#Bonneville Power Administration

[gwydionmisha]

Speaking of terrible ideas Trump-Musk have.

[sohaibsmart]

Layoffs Increase at Federal Companies, A part of Trump Purge

The Trump administration accelerated plans for widespread work drive cuts throughout the federal government on Friday, as workers at a number of federal businesses realized they might be dropping their jobs. Companies such because the Environmental Safety Company and the Agriculture Division have been the newest to be hit with layoffs as President Trump and a group led by the billionaire Elon…

[folk-enjoyer]

Song of the Day

do you want to know the history of a folk song? submit an ask or dm me and I'll cover it

"Great Historical Bum" Odetta, 1960

Originally written in 1941 by Woody Guthrie for his Columbia River Song collection. That time when Woody Guthrie (a socialist) was commissioned by the US federal government (at the recommendation of Alan Lomax. to write folk songs in support of the Coulee Dam in 1941. Woody Guthrie was in poverty at the time and was happy to finally have a job. During the month he traveled through Oregon and wrote a song every day, including "Pastures of Plenty" and "Roll on Columbia".

the lyrics in these songs, including this one, include radical themes like working-class rights, unions, anti-fascism, and anti-capitalism. because of this and because Woody Guthrie was an anti-capitalist, the songs and the documentary they were made for were ordered destroyed by the Eisenhower administration. luckily the recordings were saved by a proletarian comrade: a former employee of the Bonneville Power Administration, who decided to keep a copy of the film and recordings.

this song may also be inspired by another traditional song recorded in 1928 by Harry McClintock , but I'm not sure.

I like this cover by Odetta quite a bit. I think she does the original one justice.

[darkmaga-returns]

Starting in the early 1930s, the Technocracy movement was obsessed with control over energy. The first two requirements laid down for Technocracy in 1934 were (1) Register on a continuous 24-hour-per-day basis the total net conversion of energy and (2) By means of the registration of energy converted and consumed, make possible a balanced load.” You could easily see this exact wording on your modern energy bill.

As I wrote in Technocracy’s Necessary Requirements,

Conversion of energy means creating useable energy from stored energy like coal, oil or natural gas; when they are burned, electricity is generated. Hydroelectric and nuclear also convert energy. There were two reasons to keep track of useable energy: First, it was the basis for issuing “energy script” to all citizens for buying and selling goods and services. Second, it predicted economic activity because all such activity is directly dependent upon energy. (Note that Technocrats intended to pre-determine how much energy would be made available in the first place.)

Once available energy was quantified, it was to be allocated to consumers and manufacturers so as to limit production and consumption. Technocrats would have control of both ends, so that everything is managed according to their scientific formulas.

The modern Smart Grid, with its ubiquitous WiFi-enabled Smart Meters on homes and businesses, is the exact fulfillment of these two requirements. The concept of “energy web” was first revitalized in 1999 by the Bonneville Power Authority (BPA) in Portland, Oregon. A government agency, BPA had a rich history of Technocrats dating back to its creation in 1937. The “energy web” was renamed Smart Grid in 2009 during the Obama Administration. Note that Smart Grid was a global initiative that intended to blanket the entire world with this new energy control technology.

If America were to face this reality, these Technocrat charlatans would be thrown into the dustbin of history. Unfortunately, policy leaders like Heartland Institute are blind to it. ⁃ Patrick Wood, Editor.

When electric power was a novel idea and just beginning to be adopted in urban centers, the industry had a Wild West feel to it as multiple companies strung wires, opened power plants, and sold electricity on an unregulated market. Competition was fierce, but state and local governments concluded that the inefficiencies and redundancies endangered the public and imposed higher costs.

So states set up service territories with monopolistic or oligopolistic service providers, who were entrusted with providing reliable power and sufficient reserve for peak periods in return for being guaranteed a profit on rates proposed by the utilities but approved or set by newly established state public utility commissions (PUCs). These commissions were charged with ensuring public utilities served the general public universally within their territory, providing reliable service at reasonable rates.

Much has changed since then. Politicians began to supplant engineers to decide, based on self-interested calculations, what types of power should be favored and disfavored, and what types of appliances and modes of transportation Americans could use. As the 21st century dawned, a new consideration entered the picture: Climate change.

Under the banner of combatting global warming, utilities were at first encouraged and then coerced into adopting plans and policies aimed at achieving net zero emissions of carbon dioxide. The aim of providing reliable, affordable power – the rationale for the electric utilities’ monopolies in the first place – was supplanted by a controversial and partisan political goal. Initially, as states began to push renewable energy mandates, utilities fought back, arguing that prematurely closing reliable power plants, primarily coal-fueled, would increase energy costs, compromise grid reliability, and leave them with millions of dollars in stranded assets.

Politicians addressed those concerns with subsidies and tax credits for renewable power. In addition, they passed on the costs of the expanded grid to ratepayers and taxpayers. Effectively, elected officials and the PUCs, with a wink and a nod, indemnified utilities for power supply failures, allowing utilities to claim that aging grid infrastructure and climate change were to blame for failures rather than the increased percentage of intermittent power added to the grid at their direction.

Today, utilities have enthusiastically embraced the push for renewable (but less reliable) resources, primarily wind and solar. PUCs guarantee a high rate of return for all new power source (wind, solar, and battery) installations, which has resulted in the construction of ever more and bigger wind, solar, and battery facilities. The costlier, the more profitable – regardless of their compromised ability to provide reliable power or the cost impact on residential, commercial, and industrial ratepayers.

A new report from The Heartland Institute demonstrates the significant financial incentives from government and financiers for utilities to turn away from affordable energy sources like natural gas and coal, and even nuclear, and instead aggressively pursue wind and solar in particular. All of this is done in the name of pursuing net zero emissions, which every single major utility company in the country boasts about on their corporate reports and websites. Reliability and affordability come secondary to the decarbonization agenda.

[female-malice]

First Nations groups on the Canadian side of the Columbia River Basin are adamant that salmon runs that have long been blocked by dams in the United States must be restored, potentially in a renewed river treaty between the two countries.

But experts say possible solutions, such as “salmon cannons” that suck fish through a pipe and shoot them out upstream and over obstacles, are all costly and potentially limited in their effectiveness.

Representatives from the Ktunaxa and Syilx Okanagan nations say they continue to bring up salmon restoration in negotiations for a modern Columbia River Treaty and will not stop until a solution can be reached within or outside a new agreement.

The U.S.-Canada treaty regulates the cross-border Columbia River to prevent flooding and generate hydro power. A key component of the 62-year-old treaty is set to expire in September 2024, lending urgency to the ongoing talks.

“I think what we are doing in the fight to bring salmon back is vital to us moving forward,” said Lower Similkameen Indian Band Chief Keith Crow, who is a member on the Syilx Okanagan Nation’s Chiefs Executive Council and the Nation’s lead in the Columbia River Treaty talks.

“And we’re not going to back down, either,” he said.

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation says much of the migratory salmon run in the Upper Columbia, both in Canada and the U.S., ended with the completion of the Grand Coulee Dam in Washington state in 1942.

While the Grand Coulee Dam isn’t among four dams built in accordance with the 1961 Columbia River Treaty, First Nations leaders say the talks offer a rare opportunity for them to directly engage American officials about restoring Pacific salmon to the Upper Columbia.

“The salmon hasn’t been a big piece of (the talks), and I’ve been trying to move it forward consistently,” Crow said.

The nation opened its own hatchery near Penticton, B.C., in 2014 to help bring salmon back to Okanagan waters.

The goal, Crow said, is the restoration of natural salmon runs throughout the Upper Columbia Basin.

“We’ve been supplying salmon back to the people for years from our hatchery from the work that we’ve done, but to be able to see them actually swimming freely and coming up the Columbia the way they’re meant to be, I think it’s something I’m hoping I’m going to see in my lifetime.”

Ktunaxa Nation Council Chair Kathryn Teneese said the loss of salmon to the Upper Columbia Basin fundamentally changed communities and their ways of life, since the fish was a staple to traditional diets and held significant cultural value.

“We now have generations of people that have grown up without even knowing that salmon was very much part of our staple diet,” Teneese said. “So, from that perspective, it’s changed who we are. Because one of the things that we say is that we have a word in our language for salmon, but we don’t have access to it.

“We just fill that void with the utilization of all of the other resources off the land that we’ve always used, but there’s just a piece missing.”

Crow said salmon may have comprised up to 50 per cent of traditional Syilx Okanagan diets prior to the region losing its fish runs.

In September, the U.S. pledged more than $200 million over 20 years from the Bonneville Power Administration for reintroducing salmon in the Upper Columbia River Basin.

Crow said he has spoken with British Columbia Premier David Eby about similar long-term financial commitments on the Canadian side.

“Right now, we are kind of doing the best we can with the budgets that we get every year,” Crow said. “So, a long-term commitment would be so much more beneficial. We can get so much more done, I think.”

In June, the province agreed to separate bilateral deals with the Syilx Okanagan, Ktunaxa and Secwepemc Nations so each group receives 5 per cent of the revenue B.C. receives every year from the U.S. through the Columbia River Treaty, funding known as the Canadian Entitlement.

But the challenge in bringing salmon back to the Upper Columbia Basin isn’t limited to funding, experts say.

In 2012, a group of researchers published a report on efforts to restore Atlantic Salmon and other migrating fish species to rivers on the East Coast of North America.

The report found that the effort at three major rivers did not yield “self-sustaining populations in any eastern U.S. river” despite “hundreds of millions” in investment on the construction of hatcheries and fish passages.

“It may be time to admit failure of fish passage and hatchery-based restoration programs and acknowledge that significant diadromous species restoration is not possible without dam removals,” said the report on fish that travel between salt and fresh water.

University of Victoria Biology Professor Francis Juanes was a co-author of the report, and he said that while the topic of fish passage technology among researchers is actively discussed and constantly advancing, studies have shown the only reliable way to fully restore a natural fish run may be a dam’s removal.

Juanes said that when a dam on the Elwha River was removed about a decade ago in Washington state, “you didn’t have to reintroduce (salmon).”

“They came back naturally. In a sense, that is the best way to reintroduce salmon especially to a river system.”

Results on the East Coast where fish ladders were used, particularly the Connecticut River, were not nearly as effective, Juanes said.

“It took so much effort by so many states, and you needed the hatcheries to grow these babies. So, that’s an enormous effort, and the return just wasn’t very good.”

John Waldman, biology professor at Queens College in New York, is one of the main authors of the report.

Waldman said there is rising belief among grassroots and Indigenous groups throughout North America that dam removals may be the optimal way to restore fish runs, in lieu of the poor results from alternative passages.

“I think there’s one universal theme that has emerged over the last two decades, which is that dam removal is without question the best solution to bringing these fish back again,” he said.

“Fish ladders and fish elevators provide what’s called the halfway measure.

“It looks like to the uninitiated that you have a solution and that it works, but the truth is when you look at the actual performance of many of these fish ladders and fish elevators, not that many fish pass through them.”

The biggest dam removal project in the United States began earlier this year on the Klamath River along the Oregon-California border, where four such structures will come down by next year under a budget of US$450 million.

Discussions on removing four dams on another branch of the Columbia River Basin – in the lower parts of the Snake River – have been ongoing for years, with the U.S. federal government rejecting in 2020 the idea due to possible power-grid destabilization if the hydro electricity from the dams are removed.

Last month, U.S. President Joe Biden directed federal agencies to use all available authorities and resources to restore salmon runs in the Columbia River Basin that are “healthy and abundant.”

Biden’s order, however, stopped short of calling for the removal of the dams on the Lower Snake River in Washington state.

The Upper Columbia United Tribes, consisting of five member Indigenous nations in the U.S. Pacific Northwest, said on its website on salmon restoration that while more studies are needed, there have been “encouraging advances” in fish passage technologies such as floating surface collectors and salmon cannons to get past tall dams without the structures’ removal.

But such technology, Waldman said, is unproven in being able to support a large, natural fish migration.

“I think this is a quarter-way measure, not even a halfway measure,” he said.

“You see them emerging once in a while, and somebody gets wind of it on TV, and some late night comedians make fun of fish being shot through these these cannons. But no one’s ever ramped them up to be at a level that would sustain a natural level of migratory fish.”

But Juanes said such options may be necessary if dam removals are not possible, even if they may add stress to the salmon population and make them more vulnerable to diseases.

“For one, that’s a very costly thing to do,” Juanes said of fish-passage technology. “For two, it causes stress to the animals. I can imagine that this cannon is not a happy moment for the fish, but maybe it’s better than it dying below the dam.”

Crow, for his part, said he understands “there’s no way of getting around the fact” that dams such as the Grand Coulee remain in the migration path, posing a monumental challenge to restoring salmon migration routes.

But he said the reintroduction of salmon runs to the Upper Columbia Basin is important enough to warrant effort and funding.

“There are lots of options out there, but what is going to be the most efficient and least impactful to the salmon, and they can still get back up? That’s the key,” he said.

“I’ve been taught to think seven generations down. So, I’m looking seven generations ahead of decisions that I make today: How is it going to influence or how is it going to impact my great-great-grandkids?”

[paddy-garcia-70]

In 1941, Woody Guthrie spent a month traveling along the Columbia River, writing songs for the Bonneville Power Administration. Anything is possible with a little imagination. Honor song for singer, songwriter, poet and memoirist, Mark Lanegan (1964-2022.)

“The Pacific Northwest is one of my favorite spots in this world, and I’m one walker that’s stood way up and looked way down acrost plenty of pretty sights in all their veiled and nakedest seasons.”

~ Woody Guthrie

[xlntwtch2]

from ceciliablomberg.com

  ABOUT CECILIA 

I grew up in Sundsvall in northern Sweden and moved to Stockholm in 1970 where I attended the National College of Art, Craft and Design (Konstfack) and received my MFA in 1976. Though I specialize in tapestry, I have also worked as a muralist and a graphics illustrator. 

    Since 1977 I have worked in the United States, producing tapestries for public and private collections, and commissioned works for hospitals, banks and for the headquarters of the Bonneville Power Administration in Portland, Oregon. I was commissioned by the Washington State Arts Commission (WSAC) to create major pieces for the new Washington State University campus in Vancouver, and for Grays Harbor College in Aberdeen, Washington. In 2010 I finished a commissioned piece for WSAC for Moxee Elementary School near Yakima, Washington, and in 2012 installed a tapestry, also commissioned by WSAC, for McMicken Heights Elementary School in Seatac, Washington. In 2017 I was commissioned by WSAC to create a tapestry for Sacajawea Elementary School in Richland, Washington. I installed the the Sacajawea Tapestry in 2018. 

     In 2017 I finished a commission consisting of eight saints for the U.S. Air Force Cadet Catholic Chapel in Colorado Springs, Colo. Each tapestry is 10.5 by 1.5 feet. In 2018 I completed and installed Sacajawea at an elem

     I spent two years in Scotland, working on a project recreating the Hunt of the Unicorn tapestries. Here is a link  to a PDF downloadable version. of an article about the project by Swedish journalist Agneta Gustavsson which appeared in a Swedish arts and crafts magazine. And here is a link to the Stirling Castle website about the project.

   My tapestries have appeared in numerous national and international exhibitions and my work is represented in Contemporary Textile Art - Scandinavia, The State of the Arts, The State of the Crafts, Fiberarts Design Book I, IV , V and VI, World Tapestry Today, and a number of magazines.

    I live with my husband in Gig Harbor, Washington.

some of my favorite woven tapestries, by Cecilia Blomberg:

Point Defiance Steps

Mates

Rising Tides

Vashon Steps

[nedsecondline]

Experts, WA reps question rationale for BPA and Hanford layoffs | Cascade PBS

Officials are alarmed by the firing of 13% of the Bonneville Power Administration workforce since the PNW energy distributor receives no federal funds. — Read on www.cascadepbs.org/news/2025/02/experts-wa-reps-question-rationale-bpa-and-hanford-layoffs

[earthgirl2788]

The power utilities in the PNW are panicking. Bonneville Power Administration (a federal agency) owns and maintains 3/4 of the high voltage transmission lines in the region. And they run the studies/make the plans for how to use the water in the Columbia River Basin every year to make sure we have enough to make it through the summer. BPA (with the Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation who operate the dams) generate up to 70% of the regions power, especially during weather events. The dams are huge batteries that can be ramped up very quickly on demand, whereas wind and solar are called variable energy resources. We can’t choose when they generate, and they often don’t during the cold snaps when we need generation the most.

If they can’t hire/retain enough people to maintain the power lines or run the dispatch center, we’re looking at increased blackouts everywhere. If they don’t have enough staff studying the water year, we won’t have enough water when we need it most, and prices skyrocket (see the MLK storm in 2024).

[seattleru]

Новости Сиэтла - 26-07-2024

Федералы выбирают ядерную площадку в Хэнфорде для масштабной солнечной фермы.

Важным событием для Сиэтла и всего региона штата Вашингтон стало объявление федеральных чиновников о планах создания масштабной солнечной фермы на ядерном объекте в Хэнфорде, известном своей исторической ролью в производстве плутония для ядерного оружия. Эта инициатива появилась на фоне растущего спроса на электроэнергию в Вашингтоне, который, по прогнозам, вырастет на 20% к 2030 году и почти удвоится к 2050 году. Министерство энергетики США в настоящее время ведет переговоры с чикагской компанией Hecate Energy о разработке солнечной фермы, которая может занять 8000 акров загрязненной территории и производить до одного гигаватта возобновляемой энергии — этого хватит, чтобы обеспечить электроэнергией половину клиентов Seattle City Light во время пикового спроса.

Этот солнечный проект является частью более широкой стратегии по превращению Хэнфорда в национальный центр производства чистой энергии, несмотря на его загрязненную историю. Местные организации, включая Совет по развитию трех городов, активно работают над этой целью, особенно после запуска федеральным правительством инициативы «Очистка к чистой энергии», направленной на поиск новых способов использования загрязненных федеральных земель. Солнечная ферма также будет оснащена аккумуляторными системами, что позволит использовать солнечную энергию даже в ночное время, повышая надежность возобновляемых источников энергии.

Несмотря на то что солнечная ферма представляет собой многообещающий шаг к достижению целей Вашингтона в области чистой энергии, признается, что она обеспечит лишь небольшую часть необходимой новой электроэнергии. Остаются вопросы о том, куда будет направляться вырабатываемая энергия: будет ли она поддерживать усилия Министерства энергетики по очистке в Хэнфорде или будет интегрирована в портфель Bonneville Power Administration, управляющей электроэнергией от гидроэлектростанций бассейна Колумбии.

Губернатор Джей Инсли выразил энтузиазм по поводу проекта, рассматривая его как потенциальный катализатор будущего чистой энергетики в Вашингтоне. Поскольку штат продолжает стремиться к своим амбициозным климатическим целям, партнерство между федеральными чиновниками и Hecate Energy может стать ключом к преодолению проблем, которые часто мешают реализации крупномасштабных проектов в области возобновляемых источников энергии. Ажиотаж вокруг этой инициативы отражает растущий интерес к устойчивым энергетическим решениям в регионе, знаменуя собой новую обнадеживающую страницу в истории Хэнфорда и его окрестностей.

Источник: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/climate-lab/feds-pick-hanford-nuclear-site-for-massive-solar-farm/

Вестернские прудовые черепахи взвесили в зоопарке Вудленд-Парка.

В Сиэтле зоопарк Вудленд-Парк играет ключевую роль в восстановлении популяции западных прудовых черепах. Под руководством смотрителя зоопарка Сью Андерсен группа из 40 молодых черепах находится под пристальным наблюдением, поскольку они готовятся к выпуску в дикую природу. Эти черепахи, выведенные из яиц, в настоящее время взвешиваются и измеряются, чтобы убедиться, что они соответствуют необходимым требованиям по размеру для выживания. Цель состоит в том, чтобы они достигли веса не менее 50 граммов, что делает их менее уязвимыми для хищников, таких как инвазивные лягушки-быки.

В течение всей зимы черепахи содержались в тепле и получали хороший корм, включающий криль, сверчков и мучных червей. Это тщательное уход является важным, так как черепахи меньше своих диких собратьев из-за конкуренции за пищу. Усилия зоопарка являются частью более широкой инициативы, известной как Проект восстановления западных прудовых черепах, который включает в себя сбор черепашьих яиц из диких гнёзд и их инкубацию в зоопарке.

Ожидается, что с наступлением лета черепахи будут расти и развиваться, и их в конечном итоге выпустят в охраняемые водно-болотные угодья округа Пирс. Этот выпуск — не просто возвращение к природе; это тщательно организованное событие, в ходе которого биологи из Министерства рыбы и дикой природы штата Вашингтон будут наблюдать за черепахами в их новой среде обитания, гарантируя, что они смогут греться на солнце, свободно плавать и находить достаточно корма среди растительности. Сообщество приглашается стать свидетелями этой важной вехи, поскольку черепахи переходят из безопасной среды зоопарка в дикую природу, что знаменует собой обнадеживающий шаг на пути к восстановлению их вида в регионе.

Источник: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/western-pond-turtles-weighted-at-woodland-park-zoo/

[petnews2day]

Along Those Lines: Lower Snake River Dams Deal Threatens Reliability in Northwest

New Post has been published on https://petn.ws/WvByY

Along Those Lines: Lower Snake River Dams Deal Threatens Reliability in Northwest

Photo By: stevelenzphoto/Getty Images A long-simmering dispute in the Pacific Northwest over the management of the Lower Snake River dams burst onto the headlines late last year with the news of a backroom deal between the Biden administration and the plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the Bonneville Power Administration and other government agencies that manage […]

See full article at https://petn.ws/WvByY #ExoticPetNews

[jcmarchi]

Salmon in the Loop

New Post has been published on https://thedigitalinsider.com/salmon-in-the-loop/

Salmon in the Loop

One of the most fascinating problems that a computer scientist may be lucky enough to encounter is a complex sociotechnical problem in a field going through the process of digital transformation. For me, that was fish counting. Recently, I worked as a consultant in a subdomain of environmental science focused on counting fish that pass through large hydroelectric dams. Through this overarching project, I learned about ways to coordinate and manage human-in-the-loop dataset production, as well as the complexities and vagaries of how to think about and share progress with stakeholders.

Background

Let’s set the stage. Large hydroelectric dams are subject to Environmental Protection Act regulations through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). FERC is an independent agency of the United States government that regulates the transmission and wholesale sale of electricity across the United States. The commission has jurisdiction over a wide range of electric power activities and is responsible for issuing licenses and permits for the construction and operation of hydroelectric facilities, including dams. These licenses and permits ensure that hydroelectric facilities are safe and reliable, and that they do not have a negative impact on the environment or other stakeholders. In order to obtain a license or permit from FERC, hydroelectric dam operators must submit detailed plans and studies demonstrating that their facility meets regulations. This process typically involves extensive review and consultation with other agencies and stakeholders. If a hydroelectric facility is found to be in violation of any set standards, FERC is responsible for enforcing compliance with all applicable regulations via sanctions, fines, or lease termination–resulting in a loss of the right to generate power.

Hydroelectric dams are essentially giant batteries. They generate power by building up a large reservoir of water on one side and directing that water through turbines in the body of the dam. Typically, a hydroelectric dam requires lots of space to store water on one side of it, which means they tend to be located away from population centers. The conversion process from potential to kinetic energy generates large amounts of electricity, and the amount of pressure and force generated is disruptive to anything that lives in or moves through the waterways—especially fish.

Simple diagram illustrating how hydroelectric power is generated (Tennessee Valley Authority)

It is also worth noting that the waterways were likely disrupted substantially when the dam was built, leading to behavioral or population-level changes in the fish species of the area. This is of great concern to the Pacific Northwest in particular, as hydropower is the predominant power generation means for the region (Bonneville Power Administration). Fish populations are constantly moving upstream and downstream and hydropower dams can act as barriers that block their passage, leading to reduced spawning. In light of the risks to fish, hydropower dams are subject to constraints on the amount of power they can generate and must show that they are not killing fish in large numbers or otherwise disrupting the rhythms of their lives, especially because the native salmonid species of the region are already threatened or endangered (Salmon Status).

To demonstrate compliance with FERC regulations, large hydroelectric dams are required to routinely produce data which shows that their operational activities do not interfere with endangered fish populations in aggregate. Typically, this is done by performing fish passage studies. A fish passage study can be conducted many different ways, but boils down to one primary dataset upon which everything is based: a fish count. Fish are counted as they pass through the hydroelectric dam, using structures like fish ladders to make their way from the reservoir side to the stream side.

A fish ladder at John Day Dam, how fish often ascend and pass through a dam (Delgado)

Fish counts can be conducted visually—-a person trained in fish identification watches the fish pass, incrementing the count as they move upstream. As a fish is counted, observers impart additional classifications outside of species of fish, such as whether there was some kind of obvious illness or injury, if the fish is hatchery-origin or wild, and so on. These differences between fish are subtle and require close monitoring and verification, since the attribute in question (a clipped adipose fin, a scratched midsection) may only be visible briefly when the fish swims by. As such, fish counting is a specialized job that requires expertise in identifying and classifying different species of fish, as well as knowledge of their life stages and other characteristics. The job is physically demanding, as it typically involves working in remote locations away from city centers, and it can be challenging to perform accurately under the difficult environmental conditions found at hydroelectric dams–poor lighting, unregulated temperatures, and other circumstances inhospitable to humans.

These modes of data collection are great, but there are varying degrees of error that could be imparted through their recording. For example, some visual fish counts are documented with pen and paper, leading to incorrect counts through transcription error; or there can be disputes about the classification of a particular species. Different dam operators collect fish counts with varying degrees of granularity (some collect hourly, some daily, some monthly) and seasonality (some collect only during certain migration patterns called “runs”). After collection and validation, organizations correlate this data with operational information produced by the dam in an attempt to see if any activities of the dam have an adverse or beneficial effect on fish populations. Capturing these data piecemeal with different governing standards and levels of detail causes organizations to look for new efficiencies enabled by technology.

Enter Computer Vision

Some organizations are exploring the use of computer vision and machine learning to significantly automate fish counting. Since dam operators subject to FERC are required to collect fish passage data anyway, and the data were previously produced or encoded in ways that were challenging to work with, an interesting “human-in-the-loop” machine learning system arises. A human-in-the-loop system combines the judgment and expertise of subject-matter expert humans (fish biologists) with the consistency and reliability of machine learning algorithms, which can help to reduce sources of error and bias in the output dataset used in the machine learning system. For the specific problem of fish counting, this could help to ensure that the system’s decisions are informed by the latest scientific understanding of fish taxonomy and conservation goals, and could provide a more balanced and comprehensive approach to species or morphological classification. An algorithmic system could reduce the need for manual data collection and analysis by automating the process of identifying and classifying species, and could provide more timely and accurate information about species’ health.

Building a computer vision system for a highly-regulated industry, such as hydropower utilities, can be a challenging task due to the need for high accuracy and strict compliance with regulatory standards. The process of building such a system would typically involve several steps:

Representation of example process flow for productionizing a ML system

1. Define the problem space: Before starting to build the system, it is important to clearly define the problem that the system is intended to solve and the goals that it needs to achieve. This initial negotiation process is largely without any defining technical constraints, and is based around the job to that needs to be done by the system: identifying specific tasks that the system needs to perform, such as identification of the species or life stage of a fish. This may be especially challenging in a regulated industry like hydropower, as clients are subject to strict laws and regulations that require them to ensure that any tools or technologies they use are reliable and safe. They may be skeptical of a new machine learning system and may require assurances that it has been thoroughly tested and will not pose any risks to the environment or to through data integrity, algorithmic transparency, and accountability.

Once the problem space is defined, more technical decisions can be made about how to implement the solution. For example, if the goal is to estimate population density during high fish passage using behavioral patterns such as schooling, it may make sense to capture and tag live video, to see the ways in which fish move in real time. Alternatively, if the goal is to identify illness or injury in a situation where there are few fish passing, it may make sense to capture still images and tag subsections of them to train a classifier. In a more developed hypothetical example, perhaps dam operators know that the fish ladder only allows fish to pass through it, all other species or natural debris are filtered out, and they want a “best guess” about rare species of fish that pass upstream. It may be sufficient in this case to implement generic video-based object detection to identify that a fish is moving through a scene, take a picture of it at a certain point, and provide that picture to a human to tag with the species. Once tagged, these data can be used to train a classifier which categorizes fish as being the rare species or not.

2. Establish performance goals: The definition of the problem space and the initial suggested process flow should be shared with all stakeholders as an input to the performance goals. This helps ensure all interested parties understand the problem at a high level, and what is possible for a given implementation. Practically, most hydropower utilities are interested in automated fish count solutions that meet an accuracy threshold of 95% as compared to a regular human visual count, but expectations around whether these metrics are achievable and at what part of the production cycle will be a highly negotiated series of points. Establishing these goals is a true sociotechnical problem, as it cannot be done without taking into account both the real-world constraints that limit the data and the system. These constraining factors will be discussed later in the Obstacles section of the paper.

3. Collect and label training data: In order to train a machine learning model to perform the tasks required by the system, it is first necessary to produce a training dataset. Practically, this involves collecting a large number of fish images. The images are annotated with the appropriate species classification labels by a person with expertise in fish classification. The annotated images are then used to train a machine learning model. Through training, the algorithm learns the features characteristic of each subclass of fish and identifies those features to classify fish in new, unseen images. Because the end goal of this system is to minimize the counts that humans have to do, images with a low “confidence score” (a metric commonly produced by object-detection models) may be flagged for identification and tagging by human reviewers. The more seamless an integration with a production fish counting operation, the better.

4. Select a model: Once the training data has been collected, the next step is to select a suitable machine learning model and train it on the data. This could involve using a supervised learning approach, where the model is trained to recognize the different categories of fish after being shown examples of labeled data. At the time of this writing, deep learning systems based on pretrained models like ImageNet are popular choices. Once trained, the model should be validated against tagged data that it has not seen before and fine-tuned by adjusting the model parameters or refining the training dataset and retraining.

5. Monitor system performance: Once the model has been trained and refined, it can be implemented as part of a computer vision system for regular use. The system’s performance should be monitored regularly to ensure that it is meeting the required accuracy targets and to ensure that model drift does not occur, perhaps from changes in environmental conditions, such as water clarity; or morphological changes alluded to in a later section

It is at this point that the loop of tasks begins anew; to eke out more performance from the system, it is likely that more refined and nuanced negotiation about what to expect from the system is necessary, followed by additional training data, model selection, and parameter tuning/monitoring. The common assumption is that an automated or semiautomatic system like this is “set it and forget it” but the process of curating and collating datasets or tuning hyper parameters is quite engaged and intentional.

Obstacles

In order for the computer vision algorithm to accurately detect and count fish in images or video frames, it must be trained on a large and diverse dataset that includes examples of different fish species and morphologies. However, this approach is not without challenges, as specified in the diagram below and with bolded phrases in subsequent paragraphs:

Recapitulation of diagram above; terminal states specified on the diagram are obstacles to successful system building

Dependence on expert knowledge is a concern worth discussing. If the system relies on expert-tagged data to train and evaluate its algorithms, the system may be vulnerable to errors and biases in the expert’s knowledge and judgments, as any human-in-the-loop system would be. For example, if the experts are not familiar with certain species or morphologies, they may not be able to accurately tag these fish, which could lead to incorrect classifications by the system. Should an invasive species enter the waterway, it may become overrepresented within the dataset and affect the counts of the species that require conservation action. An excellent practical example of this is American shad, of which hundreds of thousands can pass during a migratory period, obscuring the Chinook salmon that are also passing during the same time. Manual counting methods rely solely on the judgment and observation of individual humans, which can be subject to a variety of sources of error and bias. Further, if the experts have a particular interest in certain species or morphologies, they may be more likely to tag these fish, which could result in over- or under-representation within the dataset. This can lead to life-threatening outcomes if the algorithmic system is used to make important decisions that have conservation implications.

Environmental conditions at hydroelectric dams present challenges for data collection as well.  Inadequate illumination and poor image quality can make it difficult for both humans and machine learning algorithms to accurately classify fish. Similarly, changing conditions, like a reduction in water clarity following a seasonal snowmelt can obscure fish in imagery. Migratory fish can be difficult to identify and classify on their own terms, due to the wide range of species and subspecies that exist, and the way their bodies change as they age. These fish are often difficult to study and monitor due to their migratory habits and the challenging environments in which they live. Further, there are often inconsistent data taxonomies produced across organizations, leading to different classifications depending on the parent organization undertaking the data tagging process. If humans cannot create accurate classifications to populate the initial dataset, the machine learning system will not be able to accurately produce predictions when used in production.

Example image of rainbow trout from an onsite edge device; challenging to tell from the lighting but those could be natural spots, injury, or parasitic infection

One of the key challenges of using a machine learning classifier on unaudited data is the risk of model drift, in which the model’s performance degrades over time as the underlying data distribution changes. This may be of particular concern in a highly regulated environment, where even small changes in the model’s performance could have significant consequences. The datasets produced through the effort of tagging fish images are fascinating because they are so intrinsically place-based, situated, and not easily replicable. Fish passage studies often involve monitoring a relatively small number of fish, which can make it difficult to accurately assess the overall profile of fish populations in the wider area. The number and types of fish that pass through a dam’s fish ladders or other fish passage structures can vary greatly depending on the time of year or the “run” of fish passing through the waterways. This can make it difficult to compare data from different studies, or to draw conclusions about the long-term impact of the dam on fish populations. If the system is trained on a dataset of fish that has been tagged by subject-matter experts during one season, the dataset may not be comprehensive or representative of the full range of fish species and morphologies that exist in the wild across the full year. This could lead to under- or over-estimations of number and types of fish present in a given area. In this way, the specter of model drift is actually a problem composed of both challenging data production constraints and dependence on expert knowledge.

Finally, there are background labor issues to be dealt with as part of this problem space coming from intense organizational pressure. Fish counting is a cost center that hydroelectric dam operators would like to eliminate or reduce as much as possible. A technical solution that can accurately count fish is therefore very appealing. However, this raises concerns about ghost work, where human labor is used to train and validate the model, but is not acknowledged or compensated. Replacing human workers with a computer vision solution may significantly impact the displaced workers through financial hardship or the obsoletion of their job skills and expertise. If human expertise in the identification of fish is lost, this could lead to suboptimal decisions about species conservation, and could ultimately undermine the effectiveness of the system. This becomes more dangerous for conservation purposes if the technology is implemented as a cost-reduction measure: it could be the case that—when the model drifts—there are no taggers to set it back on track.

Couple all of these points with the longitudinal decline of wild fish populations globally, and you have a challenging set of conditions to attempt to generalize from.

If the available training data is limited or does not accurately reflect the diversity of fish species and morphologies that pass through the dam’s fish passage structures, the accuracy of the algorithm may be reduced. Additionally, there are concerns about data leakage, where the model may be able to infer sensitive information about the fish from the images, such as how they are routed through the dam. Thinking about studies that happen in fisheries as per Hwang (2022), the populations analyzed are so small and the outcomes so intentionally so narrowly-scoped, it is almost the case that an organization would have to at the very least train a one-off model for each project or validate the output of each ML classifier against some additional source, which is lately outside of the interest and capabilities of organizations who hope to reduce labor outlays as part of the implementation of a system like this.

Concluding Thoughts

The sociotechnical problem of fish counting is a niche problem with wide applications. If properly implemented, a machine learning system based around fish counts has the potential to be applied in many different places, such as meeting environmental regulation or aquaculture. The rapid digital transformation of environmental science has led to the development of novel datasets with interesting challenges, and a new cohort of professionals with the data literacy and technical abilities to work on problems like this. However, building a dataset of anadromous and catadromous fish that are protected under the ESA is a complex and challenging task, due to the limited availability of data, the complexity of fish taxonomy, the involvement of multiple stakeholders, and the dynamic environment in which these species live.

Moreover, organizations subject to regulation may be unsure of how to validate the accuracy of a machine learning model, and may be more interested in fish counts than in fish images (or vice-versa). Bringing new technologies to bear on an organization or on a dataset that was not as robustly cataloged means there will be new things to be discovered or measured through the application of the technology. Since implementation of a computer vision system like this is done to meet compliance with FERC regulations, it means bringing multiple different stakeholders–including federal agencies, state and local governments, conservation organizations, and members of the public–into dialogue with one another when changes are required. By conducting these studies and regularly reporting the results to FERC, a hydroelectric dam operator could demonstrate that they are taking steps to minimize the impact of the dam on fish populations, and that the dam is not having a negative impact on the overall health of the local fish population, but it also means cross-checking with the community in which they are situated.

Author Bio

Kevin McCraney is a data engineer, educator, and consultant. He works with public sector & large-scale institutions building data processing infrastructure & improving data literacy. Kevin has several years of experience teaching & mentoring early career professionals as they transition to technology from non-STEM disciplines. Working predominantly with institutions in the Pacific Northwest, he enjoys professional opportunities where he can combine a humanistic worldview and technical acumen to solve complex sociotechnical problems.

Citation

For attribution of this in academic contexts or books, please cite this work as:

Kevin McCraney, “Salmon in the Loop“, The Gradient, 2023.

BibTeX citation

@articlek2023omccraney, author = McCraney, Kevin, title = Salmon in the Loop, journal = The Gradient, year = 2023, howpublished = urlhttps://thegradient.pub/salmon-in-the-loop,

Works Cited

[1]Bonneville Power Administration. (n.d.). Hydropower impact. Hydropower Impact. Retrieved January 14, 2023, from https://www.bpa.gov/energy-and-services/power/hydropower-impact

[2]Delgado, K. (2021, July 19). That sounds fishy: Fish ladders at high-head dams impractical, largely unneeded. www.army.mil. Retrieved January 3, 2023, from https://www.army.mil/article/248558/that_sounds_fishy_fish_ladders_at_high_head_dams_impractical_largely_unneeded

[3]Hwang, I. (2022, May 31). Salmon hatchery data is harder to handle than you think. ProPublica. Retrieved December 10, 2023, from https://www.propublica.org/article/salmon-hatcheries-pnw-fish-data

[4]Salmon status. State of Salmon. (2021, January 11). Retrieved December 29, 2022, from https://stateofsalmon.wa.gov/executive-summary/salmon-status/

[5]How hydroelectric power works. Tennessee Valley Authority. (2021, January 11). Retrieved December 29, 2022, from https://www.tva.com/energy/our-power-system/hydroelectric/how-hydroelectric-power-works

[cedarboughs]

Intro to The Columbia: America's Greatest Power Stream (1949), a propaganda film made by the Bonneville Power Administration and featuring original music by Woody Guthrie

[fumpkins]

A stronger electricity grid is crucial to cutting carbon. Does that make it green?

This story is part of the series Getting to Zero: Decarbonizing Cascadia, which explores the path to low-carbon energy for British Columbia, Washington, and Oregon. This project is produced in partnership with InvestigateWest and other media outlets and is supported in part by the Fund for Investigative Journalism.

Can slicing a 100-mile-long trench into the bed of the Columbia River — the iconic giant whose flow binds British Columbia, Washington and Oregon — be good for the environment? The answer is a big yes, says a team of energy developers that proposes submerging power cables in the riverbed.

The developers say the submerged cables could deliver “clean” energy that will be crucial for getting the most densely developed areas of Cascadia off fossil fuels.

A proposal by renewable energy developer Sun2o Partners and transmission developer PowerBridge would insert the cables into the Columbia at The Dalles in Oregon. This electrical on-ramp is near the towering wind farms and expansive solar farms installed along the Columbia Gorge in eastern Oregon and Washington.

The cables also would intersect and plug into the monster transmission lines at the Bonneville Power Administration’s Big Eddy substation, drawing cheaper solar power from the Southwest, steadier wind power from Montana and Wyoming, and reliable backup power from British Columbia’s supersized hydropower reservoirs.

But even climate-conscious developers can’t make plans involving a natural resource like the Columbia River without causing uneasiness among those concerned with ecosystems and communities. Along the Columbia, those affected would include tribal nations and unique cultural interests.

Regulators and environmentalists are likely to find themselves caught in the middle — wanting environmental justice for tribal nations, as well as limits to the impacts of energy projects on ecosystems, yet also eagerly seeking rapid action on projects designed to slow climate change.

Wind etches the Columbia River’s surface downstream of Squally Point, at right in the distance. Around the bend lies The Dalles, where Cascade Renewable Transmission partners propose to start laying power cables in the riverbed. The cables would deliver enough renewable energy to Portland to power nearly 1 million homes. Photo: Leah Nash

Sun2o and PowerBridge propose to bring their cables ashore in Portland, helping to electrify industries, buildings and vehicles while reducing the use of coal- and gas-fired power plants. Hence the project’s name: Cascade Renewable Transmission.

“The only places you can site solar and wind at scale are, for the most part, east of the Cascades. But the demand, the need for the electricity, is in Portland and Seattle, on the west side,” says Corey Kupersmith, the New York–based renewable energy developer who cofounded Sun2o and dreamed up the cable scheme. And existing power lines that link east and west are filling up fast, he says.

Anticipating environmental concerns, the developers assert they will do little harm to the Columbia, employing high-pressure pumps that make underwater cable installation quick and not so dirty. Powerful water jets would shoot down from a “hydroplow” towed along the Columbia riverbed, stirring open an 18-inch-wide trench in the sediment, while operators on the ship observe and make adjustments. A bundle of cable, unspooling as the plow moves, would slip into the trench and be buried as fluidized sediment settles back down.

Environmental impacts, they argue, would likely be short-term and outweighed by anticipated environmental gains: reductions in pollution from natural gas, petroleum fuels and coal. That includes emissions of carbon dioxide and methane, two of the greenhouse gases that are supercharging Cascadia’s wildfires and heat waves and disrupting even the mighty Columbia’s temperature and timing.

To Elaine Harvey, however, the Cascade Renewable Transmission pitch sounds like one more industrial enterprise in a seemingly endless stream of projects that have harmed her people. Such ventures have decimated the Columbia River’s fisheries and fenced off and degraded the shrub-steppe grasslands that the Yakama and other tribes and bands ceded in an 1855 treaty with the United States.

A member of the Yakama’s Kah-milt-pa, or Rock Creek, Band, Harvey lives with the legacy of dams, aluminum production, wind farms, expanding solar plants and other development. Each has infringed her people’s right to pursue their traditional practices.

As Harvey and Kah-milt-pa Chief Bronsco Jim Jr. wrote earlier this year in the quarterly newsletter of Columbia Riverkeeper: “Ours is a living culture, and we are being cheated by progress. An unrelenting cultural extinction in the name of energy development.”

The Cascade link is one of several power lines proposed or under construction in Washington, Oregon and British Columbia. And those are part of a larger trend across the United States and Canada, and around the world.

Power-system experts say the grid that has sufficed in the fossil-fuel era must increase capacity if renewable electricity is to become the lifeblood of economies. Most regional and national decarbonization studies identify beefier grids that share power over longer distances as a precondition to weaning economies off fossil fuels.

Wind blows and sunlight shines most reliably in places that are sparsely populated — areas with weak power lines. Stronger grids, in contrast, enable more power to travel between regions, so those areas can help each other out — precisely what Texas couldn’t do when a deep freeze brought the state to its knees in February and when heat strained its grid last month.

To explore the role of power transmission and the tradeoffs involved in grid expansion, InvestigateWest spoke with Kupersmith, Harvey and Lauren Goldberg, the legal and program director for Columbia Riverkeeper.

Corey Kupersmith: Renewable energy developer

An early passion for diving exposed Corey Kupersmith to coral bleaching resulting from water pollution and global warming. An engineer by training and a banker by trade, Kupersmith cofounded New York City–based Sun2o with a colleague five years ago as a business venture that honors his environmental values. “We only work on projects that reduce emissions and create a positive impact,” says Kupersmith.

Pursuing solar energy projects in sun-soaked eastern Oregon and Washington inspired him to propose the Cascade link project. Sun2o found plenty of landowners and rural communities eager to host arrays of solar panels. But it struggled to secure affordable space on power lines so it could send that energy to the utilities in greatest need of renewable energy. Those include Puget Sound Energy, the investor-owned firm that serves northwestern Washington, and Portland General Electric, Oregon’s largest investor-owned utility.

Instead, Sun2o is moving forward with smaller projects in eastern Washington and Idaho, serving utilities east of the coastal mountains, such as Spokane-based Avista Utilities.

Corey Kupersmith says the grid must expand fast to deliver the renewable electricity that Oregon and Washington needs to decarbonize. He bets that burying cables out of sight in the Columbia’s riverbed will skirt ‘not-in-my-backyard’ community opposition that delays or blocks new overhead power lines. Photo provided by Kupersmith

Moving power west over the Cascades means getting access to the Bonneville Power Administration’s (BPA) regional network, the U.S. Northwest’s transmission backbone. That network is maxing out as a wave of renewable power projects plug in, along with the battery plants needed to store and release power to help keep grid supply and demand in balance. “BPA has like 28 gigawatts of solar, wind and storage requests,” says Kupersmith. “That’s going to be pushing systems to their limits.”

And that was before Oregon passed one of North America’s most aggressive grid decarbonization plans. The June bill, which Gov. Kate Brown is expected to sign into law this month, requires Oregon’s investor-owned utilities to deliver 80% carbon-free power by 2030, compared to less than 50% today. It mandates 100% carbon-free electricity by 2040 — five years ahead of deadlines set by Washington state and California.

Bonneville itself is in a tough spot. The federal entity is being financially stretched by rising costs to maintain aging dams and improve impacted salmon fisheries and decreasing revenues due to falling power prices and customers defecting to cheaper suppliers.

Hitting a transmission barrier in his own developments inspired Kupersmith to propose the Cascade cables. He knew putting them in the riverbed was an option, because PowerBridge had installed two transmission lines in the Hudson River near Manhattan to ease power bottlenecks in New York City and on Long Island. And he saw a submerged cable as an end-run around opposition to overhead lines that has scuppered previous grid expansion efforts in Cascadia and frequently ties up projects across the continent. Overhead lines have drawn the ire of both communities and conservationists.

Kupersmith’s partner at PowerBridge, Chris Hocker, its vice president of planning, calls overhead lines “hideously problematic,” noting that they can take a decade or more to build. In contrast, he and Kupersmith anticipate their cables in the Columbia would begin pumping electricity through the Columbia in just five years — lightning speed for new transmission.

Of course, that depends on government and community approval. The partners have requested studies of the project’s necessity from Portland General Electric as well as Northern Grid, an alliance of Northwest utilities that coordinates regional transmission planning.

And the partners recently have begun conversations with the four tribes that have treaty rights in the region, including the Yakama Nation and the Cowlitz Indian Tribe. Kupersmith says they had hoped to start meeting earlier but were delayed by the pandemic and a desire to conduct the consultations in person.

Elaine Harvey: Kah-milt-pa activist

For Elaine Harvey, a power line in the Columbia heading west from The Dalles would be yet another to add to a pile of damaging energy developments taking place over decades. One of the most devastating was the 1957 completion of The Dalles Dam — one of 14 major dams on the Columbia’s main stem responsible for generating more than half of the Northwest states’ power – and decimating the world’s largest fishery.

The Dalles Dam energized the associated Big Eddy substation, where Kupersmith and his partners hope to plug into BPA’s regional grid, and which has its own painful associations for local tribes.

The Dalles Dam’s 200-foot-high barrier submerged the storied Celilo Falls, where daring dip netters once caught leaping salmon and steelhead. The dam also submerged a complex of villages nearby, which had been a gathering point for traders from tribes across the Northwest. Prior to the dam, it was North America’s oldest site of continuous human habitation.

And power lines running 7 miles from Big Eddy to Chenoweth, just west of The Dalles, pass over an Indigenous burial site.

Emotions from those historic insults and numerous other losses remain fresh more than half a century later, as Indigenous communities continue to grapple with a settler culture that often seems incapable of hearing their concerns.

Standing before a row of the more than 2,900 industrial-scale wind turbines that tap the gales funneling through the Columbia River Gorge, Elaine Harvey poses for a portrait holding a ka’pin, a traditional tool for digging edible and medicinal roots. The turbines supply low-carbon electricity, but Harvey says they’ve also brought fences and ‘no trespassing’ signs to her band’s traditional lands, excluding her people from native plant harvesting areas. At this location, there is only one landowner who allows her band to gather foods for ceremonial and subsistence purposes. Photo: Leah Nash

Harvey sees that inability manifested in another proposed grid reinforcement project that she’s fighting, just upstream from The Dalles. The Goldendale Energy Storage Project would build a pair of 60-acre reservoirs, one alongside the river and one on a bluff above. By moving Columbia River water between the reservoirs, the project would store and discharge energy like a giant battery.

The project faces vocal opposition from the Yakama Nation, to whom the site is profoundly sacred. Yakama stories recall the bluffs as a haven during great floods in millennia past, and Harvey says her band still forages there for culturally important “first foods,” such as desert parsley.

They already have lost much access to foraging sites because of wind farms, which have fenced off large areas. Only one landowner hosting a wind farm in the area allows Harvey’s people to enter and gather traditional plants, she says. Meanwhile, explosive solar development threatens to kill native plant habitat, she says, unless consultation improves between developers, government agencies and tribes.

Recently, there have been instances of better consultation. For example, at the urging of the Yakama, BPA adjusted the route of a short transmission line added to Big Eddy in 2015. In contrast, Harvey points to Washington Gov. Jay Inslee’s line-item veto that removed a requirement for the state to consult with tribes on environmentally sensitive projects — a  requirement legislators had included in the state’s recently passed carbon cap-and-trade law.

Harvey asks whether the onslaught of development in the Columbia Gorge is necessary. She questions whom the projects are really intended to benefit, noting with suspicion the express line running between BPA’s Big Eddy hub and Los Angeles.

The express line and others were built in the 1960s to help power California. In the future, excess solar power could flow north when the sun is up. But today, the lines’ primary use remains the shipment of hydropower from the Columbia River dams and British Columbia south to California.

Harvey wants to know where development will stop. “What I’m concerned about is: What is this going to lead to? Is this going to lead to wind [turbines] down the middle of the river? What’s down the line?”

Climate change also worries Harvey. A biologist by training, she knows that warmer water represents a growing threat to the Columbia’s struggling fisheries, including bottom-feeding suckerfish and sturgeon.

Harvey thinks other solutions need to be considered. Solar and wind farms are not the only ways to cut carbon pollution, she says. Gas-fired power plants can be equipped to capture the CO2 they produce. Smarter logging practices and coastal protections can boost the ability of inland forests and kelp forests to capture atmospheric CO2. Rooftop solar panels can generate power where it’s needed most.

Bottom line, says Harvey: “We already gave up enough.”

Lauren Goldberg: River defender and lawyer

For Lauren Goldberg, projects like the proposed Cascade cables can present an acute challenge. Goldberg, a 15-year veteran at Columbia Riverkeeper, sees fossil fuels and climate change as existential threats to the river and the communities that rely on it. This is a reason Riverkeeper has been a mainstay in the “Thin Green Line” movement that has blocked many efforts to push more coal, oil and liquefied natural gas down the rail lines transiting the Gorge.

And it’s why it has advocated for more clean energy production. “The Columbia River is already being impacted by the climate crisis, and the projections are dire,” says Goldberg.

Goldberg says a lot of green energy development has happened in the Columbia Basin, and she expects that will continue. But that does not mean every project that calls itself renewable and green gets a pass.

Cascade Renewable Transmission’s proponents, says Goldberg, must first prove that their project lives up to its name. “One of our core questions is ‘What power is this moving?’”

Lauren Goldberg says the Columbia Riverkeeper sees an ongoing risk of new power lines enabling expanded gas-fired generation in Cascadia, in spite of the region’s ambitious carbon-cutting mandates. She says Oregon’s new power sector decarbonization law, for example, does not preclude construction of new gas plants to power industries such as Bitcoin ‘mines.’ Photo: Leah Nash

Goldberg notes that energy developers want to build a new gas-fired power plant, dubbed the Perennial Wind Chaser, east of The Dalles. They have secured a site certificate from Oregon. And gas developments have been endorsed by some energy experts who see generators burning a fossil fuel such as gas today, then transitioning to a cleaner fuel, such as renewable hydrogen as a crucial source of backup power.

Proponents of the Cascade link say they have no relationship with individual power projects, and that the utility planners are evaluating what role their project would play in meeting the region’s clean energy policy goals.

Even if the power cables are deemed important for the energy transition, for Goldberg their carbon-cutting potential must outweigh their direct environmental impacts.

“We’ve got a lot of questions and a lot of concerns. Whether it’s renewable energy or fossil energy, we need to understand how a project is going to impact people that rely on the Columbia for salmon and for clean water,” says Goldberg.

Goldberg stresses that burying 100-mile-long power cables in the riverbed is a concept that Riverkeeper hasn’t grappled with before. And the project’s proponents have yet to file permit applications or environmental impact studies, so her organization doesn’t have the data needed to make an informed decision on whether to back or oppose it.

Based on experience and some preliminary research, however, Goldberg identifies several issues they’ll be looking for. One is the impact from stirring up sediment. She says that while the Columbia is “incredibly beautiful,” it’s by no means “pristine.” In certain parts of the river, sediments are contaminated with PCBs and other toxic pollution — a challenge Kupersmith and Hocker expect to manage by tweaking the cables’ route through the riverbed or even bringing them ashore to bypass certain river segments.

Another potential impact mentioned by Goldberg could come from the electromagnetic fields generated by power cables.Research commissioned by the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management looked at magnetic fields emanating from similar transmission cables laid across San Francisco Bay. Those cables helped reduce San Francisco’s dependence on gas-fired power plants.

Celilo Falls and its surroundings were continuously inhabited for over 10,000 years. Prior to colonization, the area served as a trading hub for Indigenous communities across western North America. Abundant salmon, steelhead and other fish caught via dip-netting and weirs brought great wealth until the Dalles Dam drowned the falls and adjacent villages in 1957. Photo: Gladys Seufert via the Oregon Historical Society

The study found that the cables had some effects on migratory fish like salmon, which navigate partly by sensing Earth’s magnetic fields. For example, the cables increased the chance that salmon smolts would take a wrong turn that lengthened their journey to the ocean. But it detected no evidence that fish were harmed. Fish appeared to be just as successful at migrating through the bay after the cables were turned on.

Columbia Riverkeeper’s sister organization in New York, which focuses on the Hudson River, evaluated the direct impacts likely to result from PowerBridge’s cable projects there and concluded that delivering cleaner power made it worth the risk. It also backed a much longer submerged cable proposed to bring hydropower from Quebec down the Hudson, but the Ossining, NY-based Riverkeeper recently reversed course on that project. What turned the tide: It concluded the project might encourage provincial utility Hydro-Québec to build additional dams — development that’s opposed by the local First Nations.

Goldberg says the “lengthy history of disproportionate impact of renewable energy on tribal nations” was part of what led Columbia Riverkeeper to oppose the Goldendale Energy Storage Project.

She says the developer came in with “heavy green-energy branding,” but that didn’t make it “clean” from a broader environmental and social justice perspective. Ultimately, the group decided to “work in solidarity with the tribes” to stop that project.

Gov. Inslee has backed the Goldendale project, but last month Washington’s Department of Ecology denied Goldendale a crucial water permit, saying it needed to know more about its impacts on wetlands, streams and groundwater. An equally crucial licensing decision by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is pending and could land any day.

This story was originally published by Livescience.Tech with the headline A stronger electricity grid is crucial to cutting carbon. Does that make it green? on Jul 24, 2021.

New post published on: https://livescience.tech/2021/07/24/a-stronger-electricity-grid-is-crucial-to-cutting-carbon-does-that-make-it-green/

[snini-9]

Superpod 2020 (Sept. 19, 2020)

So, I follow Spirit of Orca’s Whale Watching Blog and they encountered a superpod yesterday. I’d enjoy some help with IDing some of the whales present (I can ID some of them, but not others). Anyone can add onto this post with IDs as they feel fit. 

“What a wonderful day with SuperPod 2020 & baby calf. The second time in a month we have had a Super-Pod and the last one prior to this was in 2016. I got to see the new baby today. We actually saw two babies. The one that is pink in the eye patch and other white parts is the brand new baby of J35 Tahlequah. Captain Sarah McCullagh first spotted the baby calf a week or two ago. Tahlequah is the mom who birthed a baby girl two years ago and it died after a half hour. Tahlequah then went on to carry her baby girl on her head for 17 days before finally letting go. So happy this turned out to be a happy outcome with this calf. The other calf belongs to J31 Tsuchi and her calf born last year is J56 Tofino. It is still small and is among the first calf pics in my blog but it is not as pink as the smaller one. It got the name Tofino because that is where it was first spotted, off Tofino BC.  We also saw a whole slew of other whales including the following but so many more I did not identify. L103 Lapis and calf L123 Lazuli, L72 Racer, L83 Moonlight, J35 Tahlequa, and her calf J57, J31 Tsuchi and her calf J56 Tofino, J26 Mike, J27 Blackberry, J19 Shachi, J22 Oreo and son J38 Cookie, and K34 Cali.  There was lots of foraging for salmon going on and it was nice to see them catching fish. The seagulls were hovering over them after a catch to get any tidbits left behind. There are a few pics of other marine life including Great Blue Heron, Bald Eagles, Steller Sea Lions, and Harbor Seals. I also snapped a shot of our USCG as they flew over in a helicopter. It was both sad and aggravating to see NOAA out there yet again harassing the whales, motoring up over their backs and stabbing them with a 20-foot pike pole to attach a tag on them. I have seen this crew riding the whales wake making them mad where they are slapping their tail flukes showing their displeasure at having a boat over the top of them. NOAA scientists are the only ones who practice this invasive type of study. At least they are no longer using a crossbow with two four-inch bolts shooting it into the whales. The man in the bow of the boat did just that four years ago now, killing one of our endangered species residents, L95 Nigel, a 20-year-old adult male.  NOAA has been charged with the responsibility to assist in the recovery of the Southern Resident Killer Whales, and several species of salmon that are also endangered. They receive millions of dollars each year and they squander it on study after study after study fortifying their careers instead of actually doing something like say put more salmon in the sea so the Southern Resident Killer Whales can survive. They oppose the breaching of the four snake river dams which would also bring back more salmon for their winter food supply but that would mean a loss of millions in the coffers of NOAA and Bonneville Power Administration in maintaining those dams. I have always applauded NOAA’s meteorologists, they do an awesome job at predicting the marine weather and keeping mariners safe on the oceans and even here in the Salish Sea. Even in my early years as a captain, we used to get a weather fax and you would know how good the forecast was by the signature of the man or woman who signed it. You got to know who you could count on for an accurate forecast.  It is a shame these folks are linked to the NOAA fisheries folks who are utterly failing decade after decade with zilch for results in bringing back our endangered species squandering millions of taxpayer dollars every year.”  J31 Tsuchi?

J56 Tofino and J31 Tsuchi

L91 Muncher?

Not sure

J27 Blackberry

J38 Cookie

J35 Tahlequah and J57

J42 Echo?

L72 Racer

J26 Mike?

NOAA being dicks tagging whales

United States Coast Guard

Harbor Seal 

Bald Eagle

Steller Sealions 

Great Blue Heron

K34 Cali? 

Photo Credit to Spirit of Orca Whale Watching