Another dam comes down.

[Ithaca 37]

Another dam comes down! It's just a matter of time before intelligent people start realizing what we've pointed out hundreds of times here in SI is inevitable. The posters on my "ignore" list will never figure it out. This article from Time magazine is worth reading.

".............Undoing dams that have outlived their usefulness--or whose social and economic utility is overshadowed by the environmental harm they do--is an idea that is catching on. Over the past six years, some 175 dams have been dismantled across the country, and more than 600 over the past century. That's just a drop in the millpond, however, given that there are perhaps 2.5 million dams in the U.S. and that most of those removed to date have been relatively small and insignificant........................What about even bigger, more significant dams? Well, no one has seriously suggested demolishing the Grand Coulee Dam on the Columbia, but a coalition of environmental groups has taken aim at four dams on the lower Snake River--and stirred up a storm of controversy. The damage those dams have done is clear. Since they were built in eastern Washington State from 1955 to 1975, the salmon population in the Snake has gone into free fall. But the benefits the dams provide are also clear: inexpensive barge transport for wheat farmers, irrigation water for fruit growers and a small but still useful amount of hydropower...................."

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1081382,00.html?cnn=yes

 

[Tom]

Where's the success stories for the 175 dams taken down? Are there any data like that?

 

[Ithaca 37]

I don't know what kinda follow up data there is, although I'm sure there is some, at least. Did you read the whole article?

 

[ELKCHSR]

There is a big quandary on both sides of this fence...

I have mentioned some ideas that would be possible for the demolition of a large dam...

After reading the article, I would put it out there that there would have to be some thing in place for energy renewal...

If electricity is to be taken out of the grid by dam removal, then other energy creating devices must be put into place first (Nuclear reactors or what ever it is, but it should be replaced by a minimum of like for like, with the advents of modern technology, that should be easy enough).

I don't know what could be done about the need for the lost irrigation that has been in place, in some instances over a hundred years.

I would see the silt being the biggest of all the problems, unless it would be agreed upon to just let it go and have every thing grow back, with the amount stacked up behind the dam that would be released, it would probably take a hundred years at least to make that happen and have it fade into memory.

I know some that are beating the drums are purists and want it all back to the way it was, including the rocks that the pictures of old show, and possibly bringing in 80 foot trees to replace the ones that are gone.

I see these people as nuts, just because they don’t see the reality of what they want; only the end result. Utilizing every one else’s money so they can look at some thing, feeling warm and fuzzy about it. If this were to be accomplished, there are some middle grounds that could be accomplished.

Just over the hill from here by Whitehall Mt. there is a valley that has been absolutely filled in with mining tailings.

That is what kind of gave the idea of just taking the dam down to the level of the silt and build it up in front of the dam to where they both meet by raising the river.

It could be done to blend into the landscape and not be seen (as a statement in the article mentioned, "it's a bone in the valleys throat").

The costs would be substantially less then hauling it all away, the fish would be able to move up stream and it could be made to look "Pretty" when it was all done, since that seems to be the largest beef with a lot of the proponents for dam removal.

I would also say that the environmental groups seem to come up with a ton of money every year from donors. Instead of giving the lions share to the lawyers, they should put it into the reclamation of the project. Then there would be proof that they are more interested in what they clamor about.

No matter what is done, some one will feel the brunt of it…

If nothing is done, the environmentalists beating the drums for total removal will still see this as a huge problem to their own personal psyches.

If the dams are taken half down to the silt line, those who have depended on the extra water behind the dam for irrigation or play, will have to find it some where else.

If they are taken clear down to nothing again, where will the mass of silt, stone and concrete go, what ground will it have to pollute, to cover up with unsound material nothing can possibly grow in to make a few people in reality happy…

No one can say it will make the largest share of the population happy, not with a straight face any way.

The largest portion of our 280,000,000 population couldn’t give a rats hooey one way or another, nor could they even find the dams on a map if they were handed the proper state map the dams were in.