:quality(70)/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-adn.s3.amazonaws.com/public/PO3MMXIMY5AENHOJINHG44GB4E)
Last December, the Governor’s Energy Security Task Force highly ranked the Susitna-Watana Project as a viable option to help the state maintain energy security for the next 100 years. Susitna-Wanata would also provide 2.5 million megawatt-hours of renewable energy annually, combat climate change, and significantly reduce our dependence on the dwindling Railbelt natural gas supplies. Despite the advantages of Sustina-Watana, a significant number of Alaskans oppose the project. There is no way to overcome the mindset of “I just don’t want it.” But if Alaskans are willing to reimagine the project as an environmental project with significant energy benefits, there is a solution. The wealth of project information collected to date can be used to make informed decisions to benefit the environment and provide renewable energy.
To make this happen, we need a partnership of all Alaskans — Alaska Native landowners, federal and state resource agencies, non-government organizations (especially those currently opposed to the proposed project design and operation, such as the Susitna River Coalition), commercial and recreational fishermen, Railbelt utilities, local governments, interested parties and the Alaska Energy Authority. The Alaska Native landowners have indicated they would be willing to work with the state to find a solution. They have great ideas that should be pursued.
The partnership goal would be to find solutions to improve the salmon fishery, tourism, and recreation, meet the state’s energy needs, and help solve our climate change challenges. Aside from the previous goals of eliminating the CO2 emissions equivalent to that of 250,000 cars and providing electrical energy to the Railbelt, let’s rethink how we can operate the project to provide aquatic habitat and water quality to make the Susitna River a more productive salmon fishery.
What if we emphasized environmental enhancement and produced energy as a byproduct, but maintained the economic viability of the project? We could improve the environment by maintaining the important aspects of the natural hydrograph, improving water quality (managing water temperatures for fish and reducing the glacial silt in the river), and eliminating the adverse effects of floods and droughts. Other countries are doing this and incorporating other measures to bolster their salmon populations and fish sizes with great success. We can do likewise. Susitna-Watana offers the added advantage of being able to provide ideal downstream water temperatures for fish through a multi-level intake at the dam. We can use this knowledge to make the Susitna River more productive and mitigate the devastating effects on fish from warmer river temperatures attributable to climate change.
How can we provide more flow for fish and other aquatic resources in summer without wasting water that we can’t use for electrical energy generation? The solution is simple. We can use that energy to make hydrogen. Demand for hydrogen worldwide is increasing exponentially. For example, Yamaha has recently come out with a new 450 HP outboard motor that runs on hydrogen (another climate change benefit). As we decarbonize, hydrogen will become an important commodity. Utilities in the Lower 48 are beginning to install hydrogen plants as they see that as part of our carbon-free transformation. There is no reason we couldn’t use this as a fuel for rural Alaska and replace diesel generation.
The partnership needs to consider flooding of land upstream of the Watana Dam to create the water storage needed for the project. Even so, we can be creative here too and consider using the reservoir for sockeye salmon rearing. Of course, we need to get the salmon upstream and back downstream, but technological developments over the past few years have made this possible.
There is still the issue of project cost that needs to be re-examined as we have experienced significant inflation since the project cost was developed. Also, megaprojects are known for going over budget, so that needs to be addressed. We can learn from recent projects like the 1,000 MW Site C dam in British Columbia, which is nearing completion.
The good news is there are new financing options and recently enacted laws like the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) that can keep electrical rates low. The Alaska Energy Authority received a commitment from the Rural Utilities Service to finance half the cost at the 30-year treasury rate plus one-quarter percent, well below typical rates for financing large projects. Laws like the IRA and investment tax credits are now available to further reduce the burden on Alaska ratepayers. Alaska can take advantage of this unique opportunity.
How do we make this happen and where do we start? At a national level, major environmental NGOs like American Rivers recently partnered with the hydropower community (termed Uncommon Dialogue) to add hydropower to dams where it makes sense and remove dams where it does not. The partnership can start with the document prepared by the National Marine Fisheries Service for the Susitna-Watana Project after the project was put on hold. The document provides a guide for moving the project forward if that state elects to do so. The guidance could be modified to emphasize environmental enhancement.
Alaska can be at the forefront of having energy security, being carbon-free, and having a hydro project that benefits the environment. If the partnership recommends moving the project forward, we would create jobs and improve our economy. Much of this can be achieved through volunteerism, but the state legislature will need to appropriate some funds to make this happen. Once and for all, let’s work together to get a go/no-go decision on the project and see what we can achieve together. If we work for the common good, Alaska will win.
Wayne Dyok, now retired, is the former project manager for the Susitna-Watana Project.
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.