> I think it's also worth pointing out that nothing really changed because of climate change, the decision to rely on hydro was made in the 90s.

Why do you think it is worth pointing this out?

Mostly because when the title says "seven countries now generate...", it sure makes it look like there was some sort of a recent development made in response to climate change, and not something that would've been the case regardless.

To assuage any implication that the conversion was based on that concern?

It's helpful to know that there are economics and environmental concerns outside of an existential threat, to galvanize a country's momentum.