Debate attempts to address dam breaching questions

PASCO — People gathered at Columbia Basin College in Pasco last Thursday to witness a debate regarding whether it was a good idea to remove dams on the Lower Snake River to improve salmon populations. The debate comes after months of discussion at the local, state and federal levels about whether or not to keep the dams there. Policy set on that issue may impact the future of dams on the Columbia River and other streams in Washington and elsewhere.

U.S. Rep. Dan Newhouse, R-Sunnyside., and Washington Policy Center Environmental Director Todd Myers argued against the removal of the dams, while Northwest Energy Coalition Executive Director Nancy Hirsch argued for their removal.

All three panelists agreed that they wished a representative from one of the Native American tribes affected by salmon numbers and the dams were in attendance. Myers said several other agencies and representatives, including from the tribes, were invited to the debate.

Opening statements

Myers, a former member of the Washington State Department of Natural Resources and a current member of the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council, began the opening statements. Myers said salmon numbers have gone up every decade since the early 2000s.

“There is a cycle that goes up and down, so in 2019 you'll see a very bad year, in 2022 I think we saw a very good year,” he said. “What you want to get is on average going up. The thing is that we have not seen them recover as rapidly as we would like. It is slow, but it is progress nonetheless.”

Myers said the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has figured out how to allow more and more salmon through the fish passages over time, and that while breaching the dams would accelerate salmon recovery, that acceleration does not outweigh the negative effects of breaching. 

“Across the Pacific Northwest and in the state there are no silver bullets,” he said. “The challenges that salmon face, there are so many factors that play into it.”

Newhouse then gave his opening statements.

“Over half the wheat that's produced in the United States moves down the Snake and Columbia rivers and heads to destinations around the globe,” he said. “It's become a very important transportation system for many things.”

Breaching the dams would also reduce clean energy production, Newhouse said.

“In this time when everyone is concerned about our environment and reducing our carbon footprint, it seems to me that one of the things that we should be working very hard to do is preserving one of the cleanest sources of renewable energy that we have, and that’s the hydroelectric system,” he said.

Hirsch, who serves on the board of Renewable Northwest and the Centralia Coal Transition Board and the advisory committee for the Institute for Energy Studies at Western Washington University, laid out her primary reasons for advocating for breaching the dams.

“I would argue that we are seeing some increases in some years and some significant decreases in (salmon) population in more years than we've had good years, so the trend is downward,” she said. “The other important motivator for me is tribal justice. The tribes' treaty rights guarantee them harvestable and healthy … salmon and they're not able to harvest at the levels that they are usually accustomed to and it's affecting their entire culture.”

Hirsch said the salmon in the Lower Snake River are the most likely stocks to make it through climate change because of where they spawn.

“Going through eight dams is tough for the smolts coming out, and they cumulatively have losses at each dam,” she said. “So while they may have a 95% passage at one, by the time they get past eight, they're down to a 70, 65% passage rate.”

Current and future clean energy technology can replace the energy output of the four dams, Hirsch said.

“We are in a different place than we were 20 years ago,” she said. “The technology has improved to allow us to consider removing hydroelectric projects and replacing that power without increasing greenhouse gas emissions and providing a more reliable and flexible energy system than we have ever had.”

Hirsch agreed with Myers that there is no silver bullet to salmon recovery, but said that’s why she would want to see investment in all the methods of recovery, including breaching the dams.

Power generation

Newhouse said one of the pressing concerns of losing the dams is the loss of energy production and low-cost power.

“We're just at the tipping point of not having enough energy,” he said. “If we lost the dams tomorrow, wait until it gets hot this summer. Wait until it gets very cold next winter. We could have very dire consequences because of not having enough power.”

Newhouse said he wants to see more energy production on all fronts, not less, due to the state’s increasing population and power usage.

Hirsch said she maintains her stance that the dams are replaceable.

“The good news is these dams are not coming out tomorrow, so we can plan … I'm expecting, as a public power customer, that we will pay a share of transition costs, but the bulk of them will be federal resources,” she said.

Connecting with other power grids in the Western United States will reduce the risk of emergency loss of power, Hirsch said. 

Myers agreed that connecting to other grids would be more stable and reliable, but he said it also costs more.

Hirsch also said the cost of reliable clean energy has decreased in recent years, coupled with other technological advancements.

“There's a whole new wave of storage technologies that (are) called ‘long-duration storage’ that we need,” she said. “That's part of how we create a reliable and affordable energy system, is we diversify the mix of resources we have and we plan for it now so that when we're ready to take the dams out in the early 2030s, the system is prepared for that.”

Costs

Myers said there were a variety of costs associated with breaching the dams.

“The estimates are all over the place, but we’ll use Congressman (Mike) Simpson’s since he is arguing for tearing down the dams. His estimates are that it will take $35 billion to tear down the dams and replace the various amenities the dams provide now,” Myers said. “To put that in context, we spend about $200 million a year at the state level on salmon recovery.”

Newhouse said other methods of transportation like rail and highways in the same region are already near capacity and it would be difficult to replace the transportation made possible with the dams.

The Columbia Basin Herald has reported on the barge systems that take a variety of crops from inland ports along the Snake and Columbia rivers to international seaports on the West Coast.

Myers said his biggest concern is that state and federal agencies put lots of money into one avenue and don’t see the necessary salmon recovery.

“You have to prepare to spend a huge amount of money to deal with the dislocation of energy, the impacts on the economy, transportation and other things like that,” Myers said. “Given how you could use that money to help salmon, not just on the Snake, but across the Pacific Northwest, I just don't think it's worth it.”

“Even Rep. Simpson has told me that he cannot guarantee that tearing out the dams will allow the salmon to come back,” Newhouse said. “So $35 billion with no guarantees. That's a risk that seems like we should have some certainty involved.”
According to Newhouse, records show that salmon numbers were diminishing before the Lower Snake River Dams were constructed.

Hirsch spoke about cost estimates as well.

“I also want to point out there's a cost to doing nothing, and that we've spent $17 billion already on the portfolio of habitats, passage of the hydro system, restoration at hatcheries, estuary investment … and we're where we are on recovery and, going forward, we would need to continue to spend, to invest to ensure that we don't reach extinction,” she said.

Another cost will be maintenance and repair for the aging hydroelectric infrastructure at the dams, Hirsch said.

Myers said there are trade-offs and costs no matter which plan moves forward.

“The difference between the money that we have spent as part of hydro projects and the money that needs to be spent to maintain those, and relying on Congress to do that is that when we generate electricity, we generate the revenue to fund those projects,” he said.

Hirsch said breaching the dams is one of the only methods of salmon recovery not yet attempted.

“The question is, will it make a difference? We hope so,” she said. “Can we guarantee anything that we invest in is going to make a difference? We can't. But we need to we need to … take another dramatic step because of where the populations are today.”

Gabriel Davis may be reached at gdavis@columbiabasinherald.com. 

    NW Energy Coalition Executive Director Nancy Hirsch, who also serves on the board of Renewable Northwest and the Centralia Coal Transition Board and as well as the advisory committee for the Institute for Energy Studies at Western Washington University, speaks during Thursday’s debate at Pasco’s Columbia Basin College.
  

    Spillway at Ice Harbor Dam, one of the Lower Snake River dams, with the six-unit powerhouse in the background. The dam is one of four being considered for removal on a state and federal level.
  

    The Lower Granite Dam, a Lower Snake River dam, one of four being considered for removal. Those concerned with salmon populations believe removing the dams could aid in preserving the species, while those against it say the dams help pay for salmon preservation programs.
  

    Washington Policy Center Environmental Director Todd Myers, a former member of the Washington State Department of Natural Resources and a current member of the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council, debates with other panelists Thursday evening regarding the removal of the Lower Snake River Dams.