When is it right to redevelop hydroelectric sites?

It is a question that many in the industry are familiar with. There are many concerns when developing renewable energy projects. The most important concern is the environmental impact. Ultimately, renewable energy's selling feature is that it provides greater environmental benefits than not doing it. In most scenarios, there are cost benefits to any new development. My feeling it that the redevelopment of already impacted areas provides an opportunity to maintain the existing impacts and the resulting adapted environment with the creation of renewed green energy production. Water is already the greatest form of renewable energy. Waterpower is commonly viewed as reliable, reactive and renewable. It has been described as a source of energy "more than renewable". I agree. So important to the energy mix is that hydro is used as the perfect and only large scale support system for the wind industry. Where we can dramatically curb the new environmental impacts and provide this source of energy, it is my feeling that we should take all means necessary to support the redevelopment and refurbishment of our heritage green energy assets.

Many of these sites are seen as too small, or too aged to attract large corporate investment. This has caused an environment of less than optimal usage of the flowing resource, and in some cases the abandonment and removal of these sites.

When we are promoting new renewable technologies, we need to also be supporting our proven suppliers and encourage their continuing operations. Support can come from local communities, government initiatives, school level education programs demonstrating its history and benefits, and supplying to an informative discussion so as to avoid broad generalizations on hydroelectric development that have tarnished the good.