While models predict climate change will plunge California and the Southwest deeper into drought, what awaits Washington and Oregon is less clear. The Pacific Northwest will get warmer. That much is certain. But in terms of the rain that places like Seattle and Portland are known for, things get fuzzier.
The bulk of it, Voisin said, is expected to come from atmospheric rivers streaming overhead between fall and spring, with rivers running low in late summer as the snow and ice in the mountains that rim the region melt ever earlier and no longer keep the waters as high as they historically have.
It’s important to remember that some dams act as flood control and smooth out the river discharge for various benefits. Typically in monsoon style areas, not sure how many others. We might see that role come up if we have fewer but more severe rains.
We are at no risk of drought in the PNW. It rains like 3/4ths of the year
Generation methods that destroy key ecosystems of threatened and endangered species is not what I’d call “clean”. We can do so much better than dams, getting rid of them in place of actual green power would be an incredible, healing boon to these major rivers and the industries they support.
Sadly all power generation methods come at a cost. What would you suggest?
Wind and solar. They have downsides, like they all do, you’re right, but they don’t obliterate sensitive ecosystems of threatened species. The downsides to nature are significantly reduced with wind and solar. Tidal looks good too, but I don’t know enough about it to give it the official "Some Random Guy on Lemmy Stamp of Approval ".
Large hydropower is not counted as “Renewable” by California. We have renewable portfolio targets, and we import a lot of wind power from the north to meet the standards.
You can argue about how green it is, considering its impact on ecosystems, but how did they end at the conclusion that it’s not renewable?
