Alaska: We're all here cuz we're not all "there"
Su Hydro? Hmmm. That sounds familiar from about 35 years ago. It was a divisive topic then. It'll be worse now.
Wonder how much money can be spent on a study that was done years ago,(and how big the kick backs will be),before they decide it's not a good idea ,1 there is a good run of salmon that would be destroyed.2 that area is full of fault lines and subject to large earthquakes at any time. Like the first study said.
Should have been Built 30 years ago. Today they will be able to build it and address the complaints of yesterday even better!
Or all you Humans load up and head south where you belong.
Wait now, we have a brazillian cubic feet of nat gas available that is clean burning energy and we're even talking about building a dam on the Devils canyon at a cost of how many billions? Who is doing the economic analysis here? Ren and Stimpy?
current proposal is to dam watana canyon, not devil's canyon. the original proposal was for damming both.
it's complete BS to say that the run of salmon will be destroyed. Large numbers spawn in the chulitna, talkeetna, yentna, and many smaller tribs which may not be severely impacted by the proposed dam. While obviously a dam would have some impacts on river flow, I daresay that flood conditions would still produce a whopper of a flood, as nearly the entire Susitna watershed would not lie upstream of the dam, so the majority of the flow would not be directly impacted.
North Slope natural gas exists, but to say it is available is more than a bit of a stretch. We need a big fancy straw to consider it available.
I am not here advocating for this dam as the best course of action for energy, but facts are nice to establish in such a discussion.
Edit: I know HDR has done some of the environmental studies recently. I'm sure the report is publicly available if anyone wants to read it.
Wonder why us knuckleheads never harnessed the tide in cook inlet for our power? It seems to me you could have turbines on turntables so you could harness the ebb and the flood. You could put them on existing pilings or even on bridge pilings. Maybe its the ice i dunno.
Small scale, end-user hydro (where viable)? YEA!!!!
Dams? Demonstrate the need, show how it's the best alternative, and show how you (the builder/owner/operator) are going to mitigate the risks.
A major hydro dam on the Big Su??? "Who's getting paid?" is what I want to know. We (as in Alaska) don't need a hydro dam. We already have one of the largest contiguous coal deposits in the world right alongside the rail line that connects 70% of the state's population.
Clean coal is doable but the biggest drawback to (and continuing criticism of) the Healy plant is wattage lost in transmission since Anchorage is so far away. (I'm not an engineer or an electrician but that's what I was told). If that's so then build a powerplant out on Pt Mac and another in the Fairbanks area then ship the coal TO the powerplant. The Pt Mac spur line is already in the design phase. Might as well put one down the Rich to Glenallen and build a plant there too.
Cheap (relatively) power spurs investment and growth.
Let's capitalize on the resources we have before launching mega-projects of dubious merit.
If cave men had been trophy hunters the Wooly Mammoth would be alive today
Is anyone researching geo thermal power in the area?
There is enough volcanic activity that there should be a viable source of geo thermal energy to produce steam to generate power.
It's clean and eviromentally friendly.
In Yellowknife we have 2 closed gold mines in town and one is located close to the downtown area. They are currently working on feasibility studies for extracting heat from the depths of the mine to heat a good portion of the buildings in the downtown area.
With projects of this magnitude I often wonder what could be done to actually improve habitat or at least provide additional resources in the process of the development. For instance I wonder if it would be possible to develop this 39 mile long reservoir (lake) into fantastic red salmon habitat. I am not saying it is possible at all but it sure would be neat to to look into. How cool would it be to have a couple million reds run through north cook inlet? I know I sure would love to have a local dip-net fishery!
This was a topic of discussion in 1969.
The only thing that is different today is that there are a lot more people just stopping by on their way to the culmination of their careers elsewhere. Not so many Alaskans left in Alaska anymore.
I would really like to see a study on what the down stream impact would be? Would the water warm in the reservoir and effect down stream water temps that are unsuitable to salmonid species like has happened to so many rivers in the west and north west?
Alaska: We're all here cuz we're not all "there"
I'm not for or against hydro but why in the HE double hockey sticks don't we use the coal that is abundant and on the highway plus it has such a small footprint compared to hydro or a gas line. If it is the carbon footprint that is the problem then the global warming folks Should back the hydro plan to eliminate all carbon emissions for electric generation in south central. Oh yeah there is a big ole coal fired power plant sitting idle. Instead of talking about hydro the gov should claim some eminant domain on golden valley electric and start that plant if we need the power.
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming-----WOW-----what a ride!
tsk tsk....Res walks away from the computer, kicks the dog outta the way and goes out to the woodshed for another load of wood. Gonna get cold tonight!!!.
"96% of all Internet Quotes are suspect and the remaining 4% are fiction."
Susitna dam.... YGTBFK, right?
Another ridiculously stupid idea being resurrected from the past.
Just say NO!
"Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
The KeenEye MD
Hydro power would be great. It could help power the mines that are coming.
I know that there are some negatives associated with this dam, but I hope it gets the go-ahead and is built. Yes, it is going to have an environmental impact, and may harm the salmon run to an unknown degree. However, I sincerely believe that the positives make it worth it. Lots of jobs (some may even go to Alaskans), a steady source of power for FBX, Anchorage, Delta, Wasilla, and all the small towns along the way. It would help the state reach its goal of 50% of power from renewable energy sources, and maybe help GVEA in Fairbanks stop burning oil for creating electricity, which makes my electric bill fluctuate all over the place every 3 months. Remember that Cook Inlet is going to run out of gas at some point. Yeah, we could build more coal plants, but until the technology is available to capture emissions from coal plants (and "clean coal" does not really do that yet) it will not be as environmentally friendly as hydro. And like Mr. Pid said, it will provide power to the mines that are coming at some point. I am sure it will impact some, but the benefit is huge in my mind.
I think we are probably getting excited over nothing, because the chances of it actually getting completed are about the same as a gas line.
“The mountains are calling and I must go.” - John Muir
"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." - Abraham Lincoln
Great idea. Can't develop Cook Inlet gas; no pipeline to get gas to the Interior/Southcentral and Mat-Su shot down a coal plant, so yea, get 'er done!