
Who
pays the price for dam removal?
December 20, 2007
The
Oregonian
Pat
Reiten, president of Pacific Power
The recent flood closure
of Interstate 5 along our most vital transportation artery between
Portland
and
Seattle
provided a startling dose
of reality. What if authorities chose to permanently remove the
water-damaged portion of I-5 without offering up a proven alternative
route?
As ridiculous as that
sounds, that's exactly what hundreds of thousands of Pacific Power
customers face as various special interests clamor for attention in
southern
Oregon
, advocating an abrupt end
to renewable hydropower along the
Klamath River
.
Setting aside the fact
that hydropower is one of the most abundant sources of renewable energy
we have on our planet and its historic role as a crucial low-cost
economic catalyst for the Northwest, we first need to ask ourselves:
What is the proven alternative and who will pay the price?
Scientists can't agree on
an answer to the first part, but they do agree on the need to use
high-quality science to guide critical policy decisions. They admit that
at this time there is a distinct shortage of scientific analysis of the
consequences of removing hydropower dams along the
Klamath River
. Lacking that scientific knowledge, predicting the full economic
impact is pure guesswork.
This isn't a debate of
people vs. fish. Reasonable science and experience proves that people
and fish can coexist, even on the Klamath. However, in the larger debate
about the future of the
Klamath River
system, Pacific Power must
speak on behalf of its hundreds of thousands of customers -- home and
business owners, schools and seniors, farmers and families.
When interest groups call
for tearing out the Klamath dams without regard to local environmental
impacts, Pacific Power will speak up for its customers and affected
communities. When settlement parties file billion-dollar lawsuits
outside of the negotiations, constructive conversation gets
understandably stifled. And when special interests demand that all costs
and future liabilities be borne by ratepayers, we have to say
"no."
PacifiCorp initiated the
settlement process with all the key stakeholders in the region to
balance multiple interests and find solutions to very complicated issues
on a highly complex water system. Years later, one simple truth remains:
Our customers must have a voice in this decision-making process.
PacifiCorp and our parent
company are among the most aggressive renewable- and wind-energy
developers in the nation. We believe in renewable energy; we're
committed to it. These renewable and carbon-free resources are a key
part of that commitment.
Finding agreement on the
multitude of nonpower issues in the
Klamath
Basin
is better for all
concerned, but there is a steep price to pay for meeting everyone's
agenda. Special interests can't be allowed to hijack the hydro license
settlement process for their own more diverse agendas, or write a blank
check and force our customers to cover it.
If appropriate
governmental entities, based on careful, complete science and good
public policy, ultimately dictate removal of the Klamath dams rather
than proscribing fish passage structures or other alternatives, they
also must deal with the consequent financial and risk elements. Our
customers should not literally pay the price. That reality must be part
of any discussion and settlement agreement.
Pat Reiten is
president of Pacific Power. Pacific Power and PacifiCorp Energy are part
of PacifiCorp, which is owned by MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted
material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those
who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for
non-profit
research and educational purposes only. For more information go
to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Source:
http://www.oregonlive.com/commentary/oregonian/index.ssf?/
base/editorial/1198108506290780.xml&coll=7 |