The Energy Collective Group
This group brings together the best thinkers on energy and climate. Join us for smart, insightful posts and conversations about where the energy industry is and where it is going.
Post
Energy: why are we losing?
Energy: why are we losing?
Historically, Brazil had a very interesting differential due to its matrix (electricity sector) being 90% renewable.
But this century has seen a major change. Now about 30% of our matrix is thermal (coal, gas, nuclear, etc.).
The main changes that occurred: (1) increased emissions and (2) increased costs due to the fuels involved.
In developed countries, programs like demand response emerged and were incorporated in the dispatch" of their electrical systems. Result: cost reduction that benefits energy providers and demanders. In Brazil, this program exists only on paper.
Intermittent energies (wind and solar) in developed countries are being handled to avoid the effects of the "duck curve". In Brazil, this theme does not even exist yet and the associated costs are just passed on.
Discussions
"there are still great opportunities for new hydro power plants..."
Rafael, I was curious about this claim, and after a bit of searching I found a study that supported it: Brazil's current installed hydropower capacity is 114 GW, but there exists potential for 146 GW more. Brazil, with pumped storage, could be powered by 100% renewable electricity.
That conclusion comes with several caveats, however:
"The construction of hydroelectric dams is clearly associated with an array of both positive and negative environmental impacts. Some of them may represent real constraints for the installation of such structures, while others may act as a sustainable way for the local development. Since energy is widely need for almost all human activities, it is necessary to make a balance of pros and cons related with hydropower generation. No universal recipe can be here established, since regional peculiarities will play a striking role in the decision process. In the case of Brazil, which is the main subject of this paper, government, civil society, water users and scientific community are since many years deeply involved in this relevant discussion. Under a broad point of view it may be assumed that the advantages generally prevail over the limitations and a solid trend of further energy generation by the installation of hydropower dams can be identified in the country."
Like all renewable sources of energy, hydropower has significant land use impacts. In the United States during the 1960s, Sierra Club supported nuclear energy as a less-damaging alternative to hydroelectric dams:
Then they discovered there was more money in opposing it.
If you haven't already, you'll discover most of the opposition to nuclear power is not that it's dangerous, but that there isn't enough potential for profit. Nuclear is, quite literally, too cheap.
Get Published - Build a Following
The Energy Central Power Industry Network is based on one core idea - power industry professionals helping each other and advancing the industry by sharing and learning from each other.
If you have an experience or insight to share or have learned something from a conference or seminar, your peers and colleagues on Energy Central want to hear about it. It's also easy to share a link to an article you've liked or an industry resource that you think would be helpful.
Sign in to Participate