My interest in this topic starts with my major which is environmental science. I chose my major the same reason I chose this topic; I am concerned for the future of our planets environment. More specifically, I am concerned with the damages that dams can do to the environment. Hydroelectric dams are a big problem because most people would think that hydroelectric energy is clean energy when it actually is a big problem. I have seen some of these problems firsthand with salmon populations in dammed rivers. Salmon streams that are not dammed tend to hold more than those that are. There is also examples of the effects of dams on the Colorado River. On this river there are parts that have been completely dried up because the dams use so much water. The parts that have now been dried up were essential to the people that lived on them for water. Through my research I have learned more about the topic. But, after my research I still have the same belief that dams should be used less, and outdated dams should be destroyed. Dams should be replaced with solar and wind energy. 

The article, "Environmental Impacts of Dams", talks about why dams can be bad for the environment, just like the title says. A focus of the article is the robbing of a river of sediment. This leads to a river needing more sediment downstream which causes unwanted erosion. The article also focuses on dams driving some fish species into extinction. Some fish species like the White Sturgeon need fast flowing water to lay their eggs, dams can make that impossible. This source advocates against the use of dams as it can destroy ecosystems. This source would be considered biased because the website it comes from is based on promoting the life and health of the worlds waterways. 

"The Downside of Dams: Is the Environmental Price of Hydroelectric Power Too High?" is article weighing out whether or not hydroelectric power is a good or bad thing. It first brings up that a cost-benefit analysis is used for dams and there has been over 1,000 dams destroyed because they can not produce enough energy to weigh out the damage being done to the environment. Some dams cause a lot of environmental damage but they benefit the people too much with energy. The article uses the example of the Elwha River in Olympic National Park. In this river the dams have been removed because they were not producing nearly enough energy to make up for the damage they were doing to the salmon populations. This source is not biased because it is based on science and from a scientific website. 

"Advantages of Hydroelectric Power Production and Uses" by the USGS, is an article that goes through why hydroelectric dams are a good thing. It states ten reasons why hydroelectric energy is a good way to produce energy. One piece of evidence is that dams produce clean energy. Hydroelectric power has almost zero emissions which is a clean alternative to burning fossil fuels. Another piece of evidence is reservoirs from dams provide clean drinking water. The production of reservoirs provides an efficient way to get drinking water. This article aims to promote hydroelectric energy. It offers a variety of reasons why hydroelectric energy is one of the best options for clean energy. This source has no bias because it states only facts about hydroelectric dams. It doesn't try to argue anything about dams. 

Some people believe that hydroelectric energy is the superior clean source of energy and I argue that it is not. Sources for the use of hydroelectric dams like to say that there is very low emissions but there is other sources of energy that have low emissions that don't have to have the environmental effects a dam does. Sources against dams argues that dams destroy the ecosystems of the rivers they are in. The perspective for dams affects mine because it does make me realize that hydroelectric energy does have a lot of things going for it. There is no need to revise my research question. 
