The Associated Press. “Morocco evacuates 140,000 people as torrential rains and dam releases trigger floods.” ABC News, 5 February 2026, https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/morocco-evacuates-140000-people-torrential-rains-dam-releases-129889549

Morocco is dealing with an extreme weather event. The flooding is so severe that 140,000 residents have been evacuated from a large area. This is due to extreme flooding and overflow of their dams. These dams are being loaded with so much water at once that they flood and destroy the surrounding area. Many important infrastructures are being destroyed that these local areas rely on, things like farms, hospitals, schools, and more, are being taken out. Morocco has been in a state of severe drought for the last seven years and was unprepared for this much rain.

This made me think about how some places in the world are experiencing extreme drought as a result of climate change, while Morocco, once a place of drought, is experiencing the exact opposite. It’s important to help countries experiencing extreme weather and to prepare for a worst-case scenario. These countries are beginning to shift their focus away from dams, especially during this time of inconsistency and risk, especially to human lives. I wonder whether the risks involved with hydroelectric dams make them worth the cost of building and maintaining. We are beginning to find more and more problems on the local and global levels.

“Hydropower Is Getting Less Reliable as the World Needs More Energy.” The New York Times, 17 November 2025, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/17/business/energy-environment/brazil-hydropower-clean-energy-cop30.html. Accessed 5 February 2026.

Brazil is facing an extreme decrease in hydroelectric reliability due to climate change. Despite rising demand for electricity, generation from dams has decreased by 3%. In this case, extreme weather conditions are to blame. Droughts are becoming more and more common, reducing many power plants to less than half their capacity. Brazil’s deforestation problem has also weakened the natural water system. Uprooting large trees can cause erosion and more landslides, further reducing efficiency. This is not just Brazil, and many other countries are going through a similar situation. Dams are proving to be more expensive and age over time, forcing Brazil to move toward solar and wind projects. Solar has had a 10% boom in Brazil. While hydropower is still the dominant supply of electricity in Brazil, they are moving toward new opportunities and renovations.

This is interesting, how Brazil is so heavily reliant on Hydropower and what will happen to them in the future. I wonder whether, over time, solar and wind will decrease while hydropower increases again. The connection between the large rainforests in Brazil and the loop back to soil health and the natural water cycle really interests me. Maybe this is a sign for Brazil to prioritize its natural resources and limit deforestation to help address its loss of hydropower. Will hydropower become useless and ancient, or will it recover? I think it will recover over time as our climate heals, forcing countries to shift back to hydroelectric generation.

International Water Power and Dam Construction. “At a crossroads: Peru’s hydropower in an era of diversification.” Waterpower Magazine, 5 February 2026, https://www.waterpowermagazine.com/analysis/at-a-crossroads-perus-hydropower-in-an-era-of-diversification/?cf-view.

Peru has been relying heavily on hydropower for the last few decades and are actually expecting a decline in Hydropower efficiency. Climate change has increased wind speeds, and droughts are affecting dam efficiency. Increased frequency of El Niño events has forced Peru to use backup fossil fuel generation. The rise of solar and wind is becoming a strategy, and Peru will begin its efforts to adjust its new power mix. Solar and wind capacity are expected to double, and Peru has strict goals to meet to reduce emissions. Wind and Solar are actually much cheaper to scale and put less risk on local ecosystems as well. Peru’s goals have shifted from having hydroelectric power as its main source of electricity to having it support and stabilize a large system. It can no longer provide enough results to be the baseload forever, so Peru will prioritize improving existing dams rather than expansion.

This makes me think about how much countries will have to adapt as they fight climate change. What happens when we start reducing emissions, and that wind goes away? Peru does not have the luxury of relying on one, consistent energy source. This article highlights how all countries that plan to reach net-zero emissions must be able to adapt consistently to environmental changes. Local weather events may limit some countries from reaching predicted goals, and Peru is one of the first to be forced to completely shift their strategy.

Advancing Earth and Space Science. “Exposing the most dangerous dams in the US.” AGU, 16 December 2025, https://news.agu.org/press-release/exposing-the-most-dangerous-dams-in-the-us/.

This is a news article about unsafe dams across the United States. Some are considered degrading, while others “sink into the ground”. In the United States, more than 16,000 dams have high-hazard potential. Most dams were built several decades ago, and damage can be out of sight from inspectors. The study detected ground sinkage over 10 years and focused on taller dams, which demonstrated greater collapse risk. The dams in the Roanoke Rapids area are getting worse, even after being considered stabilized. A collapsing dam can cause damage to surrounding areas. Downstream towns could face flooding, and habitats could be wiped out. As the climate worsens, dams face more intense rainfall and even more water pressure over time. We need to provide better maintenance and inspections if we want an improvement in dam quality.

This is really scary to consider. While we are generating lots of electricity, we have not been maintaining hydroelectricity, and our dams seem to be outdated. The last thing we need is an attempt at clean energy being more harmful than good. I think the United States should place a higher priority on environmental goals, including better inspections on dams and even new dams for increased generation.

“China starts building world’s largest dam, fuelling fears in India.” BBC, 21 July 2025, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gk1251w14o. Accessed 5 February 2026.

China has begun construction of the world’s largest hydroelectric dam. It will be called the Motuo Hydropower Station, on the Yarlung Tsangpo River. This is going to be a crazy achievement for clean energy and hydropower. If completed, the Motuo Station would go down in history. It would generate three times as much electricity as the next-largest dam, Three Gorges, also in China. This is becoming a concern for countries south of China, like India and Bangladesh, which would be at the mercy of China’s control of the dams’ flow. China’s control over the flow gives it power and the ability to dry up or flood southern countries. This would be a 167 billion dollar dam, and it has clear risks at its size. India’s government is concerned about flooding risks and has asked for transparency.

I think it’s important to develop as many sources of clean energy as possible, and China is leading the way with these HUGE projects. There is a risk posed by such large dams, especially now that we are seeing increasingly inconsistent water behavior due to climate change. I understand some countries are concerned about the imbalance of power among the surrounding countries. We need to double our hydropower capacity by 2050, and all countries will have to reach some sort of agreement to put aside conflict. The priority should be net zero until we see a decline in atmospheric greenhouse gases.

Canon, G. (2025, January 3). California tribes celebrate historic dam removal: ‘More successful than we ever imagined’. The Guardian. Retrieved August 24, 2025, from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/03/california-klamath-dam-removal

In 2024, 4 dams on the California-Oregon border were destroyed, launching a major project in American history. The return was immense, salmon populations returned, and the river was once like it was many years ago. Toxic algae blooms were no longer an issue,  sediment build-up was no longer an issue in the river, and 400 miles of wild habitat were restored. Animals such as beavers and turtles were seen returning to their natural habitat. Seen as a success and seemed to have more benefits to the environment than downsides. 

Environmental science paid off, and the people were right. Destruction of the dams created opportunities for the return of wildlife and the original habitat. My only question is, why were these even built in the first place? Do the benefits truly outweigh the negatives? Will there be long-term negatives to removing the dam?

Nilsen, E. (2025, February 3). 2.2 billion gallons of water flowed out of California reservoirs because of Trump’s order to open dams. CNN. Retrieved August 24, 2025, from https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/03/climate/trump-california-water-dams-reservoirs

The US Army Corps released 2.2 billion gallons of water from two California reservoirs in 

February, in hopes of sending water to southern California farmers. Although the president 

ordered this, many officials criticized his misjudgment, claiming the water never even came 

close to Los Angeles. The water was now drained during the season when it was most required. 

Many criticize the lack of communication Trump had with locals, as they warned it would create 

a lack of water for local farmers that season. Most of the water ended up in a lakebed and was 

essentially wasted. Experts claimed “zero benefit” and that it was the wrong move, completely. 

This is another example of where environmental science would have prevented this issue before any damage could be done. Despite positive intentions for Los Angeles, the condition worsened due to a lack of communication. I wonder how this could have been prevented and if any scientists were involved in the decision. 

Alexander, K. (2025, August 9). New California dam removal could restore a river — and destroy a community. San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved August 24, 2025, from https://www.sfchronicle.com/california/article/lake-pillsbury-dam-california-20779336.php

PG&E is planning to remove a California dam, draining the reservoir. This is controversial because it could destroy the land’s tourism, water supply for fires, and even property values in the area. Local environmental groups and tribes are supporting this as it promotes wildlife like salmon and brings back the beautiful Eel River. The demolition would cost 580 million dollars and start in 2028. While critically endangered salmon populations in the area could increase, the longest free-flowing river could return, and the natural environment could recover. The negative impacts are significant. The loss of lake recreation would create a loss of tourism and businesses in the surrounding area. Also, in the event of a wildfire, there would be no water to be used to put out the fire. 

This was an important article because it reminds me of the controversy surrounding these decisions and the potential impact that needs to be considered in environmental science. It is never possible to entirely please both sides of the argument, and sometimes the best thing for the environment is not the best thing for the people. This creates a difficult decision for scientists to make. 

Baumhardt, A., & Ford, P. (2025, May 29). After reaching historic lows, hydropower generation in the Northwest is expected to rise in 2025 • Idaho Capital Sun. Idaho Capital Sun. Retrieved August 24, 2025, from https://idahocapitalsun.com/briefs/after-reaching-historic-lows-hydropower-generation-in-the-northwest-expected-to-rise-in-2025/

Hydropower is expected to increase 17 percent relative to 2024 due to increased rain in

northern California, Oregon, and eastern Washington. However, it will remain lower than the 

10-year average. Hydroelectric power provides 6 percent of California’s electricity. In 2022-2023

The northwest hit an all-time 22-year low from drought. Drought has lost 300 million megawatt 

hours of generation, which costs billions of dollars to the government. Oregon lost 1.5 billion to 

drought. Western states provide 60 percent of all US hydropower. Washington, Oregon, and 

California is the top 3 contributors, and 40 percent of Oregon’s power comes from 

hydroelectricity. 

This article was eye-opening and relevant to environmental science. It relates to drought and 

precipitation, which are key elements of environmental science. The lack of water leads to a 

lack of electricity in western states, where it is heavily relied on. Many overlook the electrical 

consequences of drought. Additionally, I never realized the costs droughts have on California, 

costing billions of dollars in losses. I wonder how Oregon can support 40 percent of its electricity only through hydroelectricity.