New turbine may make dams unnnessesary

This is pretty cool. Especially if it becomes more effiecient in generating the electricity.

Ohhh the big bad dams!!


Title of the article should have read "Let's Ignore Everything Dams do EXCEPT Generate Power"

The gov't tried doing something similar to this in Hudsons Bay where the tidal flow of water is about 35 feet, it looked like an excellent idea on paper but unfortunately when they placed the turbines in the water the tidal flow changed and making power no longer became viable.

Then there is the matter this article so conveniently overlooks the ability for the lake to store the kinetic energy of the water----to even out the power production.

Most stream/river flows are very seasonal---

Here in the Upper Thames watershed---a series of "flood control" dams were built---when their true purpose was to provide a steady stream flow to flush the municipal sewage treatment plants discharge away---particularly London.
Undershot wheel which depend upon flow/velocity were not popular hence the wide adoption of impounds, mill-races and large diameter overshot millwheels.

The mill pond stored the overnight flow for the next days operation.

These in stream turbines will be as unreliable a power source as wind turbines---if that.
They perhaps have an application in tidal estuaries.

If you can make the same amount of power without a Dam, why not do it? There are certainly downsides to Dams, not just Environmentally, but Cost as well.

I'm starting to get the impression a lot of you are Emo. I suspect your cutting yourself as you read this.

There are upsides to dams too sandorski. Why abandon something that is doing this country well, considering we can't really build any other sort of power plant anymore

Amen.

I'm getting the impression that you're . I suspect you're smoking pot as you read this.

Of course there are, but there are upsides to not having Dams as well. It's not really an either/or situation, Dam-less Turbines could also give us opportunities to generate power where Dams are not practical.Where Dams have caused serious issues, we can correct those issues. As Dams age and become unsafe, we can possibly simply remove them and still maintain power generation.

I'm getting the impression that you're . I suspect you're smoking pot as you read this.

Wish I was and also wish the Emo-Posters would too. Posting quality would improve all around.

Are you seriously that dense? Why not go one step further and say something really stupid like "Gasoline is awesome! It powers my car! Who cares if burning all that gas causes deadly smog, I'm gonna go sit in my garage right now with the engine running just to prove how awesome it is!"

It's absurdly ironic that all of the people who are against the idea of doing away with dams to be replaced by a better and potentially cleaner technology are the same people who often talk about how much better western society is because we have more technology than people who live in mud huts.

Fur trading was once doing this country well, but we had to stop before we killed all of the animals that gave us those furs. If we continued on that path, we likely would have seriously upset many North American ecosystems, and most furry animals (ie most land-dwelling mammals) would probably be extinct. Instead, we developed better ways of staying warm in cold weather. Maybe you should complain about Thinsulate as well.

"In a constantly changing universe, one who stands still moves backward." - R.A. Wilson

I don't think the article was saying that at all. Unless I read it completely wrong. It didn't seem like it was saying that we should tear down the dams we have now. But like someone else said, these turbines would certainly allow us to place power generation where a dam is not feasible.

Wow. I didn't expect this to get political.
This just gives us another option. It's not a replacement.