Dam Removal & Salmon in WA (NY Times)

kmudgn

Life of the Party
WASHINGTON — Two top Democrats in Washington State have come out in favor of eventually breaching four hydroelectric dams in the lower Snake River to try to save endangered salmon runs, a contentious option that environmentalists, tribes and business groups in the region have argued over for decades.
In recommendations issued on Thursday, Senator Patty Murray and Gov. Jay Inslee provided their most definitive stance in the fight to save salmon in the Columbia River basin and honor longstanding treaties with tribal nations in the Pacific Northwest.
A draft version of a study that Ms. Murray and Mr. Inslee commissioned found this summer that removing the four dams was the most promising approach to salmon recovery. The report said it would cost $10.3 billion to $27.2 billion to replace the electricity generated by the dams, find other ways to ship grain from the region and provide irrigation water. But the draft stopped short of taking a position on removing the dams.

In the recommendations, the governor and the senator said that breaching the dams “must be an option we strive to make viable.”

Ms. Murray said in a statement that salmon runs were clearly struggling, and that extinction of the region’s salmon was not an option. But because breaching the dams would need congressional authorization and bipartisan support, she said, there had to be credible possibilities for replacing renewable energy sources, keeping shipping costs down and countering the effects of climate change.
“It’s clear that breach is not an option right now,” Ms. Murray said. “While many mitigation measures exist, many require further analysis or are not possible to implement in the near term.”
Washington State relies heavily on hydroelectric power generated through dams. But the structures have contributed to the depletion of the salmon population, which is critical to the river basin’s ecosystem. In 2019, state lawmakers passed some of the country’s strongest clean energy legislation, committing to cut coal power by 2025 and transition the state to 100 percent clean and renewable electricity by 2045. Removing the dams would make it more challenging to meet those goals.
Senator Jim Risch, Republican of Idaho, said that Ms. Murray and Mr. Inslee’s report was always going to reach the conclusion that breaching the dams was the best option for salmon recovery. The report was full of “biased information” and “cherry-picked data,” he said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/31/...on=CompanionColumn&contentCollection=Trending


“Even so, those who commissioned the report eventually had to face up to the facts: First, the benefits provided by the four dams on the lower Snake River far outweigh calls for their removal,” Mr. Risch said. “Second, Congress — and only Congress — can authorize the removal of these dams, and there is no feasible or bipartisan pathway for congressional authorization of dam breaching.”

Mr. Risch said he was open to discussions on other options to increase salmon populations.
The recommendations from Mr. Inslee and Ms. Murray came a month after the Biden administration released a report on the feasibility of removing the four dams to aid salmon recovery, and another on how the energy they produce could be replaced. The dams, the last of which was built in 1975, provide energy to millions of people in the Pacific Northwest.
Mr. Inslee said there were no workable solutions other than replacing the existing infrastructure and breaching the dams.
“The state and federal governments should implement a plan to replace the benefits of the lower Snake River dams to enable breaching to move forward,” he said in a statement.
The report commissioned by Mr. Inslee and Ms. Murray stated that while there had been strong feelings and disagreements about how to save the salmon, there were also “clear areas of common agreement.”
The government has been in litigation for more than three decades for failing to develop an adequate federal recovery plan after Snake River fish started being listed as endangered species.
In 2016, the courts again rejected a proposal by the federal government to recover the salmon population, urging it to consider a plan that included the removal of the four dams.

Bill Arthur, the chairman of the Sierra Club’s Snake/Columbia River Salmon Campaign, said the question was never whether the dams should be replaced but how quickly it needed to be done. The report from Mr. Inslee and Ms. Murray put the Northwest on a presumptive path to breaching the dams, he said. If Congress moved with a sense of urgency, he added, the dams could be removed by the end of the decade.

“There is no reason, that we can see, that you can’t get the energy replacement in place and appropriate mitigation needed within six years,” Mr. Arthur said. “And then it will take three years to remove the dams.”
Collin O’Mara, the president and chief executive of the National Wildlife Federation, said time was not on the government’s side as salmon runs continue to decrease each year. Using resources and funding from the infrastructure law and the Inflation Reduction Act could allow the state and federal governments to develop a comprehensive plan, he said.
“It’s a matter of putting pieces together and making sure no one is left behind,” Mr. O’Mara said. “Unfortunately, there is a track record in this country where the promises are made, but the investment is never followed through.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/15/...tion=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article
 
Both the pro-dam and dam removal factions are guilty of cherry picking their data. What is consistently over-looked is that the 4 lower Snake dams wouldn't exist without their ongoing federal subsidies. Sure, the dams produce electricity, but the revenue produced by those dams is less than their costs, even ignoring amortizing their original development costs. All the good anti-government welfare and subsidy activists should want to end federal involvement and the ongoing bilking of US taxpayers, even without considering the benefits to salmon.
 
Both the pro-dam and dam removal factions are guilty of cherry picking their data. What is consistently over-looked is that the 4 lower Snake dams wouldn't exist without their ongoing federal subsidies. Sure, the dams produce electricity, but the revenue produced by those dams is less than their costs, even ignoring amortizing their original development costs. All the good anti-government welfare and subsidy activists should want to end federal involvement and the ongoing bilking of US taxpayers, even without considering the benefits to salmon.


One concern I have ,and this is separate from the salmon issue, is soon Washington will follow California into the electric car future. Whether good or bad Washington will need more power generation not less.
I for one am sick of looking at windmill farms. When everyone comes home from work and plugs their car in and starts cooling dinner and watching TV?
Yeah we have some issues to address.
I'm not all that opposed to removing dams, I am skeptical of how successful it will be in regards to salmon but we have to have more electrical generation not less.

At the moment I am thinking nuclear...
 
One concern I have ,and this is separate from the salmon issue, is soon Washington will follow California into the electric car future. Whether good or bad Washington will need more power generation not less.
I for one am sick of looking at windmill farms. When everyone comes home from work and plugs their car in and starts cooling dinner and watching TV?
Yeah we have some issues to address.
I'm not all that opposed to removing dams, I am skeptical of how successful it will be in regards to salmon but we have to have more electrical generation not less.

At the moment I am thinking nuclear...
There is a "yes and no" answer to this. Generally, yes, we need addition energy as the human population of the region increases. On the other hand, energy prognosticators predicted in the 1970s that the PNW would need a significant increase in the electrical supply by the 1980s. In response, regional utilities proposed and began planning for several new hydro dams and at least 7 nuclear power plants that I can think of off the top of my head. Conventional wisdom held that it was unthinkable that this projected energy deficit could be filled by increasing energy conservation. Yet that is exactly what happened. None of those 7 nuke plants were built (remember WPPSS, the biggest energy debacle ever?), and most of those hydro projects weren't built either. Conservation, the Holy Grail of those granola eating, Birkenstock wearing environmentalists more than filled the energy gap. Unbelievable, but it happened. And it can happen again, although every additional increment of energy conservation does become more difficult to achieve, but it's still possible.
 
There is a "yes and no" answer to this. Generally, yes, we need addition energy as the human population of the region increases. On the other hand, energy prognosticators predicted in the 1970s that the PNW would need a significant increase in the electrical supply by the 1980s. In response, regional utilities proposed and began planning for several new hydro dams and at least 7 nuclear power plants that I can think of off the top of my head. Conventional wisdom held that it was unthinkable that this projected energy deficit could be filled by increasing energy conservation. Yet that is exactly what happened. None of those 7 nuke plants were built (remember WPPSS, the biggest energy debacle ever?), and most of those hydro projects weren't built either. Conservation, the Holy Grail of those granola eating, Birkenstock wearing environmentalists more than filled the energy gap. Unbelievable, but it happened. And it can happen again, although every additional increment of energy conservation does become more difficult to achieve, but it's still possible.
A big part of that "conservation" was switching from electric heating and cooking to natural gas. Energy production increased by switching fuels. Even if the production of electricity didn't as much as the predicted need.

I remember WPPSS but that was when I was a kid and don't remember the specific of it's problems.. I can tell you this. A
Nuclear power plant in Olymia is preferable to one more windmill in Klickitat county.
 
Pretty much everytime I open a Youtube video in the "what are you listening to" thread, I get a commercial about about Washington (the state) subsidizing solar for residential homes. It seems to me that if every other house east of the Cascades would do like @Old406Kid has done at his off the grid MT house we'd knock the hell out of dependence on the load supplied by the Snake River dams. Solar is not an option I'm willing to spend money on when my electricity rate is $0.04547/Kwh. Then again, I know I could do my part to help reduce load requirements on the grid if I did add a solar array, there's just no payback at this time.
 
I looked into solar at one point. Walla Walla is a tree city, lots of regs, and I got lots of big trees that shade the house. In order to do the panels I have to take out trees, going against the city intent and code, and loosing all my shade. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.. I've been following this a long time and I still don't know what is the best approach.
 
Some more input and thoughts on effects.

Murray-Inslee Report Confirms Importance of the LSRD, High Value of Hydroelectricity to the Region

Community Service Advocates Were Concerned Replacement Costs Would Fall on Disadvantaged

Vancouver, Wash. (August 25, 2022) -- Senator Patty Murray and Governor Jay Inslee today released their final “Lower Snake River Dams Benefit Replacement Report” and recommendation. The report is meant to examine if there are reasonable means to replace the value and benefits of the four Federal dams on the Lower Snake River(LSRD). They concluded that breaching the dams is infeasible in light of their importance in achieving the region’s clean energy goals. Their recommendation states that robust clean energy solutions must be in place before dam removal to meet our region’s existing emissions laws.

“We appreciate Senator Murray and Governor Inslee’s efforts on the decades-long debate over the lower Snake River dams,” said Kurt Miller, executive director, Northwest RiverPartners. “Their recommendation recognizes the importance of the dams in avoiding blackouts and keeping electricity affordable for lower income communities as we retire coal and natural gas generation. The dams cannot be removed without significantly increasing the region’s CO2 emissions, which is bad for salmon in all phases of their lifecycle and will make climate change worse. Northwest RiverPartners and its members remain committed to being a partner in salmon recovery and solidifying hydropower’s role in fighting climate change.”

The Murray-Inslee report and recommendation is unconnected to any active permitting or regulatory rulemaking process. The report does highlight the exorbitant costs of removal and the risks to our economy and efforts to promote economic justice if the dams are breached.

Just yesterday (8/24/2022), Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm was interviewed by Malcom Woolf on National Hydropower Day and stated: “Most other energy resources simply can’t do what hydropower can do.” Adding, “Hydropower is cheaper and cleaner. [It] means lower bills, means better health.”

According to President Biden’s appointee, “Hydropower is a force multiplier for adding more clean energy to the grid.”

The Murray-Inslee report states replacement costs could exceed $31B, other reports have placed the figure at more than twice that number. The report does not go into any detail about who would have to pay for the billions in additional costs. Many in the region are in agreement with the Secretary that hydropower provides affordable energy.

“Cowlitz County communities face significant challenges, with a disproportionate number of residents living in poverty at a rate 25% higher than Washington State. Ensuring our customers are served with clean, affordable and reliable electricity helps protect our communities' most vulnerable population. Losing the lower Snake River dams could raise rates by over 25%. It’s critical the dams are protected for the populations we serve,” said Gary Huhta, General Manager of Cowlitz Public Utility District.

“The question the low-income households will have to ask themselves is, “Do we pay rent, pay the energy bill, buy food or buy the needed medicines.” The answer either way is not a viable option, either choice has its consequences,” said Dahlia Ochoa, Energy and Emergent Service Department Director at Community Action Connections.

Community Action Connections (CAC), located in Pasco, Wash, provides utility and heating assistance to help ensure families will not have to live in a cold, dark house, eat cold food and wash with cold water that can lead them to be more susceptible to illness. The CAC provided written comment to the Murray-Inslee process, it can be read here.

“Maintaining the absolute lowest cost, clean, renewable energy supply is essential to economic recovery and slowing current rapid erosion of the working middle class,” said VJ Meadows, executive director, Tri-Cities Food Bank. “Replacement of the power generation capacity provided currently by the dams would come at a much higher cost and drive electrical bills higher long into the future.”

The Tri-Cities Food Bank provides emergency food to more than 40,000 families in Benton City, Kennewick, Finley, Richland, and West Richland. Forty percent of the people served by the Tri-Cities Food Bank are children. You can read their comment letter to the Murray-Inslee process here.
 
my electricity rate is $0.04547/Kwh.
Grant County PUD, by far, far and away the lowest residential electric rates in the nation. The PUD sells power to residential customers for less than it costs to produce it. They do this by selling their hydro projects' power to other utilities at prices well above the cost of production, thereby subsidizing the low rates enjoyed by Grant PUD residential customers. Buzzy, you're in an electricity welfare county! Enjoy that gravy train!
  • :LOL:
 
Ensuring our customers are served with clean, affordable and reliable electricity helps protect our communities' most vulnerable population.
Good thing Cowlitz County's poor live in Cowlitz County. If they lived anywhere else in the US, excepting Grant County and Tacoma, their electric bills would be far higher. Context matters in comparisons of this sort.
 
Maintaining the absolute lowest cost, clean, renewable energy supply is essential to economic recovery and slowing current rapid erosion of the working middle class,
If I haven't made the point already, it needs to be said that cheap energy prices are not some kind of entitlement. PNW electric rates are already the cheapest in the nation.
 
Grant County PUD, by far, far and away the lowest residential electric rates in the nation. The PUD sells power to residential customers for less than it costs to produce it. They do this by selling their hydro projects' power to other utilities at prices well above the cost of production, thereby subsidizing the low rates enjoyed by Grant PUD residential customers. Buzzy, you're in an electricity welfare county! Enjoy that gravy train!
  • :LOL:
Y'all need to git 'ur facx straight, bub! ;-) Cheland PUD's residential rate is $0.027 / Kwh, Douglas County PUD's residential rate is half of GCPUD's at $0.0233/Kwh. In the meantime, we are enjoing the gravy train electricity welfare, thank you very much! 95F outside right now, a chilly 72 in my tying room.
 
Y'all need to git 'ur facx straight, bub!
Oops, my bad! Don't know how I missed those Chelan and Douglas electric welfare recipients. Must be that old timer's disease. Gotta' admit, those mid-C PUDs crafted some "crafty" long-term power sale contracts when they were renewed a while back. Coulda' taught Trump a few things about the "Art of the Deal."

72 in the tying room? I find temperature to be a bit weird. 68 or 69 feels comfortable in the winter according to my thermostat. But now that we're set on AC, I have it set at 76. 73 or 74 feels "chilly" when it's so damn hot out side, but those same temps would feel roasting hot in the winter months.
 
I feel like with all the screens in modern life and the oncoming electric cars, we need A LOT of electricity but that just a hunch. Seems like for a long time now, electricity use per person has been increasing at a high rate. Has this all been offset by efficiency? That’s hard to believe.

Seems like solar panels make a lot of sense…
 
Oops, my bad! Don't know how I missed those Chelan and Douglas electric welfare recipients. Must be that old timer's disease. Gotta' admit, those mid-C PUDs crafted some "crafty" long-term power sale contracts when they were renewed a while back. Coulda' taught Trump a few things about the "Art of the Deal."

72 in the tying room? I find temperature to be a bit weird. 68 or 69 feels comfortable in the winter according to my thermostat. But now that we're set on AC, I have it set at 76. 73 or 74 feels "chilly" when it's so damn hot out side, but those same temps would feel roasting hot in the winter months.
My tying room is at the end of the ducted system and is actually cooler than any of the other rooms; 72F in here right now. This time of year and I have to go outside a few times a day to warm up.
 
Back
Top