There have been three articles on power generation in the past few weeks on the editorial page. The first was written about the wonders of wind, coal and nuclear generation in the Northwest. This piece made no mention of hydro, which I thought was strange. This person wanted to make the point of how the economical aspects compared. The next was on wind only and disagreed with the economies of wind generation. The third was about using turbines in the irrigation canal for power generation.

While this concept is not new, it is rare in the Northwest. I believe it to be a viable resource where large irrigation systems are used. The controlled rate of water is already there and we lose nothing from using it for generating purposes. What really struck me as odd was the statement that this water is considered to be a renewable resource. I would be interested to know how water removed from a canal magically becomes renewable when the same water, from a hydroelectric dam is not.

Must one assume the magic happens when enough dollars are directed to flow through the appropriate channels?

DALE MORRISON, Burbank