Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
No. of Recommendations: 2
This is similar to the policies of Washington state and California. All of these states have large hydroelectric resources, but do not count hydro power as renewable.

For the love of god, WHY?

I think there is general opinion that we have already dammed up as many rivers as we can, and therefore it doesn't really matter if large hydro is included in the RPS, as there won't be any new dams in the future. I am not sure I buy into that argument, particularly for a sparsely populated state like Maine. In other places, existing hydroelectric facilities could be upgraded to provide more power. There are also areas where new hydroelectric pumped storage capacity could be added. But it is just too difficult to cut through all of the EPA's red tape. It is easier, and in the short term probably cheaper, just to build another natural gas burner.

Then there is the trend towards actually removing dams from service in the name of protecting the environment.

Short answer: Hydroelectric dams are disliked almost as much as nuclear power amongst the environmental crowd.

- Pete
Print the post  


When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.