OPINION: Eklutna’s complex balance of science, fish and clean energy

Alaskans from across the state enjoy the beauty and landscape of Eklutna Lake and the surrounding area. Hikers, campers, kayakers and a variety of other users can be found there on any given day throughout the year. Another important aspect of the Eklutna story and its many benefits is that the water from Eklutna Lake provides 90% of the Municipality of Anchorage’s water supply and production of the lowest-cost renewable energy in Southcentral Alaska through the Eklutna Hydroelectric Project, which was constructed by the federal government in the 1950s.

Before the owners of the hydro project — Chugach Electric Association, Matanuska Electric Association and the Municipality of Anchorage — acquired the project in 1997, a Fish and Wildlife Agreement was executed in 1991 amongst the hydro project owners, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service and the state of Alaska. The 1991 agreement requires the hydro project owners to consult with state and federal agencies and other interested parties to develop and propose to the governor a program to protect, mitigate damages to, and enhance fish and wildlife resources affected by the project. The agreement also requires consideration of the impact of fish and wildlife measures on electric ratepayers, municipal water supply, recreational use and adjacent land use. We were required to initiate this consultation 25 years after purchasing the project and to repeat this process every 35 years.

The project owners initiated this effort roughly four years ago, more than three years early. Working with the other signatories to the 1991 agreement, the Native Village of Eklutna and many other groups that expressed interest in this effort, we have spent thousands of hours and roughly $7 million to date studying the impacts of the project on fish and wildlife and working on developing the proposal that will go to the governor next year for final approval. The study effort has been expansive, and we have worked with dozens of agencies and groups compiling information, developing study plans, implementing two years of field work, preparing study reports, analyzing alternatives, and working collaboratively to come up with the recommended mitigation program. We invite anyone interested to explore the process and results of this effort available online at www.eklutnahydro.com.

A recent commentary accused the Eklutna hydro project owners of not caring about the history of the Eklutna area, fighting to prevent salmon from returning to the Eklutna River, and a variety of other misdeeds. Those statements and accusations are false. As part of this effort, we have committed to returning water to the Eklutna River and we received 36 comprehensive alternatives from eight separate groups and agencies. We are analyzing the cost of each alternative, looking at the likelihood of success for future fish habitat, analyzing impacts on other uses such as hydropower, public water supply, recreation, and the impacts of mitigation measures on both ratepayers and taxpayers as well as increased opportunities for the public benefit from water in the Eklutna River. We have provided special participant status to the Native Village of Eklutna, which was not listed in the initial congressional directive. As not-for-profit electric cooperatives and a local government entity, it is our obligation to study and recognize the costs of any possible mitigation measures and balance those with the other tradeoffs and benefits of the potential solutions. It is our obligation to each of you, our members and local taxpayers, who are responsible for the costs and future obligations to the project.

In the coming months, we will develop and release a draft recommended protection, mitigation and enhancement plan for review. There will be an opportunity for public comment, including two public meetings in January. Ultimately, the final proposal will go to the governor, and we have committed to including a separate comment table from the Native Village of Eklutna if we are not able to agree on the best path forward.

We are mindful that water in the river reduces available, dispatchable, renewable energy that cannot be replaced with wind or solar. Eklutna hydropower is also the least expensive power on the Railbelt, with the only reliable replacement for this power currently generated by natural gas, which is more expensive.

As we remain focused on the fine balance between efforts to reduce carbon, increase energy diversification, protect the environment, increase opportunities for salmon return where possible, provide a quality municipal water supply and ensure affordable, reliable power, we will finish out this process with the same transparency, integrity, respect and inclusiveness that has been the foundation of this project for the past four years. We will continue to work collaboratively with multiple agencies, committing resources to a science-based study process, to achieve the best possible outcome to comply with the 1991 Fish and Wildlife Agreement and meet the diverse needs of Alaskans.

Kolby Hickel is the deputy municipal manager for the Municipality of Anchorage.

Andrew Laughlin is chief operating officer for Chugach Electric Association.

Tony Zellers is director of power supply, Matanuska Electric Association.

The views expressed here are the writer’s and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.