Hydroelectric is not an enviro-nut approved source, because it interferes with turtles humping, and we can't have that.
Quite completely wrong. Hydro power has always been ecologically compatible. Of course, ecologists are concerned about insuring that there are environmental accommodations made for unique habitats and at risk populations, but this does not mean that anyone would rather have ten coal fired power plants in the place of one medium size dam.
In general, most intelligent and informed individuals realize that it is impractical to try and immediately end all fossil-fuel energy generation and fuel usage. But it is obvious that these particular carbon fuels and most importantly, their combustion products must be phased out over the coming few decades.
Sustainable Alternative Energy sources, from my perspective includes:
Nuclear, Hydro-electric, geothermal, wind, solar (thermal and PV), tidal, wave, biofuels, and a host of various combinations and varients of these. Virtually, the only sources to be removed are the previously sequestered fossil fuels, coal, oil and gas.
Maybe you should tell these folks that. Seems the right hand hasn't a clue what the left hand is saying eh what! This is only four of the HUNDREDS of environmental reports talking about the negative impact of hydroelectric dams. Seems you don't know much about the environmental impact of dams at all, nor how the rest of the environmental groups feel about them. WHOOPSIE!
http://www.fwee.org/hpar.html
Environmental Impact of Hydroelectric Dams
CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AGENCY | Joint Review Panel Submits Environmental Assessment Report For Proposed Lower Churchill Hydroelectric Generation Project
What are the Negative Effects of Building Large Hydroelectric Dams?