Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Mitigating the Adverse Effects of Hydropower Projects: A Comparative Review of River Restoration and Hydropower Regulation in Sweden and the United States
Stockholm University, Stockholm Environment Institute.
Stockholm University, Stockholm Environment Institute.
2015 (English)In: Georgetown International Environmental Law Review, ISSN 1042-1858, Vol. 27, no 2, 251-273 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Hydropower involves two of the most pressing global environmental challenges of modern society—accelerated biodiversity loss and climate change. On one hand, hydropower provides a reliable source of renewable energy. On the other, it contributes to significant biodiversity loss in freshwater ecosystems. Mature hydropower producing countries must increasingly restore habitats damaged by existing hydropower projects while attempting to increase their production of renewable energy. Meanwhile, developing hydropower countries are only beginning to craft regulations for their burgeoning hydropower industries. This article evaluates the application of environmental laws to hydropower projects in Sweden and the United States, comparing the relative contribution of each regulatory program to river restoration. It concludes that the United States has achieved greater ecosystem restoration, primarily due to its hydropower licensing framework. In the United States, regulators issue licenses for a limited term of thirty to fifty years. After the license expires, the operator must obtain a new license compliant with current environmental laws. In Sweden, licenses are perpetual, and only the environmental laws in effect at the time of the original licensing bind dam operators. Countries can strengthen laws governing hydropower operations by learning from the different extent of river restoration in these two similarly situated hydropower-producing countries. To improve hydropower regulation in developed countries and to create effective regulations in developing countries, the following two elements are essential: (1) mandatory, periodic review of licenses to adapt to new laws, changed circumstances, and scientific improvements; and (2) placing the burden of proof on project operators to demonstrate that a given project serves the public interest. This article first discusses the conflict in hydropower regulation: fostering power generating technologies with limited carbon emissions versus protecting river ecosystems. It then compares hydropower productivity and river restoration in Sweden and the United States—two similarly situated hydropower-producing countries. The article then compares the differing procedural and substantive laws and regulations in Sweden and the United States before explaining how different environmental laws in the two countries results in different extent of river restoration. Ultimately, the article finds that the United States’ system affords greater long-term environmental protection, a conclusion that offers suggestions for both developed and developing countries alike to craft and update hydropower policies.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2015. Vol. 27, no 2, 251-273 p.
National Category
Environmental Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-124861OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-124861DiVA: diva2:891001
Available from: 2016-01-05 Created: 2016-01-05 Last updated: 2016-01-15Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Fri fulltext
By organisation
Stockholm Environment Institute
In the same journal
Georgetown International Environmental Law Review
Environmental Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Total: 15 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link