I assume it’s a matter of universal scalability. There’s a limited number of viable hydro projects, whereas solar and wind power is just a question of scaling up production generally. Most places are viable for at least one of the two.
I think its not built as much because solar/wind are simpler & cheaper. Hydro needs the right elevation/water flow/geography. Its disruptive to ecosystems & human habitation & it has huge up-front costs. Yes, its great sometimes, but maybe not as often as we might think.
There’s also the problem that all of the best spots for hydro have already been dammed. The spots that remain are much more marginal, and with other water issues getting worse worldwide hydroelectricity is in competition with other forms of water use.
I have to wonder why hydro is always left out of the solar+wind clean energy statistics. Is it just because it’s old tech?
I assume it’s a matter of universal scalability. There’s a limited number of viable hydro projects, whereas solar and wind power is just a question of scaling up production generally. Most places are viable for at least one of the two.
I think its not built as much because solar/wind are simpler & cheaper. Hydro needs the right elevation/water flow/geography. Its disruptive to ecosystems & human habitation & it has huge up-front costs. Yes, its great sometimes, but maybe not as often as we might think.
There’s also the problem that all of the best spots for hydro have already been dammed. The spots that remain are much more marginal, and with other water issues getting worse worldwide hydroelectricity is in competition with other forms of water use.