RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:QUIZ For The SH SU BB Readers: SPOT The ERROR !In our eyes it is strange.
However, realize that hydro power is considered by some governments and organizations as a non renewable resource. I have seen it listed in such a way in some other publications as well.
This bizarre concept is mostly prevalent where high concentrations of environmental idiots gather in large groups, such as in the government of the State of California, the Sierra Club, and The Utility Reform Network.
In order to push their agenda further, Califiornia, already the second largest hydro producer in the US, set goals for renewable energy sources in 2002 and 2011. Utilities were required to generate a third of their power by renewables by 2020. But the state set a limit on the inclusion of hydropower. It allowed smaller projects less than 30MW, but not larger ones towards the renewable mandate. It even disallowed imports of hydro energy from neighbouring states to count as renewable energy. This forced to start even more electrical generation projects from 'good' renewables like wind and solar.
in 2012, a bill to allow large hydro projects to also count as renewables there was crushed due to objections of environmental nutbars.
Yet the list goes on. State governments of Michigan, Missouri, Iowa, and Ohio also do not allow hydro to count in the renewable mix.
This is what happens when members of fringe environmental groups squirm their way into positions of power, kind of like the makeup of the government in Canada now.
So, it all depends on where the chart he is referring to is printed, and most often this perceived error is from the propaganda charts and figures spewed by the anti fossil fuel groups, and is 100% correct in their view.
When talking about the global electrical energy mix, fortunately most of the world also sees it our way.
Got oil?
Lawisfun wrote: That is weird. Why is hydro considered non-renewable?