What's next?

Just found this… thumbs up to Michigan for accepting global warming after first defined 50 years ago and widely shared in popular media just 20 years ago.

Curious they’re focusing on Dams which could contribute to the increasing electrical demand. The only dam being considered for removal in my area was built to generate electricity while several other recreational dams are not being addressed.

Hydroelectric contributes almost no carbon or other negative effect. Hydro solves the intermittent generation solar or wind sources provide and the output of modern high efficiency low rise hydro installations equals or outstrips both those sources.

The decision to remove dams is not reversible and doesn’t seem a rational choice to address the years of neglect most communities elected. Does leave you wondering why hydro potentials are being suppressed while solar is being embraced as the popular solution.

Who’s really benefiting, in my area it’s not the general public.