Sunset Falls Presentation March 5, 2013 SaveTheSkyRiver.org Dont - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sunset Falls Presentation

March 5, 2013

SaveTheSkyRiver.org

Don’t dam the Skykomish River

SaveTheSkyRiver.org

What is Savetheskyriver.Org ?

We are part of a coalition of conservation groups and individuals

• pposed to new hydropower on the Skykomish River

Supporters Of Savetheskyriver.Org

Friends of Heybrook Ridge

What is the problem?

Snohomish PUD wants to dam the Skykomish River

Wild Sky Wilderness Mount Baker Snoqualmie National Forest Index Gold Bar

This site has been studied and rejected

5 times from hydropower development:

Puget Sound Energy in the 1920’s Snohomish County PUD in the early 1980’s Pacific Hydro in the mid 1980’s Sunset Falls LP in the early 1990’s Tacoma Public Utilities in the 1990’s

The Skykomish River is protected from hydropower development

The Skykomish is one of only four rivers in the Washington State Scenic River System The Skykomish River has been nominated for National Wild And Scenic designation by the U.S. Forest Service. Sunset Falls is in a Northwest Power And Conservation Council Protected Area because “such development would have major negative impacts that could not be reversed.” The Skykomish is listed by the U. S. Department of Fish and Wildlife as Designated Critical Habitat for ESA-Threatened Salmon and Bull Trout.

New dams do not qualify under I-937 as renewable energy

Washington’s clean energy laws exclude new fresh water dams. I-937 was designed to encourage advancements in clean energy

• technology. Dams are obsolete technology from the last century.

Washington already gets more than 80% of its power from hydro. SNOPUD is actively lobbying the the Washington State Legislature to change I-937 – despite the clear intent of Washington State voters!

Proposed NEW hydropower project

Dam Intake Structure Diversion Tunnel Power House Sunset Falls Canyon Falls

Proposed dam site

Mount Index

Canyon Falls

would be dramatically de-watered

Sunset Falls

would be reduced to a trickle

Proposed intake structure above Canyon Falls

190’ 355’

Huge underground intake 142’ x 355’ x 190’

Required to prevent fish and wildlife from being sucked into the turbines

ESA “Threatened” species The Marbled Murrelet designated “Critical Habitat” 1 mile south of proposed intake Northern Spotted Owl Proposed “Critical Habitat” one mile south of proposed intake

Federally protected Bald Eagle – documented nest sites are commonly observed at project site Federal species of concern State Sensitive Peregrine Falcon – lives within riparian zones and

• pen areas and cliffs

Underground blasting may harm aquatic birds

Harlequin Duck A priority species and of tribal importance Water Ouzel (American Dipper)

Roosevelt Elk – documented band in South Fork drainage Black Bear – documented

• ccurrence in project area

North American River Otter – Our Mascot Present in the project location

Juvenile Fish In The Project Area

Chinook Salmon ESA Threatened Bull Trout ESA Threatened Coho Salmon Pink Salmon Chum Salmon Sockeye Salmon Steelhead Cutthroat Trout

Designated Critical Habitat for Chinook Salmon and Bull Trout

Other species known to exist in the Sunset Falls area

Rainbow Trout Brook Trout Mountain Whitefish Pacific Lamprey Western Brook Lamprey Largescale Sucker Longnose Dace Sculpin

165,000 cubic yards of granite to be excavated for construction

Aggravating to both humans and wildlife

19 foot diameter tunnel requires 35,000 cubic yards of excavation Intake cavern = 95,000 cubic yards of excavation

190’ 355’ 142’’

LOW IMPACT?!

Underground powerhouse requires 35,000 cubic yards of excavation

150’ 100’ 30’ 77’ 57’

This would be a major industrial construction project on

• ne of our only State Scenic Rivers

16,500 truck sorties just to remove blasted bedrock Hundreds of dynamite blasts Thousands of heavy equipment operating hours Massive diesel exhaust

440 million lbs. of granite to be blasted and hauled Tens of thousands of truck trips on deadly Highway 2

Estimated cost is at least $170 million Energy output would average 13.7 Megawatts Could only run at capacity from April – June when additional power is not needed Project reduces available funding for investing in new clean energy technologies Project site requires costly Fisheries upgrades

Snohomish County PUD - Energy Resources Plan for 2022

Total small hydro potential = less than 1% of portfolio

BPA , 82.3% Jackson Hydro, 3.2% , 0 All Small Hydro, 0.7% Packwood Hydro, 0.1% Wind, 7.0% Landfill Gas, 0.3% Biomass, 0.1% Tidal, 0.5% Geothermal, 5.4% Customer Owned Solar, 0.2% Utility Scale Solar, 0.1%

All small hydro = 0.7% PUD projects through 2022

BPA = 82%

Alternatives

Energy efficiency - 85% of new demand can be achieved through energy savings New incentive programs – To replace baseboard heaters with heat pumps Expand Solar Express Program – Incentives for residential solar and hot water Add utility-grade solar energy in eastern Washington Upgrade existing hydro facilities – In accordance with I-937 Modular energy storage – Aligns renewable energy production to demand Develop clean local geothermal resources – Mt. Baker area studies underway

Conclusions

Construction would be lengthy, very high impact Project would be low energy – less than 1% of demand Project would violate existing river protections and I-937 Previous studies have determined site is not viable If developed, project impacts could not be reversed

How smart people can make bad decisions

Apathy is our enemy

What can people do to help?

Learn more and discover great resources at SaveTheSkyRiver.Org

Citizen Action Can Prevent This Project

• Speak your mind before the PUD Commissioners

at public meetings held every two weeks.

• Email us at SaveTheSkyRiver.org to learn more.
• Write to your elected officials to make sure they

understand your opposition to the project.

• Templates and sample letters on the website