The data in the table and chart above was extracted from the world bank public data.Correlation was calculated using "Pearson's correlation", Quote from Wikipedia:
Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient is a measure of the correlation (linear dependence) between two variables X and Y, giving a value between +1 and -1 inclusive. It is widely used in the sciences as a measure of the strength of linear dependence between two variables. The correlation coefficient ranges from -1 to 1. A value of 1 implies that a linear equation describes the relationship between X and Y perfectly, with all data points lying on a line for which Y increases as X increases. A value of -1 implies that all data points lie on a line for which Y decreases as X increases. A value of 0 implies that there is no linear correlation between the variables.
The table below is an†Interpretation of the degree of correlation between two variables:
|None||-0.09 to 0.0||0.0 to 0.09|
|Small||-0.3 to -0.1||0.1 to 0.3|
|Medium||-0.5 to -0.3||0.3 to 0.5|
|Strong||-1.0 to -0.5||0.5 to 1.0|
In an ideal situation, a higher yearly average precipitation would imply higher surface water flow (rivers) and more hydraulic power available for hydroelectric power generation. Sadly, the correlation between both Indicators isn’t that high. The Correlation coefficient between the percentage of power generation from hydroelectric sources and the average yearly precipitation equals to 0.29, indicating a medium positive correlation between the two indicators.
If we take a closer look at the data we notice counties like Paraguay having 1130 average precipitation per year and 100 % of Paraguay’s Electrical Generation produced from¬†hydroelectric generation. An excellent example of the healthy use of Earth’s resources by reliance on the renewable green energy. Paraguy produces sufficient power for its domestic use and exports the majority of its electrical power to Barzil and Argentina (90% of its generated electricity).
Iceland has 1940 mm average yearly precipitation, with 73.81 of Iceland’s electrical power produced from hydroelectric generation and the remaining from renewable resouces. Another example of the healthy use of Earth’s resources.
On the other hand, Countries like Jamaica have 2051 mm average precipitation per year, yet 96% of Jamaica’s electricity¬†is produced from oil and only 2 % from hydroelectric energy. A perfect example of the reasons we are facing global warming, high Co2 Emissions and the Green house effect.
Another example is Cuba, it has 1335 mm average precipitation per year, yet Cuba’s electricity generation¬†relies only by 0.85 % on hydroelectric and the rest of its electricity demand is covered 82 % from oil and 13 % from natural gas.
The most shocking of all examples is United Kingdom, being one of the high income countries and pocessing the technology and human expertise to produce 16% of its electrical energy from nuclear power, 44 % from natural gas, 29 % from Coal but only 5.7 % from renewable energy and 0.9 % out of hydroelectric energy. United Kingdom has a 1220 mm yearly average precipitation.
Why isn’t hydroelectric energy more widely used in United Kingdom, in Cuba, in Jamaica and in the rest of the world? Isn’t hydroelectric energy is the safest and most reasonable option? Isn’t it cheaper and sustainable on the long term?