Hydropower: It's Renewable, But Is It Green?

A federal judge in Portland is considering how the hydroelectric dams on the Columbia River interact with salmon.

 The Switch

When you flip the switch, where does your power come from?
And what will power Northwest homes and businesses in the future?
We're asking these questions and more for our special series The Switch.

At the same time, environmentalists continue to push the Obama Administration to remove several of the hydroelectric dams on the Columbia River.

And that leads us to the next installment in our energy series, The Switch.

Hydroelectric power has long been part of the Northwest’s fabled history. In fact, Woody Guthrie wrote a whole album about building the Columbia River dams.

But in our clean energy future, is hydropower really "green" enough?

Ethan Lindsey explores the issue.


Hydro power and the Northwest, they’re nearly synonymous, even for people who've never heard Guthrie's "Roll on Columbia." 

In fact, when Fran Halpin graduated from college in Massachusetts, it just made sense to move West and work on one of the country’s biggest renewable energy projects.

Bonneville GeneratorFran Halpin: “I came here and got a job with Bonneville, and I said, this is like my dream job. I get to do engineering and I get to be environmentally conscious, and work with fish survival and renewable energy and conservation. Being an engineer, I am not that much of a braggart. People have to pry this stuff out of me. It is a job I am very proud to be doing and happy to be doing. I’ve loved it ever since I came out here.”

Halpin works in the Portland offices of the Bonneville Power Administration.

Today, he heads up a team that watches the water flow of the Columbia River system and markets power accordingly.

Through Halpin’s eyes, the hydroelectric power generated along the Columbia is one of the best answers we’ve got to our energy questions.

His office sits next to a trading floor and monitoring room – both of which feature banks and banks of computer screens.

Fran Halpin: “I have a couple of displays here that I can show you if you want. Ok, so this is about midnight here. So we’re at 1500 megawatts or 1700 megawatts at Grand Coulee. And then it’s dropping off between midnight and 1 o’clock. Turning off the Late Show, electric heaters are turning off. And then, early risers start getting up, so you start seeing the load picking up, people are coming into schools or offices, so the load does come way up.”

The Bonneville Power Administration sells and markets electric power generated from the federally-owned energy projects in the Northwest – that includes wind and nuclear power, as well as BPA's bedrock business: hydroelectric dams.

On a tour of the Bonneville Dam, the sheer scale of the engineering is breathtaking.

The dams are operated by federal agencies, notably the Army Corps of Engineers.

Dams make up the biggest piece of the Northwest’s hydroelectric pie.

They're a reliable source of base load power. That and their ability to respond to increased demands at peak times are key selling points of hydro.

Longtime Oregonians remember when hydro constituted more than 90 percent of the state’s power a few decades ago.

Inside the dam, next to the energy turbines, it’s hard to believe that hydro’s share of the regional power mix has now been cut in half.

Population and energy growth has been coupled with a push to sell cheaper power to California.

So now, Oregon gets just 42-percent of its energy from hydroelectric power.

Still, hydro is one of the cheapest – if not the cheapest – power source we’ve got.

The Bonneville Power Administration says its average price per kilowatt-hour over the past year was 2.73 cents.

The only rival is coal – but hydro supporters like to point out the dams don’t pump any pollution into the sky.

And on top of all that, it’s renewable.

Steve Wright: “Well, hydro is clearly renewable. I don’t think there’s any question about that. The fact of the matter is, it’s the cycle of water that we are able to take advantage of.

Steve Wright is the Administrator of the Bonneville Power Administration.

He says it’s also sustainable, and in his mind, green.

Steve Wright: “I believe the fundamental value of the electric power system in the Northwest resides in that river. This is a huge river, and it sits on the side of a very steep hill. And that’s a unique opportunity. Hydro power is the best renewable resource because it is the lowest cost and most reliable renewable resource. And I think that’s why so many people in the Northwest feel connected to the Columbia.”

But Wright, as well as anyone, knows and acknowledges the environmental costs of the dams.

They damaged the nearby habitat, forever changed cultures, and killed lots and lots of fish.

And to Brett Swift at the conservation group American Rivers, a label like “green” or “sustainable” or “renewable” just doesn’t fit.

Brett Swift: “Dams absolutely have an adverse impact on the environment. The important question is ‘what is the role of hydropower in the future of our energy mix. And how we label it doesn’t necessarily inform that.”

Swift says American Rivers knows that hydropower will be a part of the region’s future energy reliance – but says that doesn’t mean we should start building new dams or dismiss getting rid of old, inefficient ones.

 Jerry Bryan
  Jerry Bryan

One model for future hydro is small-scale, low impact dams.

Jerry Bryan stands next to a small hydroelectric project in the Farmers Irrigation District outside Hood River

The entire facility is about the size of a 7-11.

Jerry Bryan: “You are looking right now at the control panels for both of those generators. I still think that I am staring at engineering technology from the 40s and 50s.”

Unlike a traditional dam, this project allows fish to swim by unimpeded and yet provides local irrigators with the water they need to grow their crops.

Many in the state say little hydro projects like this could serve as models for low-impact, small scale power generation in the future, but Bryan is reluctant to take any praise.

Jerry Bryan: “If I am going to stand here and say a project I am working on is a model for everyone, I am justly accused of affected arrogance. So I am not willing to say that, but what I am willing to generalize is that if people sit down, then wonderful models emerge.”

Bryan says his project isn’t perfect. Every energy source has drawbacks.

And that’s the crux of the hydro debate, says Angus Duncan, with the non-profit Bonneville Environmental Foundation.

Angus Duncan: “There’s a tendency to exalt some sources of energy, and demonize others. And for better or worse, hydro has been demonized in the Northwest. Right now, a far greater threat to salmon runs generally, is global warming. That is a bigger threat than the hydroelectric system.”

Duncan says inefficient and destructive dams are being torn out around the region right now. And that should continue.

But he says if we tear out the big dams, we’ll need to replace that energy with something else.

And until hydro power can be replaced by something other than coal, it’s "green" enough for most.

Comments

May 11, 2009
1:22 a.m.
It's not a question of "is hydro bad"? You have to look at it on a case-by-case basis -- as with anything, wind, solar, oil, gas...And, in the case of the 4 lower Snake dams, YES, those 4 dams are killing salmon and driving several populations toward extinction. The good news is that, according to the new Bright Future report from NW Energy Coalition, we can replace the current energy production from the 4 lower Snake dams AND meet all new load growth for the region with a combination of conservation, energy efficiency standards, and increased clean energy production, such as wind and solar. We can do all of this right away and meet our energy goals by 2020. We just need to be smart about it. It's ridiculous to assert -- as does BPA Administrator Steve Wright -- that the future of renewable energy in the NW is hydropower. No one believes this, especially fishermen. If we really want to keep the region healthy, let's keep the good dams and scrap the others. There's no need to keep these dinosaurs around any longer than necessary. In fact, restoring our rivers more to their natural state will help protect family-wage jobs in the fishing industry.

— Posted by natbrandon

May 11, 2009
10:20 a.m.
Here's another way to think about this issue. Let's create a hypothetical scenario. Let's say we had a "green" energy technology that, as a by-product, put a chemical into the river which killed up to %90 of the young salmon during the spring migration downstream. Would we call that a "green" technology? I think that most people, even conservatives, would agree that isn't green. And yet in the case of hydro, because there is no chemical "smoking gun" we can just put our heads in the sand and call it "green". I find it disingenuous at best, that folks (energy industry) who ten years ago, couldn't give a rip about "green" energy, are now suddenly playing the "green" card as a PR move, but are still not willing to look at the true cost of hydro and factor those cost into the equation. There are tens of thousands of jobs being lost throughout the pacific northwest and in California due to the continuing decline in salmon populations. Entire towns are facing economic disaster. And what about the rest of us? Salmon is a tremendously valuable food source for people. The continuing decline is having huge ripple effects throughout the food chain in the ocean, and yet we still argue about whether or not hydro is "green"? Green is about protecting the planet, maintaining ecological balance, not letting entire species slide into extinction, leaving the earth a better place than we found it for the next generation and for generations to come. Green is about respect for our very limited time on this earth and not letting arrogance and greed drive our decision making processes. So big energy needs to stop the hyperbole about green, unless they are really willing to walk the walk and not just talk the talk. If big energy wants to be green, then they need to start looking at the true cost of hydro and start facing up to the fact that hydro is not the silver bullet. It has huge ecological costs and while it is true that it doesn't put carbon into the atmosphere it has nearly destroyed what was once the largest salmon producing river system on the planet and that is a cost we all have to recognize. Are we willing to just sit by and watch as more and more of our salmon runs slip into oblivion. Think about that next time you order lox with you bagel. Or better yet think about that the next time you turn on your lights.

— Posted by epetlock

May 11, 2009
11:41 a.m.
I have to say I agree with the other two commenters. NW hydro is surely part of the energy future, but there is good hydro and bad hydro. I would hope that we wouldn't choose to tear out old-growth forest in order to install wind turbines, even though wind energy is clean and renewable. Same with dams. And if there is some effective salmon-saving modification to Snake River dam operations short of dam removal, let's do that - but in nearly 20 years of studying it, BPA and the Corps haven't found one that holds water scientifically. Also, while global warming is clearly a huge problem - potentially cataclysmic - it seems simplistic to say, "Well, we have to address climate change now, and we'll deal with endangered species and other ecological values later, after we've addressed climate change, to the extent they still exist." Don't we have to do both? Don't we need to find a way to make it through climate change without thoughtlessly, and needlessly, sacrificing critical ecosystems? Thanks to OPB for getting into the issue - it warrants more thought, more discussion, and most of all, an honest process to reach a settlement that works for fish and for people and for river-based communities.

— Posted by nonydog

May 11, 2009
3:24 p.m.
I don't understand it. When someone suggests that hydropower is green, the response is to "take out the Snake River dams"! I note that nonydog says if there are some salmon-saving modifications that could be added to the Snake River dams, we should "do it" . There are such modifications, and they have been added to those dams - they're called spillway weirs, and have proven very effective at fish passage. Also, another thing I don't get.....I thought that a resource is "green" if it is renewable and does not add to global warming. If that is the case, hydropower is one of the greenest of the green energy sources. Folks in the northwest have been blessed to have access to hydropower for these many years. Those dams provide the largest source of electricity in the northwest - electricity that supports jobs for hundreds of thousands in the region. I believe there must be a sensitivity to salmon recovery, and am willing to help pay for improvements to the dams to increase salmon survival. I don't believe that we must eliminate an existing source of renewable energy - more than a thousand megawatts of hydropower - in order to save even more salmon to be killed by those who would harvest them. Isn't there a more rational means of solving this issue?

— Posted by fishin1gma

May 13, 2009
8:02 a.m.
Why do news media keep asking this dumb question? It’s obvious why we have an energy problem – no one knows that hydro is renewable! American Rivers is so anti-hydro that it fogs their ability to think rationally. We will NOT get where we want to be with renewables by relying on the fad called wind power. Wind is not reliable, dependable, cost effective, or efficient. We cannot rely on a technology that needs taxpayers to build their transmission lines and so-called smart grid and gets by on large government subsidies when it is not dependable power that requires backup from other energy sources. It is pure fantasy to think the Country will supply 20 % of its power with wind as a major source. The result will be skyrocketing rates for power and the public and media haven’t figured that out yet. When they do – it will not be pretty.

— Posted by RAMC

May 22, 2009
6:57 p.m.
Dam removal is a ridiculous proposal. Saying wind can replace hydro is naive at best. Wind power is in no way consistent as hydro power. When the wind stops for a week out in the gorge, the output literally goes to zero. Reality is, if you want to remove dams to save salmon, gas turbines, nuclear, or coal powered plants will be the replacement. That is reality. I cannot believe that people will lend their support without realizing the reality of the world they live in. If you want to pay for a new nuke plant because we breached dams, you want to pay for it. Don' t make me pay for it. Does anyone here know there are also environmental groups fighting wind power and tidal power? Geothermic is also being challenged by enviro groups. Solar is very, very expensive to start up and these solar farms will not last like a dam does by any means. Do you know how nasty the processes/byproducts are that produce solar equipment? Solar will need frequent refurbishment. You have to choose the lesser of the evils to maintain our existing lifestyle. If you want to live in a hut with no power, please don't try to make me do it! Conservation is great, but how will conservation bridge the gap with an ever growing population? We in the PNW have some the lowest power rates in the nation due to our hydro. It is a great gift. How would a 2x or 3x power bill sound? Start calculating the price of one of those nuke plants into your power bill. I think the extreme salmon advocates should pay the bill if they want to be the ones to make the decisions. Having said all that, I am a huge liberal democrat and think that any REASONABLE means that are cost conscious should be used to save salmon. Do you know that BPA spends something like 350 million per year on Salmon? How could that money be spent to lower production costs for factories to provide jobs if only half of it was used to lower power prices? Think and act with knowledge, not on some silly trend. Look at the facts before you jump on a bandwagon. Look at the big picture, not a microcosm of the reality.

— Posted by Steve_Vancouver


Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post.

Login or register to set up an account.

© 2009, Oregon Public Broadcasting.

Search · Inside OPB · Report Reception Problems · Privacy Policy · Terms of Use · Contact Us · Pressroom · Employment · Community · Audio Streams · RSS Feeds


PBSNPRPRIBBC