Sunday, March 22, 2009

Clean hydro power, revisited

Here is a portion of the original permit for the Estabrook Dam from 1937. I have seen this misquoted elsewhere (in fact Mr Helm misquoted it as a comment on this blog), so I thought I would set the record straight. The permit has no exact definition of what the hydro capabilities would be, but note that it is indeed noted to be more than 50 theoretical horse power for 50% of the time.

The dam would have been capable of creating clean hydro power from the get-go, but would have been subject to additional regulations, as in the Wisconsin statute below:
"31.09 Proposals to accompany applications. Each applicant for a permit to construct, operate and maintain a dam for the purpose of developing power or for the purpose of aiding in the development of power by other dams through the creation of reservoirs or otherwise, and each applicant for a permit to construct, operate and maintain a dam for any other purpose whatsoever, which is capable of developing 50 theoretical horsepower or more available for 50% of the time throughout the year, shall file with an application for a permit, in addition to the requirements of s. 31.05 or s. 31.07, as the case may be, the following proposals..."

6 comments:

Erik Helm said...

I unintentionally left out the word 'more' in my reference, which was not a quote. My bad. So let's assume 50-100 hp for argument's sake...

I explained the nature of 'spate' rivers and their effect on hydropower (low flow, followed by flooding). These rivers are not good candidates for electrical generation. Call the DNR. They should verify what I have said.

Cheers,
Erik

The River Otter said...

It doesn't specify the amount- they didn't go through the legal steps necessary to do the hydro at the time. I am not assuming that it was between 50-100. What would it really be?
Also, (honest question here) what exactly do you mean by spate river? One that changes with the rainfall/seasons? Aren't they all like that (more or less)?

Erik Helm said...

Spate rivers are rivers that normally have lower flows, and are prone to flood events. The Milwaukee River gets most of its flow from runoff. The main branches to the north that originate as trout streams are quite small, but the drainage area of the main river is quite extensive.

Rivers need a more or less constant flow and gradient in order to be good candidates for hydro power. The Milwaukee has poor gradient and wildly fluctuating flows, thus, not a good candidate. There could be a possibility if a huge reservoir was constructed upstream of the dam, but then everybody would indeed be displaced, and flooding would worsen.

The River Otter said...

Well, I think it is worth considering. Solar and wind power don't work all the time either, being weather- and season-dependent.

Anonymous said...

Hydro power on the Milwaukee River is not even close to being feasible. Wake up and stop grasping at any reason to keep the dam. You pro-dam repair people are getting more and more desperate. I especially liked how respectful your side was at the public hearing. I'm sure all the booing, yelling, and having someone escorted out by the sheriffs really impressed the County Supervisors. Keep up the good work!

The River Otter said...

Believe me, I was plenty embarrassed by those shenigans and was reminding people to be polite and respectful throughout.