2 ms·
It is, sadly, not in widespread public awareness. But some research is there, such as [1] [2]. If a hydropower dam has been built today on lower Mississippi it
by rini17 6y ago
It is, sadly, not in widespread public awareness. But some research is there, such as [1] [2].
If a hydropower dam has been built today on lower Mississippi it would over time fill with a cubic-mile-worth of toxic sediment on the top of currently existing problems. This is not an exaggeration, an additional superfund site with a volume measured in cubic miles, due solely to the hydro project itself I don't see how else can it be construed.
[1]https://waterlawjournal.com/sedimentation-in-california-reservoirs-a-long-term-problem-of-immediate-concern/ https://waterlawjournal.com/sedimentation-in-california-rese...
[2]https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12665-019-8146-y https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12665-019-8146-y
- dredmorbius 6y agoFirst, if. The lower Mississippi has poor hydro potential. And the region is already a cancer alley. Again: hydro does not create that risk or the polutants. This is an extreme reach.
- rini17 6y agoAh now I get it, when something instead of producing pollution directly, merely concentrates it in a reservoir, we can blithely ignore it. /s