APR 07

If Massachusettes-based Free Flow Power has its way, the Mississippi River will be producing 1600 megawatts of free, constant, emissions-free energy by 2017. They'll do it by installing thousands, or even tens of thousands, of in-stream turbines at 59 sites stretching from St Louis to the Gulf of Mexico.

Hundreds of turbines would be installed at each site and, all together, they would produce enough power to eliminate the need for two large coal-fired power plants.

Of course, right now, this project has a lot of hurdles to jump. First, they have to complete a detailed environmental analysis of the project, and Federal Energy Regulatory Comission has to approve the project. The environmental analysis could take as long as three years.

Additionally, Free Flow Power has yet to demonstrate that their systems can operate at costs below that of natural gas power. If the project doesn't produce economical power, financing the project will be impossible. In fact, Free Flow Power, as far as we can tell, hasn't actually tested their turbines outside the laboratory.

Free Flow isn't the only company working on in-stream hydroelectric. A pilot project has already been installed in New York's East River and several other companies are working on similar technology.

But if Free Flow Power can demostrate that their system isn't going to harm the river's ecosystem, they'll get first crack at developing all 59 of these high-energy sites in the Mississippi...and that could turn out to be quite an asset.

Via STLToday

Comments (8)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

the fish
written by fishy, April 07, 2008

What about the fish? Wouldn't they get chopped up going through these things? Sushi anyone...

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Robbert, April 07, 2008

Fish are about as likely to swim into these turbines, as they are likely to swim into the screws of ships. Which is not.
In fact it's even less likely as these turbines will not create their own suction like a ships screw does. It's the water that flows through them that provides the movement, not vice versa.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Mississippi?
written by Dan, April 07, 2008

After living in the St. Louis area from 98-02, I would think a much cleaner river would be more feasible. There is so much debri going down that river and mud, I would think maintenance would be very costly.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by dialtone, April 07, 2008

I live in Minneapolis - just upriver in Coon Rapids there used to be a hydro-electric dam - the turbines are gone but the dam is still there; also there used to be a hydro dam right in downtown Mnpls. - lots of water - good size drop at St. Anthony Falls - I think these things should be installed on every river with good enough water flow - screens can keep the fish & debris out

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Simon D, April 07, 2008

Interesting - thanks for running this story.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Saint Louis
written by Stephen, April 08, 2008

Wow, I am sad I missed this article in the Post. Never expected original reporting from them. Hope I will be living off this soon enough. If memory is correct, something like enough water passes in front of the Arch a minute to sustain St. Louis water use for a year.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Good Idea
written by jim, July 20, 2008

Well, a few fish might become chowder, but are we supposed to live like Neanderthal people, dragging our knuckles on the ground, and freezing because we don't have heat?

Would you like your chowder red or white, sir?

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Info
written by Christina, August 04, 2009

Ok first if they put them in. They may be smart enough to a screen so the fish and debri wont get in there. I think it is a great idea to help out with the environment.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment