Niagara Falls and RainbowThis week in class we had conversations about Niagara Falls and IF they actually "turn them off" at night to create hydropower at nearby US and Canadian generation plants. So I went traveling across cyber space to see what I could find. Not as good as actually being there, but for now.... let's see what you can find too. Right now I submit http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/21/tech/main1916244.shtml
a news story from 2006 about drilling a new tunnel to create more power, and diverting more water, though they say it won't be noticeable, I have a hard time believing that 50 - 75% diversion isn't. What do you think? And should they be creating more hydropower, an alternative energy source, by diverting falls water?
25 comments:
On the surface this project seems like a no brainer to create more renewable energy. However there are some questions that need to be asked. Is any of that drilling going to affect the water table in that area? Is the longterm economic savings created by the sustainable energy going to offset the the cost of the project and possible loss of tourism dollars should the falls be adversly affected? Aside from these questions, as long as the environment isn't going to be adversly affected, and there is going to be a possiblity to power 165,000 homes with clean renewable hydroelectric power, then that seems like a positve effort.
Josh Drozdowski GEOG 320
I found it interesting that they turn the water off. After class on Tuesday I searched for a picture on the Internet and found one on this website. I don't know what the credability is of any information on this website, however there is a picture of Niagara Falls at night with the water turned off at the bottom of the page.
http://www.ianrowland.com/Travels/EdgeOfAllegiance/EdgeNiagara.htm
I searched for some answers to the Niagara Falls questions, whether the falls is shut off at night for the hydroelectric plant. What I found is that during the day there is 100,000 cubic feet per second of water going over the falls, but at night they slow the water flow to half that at 50,000 cubic feet per second. The excess water is pumped into water reservoirs for the hydroelectric power plant by both Ontario Hydro and the New York State Power Authorities.
I agree with Josh. I believe the idea is a great concept, but there are issues which I believe have not been reviewed properly. Renewable energy is extremely important, but if nobody is looking at the long term effects then that could possible mean that there will not be any water left at some point in time. We have enough issues already with our environment, we do not need to add to them.
I am surprised by the lack of information on the web that describes the role that the falls play in the areas ecosystem. All the articles are about how the governmental, private, and public sectors battle for their vision of what the falls should be used for with little to no mention of what the falls already provide. There have been “preservation efforts” to stop/slow the natural erosion of the falls, there are electric dams all over the place, and meanwhile the areas just outside the parks (upstream/downstream) are being urbanized which is changing the topography and airflow of the region. If I had a better understanding of why the falls are important in their natural state then I could make some arguments as to why altering them is bad, but it almost appears if humans have already judged falls as an unimportant piece to nature’s workings, and therefore a commodity to be shaped and used as we wish. It seems like we’re getting in on this debate about 50-100 years too late
Taking in everything that everyone has said I find very good points and takes on this story. I was curious to find that they plan to use some 50-75% of the falls water but fail to mention the effects this would have on the falls themselves (I would imagine a great effect) but also the ecosystem. However, they seem make a point of mentioning the help such an endeavor could offer. This got me to thinking and I wonder if the water being used to generate power could be recycled back into the falls? I do not know much about hydroelectric power or whether or not something like this could be possible. I understand that a second or larger tunnel that could cycle the water would coast more and take longer to build. But again I wonder if it may be worth it. Clean energy and no relative lose of water - seems like a win-win.
I was thinking the same thing Matt. I think though that the energy system works because damns and waterfalls create two bodies of water next to each other that are separated by height. Gravity pushing huge volumes of water down to a base level is what turns the turbines and generates the electricity, so to bring the water back up to pump it out where you take it out would probably use at least as much energy as you were creating.
Hydroelectric seems to have great advantages in this particular area. It doesn’t burn fossil fuels and it’s economically stable. I’ve been thinking about the damage to the ecosystem and I honest can’t think of much. I don’t know of any fish spawning that goes on there or any species that’s been devastated because of construction. I do think that if the damn ever “failed” though, there could be a disastrous problem.
I agree that if they take 50 to 75 percent of the water from the falls that it would be noticeable to the viewers. I also look at it as they are using renewable resources to provide energy to many people too.
I am unclear about the whole turning the falls off thing, if that is what actually happens. When they turn it off, is that when they work on the tunnel? Also, it seems like this situation could start some sort of water war itself, since it is on the Canada-U.S. border, especially if the tunnel is that big and that major amount of water will be passing through it to Canada.
I’ve been doing some research over the internet, for the last couple of days and several websites have given the date of March 30, 1848 through March 31, 1848 as the only days when the water stopped flowing over the edge of the Horse Shoe Falls of Niagara. Of course for those of you who may not know the Horse Shoe Falls is the Canadian side of the falls. Apparently several large blocks of ice blocked the flow of the
Niagara River which caused water to stop flowing towards the falls. The flow of water towards the falls was blocked somewhere between 30 and 40 hours. On the American side of the falls water has stopped flowing over the edge of the falls six times.(1883, 1896, 1904, 1909, 1936, and 1947). Also as SSanche2 has stated they do indeed reduce the amount of water that flows over the edge of the falls at night.
I believe using the falls as a source of alternative energy is great as long as mankind does not comprise the natural beauty of the fall in anyway!
I attempted to find what negative effects this diversion would have on the falls. The main problem I found was whether or not this project is going to compromise the beauty of the falls itself. As much as I hope to preserve nature in all its beauty, I also see the need for this type of renewable energy. Especially, if it means closing some coal burning plants in the process. After all is complete, I do honestly hope that when I make it to see the falls for myself I will be as amazed by its beauty as others have in the past.
It found it very interesting that at night, more water is used to fill the reservoir. During the day less water is taken from the river so that tourist can see the amazing falls. But at dusk, more water is diverted into the reservoirs for hydroelectric power. I did not find one site saying that the water flow was completely shut off, just partially. Some people would like more water taken from the falls to create more power for the many people in the NE. But, like anything else there are political, and environmental problems, etc
I found this whole idea of turning off the water was very informing. I had no idea that they did that, but it seems like a good idea in order to create more renewable energy. Overall I have to agree with Josh, the whole idea seems like a great idea, but what are some of the things that could be lost as a result of this that may not be able to be changed in the future. I think Josh poses some good questions.
I am all for supporting alternative energy. Thus, if diverting water from the falls will shut down the coal-burning power plant in Ontario I think it's justified. However, I do wonder what will be lost. Niagara Falls is more than just a honeymoon stop, it's a national attration, an environmental marvel and a federally protected national park (in Canada) Which means it is an economic hub for the surround towns and wildlife preserve. If the diverting water becomes detremental to the beauty of the falls and interest in them is lost, so are its other environmental and economic benefits.
Aleise Haglund
GEOG 320
The article that I found was that they take 75% of the water at the power plant from Niagara Falls.
If this helps our environment, I think it is a good idea because it is renewable sources.
However, we should know when to stop taking away water from falls.
I think that they are on the right track with trying to use the falls as an alternative energy source. Also it said that they are going to close down the coal burning plants which release carbon into the atmosphere. But, what I think they need to look at is what the effects of diverting 50% to 75% of the water is going to have on the environment. Its great that they could electrify 160,000 homes, but at what other costs is this going to come?
I believe that the use of alternative resources, especially those that are renewable is a great idea. There is a lot of water in the world so taking advantage of it by converting it into hydroelectric power is a great idea. But although it is a great idea, and could be a great short time solution to energy problems, the real question is whether drilling a large whole, or altering the falls in some way will be more harmful or beneficial to those in the Niagra Falls area. by diverting 50-75% of the water would be noticeable and could be harmful to the surrounding environment. Maybe finding a less harmful solution to create the hydroelectric power would be more beneficial in the long run.
I guess I feel the same as the other readers when I say if the good outweighs the bad. You have to remember that almost nothing in the world today is natural in the first place. Although you may do your best to make sure that you do not disrupt the natural cycle of nature, this is a difficult task. Nature has its natural course and when you make any change it is a CHANGE.. I guess the best they could do is to try their best to make it as minimal as possible. The only true way to make sure the environment is not damaged is similar just like sex, do not do it. Being in the world today that is almost not an option. In addition this would not be the first time that man has laid its hands on the fall. Others have stated the time that a rock had blocked the flow of water and in 1969 when the fall was stopped for construction to some of the rocks that were on their way to falling apart. These events alone made a difference, so the question is that, does the end justify the means? If it does good if not, that sucks. The answer is not one that will be revealed in a second, minute, hour, day or year; but decades or maybe even centuries. You had to remember that nature is inevitable. Look at when they are trying to adjust the flow of the Mississippi; it is naturally changing its course another route. New Orleans also serves as the ultimate example, the levee will not hold forever. You can either take that as a lesson or an example.
Robert Walker GEOG 320 WWW
Creating more power with less coal is an awesome idea. But taking away 50 to 75 percent of the water from the falls is, no matter what anyone says, going to make a noticeable difference and if the falls aren't what they are right now due to this diversion than what impact will this have on the surrounding area in terms of tourism. With our economy the way it is right now can we afford to help other areas loss money. I know we need to try for a more substainable earth but you also have to make sure that we can support ourselves
I think that it is really cool that they turn off the water and create energy. I wonder how turning the water off effects the rate of erosion? regardless it is a great way to use the enviromental advantages we are given.
I find that this current attempt to harness the water flow at Niagara Falls is absolutely necessary. While we are seeing an average rate of erosion that has dropped to 3-4 inches a year, we are also seeing an enormous amount of water that is being diverted into hydro tunnels in order allow for significant amounts of hydro power. The diversion of water due to the construction of the International Control Dam was ingenious. Pumping the water that is diverted at night into the reservoirs averages 100,000 cubic feet per second that is used for hydro generation. This example and its effects should demonstrate the importance of pooling our water resources in order to ensure hydro before it is too late. The water that is being diverted is not taking away from the beauty of the falls, but adding to the sources of energy that if we are not careful, we are going to be without.
I disagree that it will not be a noticeable difference. Diverting over half of the water at any given time will disrupt the natural flow process and could lead to future problems with the falls. However, I am completely for using alternative forms of energy sources and feel that there are unlimited opportunities throughout the contintent to apply these techniques to create more power. Drilling a tunnel into the falls seems somewhat unnecessary and excessive way to create this source of hydropower. With Niagra Falls being a state park, I think they should find an alternative approach to gaining more power and that they should consider more options than potentially jeopardizing one of the most famous landmarks in America. In my overall opinion, they should not divert the falls water to create more hydropower but the could try another method to make use of the falls to create this energy source they are seeking.
Kyle Seay
Online Geo 320
Much like many other "green" projects i.e. ethenol. Its sounds and looks good on teh outside but what are going to be the lasting and long term effects. There should be more thoughts put into what the affects of these projects will be other than the immediate gratification of creating more power. If they plan on diverting 50-75% of the falls water there has to be a noticeable difference. Why not build a nuclear power plant if more power is needed?
i think it is a whole load of shit-lol
i think you could improve it
maybe relate the answer more to the question-lol
if i ever come back to your website
i expect it to make more sense
be improved
relate more to the question-lol
if i do write back to you
i would like to write something which is more nice-lol
bye for now
you had better hope i write back-lol
because i am telling you what is wrong and things
bye bye
beth
Post a Comment