Energy

Oregon Calls For More Water Over Columbia and Snake River Dams

November 25, 2008
By

Battle lines are being drawn for a new federal court fight over salmon recovery plans for the Columbia and Snake Rivers.

Today, the state of Oregon and a coalition of fishing and conservation groups asked U.S. District Court Judge James Redden to increase the amount of water that will be spilled over dams in 2009.

Why? To help juvenile salmon make it to the ocean. In a press release, Earthjustice says the extra water flow increases their odds of survival. Judge Redden ordered extra water to be spilled in 2006, and the groups claim that’s the big reason why the numbers of returning salmon are up this year.

But if more water goes through the spillways, it means less is going through the generators, costing the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) millions of dollars. That’s why the latest version of the Salmon Recovery Plan, also known as the Biological Opinion, focuses on finding other ways to help fish get past dams. It also calls for spending millions to improve salmon habitat and the regional system of fish hatcheries.

Judge Redden will hear oral arguments on the newest Salmon Recovery plan on January 19. 2009. He’s rejected three earlier plans. But this fourth plan has more widespread support among state governments and the Northwest tribes.

Survey Shows Support For Coos Bay LNG, But…

November 20, 2008
By

The companies that want to build an LNG terminal near Coos Bay are touting a new survey they say shows widespread support from the public.

People in Coos, Douglas, Jackson and Klamath counties were asked about the project and the survey says 56% support of them support it. 16% of respondents said they were against it.

They were also asked about a companion LNG pipeline that would run across southwest Oregon from Coos Bay to a site near Klamath Falls. That question came up with similar results.

Those results are in stark contrast to a series of public hearings held by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission where LNG opponents greatly outnumbered supporters. Sponsors of the poll brushed that off by saying that opponents usually show up in greater numbers at public hearings, and claim that public support is “indisputable.”

But here’s what’s also indisputable. A surprising number of people polled, 37%, hadn’t even heard of the LNG proposal. And 46%, nearly half, hadn’t heard of plans for the pipeline.

Clearly both side have a lot of explaining to do.

Jody McCaffree with Citizens Against LNG told the Coos Bay World that what the results really show is that people aren’t really paying attention. She predicted that if people, “understood the whole concept, they’d probably change their minds.”

The poll was conducted by Moore Information of Portland. They questioned 400 people by phone and claim a margin of error of 5%.

Jordan Cove and Pacific Connector is a consortium of three companies that are behind the plant and pipeline. They say the plant and pipeline will cost $2.5 billion to build and create 400 full-time jobs.

FERC Puts Bradwood Landing LNG On Hold

November 17, 2008
By

Opponents of the Bradwood Landing LNG plant got some welcome news today.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) says it wants more time to think about requests for a rehearing on the Bradwood project.

FERC approved a license for the LNG plant back in September. Since then, several federal, state and tribal agencies have called on FERC to reconsider the decision. Their argument? That FERC approved the license without following the procedures laid out in state and federal law, including the Endangered Species and Clean Water Acts.

See our earlier stories:
Fed Vs Fed In LNG Battle
Oregon Joins LNG Battle

Even NorthernStar Natural Gas, the company that won the license, agreed FERC should take its time making a decision on a rehearing. NorthernStar is concerned that if FERC moves to quickly, it gives LNG opponents a good reason to take FERC to court.

Today’s announcement by FERC doesn’t say how long this pause will last, nor does it say when it will make a decision on rehearing the case. But it gives opponents some breathing room. And with a new administration taking office in about two months, that may be all they need to stop the project once and for all.

Mixed Reviews on Klamath Dam Deal

November 16, 2008
By

The news this week about the Klamath River dams is so huge, it’s almost impossible to believe how far we’ve come in the past seven years.

The headline is this. Pacific Power, which owns the four hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River, has agreed to their removal. It’s an agreement in principle. There are many obstacles to overcome. It’ll take years to implement. But if this goes through one of the great salmon rivers of the west coast could be running free from headwaters to the ocean.

This is THE Klamath we’re talking about. Low salmon numbers from this river led to a near closure of the commercial salmon season across most of Oregon and Northern California in 2006. Bitter water wars erupted in 2001 when farmers were denied irrigation water in favor of salmon and other fish. The farmers got their water after the Bush administration intervened, and the following year tens of thousands of salmon died in warm, shallow waters.

So why would any salmon respecting green group be opposed to such a deal?

For Oregon Wild, this deal amounts to little more than a last minute attempt by the Bush team to reward its friends. Oregon Wild says the deal relies on getting $1 billion from the federal government, a four year cost-benefit analysis by the Interior Department, and other conditions it describes as “highly unlikely” to be met. Meanwhile, work on removing the dams wouldn’t even begin until 2020.

Oregon Wild also complains that the deal gives too much water to agribusiness, doesn’t preserve enough water for salmon, and grants another 50-year extension of agriculture development on the Lower Klamath and Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuges.

Other environmental groups are not so cynical. The Wild Salmon Center in Portland told the Oregonian that this is as big as anything they’ve seen to restore a river. The group’s President, Guido Rahr, is quoted as saying “You really are giving a river the chance to come back.”

Sustainable Northwest called the agreement a step in the right direction. This group was involved in the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, which is based on seeing the dams removed. Sustainable Northwest called on the federal and state governments to implement the entire Klamath Basin agreement and to remove the dams quickly enough so that salmon will benefit.

12 years is a long time to wait for dam removal to begin. Much of the costs of dam removal will fall on the shoulders of Oregon customers of Pacific Power. A deal that removes dams, but still doesn’t provide the water needed by salmon isn’t much of a deal at all.

Powerful political forces are lining up behind this. We hope they get it right.

Wind Farm Backlash In Umatilla County

November 8, 2008
By

Seems like not everyone is crazy about the new crop of wind turbines that are growing like crazy in eastern Oregon.

According to the East Oregonian, the city council of Milton-Freewater went on the record to voice its concerns that too many wind mills will ruin the town’s view of the Blue Mountains. The article says those scenic views are one of the town’s selling points for attracting new business.

The council is also worried about all the money its spent to develop an area of town known as the South Hill. The plan is to put new homes in the South Hill area instead of taking up valuable farm land on the valley floor. South Hill is also a potential wind farm site.

There’s no question in our minds that huge wind farms have a dramatic impact on the landscape. We recently drove through northern Wasco County. It’d been several years since our last visit, and we were surprised by how much larger the wind farms in the area had grown. The sight of wind turbines, one next to another, for miles and miles, was a little bit eerie. It’ll be interesting to see if other areas of eastern Oregon start to say, “we’ve had enough.”

300 Mile, High Voltage Power Line in NE Oregon?

October 26, 2008
By

That’s what Idaho Power wants to build.

It’s proposing a 300 mile, 500 kilovolt power line starting near Boardman, OR to a location near Melba, ID.

The power line would cut diagonally across the NE corner of Oregon, similar to how I-84 crosses that part of the state.

Because part of the proposed line would cross Bureau of Land Management land, and U.S. Forest Service land, the feds are getting involved. BLM is taking the lead role for the federal government and will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.

BLM says about 11% of the proposed route crosses federal government land. Most of it crosses land held by private landowners.

At the state level, the lead agency is the Oregon Department of Energy-Energy Facility Siting Council. (There’s a mouthful.) This agency has authority over large energy projects such as power plants, wind farms and (obviously) high voltage power lines.

Time is running out if you want to attend one of the public meetings. Here’s the schedule for the remaining three meetings:

  • October 28 – Island City, Oregon, OSU Agricultural Service Center
  • October 29 – Pendleton, Oregon, Pendleton Convention Center
  • October 30 – Boardman, Oregon, Port of Morrow Riverfront Center

All meetings start at 4pm, with special presentations at 430pm and 530pm. This process is in the very early stages, and may be your best opportunity to have some impact on the outcome.

To learn more about the proposed power line visit:
Boardman to Hemingway Transmission Line Project

Oregon Joins Anti-LNG Battle

October 20, 2008
By

Oregon joined forces with Washington and NOAA Fisheries by filing for a new hearing on the Bradwood Landing LNG plant.

The filing asks the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to withdraw approval of Bradwood, saying FERC failed to follow the law.

Among the state’s complaints, that FERC approved the project before getting the necessary Oregon permits for air and water quality, that it didn’t consult with NOAA Fisheries, that it failed to determine if Bradwood is really needed and in the public interest, and that FERC didn’t do a good enough job studying the safety and security issues of the project.

In a news release, Governor Kulongoski says FERC shows “complete disregard” for Oregon’s role. “By requesting a rehearing, FERC has one final opportunity to do this right. If Oregon is not afforded a rehearing, legal action is imminent,” says Kulongoski in the release.

Several environmental groups and some northwest tribes also filed for a new hearing. The list includes Columbia Riverkeeper, Sierra Club Oregon, the Nez Perce Tribe and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation,

Fed Vs Fed In LNG Battle

October 19, 2008
By

Opponents of the Bradwood Landing LNG plant must be feeling pretty good about the latest news on the project.

On Friday, the National Marine Fisheries Service (better known as NOAA Fisheries) filed for a new hearing on Bradwood, saying the decision to approve the project violated the Endangered Species Act. And NOAA isn’t the only government agency to make that claim. Washington’s Department of Environmental Quality also filed for a new hearing on similar grounds.

A little background, last month the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) gave conditional approval to Bradwood Landing, which would sit on the Columbia River about 20 miles upriver from Astoria. The proposal also includes a pipeline that would carry natural gas further east on the Oregon side of the river, cross under the Columbia into Washington, and terminate near Kelso, WA.

NOAA says FERC violated federal law because it failed to consult with NOAA about the environmental impacts of the LNG plant. NOAA Fisheries has authority to protect several species of fish and marine animals, and to protect fish habit under two federal laws. Keep in mind that NOAA isn’t asking FERC to take back the approval, but rather that it wants the project to be put on hold.

NorthernStar Natural Gas of Houston, TX is the company that wants to build the Bradwood Landing plant. It told the Oregonian that NOAA’s filing is “procedural” and won’t impact the permitting process.

And then there’s the filing from Washington DEQ. It offers a far more detailed critique of how FERC failed to do its job studying the potential impacts of the LNG plant.

Some of the highlights:

  • Ballast Water: When LNG cargo ships arrive, they may dump engine cooling water into the Columbia River. They may also take in river water to act as ballast on the return trip. DEQ says FERC doesn’t have enough information to know how this will affect the river.
  • Emergency Preparedness: An explosion at the plant, or along the pipeline, could have serious consequences for the river and the people who live nearby. But DEQ says FERC failed to analyze how much it would cost to handle such an emergency, or how much it’s going to cost to prepare for one.
  • Geologic Hazards: DEQ says FERC didn’t do a good enough job studying the impact of landslides along the pipeline route.
  • Economic Impact: DEQ says FERC failed to fully analyze how large LNG cargo ships would impact other shipping that uses the Columbia River. LNG ships will require extra security that could delay barges and other traffic. DEQ also says FERC needs to do a better job of how Bradwood Landing LNG would impact the local fishing industry.
  • Greenhouse Gas: DEQ says construction of the project will produce 146,000 tons of carbon dioxide every year, and once the plant is operating it will produce 102,000 annually. But DEQ says, FERC doesn’t require NorthernStar to do anything to offset that.

DEQ takes it a step further and says FERC should rescind its approval of the Bradwood Landing project.

The Oregonian says the state of Oregon will join the fray on Monday.

OSU: One Step Closer To Wave Power

October 13, 2008
By

Scientists at Oregon State say they may be only a couple of years away from installing the state’s first commercial wave energy project off the coast.

They’re feeling optimistic after a successful month-long test of a wave energy device they deployed near Newport. Associate Professor Ted Brekken says, in a news release, that the test went “exceedingly well”. Brekken says the buoy produced lots of power, worked about as well as they expected, and gave them lots of data for further study. OSU has been testing several designs that use a direct-drive system.

OSU isn’t the only group to conduct such test. Finavera Renewable of Vancouver, BC tested a wave energy buoy for almost two months off the coast near Agate Beach. About a week before they were going to retrieve the buoy, it sank to the bottom of the ocean and wasn’t salvaged until July. Still, Finavera says it collected useful data while the buoy was in operation.

OSU News Release: Successful Ocean Test Advances Wave Energy Research
OSU Video Link: Wave Energy Generator Deployment