time they can bring back about 1000 salmon, but it is such an extreme idea that some residents could be limited to as little as 7 gallons of water per person per day during back to back dry years, essentially making these regions uninhabitable. Doug Obegi of the NRDC, along with other well funded nonprofits, have unleashed a barrage of negative press harshly criticizing the city, and chiding them for what they call ”being on the same side as Valley farmers.” But S.F. is not backing down on opposing the plan which gained approval by the cheerleading of Felicia Marcus, former State Water Resources Control Board Chair and NRDC attorney.
As chairwoman of the California Water Resources Control Board, Felicia Marcus oversees a massive state bureaucracy with a $1 billion annual budget.
In a prescient op ed today (2018) in the Modesto Bee, Assemblyman Adam Gray (D-Merced) had some harsh words for Marcus and her radical environmental cohorts. “Despite her promises to the contrary, she and her board have used their immense authority to jeopardize – not protect – the economy and drinking water supplies of the Northern San Joaquin Valley.”
Gray says, “The State Water Board claims it needs the water to help restore fish populations, but an earlier version of their own report suggested their plan would result in little more than an additional 1,000 fish per year.”
“Irrigation districts in Merced, Turlock and Modesto have all proposed responsible alternatives that call for a combination of increased water flows, habitat restoration and predation controls,” Gray said. “Unsurprisingly, the State Water Board has rejected those proposals out of hand while continuing to preach a preference for voluntary settlements.”
“The truth is, the board will never be happy until it gets our water – no matter the consequence to our economy or our drinking water supplies,” Gray added.
California’s residents, farmers and ranchers find themselves in this untenable situation once again.
Residential water use only accounts for 10% of the total. The other 90% is mostly agricultural and environmental use. It’s farmers growing too many water-intensive crops (almonds and avocados being the big ones) and environmental nuts dumping water into local ecosystems trying to boost the populations of obscure local fish.