- National Performance of Dams Program

4/10/2015
Some Dam – Hydro News
TM
And Other Stuff
i
Quote of Note: Good Advice: ” Never lick a steak knife.”
Some Dam - Hydro News Newsletter Archive for Back Issues and Search http://npdp.stanford.edu/
Click on Link (Some Dam - Hydro News) Bottom Right - Under Perspectives
“Good wine is a necessity of life.” - -Thomas Jefferson
Ron’s wine pick of the week: 2012 Cypher Zinfandel "ZinBitch"
“No nation was ever drunk when wine was cheap.” - - Thomas Jefferson
Dams:
(A free fix is good.)
Letter: Dam similarities concerning
Stan Bradley 12:15, March 28, 2015, lancastereaglegazette.com
The people of the Buckeye Lake region would find the information concerning
the Johnstown, Pennsylvania, flood of 1889 interesting and the similarities
between the South Fork Dam above Johnstown and the Buckeye Lake Dam
frightening. Both the South Fork Dam and the Buckeye Lake Dam started out
as dams to create feeder lakes for the canal systems during the early 19th
century. When the railroads made the canal systems redundant the feeder
lakes over time became resort areas and their respective dams were only kept up marginally. As a
result of only being kept up marginally South Fork Dam failed catastrophically on May 31, 1889
after several days of extremely heavy rainfall, resulting in 2,209 deaths and $17 million in
damages ($425 million in today’s money). I am thankful that nothing like that has happen to the
Buckeye Lake area so far, but the Army Corps of Engineers has reported that the likelihood of
dam failure is high because of the more than 370 homes that were built directly onto the 4.1 mile
earthen structure over the years.
1
Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu
State officials now are saying that they will have to study the Corps’ report and hold public
meetings. I feel the people of the area cannot afford to wait that long. Action must be coming and
coming quick so central Ohio doesn’t have its version of the Johnstown Flood. Finally, these same
state officials will be saying that they do not know where the money will be coming from to fix the
problem on Buckeye Lake Dam. Do not let them kid you; for a while the leaders in both houses of
our legislature and our governor have been bragging that Ohio has $1.5 billion in its rainy day
fund. The last time I heard rainy day funds were for emergencies and if the Buckeye Lake Dam
does not count as an emergency, then I do not know what emergencies are.
Stan Bradley, Lithopolis, Ohio
(The argument goes on and on.)
Op-Ed - Snake River dams are assets that must remain
Ron Dunning of the Port of Walla Walla, March 28, 2015, union-bulletin.com
The Walla Walla Union-Bulletin has recently printed several letters to the editor from citizens
supporting the removal of the Lower Snake River dams. A new environmental group at Whitman
College has been formed for the same purpose. The arguments they use to support dam removal
are flawed. The notion that breaching the Snake River dams would save taxpayer money, while
increasing “recreation” money and by reference exceed the current benefits of hydropower and
barging flies in the face of every objective academic study done by actual experts. Dambreaching proponents claim investments in wind generating capacity have made hydropower
redundant. Perhaps they are referring to the Northwest Power & Conservation Council’s 2014
report that states wind energy added 1,906 MW of new generating capacity.
What they failed to mention is that same report lists hydropower as providing 62,336 MW, or 53
percent of our total generating capacity. Additionally, hydropower provides critical peaking
capacity to the Northwest, to meet high energy demands almost immediately. Wind energy simply
can’t respond in that way. The Snake River dams and the carbon-free electricity they produce are
a critical part of our regional energy portfolio. The Columbia Snake River System is the top wheat
export gateway in the nation. Of the wheat moving by barge down the river for export, 54 percent
moves through one or more of the four Lower Snake River dams. Barging on the Columbia
Snake River System moves 9 million tons of cargo valued at $3 billion each year. Our river
system allows communities in Eastern Washington and beyond to export their goods to countries
throughout the world, and keeps our farmers and others competitive in the global marketplace.
While dam-breaching proponents make their case in environmental terms, no true
environmentalist would advocate removing barging as a transport option. One barge tow carries
the equivalent of 538 trucks worth of tonnage. Barging is the safest, most efficient and most
environmentally friendly method of cargo transport available today. A barge can move one ton of
wheat 576 miles on one gallon of fuel. Barging has lower exhaust emissions than rail or truck.
At a time when we have more demand than ever on our surface transportation systems, our
region is the envy of other areas that do not have barging, and must rely on trucking and rail.
Rhetoric is no match for facts. The inland river system is a robust multiuse system that supports
hydropower, navigation and recreation, balanced with fish and wildlife needs. Most in the region
are excited to celebrate historic collaborative efforts that are yielding record returns for our iconic
salmon runs. We encourage those who care about fish, energy, trade and recreation to join in that
collaboration. Ron Dunning is the current president of the Port of Walla Walla Commission. He
has served on the Port Commission since 2010. He is the owner of Dunning Irrigation, co-owner
of Touchet Seed & Energy, and 51 East Main, a downtown Walla Walla commercial property.
(It will come down to who has the most votes. Compare the facts cited in the previous letter. Wind
turbines cannot last 45 years, maybe 5 would be a better number.)
Letter - Dam facts on Lower Snake River add perspective to conversation
union-bulletin.com, March 28, 2015
2
Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu
In a recent letter to the editor, John McKern observed, “When the wind does not blow, wind
turbines don’t generate electricity.” He was apparently writing in support of Lower Snake River
hydropower and believes the four dams produce more energy than northwest wind power.
It’s time for some facts, The nameplate capacity of the four dams is 3,033 megawatts. The
Northwest Power and Conservation Council lists the nameplate capacity of wind energy at 8,975
Megawatts.
Yes, wind turbines require wind, but hydropower requires water. The Lower Snake River dams are
run-of-the river dams with no storage capacity. Over the past 10 years, the dams have annually
produced an average of 959 annual megawatts, just 32 percent of the dams’ nameplate capacity.
Further, hydropower production is highest during spring when demand for power is lowest, and
thus the wholesale price for that energy is also at its lowest. In 2012, wind energy produced
2,007 average annual megawatts, or more than twice the 1,039 average annual megawatts
produced that year by the dams. Readers and ratepayers might also wish to know these facts:
Over the next 15 years, all 24 Lower Snake River turbines will reach the upper life span limit of 45
years. The first three turbines are now being rehabbed at a cost of $97 million. The cost of
rehabbing all 24 over the next 15-20 years will approach or exceed a billion dollars.
When we’re talking “dams,” let’s not spout opinions. Union-Bulletin readers need dam facts.
Brett Haverstick, Moscow, Idaho
(Travelogue.)
Touring Hoover Dam is powerful experience
By MARGO BARTLETT PESEK, LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, March 29, 2015 - reviewjournal.com
Hoover Dam, which turns 80 years
old this year, is an engineering
marvel that attracts nearly a million
visitors annually to its location on the
Colorado River just 30 miles from Las
Vegas. Completed in April 1935, two
years ahead of schedule, the dam
was built during the Great
Depression, drawing job-hungry
workers by the thousands. They
faced harsh and dangerous
conditions in a remote location while
working on the huge federal project.
Originally called Boulder Dam, the
structure changed the face of a
multistate desert region in the West. The dam harnessed the power of the Colorado River to
generate electricity and stored water in Lake Mead, creating a popular recreation area, supplying
domestic and agricultural water to millions and controlling flooding downstream. Congress
changed the name of the dam in 1947 to honor President Herbert Hoover’s early support of the
project.
To reach Hoover Dam, follow U.S. Highway 93/95 from Las Vegas through Henderson. U.S. 95
heads south at Railroad Pass and U.S. 93 continues toward Arizona through Boulder City. At the
second stoplight in Boulder City, turn left onto a U.S. 93 bypass that skirts the downtown area.
Follow it toward the bridge across the river for 5 miles and then turn onto state Route 176, the 2mile access road to the dam. The narrow road across the dam no longer carries through traffic
into Arizona but accesses parking areas for overflow from the parking garage on the Nevada side,
open daily from 8 a.m. to 5:15 p.m. Escalators and elevators access the nearby visitor center
across the highway. An elegant structure of concrete and steel, Hoover Dam sits wedged between
the high, dark cliffs of Black Canyon. Contrasted against the blue-green water, its light-colored
face dazzling in the desert sun, the beautiful dam appears frail despite its massive size.
3
Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu
Most visitors try to preserve their trip in photographs. Views of the lake side of the dam are good
from the approach to the Spillway House, a multiuse building north of the crest of the dam on the
Nevada side, and from parking areas on the Arizona side. The downstream side of the dam is
best photographed from the air, from boats or rafts on the river or from near the highway bridge
spanning the river south of the dam. For safety reasons, there are no views from the U.S. 93
bridge itself. To see the dam, travelers must exit the highway and stop at a viewing area near the
bridge.
Tours of the dam began in 1937 and were an immediate success. Many millions of people have
followed rangers into elevators that carried them down into the thrumming depths of the dam. It is
not a journey enjoyed by people who suffer from claustrophobia. Warnings are posted for visitors
who have pacemakers or other devices that might be affected by the huge generators. Since it is
hot at the dam most of the year, wear light clothing and drink plenty of water. Leave pets at home.
Tickets for three kinds of tours are available online or in the lobby of the visitor center, which is
open daily, except Thanksgiving and Christmas, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. The first tour explores
exhibits in the visitor center and costs $10 for anyone older than age 3. The second, 30-minute
tour takes in the power plant and includes access to the visitor center displays. Tickets cost $15
for people ages 17 to 61, $12 for seniors, military and youths ages 16 to 4. The third and longest
tour spends an hour in the dam’s interior tunnels and power plant and includes visitor center
access. Tickets for this tour cost $30 and are available only at the dam. Limited to 20 visitors ages
8 and older, this tour sells out fast. It is not suitable for some disabled visitors.
Margo Bartlett Pesek’s Trip of the Week column appears on Sundays.
(Somehow this doesn’t feel right!)
Friends of doomed 1883 dam in Northampton urge intervention by
Historical Commission
By Mary Serreze | Special to The Republican, March 31, 2015, masslive.com
NORTHAMPTON, Mass. - A
group of residents who tried
and failed to save a historic
dam in Leeds several years
ago want to make sure its
memory is properly honored
when the dam is taken
down. The city's Board of
Public Works, under
pressure from the
Massachusetts Office of
Dam Safety, voted in
October 2010 to remove the
1883 Upper Roberts
Meadow Dam located off
Chesterfield Road, despite
the efforts of an advocacy
group to preserve the
structure. Members of Friends of the Upper Roberts Meadow Dam packed a Historical
Commission meeting Monday night to make their views known.
Joe Misterka said preliminary plans by the Department of Public Works to install a plaque and
walking trail at the dam site are inadequate. Misterka suggested reconstructing the top section of
the dam, with its graceful arch, at an overlook on the property off Chesterfield Road. Misterka said
he was offended when he heard last month about an idea by City Engineer James Laurila and
consultants GZA GeoEnvironmental to repurpose some of the stone blocks from the dam in the
planned reconstruction of Northampton's downtown Pulaski Park. "The dam is an engineering
marvel," Misterka said. "The granite blocks shouldn't just go anywhere." Wayne Thibault, who has
4
Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu
lived with his wife across the road from the dam and its six-acre impounded reservoir since 1970,
faulted the DPW, saying that when it comes to the dam they have "suppressed information to
stifle dissent."
"Our hope is that you give no approval to any plan that involves removing the dam," Thibault said.
Historical Commission Chairman David Drake reminded those present that the commission has
no jurisdiction over the fate of the dam, even though he agrees that the structure has historical
value. "We like the dam," said Drake. "We were not part of the decision to take it down." Ward 6
City Councilor Marianne LaBarge said she believes the dam can still be preserved, and said she
would like to invite Governor Charlie Baker to come out and see the structure. "With a new
governor in office that could change everything," she said. Jason Johnson of the Mill River
Greenway Initiative showed the commission a recent report that documents the archaeological
history of the Leeds neighborhood, and made a plea for greater recognition of the area's history in
future decision-making.
The Historical Commission may act in an advisory capacity to the DPW as decisions are made
about the dam's removal and the property's eventual use, said planning department staffer Sarah
LaValley. Removing the dam will require that the Dept. of Public Works satisfy Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act, said city land use planner Sarah LaValley. That involves
crafting a plan to mitigate impacts on historic structures. The Historical Commission may make
recommendations within the Section 106 process, she said, adding that the advisory body does
not have the power to block the project. There was some discussion of connecting the Upper
Roberts Meadow dam site with a network of hiking trails envisioned through the Sawmill Hills and
Mineral Hills, where the city has been accruing conservation land over the years. Members of the
commission agreed in principal to support historical interpretation and public access at the dam
site, as well as the appropriate and creative re-use of the dam's heavy granite blocks. “We agree
that the dam has historical value," said Drake. "The granite blocks should be used in a way that's
appropriate and sensitive." The dam, discontinued reservoir, and surrounding acreage are owned
by the city's Water Department of the Department of Public Works.
(Removing a dam in CA makes one wonder! Like the logo. How come there’s always grant money
to remove a dam, but not to build one?)
St. Helena gets $1 million grant to remove dam
April 01, 2015 • By Jesse Duarte, napavalleyregister.com
ST. HELENA, CA — The city of St. Helena has received a $1
million federal grant to help pay for the removal of the Upper
York Creek Dam, bringing the long-awaited project one step
closer to breaking ground. The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency has pledged $987,876 to reimburse the
city for part of the cost of removing the earthen dam, which
has been deemed an illegal barrier to fish passage.
The $5.6 million project will also reconstruct the natural
stream channel and restore the riparian environment with
native plants. The dam hasn’t been used as a water source
since 1993, when a court order – rescinded in 2001 – called
for its removal. But the dam and the sediment that built up behind it still remain. The project’s final
environmental impact report will come before the City Council for approval in late April or early
May, said Public Works Director Steve Palmer. Once the report is certified, the city can finish
construction plans, apply for permits with agencies like the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife, and put the project out to bid by the end of the year, Palmer said.
The project could start early next summer and will take about two years. The project has already
received a $800,000 grant from Proposition 84, a state water bond approved in 2006. The city has
allocated another $3 million from its own bond funds, leaving another $800,000 that the city still
needs to scrape together. “We’re actively searching for other ways to get that money, but in the
meantime we need to move forward, get the environmental report adopted, and start working
5
Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu
through our permits,” Palmer said. “The more shovel-ready your project is, the more opportunities
there are for funding.” While the city hasn’t applied for permits, regulatory agencies have signaled
their support for the overall goal of removing the dam, which is near Spring Mountain Road.
“All the resource agencies support this project,” Palmer said. “It’s a great project that will remove
the dam, reestablish the natural channel, and provide habitat for the steelhead.” The city will
restore a quarter of a mile of stream channel that was affected by the dam, which was built
around 1900 to provide water for agricultural and municipal use. In 2000 the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) notified the city that the dam was violating the
Endangered Species Act by blocking the migratory path of steelhead that traditionally bred above
the dam. In 2010 the city signed an agreement with NOAA to remove the dam, and has been
paying a $70-a-day fine ever since. The city tried working with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
to remove the dam, but ended the partnership in 2013 because the project seemed to have
stalled. The environmental report analyzes the effects of removing the earthen dam and the
accumulated sediment, and hauling the material off to some combination of Clover Flat Landfill,
the area around the Lower Reservoir, and Spring Mountain Vineyard. Palmer said the city is still
working out the details of where the material will end up.
(Getting a little cerebral!)
Science Corner: Yuma's story can't be told without focus on engineering
By Cecilia Vigil , April 2, 2015, yumasun.com
Science Corner: Yuma's story can't be told without focus on engineering While my passion is in
biology, my brother’s passion is the field of engineering. While his field is one that I would not
delve into, I truly find it fascinating! Think about it — if we analyze the etymology of “engineering,”
it derives from “enginium,” meaning clever, and “ingeniare,” meaning to contrive or devise. Here,
you begin understanding those in this field, and the passion for engineers to invent, design, build,
maintain and improve structures, devices, machines, systems, materials and processes. This
also explains why there is such a wide spectrum of subdisciplines in engineering: chemical,
electrical, mechanical, bioengineering, civil, systems, etc. The bottom line is that engineers are
problem-solvers! And while I, in the field of biology, also work in problem-solving, this is where our
two disciplines begin to take two different paths; the biologist attempts to understand nature, while
the engineer attempts to invent things that do not exist in nature.
However, both fields of science rejoin in practice because many engineers use observations from
nature as a template for their inventions. For example, the military is researching applications of
gecko toe pads for human devices to climb vertical surfaces. And the architecture of desert
beetles to capture fog moisture by raising their backsides has resulted in water acquisition
devices for humans in the Namib Desert. How cool is this?
Humans are inventors, and the technologies of the time have assisted our species in employing
the resources available to us. Beginning with the invention of the wheel, pulley and lever,
engineered tools used, for example, to build pyramids in Egypt. The field then continued to evolve
with the design and invention of mechanical contraptions such as the aqueducts developed in
ancient Greece, by the Aztecs in Mexico, and the Sinauguas in Verde Valley, Ariz. As people
expanded in mobility and commerce, civilian structures such as bridges, complex buildings, and
production machines bloomed, particularly during the Industrial Revolution. The economic boom
of America in the 1940s had much to do with our ingenuity for military engines and devices, and
the introduction of residential air conditioning in the 1920s facilitated the great migration to the
Sun Belt, which prompted the development of cities such as Phoenix and Yuma. So let me now
focus on Yuma, a story that cannot be told without that of engineering. That is because
development goes hand-in-hand with employment opportunities, and Yuma’s multibillion-dollar
agriculture industry, which requires a water source — the Colorado River, is a main source of our
economy.
As mentioned in a recent Science Corner column, the efforts to harness the river began with the
engineering accomplishment of the first dam in the Colorado River being completed in 1909. This
was the Laguna Dam that, in conjunction with a system of canals, was devised to deliver
6
Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu
controlled irrigation to the Yuma Valley. The engineering of dams requires the understanding and
control of the enormous forces and the potential energy of water, along with the comprehension of
foundation and seismic assessments that rely on geotechnical, hydrological, hydraulic,
mechanical and structural design. These projects demand in-depth skills and must be
coordinated in a way that their reservoirs not only store water supplies, but that their infrastructure
of levees and canals channel water to our homes and fields, and keep rivers running the course in
a planned and strategic direction. The complexity of harnessing the forces of the river does not
end with damming it. As part of the Yuma project, which was through the Federal Reclamation
Act, a massive tunnel and canal system was devised. About 1 1/2 miles from Laguna Dam, at
Indian Heading, the Yuma Canal splits into the Reservation Main Canal and the Yuma Main
Canal. The Yuma Main Canal continues southwest until it reaches the Siphon Drop Spillway, and
after another 3.5 miles it reaches the Colorado River Siphon, which transports the water under the
Colorado River. The Yuma Siphon was completed in 1912, the same year Arizona became a
state. This engineering marvel still delivers irrigation water for the Yuma Valley through a 14-footdiameter concrete tube that reaches 955 feet from the California side of the river to just below old
City Hall
The 336-foot Ocean-to-Ocean Bridge was completed in 1915 and was the first highway crossing
of the Colorado River. Interestingly enough, the bridge was designed by engineers in Washington
who were unfamiliar with the dynamics of the site. Due to this, they had to later implement
falsework (temporary supports) during construction, to offset unforeseen design weaknesses,
which were twice washed away. The bridge was eventually constructed on the south shore and
floated atop the river on barges. The bridge was closed in 1988 due to structural concerns and
reopened in 2002. Today, the one-way traffic system that permits passage from Yuma to
Winterhaven, Calif., is reminiscent of the historic structure and speaks to the rich history of our
city. Yuma, 100 years later, has grown to include commerce beyond agriculture and continues to
grow both in size and culture. Given our proximity to the Mexican border and the North American
Free Trade Agreement, industrial plants are common. Yuma Proving Ground is in constant need
of and employing engineers for its testing of medium and long-range artillery, aircraft target
acquisition equipment and armament, and armored and wheeled vehicles. The U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation manages, develops and protects water and
associated resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner that necessitates
those with engineering backgrounds. The value of engineers to Yuma underlies the importance of
the Arizona Western College and University of Arizona joint engineering program. Students can
obtain their baccalaureate degree in systems engineering here in Yuma. Currently, AWC also
offers certificates in engineering-related fields, such as solar panel installation, and UA has plans
to expand their engineering program to include solar, electrical and civil degrees in order to
support the rapidly growing demand for such careers in Yuma. As we continue to grow as a city,
our need for engineers will be among the highest demand, as nearly all projects related to growth,
development, management and maintenance will necessitate their ingenuity. Cecilia Vigil, Ph.D.,
serves as a professor of biology at Arizona Western College. She can be reached at
[email protected].
Hydro:
(If at first you don’t succeed!)
Hydro proposal at St. Anthony Falls lock tries again
By: Steve Brandt, March 27, 2015 - startribune.com
Symphony Hydro has reapplied for federal permission to generate hydroelectricity in the St.
Anthony Falls lock after a federal regulator last month denied its initial try. The firm submitted its
plan for twin turbine-generators in the Upper St. Anthony lock that would roll up on tracks like a
7
Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu
garage door when the lock is needed for flood control. The Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) on Feb. 5 denied a preliminary permit application by Symphony to install the
generating equipment in the lock. It cited opposition from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
which owns and operates the lock. The lock will close to watercraft after June 10 under a
congressional mandate intended to halt the spread of invasive carp up the Mississippi River. The
corps will still operate the locks for flood control, opening gates during high-flow periods. The
corps earlier expressed concern that the ice and debris would damage the compact and
lightweight generating equipment. The latest proposal from Symphony, which lists a Raleigh, N.C.
address, is more explicit in describing how the framework holding the turbine-generator would roll
up above the lock.
Symphony said in its application that it met with corps representatives last month to discuss how
the power generating equipment could be operated without interfering with corps operations. The
corps said it won't formally comment until FERC accepts Symphony's application. "I believe they
are making an effort to address the concerns the Corps' had with their previous proposal," said
Nanette Bischoff, the lead corps person for permitting matters in its St. Paul district, in an e-mail.
Symphony is one of three firms seeking FERC approval to produce power at the upper falls. Xcel
Energy long has operated a larger hydropower generator there. Symphony and Crown Hydro
each has proposed generating up to 3.4 megawatts when they can draw 1,000 cubic feet per
second of water at the falls. But park and other advocates have opposed diverting enough water
to affect the appearance of the falls, and it's unlikely both would win approval. A much-smaller
proposal would generate power on the river's eastern shore in the bowels of a housing
development that is renovating the historic Pillsbury's milling complex. Symphony said in its latest
application that if there's not enough water to go around and the Crown proposal advances, it
would stand aside. Crown is fighting to keep the license that the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) granted it in 1999, after unsuccessful efforts to win local approval. It wants to
amend its plans to install generators in tunnels just outside the lock on Corps of Engineers
property.
8
Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu
(Tilt!)
Dam decision is due
Kennebunk Light and Power weighs relicensing vs. filing for an exemption
By Duke Harrington, Staff Writer, 3/27/15, post.mainelymediallc.com
The Kesslen Dam on the Mousam River
near Lafayette Square in Kennebunk, ME
is one of three operated for more than a
century by the Kennebunk Light and
Power District. The dams could be
removed if directors rule against filing for
a federal relicensing application in March
2017. On March 31, the district will unveil
a report showing what the Mousam River
might look like with the dams
decommissioned.
KENNEBUNK — While the swing Sen.
Angus King made through Kennebunk on
March 20 was not expressly made to hear
about the federal relicensing of three
dams on the Mousam River, his timing could not have been better.
On Tuesday, March 31, the Kennebunk Light and Power (KLP) District will hold a public
informational session to unveil results of a report detailing what the Mousam River might look like
with its three dams removed, should trustees rule against filing a federal relicensing application in
March 2017. KLP’s license to operate the dams, issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC), expires in 2022. Sen. Angus King, center, commiserates with Kennebunk
Light and Power District outgoing General Manager Sharon Staz, left, and its new GM, Todd
Shea, over the long and expensive relicensing process for three KLP dams on the Mousam River,
during a visit to the district offices on Factory Pasture Road, March 20. (Duke Harrington photo)
“The fact that we have to file an intent to renew our license a full five years before it expires
shows you they [FERC] recognize their process is that complicated,” said Sharon Staz, KPL’s
treasurer and outgoing general manager. “The relicensing process for an operation as small as
ours is as difficult and as onerous and as expensive as if we were the Hoover Dam.” According to
Staz, the relicensing process could cost KLP, “anywhere from $850,000 to $1.3 million.” “That’s
ridiculous,” said King. “This is a small, 100-year-old site. Relicensing it should take 10 pages and
a couple of days.” Ostensibly on hand to see KLP’s solar powered charging station for electric
cars — following trips earlier in the day to unveil new solar-power arrays at the Wells Reserve at
Laudholm and the Maine Audubon headquarters in Falmouth — King showed much more interest
in the dam relicensing: He spent 40 minutes chatting about it with Staz and KLP’s new general
manager, Todd Shea, versus four minutes eyeballing the charging station. “This is one of my
passions, the one-size fits-all regulatory process,” said King, who sits on the Senate Energy and
Natural Resources Committee. His goal, King said, “is the whole thing of rightsizing the regulatory
process.” For KLP, however, that work may be too little, too late. King asked if KLP could file for
an exemption from the relicensing process, given its small size (just 6,599 customers), age
(generating power since 1893 from its dams, which were converted from wood and timber to
concrete in 1954), and output (between 1.3-5 percent of its needs comes from the dams).
However, Staz said an exemption is not as good as it sounds. “We’ve been told by three different
engineering firms that the process of filing for an exemption is almost as expensive as the
relicensing itself,” she said. With that in mind, KLP’s five-member board of trustees has been
weighing its options. While the electricity it generates costs less than the power it purchases and
passes on from Florida-based NextEra Energy, the cost of relicensing the three Mousam dams
has given the KLP trustees pause. Last summer, while water levels on the Mousam were lowered
to conduct inspections of all three dams, KLP hired Wright Pierce Engineering to model what the
9
Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu
river might look like with the structures removed. “If the dams were to be breached, we wanted to
know what the river would look like, because we thought the public had a right to know,” said
Shea. The March 31 meeting, said Shea, is intended to be the start of a public dialogue on the
future of the dams, and the Mousam River. “We’ll be sharing the modeling in the photo
simulations,” said Shea. “Because that was a major hurdle in what we’ve been dealing with, that’s
the first piece of solid information we’re able to provide to the public. We’re hoping by mid- to latesummer to have another meeting to provide more information.
Save the date
The Kennebunk Light and Power District will hold a public informational session to unveil results
of a report detailing what the Mousam River might look like with its three dams removed, should
trustees rule against filing a federal relicensing application in March 2017. The meeting will begin
at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, March 31, in Room 301 at Kennebunk Town Hall. Doing right now is
confidential by nature because of the federal filings we have to do, but we want the public to know
what’s happening, and what could happen.” However, while the public will be shown pictures of
what the Mousam might look like if allowed to flow free along the section KLP controls, that model
should not be taken as a sure sign of things to come. According to KLP Vice President Wayne
Berry, all options remain on the table. “I can say this concretely, that we have not reached a
decision,” he said. “I truly wish we had more answers as well, but we’re being very careful about
gathering information. We want to make a good decision for everyone, but while we have a lot of
data collected, there’s nothing that I would say that it’s final. “There’s a lot of talk out there, but
nobody should be thinking that we’ve made a decision. We haven’t really made any decisions,
and I can say that when we do it will certainly not be all about costs, though of course that is a
major consideration.” “For the amount of power generated here, it doesn’t make sense to spend
$1 million on relicensing, but then that means we lose a renewable energy source,” said King.
“There ought to be a process for concerns that are under a megawatt that are ‘file it and forget it.’”
But if the dams remain, other concerns present themselves, such as fish passage.
“And, not to make a pun, but that’s a whole other school of thought,” said Staz.
(Minnesota hydro history.)
Progress: Hydroelectric power once electrified Welch
By Ruth Nerhaugen, contributor, Mar 28, 2015, republican-eagle.com
Long before nuclear power and
other modern energy sources
were developed, pioneer
Minnesotans harnessed water
power to meet their needs.
During the early years, the flow
of water was sent directly
through roller mills where
wheat was ground for flour.
In the 1930s and ‘40s, an
enterprising Welch family went
a step further and established a
hydroelectric power plant at the
Welch Dam.
Welch Township got its first permanent settlers in 1857-58. Twenty years later, in 1878, W.D.
Lowry built a flour mill at the village of Welch, which was called Eagle Mills until 1886. He chose
the location because it was possible to harness the power from the descending waters of the
Cannon River to operate the rollers. According to materials on file at the Goodhue County History
Center, wheels were used in early mill turbines. The water flowed into side slits, causing the wheel
to revolve. In roller mills, the wheat would be ground between two stones. One was shaped like a
saucer and the other rolled around inside the rim. This system was used until around 1931, when
Clarence Nelson created a hydroelectric power plant at the mill. Samuel and Peter Nelson had
10
Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu
opened the first store in Welch in 1886 and established the first post office at the time the name
was changed to Welch — like the township, in honor of Civil War hero A.E. Welch. Sam became
postmaster and Peter built a grain elevator. Welch’s original hydro-powered flour mill, the power
plant, grain elevator and Milwaukee Depot were destroyed by fire in 1934, but Clarence Nelson
immediately rebuilt a modern hydroelectric plant in 1935, the same year construction started on
U.S. Lock & Dam No. 3. The feed mill also was rebuilt. It operated from power supplied by the
Welch hydroelectric plant. According to a 1941 article in the Red Wing Daily Republican, “The
Welch electric power plant … supplies current in this community of 75 inhabitants. The plant is run
by water power and is operated by the Nelson Brothers.” An accompanying photograph shows the
interior of the old mill and early equipment. A Welch Township history written for its 155-year
anniversary says that the Rural Electrical Association purchased the customer base in
approximately 1963. The old mill structure still stands, but it has been put to new use.
Descendants of the Nelson family operate Welch Mill Canoeing and Tubing on the Cannon River
at the Welch Mill.
(Thought the battery bunny was the only one who did this! Oh, that’s ticking!)
Pueblo Dam hydropower clicking along
BY CHRIS WOODKA THE PUEBLO CHIEFTAIN, chieftain.com, March 29, 2015
It will be awhile before the turbines start
spinning, but work continues toward installing
hydroelectric generation at Pueblo Dam, CO. An
update on the hydropower project was shared by
Kevin Meador of the Southeastern Colorado
Water Conservancy District staff at this month’s
board meeting. “We’re working with Black Hills
Energy on the pricing of power and what we sell
it for. That’s a key piece, and we’re getting close
to the nitty-gritty,” Meador told the board. The
district is working with Colorado Springs Utilities
and the Pueblo Board of Water Works on a 7megawatt generation system that would be installed at the North Outlet Works on Pueblo Dam.
Interior Department Announces Plans to Partner with Crow Tribe on
Yellowtail Afterbay Hydropower
Working through the Bureau of Reclamation, the Department of the Interior, in partnership
with the Crow Tribe, will enter into an agreement for hydropower development on the
Yellowtail Afterbay Dam, downstream of Yellowtail Dam and Powerplant, on the Bighorn
River near Fort Smith, Montana.
March 31, 2015 | Source: Bureau of Reclamation, globenewswire.com
WASHINGTON, D.C., March 31, 2015 (GLOBE
NEWSWIRE) -- via PRWEB - The Department
of the Interior, in partnership with the Crow
Tribe, will enter into an agreement for
hydropower development on the Yellowtail
Afterbay Dam, downstream of Yellowtail Dam
and Powerplant, on the Bighorn River near Fort
Smith, Montana. The agreement is part of the
Crow Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act of
2010. Under the settlement, the Tribe holds the
exclusive right to develop and market power
generation on the Yellowtail Afterbay Dam. "The
Crow Tribe is excited to embark on the Tribe's
exclusive right under our water settlement to
11
Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu
develop hydropower at Yellowtail Afterbay Dam and to begin the critical work to bring the benefits
of hydropower to the Reservation and our tribal membership," said Crow Chairman Darrin Old
Coyote. "This is an excellent opportunity for development of new hydropower capacity on existing
infrastructure," said Deputy Secretary of the Interior Michael L. Connor. "Working through the
Bureau of Reclamation, Interior is pleased to assist the Crow Tribe on its Yellowtail Afterbay hydro
development, resulting in clean, renewable energy, and creating vital jobs in the process."
The Tribe is responsible for overall management of the hydropower project and for coordination of
activities associated with the project. The Bureau of Reclamation will provide technical assistance
in reviewing designs and making sure the new hydro coexists with the existing Yellowtail Afterbay
Dam in a safe and reliable manner. The next steps include completion of design data collection,
followed by design and implementation of Reclamation's dam safety processes for the proposed
modifications to the existing structure. This article was originally distributed on PRWeb. For the
original version including any supplementary images or video, visit
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2015/04/prweb12623040.htm
Bureau of Reclamation, Tyler Johnson
(They keep trying but no one bites.)
Canton Seeks Partner For Hydropower Project
By Ken Byron, 3/30/15, courant.com
CANTON, CT — Town officials
are making their second
attempt to find a private partner
for a hydropower project that
would use existing dams on the
Farmington River. Selectmen
authorized a contract last week
with an attorney who will
prepare a request for proposals
and then review the
submissions. The Virginiabased attorney, Paul Nolan, will
be paid $7,300 for the work,
according to town documents.
The hope is to use the dam in Collinsville on the Farmington River to generate hydropower.
Another dam further downstream in Avon and Burlington may also be included, but people familiar
with the project say its condition could make that difficult. Town officials have said that the
hydropower project can't move forward without a private partner because of its cost. A similar
request for proposals was made last year and three firms responded. The town tried
unsuccessfully to negotiate deal with two of them. Despite that, First Selectman Richard Barlow
said he is optimistic that the second attempt will be successful. He said issues that were
unresolved when the first call for requests was put out are now settled and that private entities
have asked the town about the status of the project in recent months. The board's voted 3-1
March 25 to hire Nolan to prepare the new request for proposals. Selectman Lowell Humphrey
cast the dissenting vote. Humphrey said he has supported the hydropower project in the past but
with less than a year left before a new board is elected, he said the town should hold off on
making commitments to it. "I would hate to rush into this just to get it done before our term is
done," Humphrey said. "Let the incoming board of selectmen take a view and see if this is
priority." Chief Administrative Officer Robert Skinner said the request for proposals should be put
out in the next couple of weeks. Skinner said he would like responses back by early June and
have an agreement negotiated by July if possible. The town is also negotiating a lease for the two
dams with the state. The dams were owned by the former Collins Company and powered its
factory in Collinsville. The company closed in 1966 and the state now owns the dams. One issue
officials are discussing is the state's demand that a fish ladder be installed at the Collinsville dam
12
Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu
and who would pay for that. Barlow said he has had talks recently with top staff at the state
Department of Energy and Environmental Protection about the dams. "Those talks seemed
encouraging to me," Barlow said. "They understand the issue and the value of the project."
Hydroelectric dam to replace university parking lot
Written by Sandy Van, Cameron Yong/HIGHLANDER. 3/31/15, highlandernews.org
University officials recently approved the
construction of a 600-foot hydroelectric dam
to contain the mouth of the majestic Colorado
River that snakes through parts of UC
Riverside. Monikered the “Great Wall of
Scotty,” the $100 million dam will be
constructed in place of Parking Lot 30, which
has seen scanty use from the 22,000
Highlanders who mostly live on or around
campus. Last quarter, members of the
community discussed ways to improve the
physical landscape of the campus with many
arguing for fewer parking lots for motorized
vehicles as swimming and kayaking were
cited as popular modes of transportation.
Fourth-year beekeeping major Barbra Messington argued in favor of Lot 30’s demolition, saying,
“Students are making the conscious decision to travel in a healthy and nonpolluting way,” and
added that the dam “had to go somewhere.” Funding for the Great Wall of Scotty is being
provided by an anonymous billionaire donor, according to campus public records.
Overall construction is expected to take five years to divert the river’s passageway and to lay
down a cement foundation for the dam. Meanwhile, the university is expected to add 300 new
faculty members to oversee the duration of the project.
Major dam goals include flash flood control, as some UCR buildings were hit with a deluge of
water last year, causing thousands of dollars’ worth of damage. “It’s not a surprise,” said
meteorologist Mindy Wilson of Riverside Weather Services. Typical spring weather results in
“sudden rainfall with as much as 8 inches on the daily.” UCR officials are also attempting to make
the shift from solar to hydropower after an unidentified jet engine part landed on and destroyed
the university’s 10-megawatt solar farm last month. The Federal Aviation Administration, the
national body in charge of regulating airspace travel, has declined to comment. With dam
construction set to begin as early as this Thursday, first-year mechanical engineering major Mary
Phan worries about the kind of impact the dam will make on the Riverside wetlands. “I wouldn’t
trifle with dams,” Phan said. “I heard the structures themselves can increase the chances of an
earthquake occurring in an area.” Felipe Braxton, president of Students All For Dams, an
advocacy group for the construction of the dam, believes that the structure will save “hundreds of
lives,” citing the campus statistics of 134 students who drowned last year while traveling to
classes. “Recent climate change has been less forgiving and it is important for humans to
intervene before the world freezes over,” Braxton said, alluding to increasing concerns over global
cooling in the state. UCR hydrology professor John Litz highlighted the significance of harnessing
the river’s resources, but cautioned against building too many dams as it may lead to
unprecedented impacts on aquatic species, referencing the endangered Riverside freshwater
salmon. “Extremely rare fish travel through the university’s canal system and continuing
construction may adversely affect their migratory routes,” he said. With the proposal of the dam in
its final stages, student protests continue to embroil Sushi by Panda Express for using the prized
salmon on its menu.
(Someone sees something that’s not there.)
13
Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu
Snowpack survey not devastating
Mar 31, 2015, appeal-democrat.com
Snowpack survey not devastating Julie R. Johnson/Glenn County Transcript
Snowpack is a very important concern for Pacific Gas and Electric Co., as the utility company
generates 15 percent of its electric power
from its hydropower stations across the
state. With this year's dismal snowpack
measurements, the state going into its fourth
year of drought conditions and this winter
being the warmest on record, that concern is
weighing a bit heavy. On Thursday, PG&E
hydrographers took snow measurements at
a meadow on the slopes of Lassen Peak.
What they learned was alarming, but not
devastating, said Paul Moreno, PG&E
spokesman.
"During the survey, PG&E hydrographers
learned that while the state's snowpack is
about 8 percent of normal, the amount of
PG&E hydrographers Grant Higgenbotham,
rain and snowfall that has fallen in our
left, and Chance Fulk measure snow at a
watershed lands is about 72 percent of
meadow on the slopes of Lassen Peak on
normal to date," he said.
Thursday. PG&E closely tracks snowfall so it
Throughout the winter months, PG&E takes
can make best use of water for hydroelectric
snowpack measurements in several
power. The snow measurement data is shared
locations to estimate on how much water will
with the California Cooperative Snow Survey.
be available to generate hydroelectric
power.
Snowpack data from PG&E, in addition to other public and private groups, is submitted to the
Department of Water Resources to form the California Cooperative Snow Survey.
The Cooperative Snow Survey provides information throughout the state on how much water is
available this year, Moreno said. That information will allow the utility company to make plans and
optimize its hydroelectric power over the summer period when demand is highest.
"The winter's warmer weather has meant two things for the snowpack," Moreno said. "First, in
areas of lower elevations where we usually get some snow during the winter, they got more rain
than snow, and when it did snow it melted quickly. Second, if you look at the total rain and
snowfall in the watersheds, 72 percent of normal may not be great, but it is providing us rain and
snow melt in our reservoirs and providing PG&E a chance to manage our water resources wisely."
At the Lassen Peak site survey, the hydrographers measured 7 feet of snow in a length of tube.
With the snow in the tube, they were then able to measure the water weight of the snowpack.
"During the most recent measurement, there was 44 inches of water in the 7 feet of snowpack,"
Moreno said. "Normal is about 77 inches of water. That gives us about two-thirds of normal on
Lassen Peak. Unfortunately, in other parts of the state we don't have such relatively good
numbers." He said most of the Lassen snowpack melt will wind up in Lake Almanor and then run
down into the North Fork Feather River, where PG&E has seven powerhouses generating
electricity before the water ends up at Lake Oroville. "We will have to take steps to conserve and
manage as much water as possible so our reservoirs will be as full as possible at the beginning of
the summer," Moreno said. "Normally at this time of year we have had more rain and melting
snowpack running down the mountain and hills than PG&E can possibly catch in our reservoirs.
Not this year." So, for now, the utility company is not releasing as much water from its reservoirs
to generate hydropower as it has in years past. "We are saving as much as we can for later,
during the summer, when the need is the greatest," Moreno said. PG&E will conduct two more
surveys through May to provide the company a vision of its future hydro-productivity.
"Hydroelectric power is an important source of clean and renewable energy for our customers,"
14
Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu
Moreno said. "It's an important part of our power portfolio, about half of which is carbon-free,
making us one of the cleanest electric utilities in the nation."
(Didn’t know you had to win a license?)
Duke Energy wins Yadkin River hydro license
BY BRUCE HENDERSON, CHARLOTTEOBSERVER.Com, 04/02/2015
Duke Energy Progress has won a 40-year federal license to manage its hydroelectric project on
the Yadkin-Pee Dee River east of Charlotte. The license, which replaces one that expired in 2008,
lets Duke continue operating its hydro plants on Lake Tillery and Blewett Falls Lake. During a year
of normal rainfall, the two plants generate enough electricity to power about 25,000 homes. The
new license includes benefits negotiated with government agencies, advocacy groups and
members of the public.
Among them:
▪ Fish passages for two migratory fish species, American shad and blueback herring,
which once spawned upstream of Duke’s dams.
▪ Three new recreation facilities and improvements to all company-owned recreation
areas on both lakes. Seasonal, scheduled releases from Lake Tillery will benefit paddlers.
▪ Conveyance of about 1,600 acres to the state and protective easements on Duke
property around the lakes.
Legal challenges delayed the license’s renewal after Duke filed an application with the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission in 2006. Duke is still waiting for a new hydro license for the
Catawba River, which has also been snarled in legal challenges for nearly a decade. Legal issues
in that case have been resolved, however.
Water:
(Duh, passionate plea for the obvious.)
State needs new dams, reservoirs
BY TIM JOHNSON AND JOEL NELSEN, SPECIAL TO THE BEE, 04/01/2015, sacbee.com
Like a gift card buried in a dresser drawer, it is easy to forget the promise of a previous season.
Just seven months ago, the Legislature passed a $7.5 billion water bond. It was California’s gift
card for water with funding for groundwater cleanup, environmental projects and improving our
ability to move water to places that needed it most. It included $2.7 billion for more water storage.
And not just any storage – for surface storage. We were in the room when the final details were
being put together. No one was talking about groundwater storage. For the first time in decades,
there was open, clear support for additional surface water storage. Not to be forgotten was the
overwhelming support for a bond that included new reservoirs. Only two members of the
Legislature voted against the bond in August. When put to a statewide vote, the bond passed with
67 percent of the vote, the highest for any ballot measure in November. The opposing campaign
clearly cited its concern about building additional dams as well. There can be no doubt the
Legislature and the people of California thought they were voting for more reservoirs.
Surface storage is the first and most important part of a comprehensive water solution. Even the
areas of the state with the greatest potential to recharge groundwater require a steady supply of
water to fill the underground aquifers. Other than the few short months of heavy rains, that water
will come from a reservoir. Surface water storage also benefits the Delta and the environment. A
primary requirement of the bond is that 50 percent of the benefits accrue to the public with an
emphasis on the Delta. As new reservoirs are managed specifically to improve water releases for
15
Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu
salmon and decrease salinity, these benefits will be clearly seen. For example, the proposed Sites
Reservoir in the Sacramento Valley would allow more water to be released for the four runs of
salmon in its rivers. Sites would also support the winter flooding of rice fields that are critical
habitat for the millions of birds that migrate along the Pacific Flyway. The proposed Temperance
Flat Dam in the San Joaquin Valley would provide certainty to communities such as Porterville,
Lindsay and Orange Cove that totally rely on federal water for daily use. Temperance Flat would
also help refill the San Joaquin groundwater basin by directing runoff to recharging basins that
otherwise could not handle the water all at once. Today’s angst and handwringing over new
reservoirs should be seen for what it is – at best a lapse in memory. At worst it is an attempt to
reverse the clear mandate that a long-awaited comprehensive solution to the state’s water
problems include all options – even dams. Tim Johnson is president and CEO of the California
Rice Commission. Joel Nelsen is president and CEO of California Citrus Mutual.
Environment:
(In case you wondered.)
Bonneville Dam fish count 4/2
April 2, 2015, columbian.com
Columbia River at Bonneville
Tuesday — 270 spring chinook, 26 steelhead.
Year to date — 1,684 adult spring chinook, 3,200 steelhead. Ten-year average through March 31
is 200 adult spring chinook and 2,131 steelhead. Water temperature was 48.4 degrees
Wednesday. Streamflow was 240,000 cubic feet per second. Water clarity at the dam is about 3.5
feet
Willamette River at Willamette Falls
Tuesday — 87 spring chinook, 34 steelhead. Year-to-date count is 246 adult spring chinook,
3,341 steelhead. Water visibility Wednesday at the Morrison Bridge in Portland was 3.4 feet.
More Like This
•
Bonneville Dam fish count 4/1 Apr 1, 2015
•
Bonneville Dam fish count 3/27 Mar 27, 2015
•
Bonneville Dam fish count 3/28 Mar 28, 2015
•
Bonneville Dam fish count 3/20 Mar 20, 2015
16
Copy obtained from the National Performance of Dams Program: http://npdp.stanford.edu
i
This compilation of articles and other information is provided at no cost for those interested in hydropower, dams, and water resources
issues and development, and should not be used for any commercial or other purpose. Any copyrighted material herein is distributed without
profit or payment from those who have an interest in receiving this information for non-profit and educational purposes only.