The Haines Borough has a very clear need for additional hydropower. Given our present sources, the utility (APT) must supplement with diesel various times during the year. This situation is exacerbated as more and more people attempt to mitigate the high cost of heating fuel with electric heat or with non-fossil fuel systems that still require substantial electricity to run pumps and fans.
Additionally, the Haines Borough as well as the Borough of Skagway, with whom we are yoked because we share the same utility, are both developing substantial deep-water port operations due to extensive mineral exploration in the Yukon and interior Alaska.
Finally, a substantial increase in hydropower is required to mitigate air pollution from the cruise ships that frequent our communities and provide needed economic activity. Once sufficient power sources are developed, cruise ships can be required to plug in, thus reducing emissions.
The development of additional hydropower is a step that moves us toward self-reliance in that we will be less dependent on foreign resources; but one of the additional benefits of the Connelly Lake project is that it also will remove our reliance on an undersea cable that is now the community of Haines’ link to the bulk of its hydropower. Although undersea cables are not uncommon, our uncommon distance from support ships able to supply and service the cable is a weak link. Connelly Lake, located in the Haines Borough, can transmit power through an easily accessible buried cable to our community. Thus, even if the link to Goat Lake in the Skagway Borough is ever lost, Haines will still have access to hydropower. The development of a hydropower source accessible by land will increase the reliability of the power supply – a critical dimension of any infrastructure improvement.
The case for additional hydropower supplies is easily made. And the potential of Connelly Lake is clear. Connelly Lake has been “on the books” as a hydropower source for decades. The case in favor of a land-based transmission line over an undersea cable in such a remote location is also easily understood. But Connelly Lake is located at the head of a watershed that has many assets: fish, wildlife, recreation, wilderness, cultural. It is important to discover if the development of Connelly Lake as a hydropower site can complement or even enhance these assets. I, for one, look forward to the FERC process for answers to the question of the impact of the development on the watershed. The one concern that I have with the permitting process is that studies be conducted by organizations that are as free as possible from ties to interest groups – either pro or con. The outcome is going to depend, I believe, on the reliability of findings. It is important to avoid contaminating data through association with groups which have signaled fore-gone conclusions. I sincerely support going forward with the FERC process.
Though I do not yet speak on behalf of the Haines Borough, I would like to mention that the Haines Borough Assembly did adopt a resolution (09-01-149) January 27, 2009, resolving that the Haines Borough Assembly “supports the investigation, study, conceptual design, and initial permitting of any potential projects by AP&T or others which can be shown to provide reliable, cost effective, renewable energy in a manner which does not adversely impact local rate payers, the local economy, the watershed ecosystems, or the traditional uses of the area.” I believe that Resolution 09-01-149 articulates a reasonable position and supports proceeding with the FERC permitting process for Connelly Lake as well as Shubee Lake.
No comments:
Post a Comment