Sage Lord never thought someone could feel strong emotions for a waterway.

“We were going over some poetry that was written about … dams,” the 14-year-old Grade 9 student said. She and some of her classmates were poring over poems, when one expressing grief for a river caught her attention.

“It was, like, a really interesting perspective, because I wouldn’t even think someone would feel … something like that,” Lord said.

She’s one of the students in a University of Winnipeg social studies class that includes a unit titled “impacts of hydropower,” which explores the effects generating the energy source that Manitobans rely on has on the surrounding communities.

“Before the unit, I didn’t realize … there were so many issues,” said Lord.

The unit has been eye-opening for other students in the class.

“Before I learned about hydroelectricity, I was told that it’s very clean energy, and it’s renewable and it had a lot of advantages,” said Setayesh Khasheei.

“I think that it’s really important for people to know where their energy comes from and who are sacrificed behind it.”

Instructor Derek Eidse has been teaching the unit at the U of W Collegiate for several years. It was developed by the Interfaith Council on Hydropower, an advocacy group for hydro-impacted communities. Eidse, who is a member of the group, came up with the curriculum.

There are 20 other schools in the province teaching components of the curriculum, he said.

“If I was in Alberta, I would teach about oil. If I was in B.C., I’d teach about the forest,” Eidse said.

“Hydro in Manitoba has its complexity. We acknowledge that yes, hydro is a cleaner energy source than coal and natural gas. Yes, it’s cheap and affordable. But what are the risks?”

Eidse said the answer to that question is different for people whose communities have been directly affected by power generation than for those who see the impacts of producing cheap electricity from “quite far away.”

Friday’s lesson focused on how hydroelectric generation is affecting the population of lake sturgeon.

Tataskweyak Cree Nation said earlier this year that Manitoba Hydro’s “environmental colonialism” had caused the near demise of the fish in the lower Churchill River, in the province’s north.

In a statement sent to CBC last month, Manitoba Hydro said the Churchill River diversion — which redirects water from the Churchill River to the Nelson River basin to increase the water flow to generating stations — is “an integral component” of the Crown corporation’s overall system.

Hydro’s operating decisions “must balance a range of factors,” including energy security and affordability, the statement said.

A complicated issue

Researchers hired by Tataskweyak Cree Nation found hydroelectric waterflow control had compromised the ecosystem of waterways the First Nation uses for fishing.

“Dams are great, but what about the sturgeon?… What about climate change?” Eidse said. “It’s important that students understand that an issue can be complicated.”

Several First Nations have recently taken legal action against Manitoba Hydro over the impacts of power generation in their communities.

Norway House sued the corporation last week, saying waterflow regulation had diverted a large amount of sediment to a lake once used by local commercial fishers.

A Manitoba Hydro spokesperson said last week it takes that claim seriously, but won’t comment on its specifics. Hydro’s regulation project is fundamental to ensuring “a reliable supply of affordable electricity,” and the utility conducts all its operations within regulatory requirements, the spokesperson said.

York Factory and Berens River launched similar lawsuits against Hydro last year.

In southern Manitoba, two Dakota nations also have lawsuits against the corporation, accusing it of having profited from operations taking place on lands never surrendered to the Crown.

Manitoba Hydro said it wasn’t previously aware of the social studies unit and wasn’t involved in developing its curriculum. Hydro said it hopes the University of Winnipeg Collegiate class offers a balanced perspective on the impacts and benefits of hydroelectric dam development.

Eidse said that’s his goal. Every year, the class holds a mock vote, in which students pretend to be members of a community making a decision on a proposed dam.

“This year, students voted no,” Eidse said. “They thought the risks outweighed the benefits. But for the last two years students voted yes, and said the benefits outweighed the risks.”