	Last but not least the finalized feasibility of such energy source on the national scale would be possible, however due to the nature of reservoirs construction often having effects on the regional environment; it would be very hard for something like that to be implemented nationally because in fact, most of the productive spots for hydro plants have already been taken. When it comes to the feasibility of hydropower as a national energy source across the United States, there are many things that have to be taken into consideration such as the resource availability and potential, cost of energy per source, and a continuous sustainable production. As it already has been mentioned, most productive spots for hydro plants have already been taken; in fact throughout the early part of the century, hydroelectric plants supplied a bit less than one-half if the nation’s power. These reservoir constructions have been directly related to the drying the limited places where there is lots of water. Another factor that has to be considered when it comes to this power being adapted on the national level, is the cost of energy per source which does place hydro relatively close to competing with other electric sources and although that is important to bring new technology to the scene, it simply requires areas whom are very geographically limited in order to provide continuous generation to fit the demand. This also comes with a heightened dilemma of access rights and ownership for both water and land, and also should be considered in comparison to future demands for things such as agriculture, drinking water supplies, fishing and ecosystem health which can all act as complicating factors when finalizing any decision. Currently hydropower electricity makes up about 16 percent of global electricity and these numbers are expected to grow since hydro’s technical potential is five times the current utilization rates with the overall estimated contribution of up to 16,400 TWh/yr and is expected to double by 2050 with the capacity of 1,947 GW generating an annual 7,100 TWh average. This concludes that since the consumption of biofuels and other non-hydroelectric renewable energy sources has nearly doubled between 2000 to 2017, the demand for a clean energy source such as hydroelectricity is also estimated to grow as the incentives of state and federal government is beginning to require certain incentives to use renewable energy sources. And this brings up the the last and most important conclusion, that the potential with these renewable sources is best when equipped with other renewable source to create the larger picture and meet the demand of consumers. By now, there is no doubt that this source has the ability to provide enough electricity for all of us but the thing that rather should be asked is whether it is worth it as an energy source or not to possibly affect the ecological cycles that are more often essentially related to the health of the biome. There clearly is enough water throughout the United States to generate power off of it, but at the end of the day what is most important is the health of the environment; this hydrological source has great power potential to meet our demand but it simply cannot be worth it to alter the water cycle on a larger scale, that would be detrimental however hydropower seems to serve most in decentralized regions where there is plenty of water to ever be viewed as a primary  productive source.
