![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/8f2046ae-5d2e-495f-b467-f7b14ccb4152.png)
There’s another whole aspect to the recurring pushes to remove the dams that’s pretty much always left out too.
Likely the biggest beneficiaries if the dams were removed would be power companies, who, even with the dams generally operating at a tiny fraction of capacity, are stuck having to sell cheap hydroelectric power at low rates.
If the dams were removed, they’d be able to justify contracting (often with their own subsidiaries) for the construction of expensive new power plants with lower capacity and higher operating costs and would then be able to convince the PUCs to grant them massive rate increases.
Ah, but I’m sure that has nothing to do with the mysteriously well-funded campaigns to remove the dams that get a new round of publicity every few years…
What the fucking fuck?!
Those fucking psychopaths actually want to punish Mexico for experiencing a drought?
Ah - just went and read the article, and what it actually centers on is a sugar cane industry that’s been wedged into south Texas (undoubtedly with big fat bribes paid to politicians).
Sugar cane is notoriously water-intensive, and likely should’ve never been grown in south Texas in the first place. It’s near certain that the sugar cane industry is actually the most significant proximate cause of the very drought conditions that are now a problem. So in effect, it’s the US, at the behest of Texas legislators and interests, wanting to punish Mexico because the Texas sugar cane industry wasted all of the available water and still wants more.
A similar entirely contrived “problem” exists in south Florida, in which the heavily subsidized sugar cane industry and their legion of wholly corrupt politicians are the proximate cause of the draining of the Everglades.