Chile Forum

I find the thread interesting, as an Australian. We have similar issues regarding development, and the constant fight between high growth neo-classical economic views and the increasingly powerful sustainable development view that has come to dominate our politics.

In Australia, a country with very similar characteristics to Chile, we are seeing more and more privatisation of public property under the banner of the fallacy of the efficiency of the market. There is a lot of anger in Australia about this.

In regard to the technical issue of transmitting the electricity, it is well done in Australia already, with an excellent national grid covering electricity generated from sources as diverse as Tasmanian hydro to coal fired mega powerstations in Queensland to wind generators in Victoria to home produced power via a solar cell or wind generator, anywhere. If you are a home producer of energy, you can sell your excess produce back into the grid at a very considerate rate!

However, I agree with the thoughts of most so far - why destroy a pristine environment when there is ample oppurtunity to further environmental destruction a little closer to home - near the consumers that demand this energy!

In Australia, we have a term for this type of pro-development at all cost people. We call them a nimby - Not In My Back Yard!

El Chanco

Won't the distances in Chile prevent transmission over conventional high tension overhead wires? This technology has a maximum transmission distance I believe.

BUT...

When electrical energy is required to be transmitted over very long distances, it is more economical to transmit using direct current instead of alternating current. For a long transmission line, the lower losses and reduced construction cost of a DC line can offset the additional cost of converter stations at each end.

Actually, the longest HVDC line is currently 1700km...
That's like an easy jump from anywhere in Patagonia to anywhere up to (or beyond) Santiago
And high voltage direct current has a potential for up to 3000km transmission.
That's just about the distance from Coihaique to Arica
And with a wee tweak of super-conductor technology...
It'll be longer, soon enuff.
Hey... "Build IT and they will BUY it"

BTW...
In our own "home and (stolen) native land"...
There is currently a thing called "Site C"...
Rejected in 1989... but now being reviewed
Same, same, but different.
Flooding productive agricultural land and wildlife habitat
... as well as one of the best locations for wind generation in the province
Keep your eye on this power~puppy too, if ya wanna see some controversy

Actually... rather than just bitch and whine about the issue...
g~j will share one solution
It's called "run of river" = using the natural gradient of the river to produce (local) power, thus eliminating the need for large scale dams~reservoirs and transmission lines~grids

http://www.financialsense.com/contributors/marin-katusa/hydroelectric-revolution-a-river-runs-through-it
Great article... RECOMMENDED !!!
It may not be the "final solution", but for certain areas/applications...
It's simple-easy-cheap-effective-envirofriendly...
Arguably it could be quite effective in a water~river~rich environment like south/central Chile.
But...
Something like that wouldn't be "profitable" for the aforementioned evil crony~capitalists.
So, it'll never happen?
Unless by local small-funding community affirmative~action...
Then like el chancho sez... feed your excess kilowatts back into the damned grid... $ $

I understand the longest economic distance for HVDC would be 7000km, and for HVAC around 3000km. Possible with a hydroelectric scheme the economic distance could be even longer as essentially once the initial investment is written off the electricity generation is essentially free.

This is an issue with a lot of pros and cons, and Chile needs energy to progress, having come very close to a standstill due to imported gas being shut off in 2007. I don't think the government will forget that in a hurry. There are not many alternatives, coal fired (yuck), nuclear (not in an earthquake-prone country please...), there are no reserves of natural gas available... I don't know if alternatives like wind and wave power are possible on the scale being discussed.

Correct me if I am wrong but are the transition lines not already in place? I thought there were already a couple big dams in Los Rios y Los Lagos that power a good portion of Central Chile.

If they are worried about the "scar" it would be a little late I believe. Flooding the valleys is another issue that needs to be addressed. The animals will move to higher ground things will “normalize” in a short time.

It will be like the WeaselHead here in Calgary, it is a wetland that is cause by a dam down stream. The only reason it is there is because of the dam. The city/province want to put a road through it but there is a lot of opposition from environmental groups that want this “natural” area protected.

Hydro is the only economical resource for electricity Chile has, if you have other alternatives what are they? Solar and wind will supply some juice but not so good on still nights. Gas looked good until the Argies got involved, now the 2 gas fired plant are running at ¼ capacity. The electric corridor would be 10 times cheaper to run up through Argentina but after the gas debacle running up the east slope of the Andes is not happening. Conservation is the quickest way to decrease use and is being contemplated (compact fluoresces may become mandatory as was done in Australia), also inertie is also being developed. When inertie is available I know hundreds of houses in Santiago will set up 2-5 kw systems, hell they will be producing electricity at the prime hours every AC system in downtown is using it, this is several years away and will only supply -10-15% of the need. So to all you anti dam advocates tell me where is the juice coming from? If you mention the dozens of tidal, wave action etc projects around the world that have 15-20 year development horizons and may never be viable you are dreaming.

Thanks g~j for the interesting link

http://www.financialsense.com/contribut ... through-it
Great article... RECOMMENDED !!!
It may not be the "final solution", but for certain areas/applications...
It's so freak'n simple-easy-cheap-envirofriendly...

Lots of little things add up and do make a difference: you know 'em well - conservation, retrofitting, green architecture, solar where it works, wind where it works, efficiencies... Sure you need some concentration of energy for production, transportation, but not everything has to come from the same grid. There is more than one solution to the energy problem. There has to be or we'll never get the "damn oligarchic elitists" out of our lives.

... tell me where is the juice coming from? If you mention the dozens of tidal, wave action etc projects around the world that have 15-20 year development horizons and may never be viable you are dreaming.

True enuff, nwd... folks gotta have juice, just as folks might well learn to recognize (future) choices.
But look at the damn dam... 15 +/- years to complete???

Construction may start in 2014 and take 12 years...

So either way - gov't~industry are looking at a 15+/- year fwd plan to provide some quantifiable amount of future gigawatts...
Seems like any plan to develop more hydro automatically kow-tows to the status quo...
Chile = Big Hydro = why change?
This negates, diminishes, eliminates any plan or incentive to develop alternate or renewable.
It would take a leader with real cojones (o ovarios) to kick-start that horse.
With 4000+km of wild, windward Pacific coast to harvest energy...
+ with the recent/significant developments in ALL renewable technology
Chile has some pretty impressive (unused, under-utilized) energy resources
[some real interesting (and scalable) wave and/or tidal generators cropping up these days]
If we're projecting hydro vs. an alternative over 15 year's development...
An equivalent number of renewable gigawatts might easily be seen in the same time-frame
These gigawatts CAN be viable - with commitment - but that's a shallow commodity these daze.

Any renewable juice, be it solar, wind, tidal, wave, geothermal, run-of-river.... doesn't require large, elaborate, capital-intensive grids... smaller~local projects can suffice.
BUT... those Big grids, with the Big infrastructure surrounding...
Are just what Big bizness and Big banking want~need.
Seems like what is missing (and will always be...)
It's the political~corporate~financial will (cojones o ovarios) to Just Do It.
Step back to g~j's favorite whipping boyz... those nasty~evil crony~capitalists.
Who are not (yet) optimally invested in renewables to maximize profits in their corporate coffers.
If/when they realize the inevitable future directions... better jump on their bandwagon...
Or be a trend-setter... show 'em the way

Let me just say this to begin with. Hydro power is not a bad way to go if you need the juice. There are tradeoffs with everything.

Just curious, though, maybe we wouldn't need so much dam(n) power if we used what we do have more efficiently. Shut off the lights, lose some of your power hungry gadgets, use the computer less, quit buying crap junk products from China that fall apart and instead demand quality products that don't fall apart. Buy used stuff whenever you can. Repair instead of replace.

We have more than enough resources, power and otherwise, if we just use it better. I better get off my soapbox....(I am just upset about that gulf oil spill!)

I agree that today hydro is the only option for Chile. The amount of clean power hydro can produce dwarfs any attempt to add to the total with alternative sources. I might note too that the US experience with the REA (Rural Electrification Administration) put out so much power the US experienced incredible growth in the middle class. Factories could run three shifts... etc. To move up in the global economics a country needs to produce surplus cheap power.

Hoover dam was completed in 5 years. Grand Coulee dam took 7 years. Why would a dam take 15 years in Chile?

Nuclear can be done safely even in an earthquake zone using the new cores that cannot melt down.

Incidentally Chile doesn't have a true "grid". It's actually a corridor and suseptible to extensive outages should line failures occur in the right place(s).

I'm not in favor of ripping up some of the last great wilderness in the world.

Chuck J 3.0 wrote:Norte-Americano's are pathetic.

And not just pathetic, but unable to recognize what it means to be imperialistic and hypocritical.

The US eco-people seem to feel it is appropriate to dictate to the Japanese what they can and cannot eat, even when the food sources are in no danger of extinction.

There's a class of people from the US who visit Chile believing in a sort of Eco-Lebenstraum, a geopolitical control grab that would have made Hitler proud. They see a nice river in which they would like to play for a few days every few years, and do their best to prevent economic growth in Chile for the benefit of a few foreigners' continued, albeit occasional, splashing around in leisure activities.

These same visiting foreigners and their ilk only a few years ago noisily protested the construction of the Carretera Austral, which made it possible for these foreigners to reach those rivers so that they can play in them when they feel like it.

Here in Patagonia we see the effects of the imperialists from the US in themes such as "Patagonia Sin Represas." These foreigners and their local minions are a mendacious Orwellian sort, their propaganda showing photoshopped skylines with power transmission towers superimposed over locations where no such development has even been suggested. The ghost of Goebbels rides with these people.

I was up in Aysen a few months ago. For the benefit of those who are not involved in the details, a good deal of the Aysen region already has roads and power transmission lines. That is what the government is supposed to provide for its citizens. I got to visit one of the existing hydro power generation facilities in the Palena area (the generators are from China). There are fences and mines and reservoirs and farms and fisheries and cattle and sawmills and ambulances and gas stations and insurance salesmen and fast food in Aysen. We are not talking about a "pristine" region, despite what the eco-propagandists have been showing in their very selective and often photoshopped presentations.

What these foreigners (North Americans) and their naïvely ingenuous Chilean lackeys are really saying is this: Chile sin represas, Chile sin energía, Chile sin futuro. They would rather that Chileans starve and freeze in the dark than receive economical electricity.

The Ugly American is not dead. He is only wearing sandals, smoking dope, and hugging other peoples' trees these days.

[quote="PanAmerican"]I agree that today hydro is the only option for Chile.......
latest generation of earthquake-resistant nuclear facilities.[quote]

Resistant is the key word, 7s maybe but an 8 I wouldn’t trust anybody’s engineering, plus they would have to buy uranium as they are not a producer nor does there appear to be any in Chile. They would pay as much to buy the nuc tech from Canada as putting in the line south to new Hydro projects. The reason BC on the Pacific doesn’t have any nuc reactors is we know we will get a big bump sometime. They have looked at a reactor for the tarsands in Alberta to get away from coal/electric to crack the oil from the sand that may happen. But as I said before first increase what is available through conservation then add Hydro while setting up inertie and developing wind and micro solar, hey they are dams they can be removed if not needed