The following article describes a classic trade-off situation .  The positive efforts to produce electricity locally (Distributed Generation) via hydro could have serious and long-term negative impacts on availablity of water for a healthly fish population as well as creating water challenges as the Central Oregon population continues to grow.

And, as the article points out, there’s the additional concern that serious self-serving, “good-old-boy”, behind-closed-doors negotiations have been happening and that there’s a specific effort to withhold full disclosure from the public.

# # #

Flushed Away: City hydro project could be a drain on Tumalo Creek
Eric Flowers – the Source Weekly – October 28, 2009

You wouldn’t guess it from the rain soaked streets this week or the water gushing down Tumalo Creek, but there are signs aplenty that the upper Deschutes basin is running out of water to meet the demand of farms, cities and fish – all of which have legal, as well as historical and biological, cases for getting their share of water, especially during the parched summer months.

Recent data indicates that well owners are drilling deeper to hit groundwater, hinting that population growth and other high-intensity uses like golf courses may be negatively impacting the aquifer – something that just a few years ago experts said wasn’t likely to happen under the current rules. Meanwhile, pending applications for new groundwater withdrawals are approaching the ceiling the legislature set up when it crafted a series of special rules to stave off a potential development moratorium.

In the case of Bend, conservation campaigns have done little to curb residents’ thirst. The city still ranks significantly higher than similarly sized cities in the valley for per capita water use. And the city council recently spiked a proposal to address the problem with a tiered-rate structure that would have charged big-time water users more than conservation-minded residents. Still, the city has prided itself on being a leader on the basin’s water issues, working collaboratively with groups like the Upper Deschutes Watershed Council, the Deschutes Resource Conservancy (DRC) and the local irrigation districts on river restoration efforts designed to restore habitat and pump up traditionally meager summer flows on the Deschutes River and its tributaries.

That’s why the city’s latest water initiative has left some environmental advocates puzzled. Buried inside Bend’s massive surface water treatment plan, which emerged last month, is an initiative that could more than double the city’s withdrawal from Bridge Creek, potentially wiping out some of the summer and winter flows downstream in Tumalo Creek, a major tributary to the middle Deschutes that has already had millions of dollars invested in restoration efforts to offset the effects of erosion and excessive water withdrawals.

The city has yet to release the exact details of its diversion plan, though a feasibility report was due out last month. One of the major elements of the plan, however, is already raising a cautionary flag with some observers. Specifically, the city is proposing to add a small hydropower project to its water supply when it replaces a pipeline that funnels a sizeable chunk of the city’s drinking water from Bridge Creek to the Outback storage facility. The city estimates that by pushing drinking water through a turbine system before funneling it into the storage tanks, it could generate $1.8 million worth of electricity.

The only problem: nobody, except maybe the city, knows just how much surface water – one of the basin’s most scarce and precious resources – the city would have to divert to meet those estimates. And right now the city isn’t talking. According to the Department of Water Resources, Bend holds certificates for about 36 cubic feet per second (cfs) of surface water in Bridge Creek, or about 16,000 gallons per minute. However, the city diverts only about 14 cfs of that on any given day. The rest of the water is set aside for irrigation and “in-stream” flows – the water that is left in the river for fish and all other manner of life that depend on the river for sustenance.

Prior to the 1980s, and for the better part of a century, that number was zero. The state never saw fit to leave any water in Tumalo Creek when it doled out water rights around the turn of the century and farmers and irrigators weren’t about to hand over their water to a few trout and snails. As community values changed and people began to put a greater weight on the inherent value of a natural river, irrigators responded. In the case of Tumalo Creek, the irrigation district changed its point of diversion from near the source of Tumalo Creek to its current location downstream of Shevlin Park, the move restored summer water to roughly ten miles of stream, around Bend’s urban area.

“Tumalo Creek since the mid-‘90s has been on a restoration trend,” said Scott McCaulou, Deschutes River Conservancy program director.

“The situation in Tumalo Creek has been improving over the past 15 years in large part because of Tumalo Irrigation District’s desire to deal with the problem,” said McCaulou, who oversees DRC’s upper basin leasing and water bank programs aimed at restoring flows on the Deschutes River and its tributaries.

In addition to changing its point of diversion, the irrigation district also embarked on several water conservation projects with the assistance of the DRC and other state and federal agencies, McCaulou said.

Those projects, which consisted of replacing miles of open canals with watertight pipes, resulted in restored flows of about 8 cfs, or about 3,500 gallons per minute, below the district’s diversion near Shevlin Park. It’s the only thing keeping the water in that stretch of the river during peak irrigation months of August and September.

At this point it doesn’t appear that the conserved water from those projects is in any danger of being diverted by the city, but it could make it difficult to add more flow to that trickle that represents just a fraction of the water requested for fish by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

And it could impact how much water tumbles down the stream at other important times of the year, including the late spring when fish are beginning to spawn in shallow gravels.While a few cubic feet may not seem like much in a basin that flushes hundreds of gallons of water per second through its canals, it can have a significant impact on a small stream like Tumalo Creek, staving off fish mortality in summer months when water temperatures soar as well as preventing damaging ice-over events during the winter months.

“A few cfs is a significant volume of water in this context where maybe it isn’t on the main stem (of the Deschutes). Small changes could have a large impact and that’s one of the things that we’re interested in having a conversation with the city about once the plan is available,” McCaulou said.

It’s more than just a philosophical or abstract management question. The DRC, in collaboration with other state and federal agencies, has invested some $5 to $7 million in Tumalo Creek since restoration efforts started, mostly in the form of piping projects.

The DRC isn’t the only organization to pour resources into Tumalo Creek restoration in the recent past. The Upper Deschutes Watershed Council has also made a significant investment in Tumalo, mostly in the form of stream channel work designed to counteract erosion and enhance habitat.

The city’s diversion and hydro plan was the topic of discussion at a recent Watershed Council board meeting. And while the council is taking a wait-and-see approach on the issue, it’s watching closely. Like the DRC, the watershed council hasn’t heard much from the city and is waiting for its technical documents to see how much deference the city has given to the environmental issues. But right now, watershed council has very little to go on.

“We don’t know what their intention is, what they want to do, or what the consultants say they should do,” said Watershed Council Executive Director Ryan Houston.

A lack of a clear plan of action, however, didn’t stop the city from recently moving ahead with a major piece of the project. Last month, the city council authorized staff to purchase the steel pipe for the transmission line.

Veteran Bend City Councilor Jim Clinton explained the purchase as something less than a commitment to the Bridge Creek project. Should the city decide to go a different route, Clinton said it could simply recoup its investment by re-selling the pipe – for which there is presumably a demand. Still, the fact that the city would write a check for the pipe has some questioning just how serious the city is about considering other options.

“It’s probably one of the only times I’ve ever seen a government entity agree to buy materials before they actually had a feasibility report that was out and made public for comment. A lot of people might say, ‘So what?’ but usually these kinds of issues are expanded upon when we’re talking about a pretty important resource like Tumalo Creek,” said Tom Davis, a retired engineer and Sisters resident who sits on the Upper Deschutes Watershed Board and is active in fish conservation issues throughout the basin on behalf of the Native Fish Society.

While the Source had a relatively long list of questions for the city about its plan, as well as issues related to its current conservation strategy, phone calls to staff weren’t returned until after deadline. But some of the city’s existing public research does illuminate. For example, the city opted to purchase a pipe that is more than double the system’s current capacity, indicating that it plans to, at some point in time, divert more water. However, there are some legal limitations. According to a consultant report for the city released in September, the city can only divert water for hydro that is actually being used in the drinking system. Whether that would limit how much the city diverts depends on just how many showers and sprinklers are running on a given day – and perhaps on who is counting.

But with a strong financial incentive to divert more water (more water = more power = more dollars) don’t expect the city to pass on any water it can get. As the report indicates the city is counting on the fact that, “water will be available for generations up to the anticipated right/water use volume for each year.”

Not everyone at the city agrees that it should pursue an aggressive diversion strategy. Clinton, who also sits on the Upper Deschutes Watershed Council, said he supports the project, but only if the city limits its withdrawal to its historical diversion from Bridge Creek.

“I think that whatever the city does it should hold Tumalo Creek harmless,” Clinton said. “That’s a lot different than saying, ‘Let’s not do Bridge Creek at all.’”

Clinton isn’t the only one on the city council approaching the project with caveats. Not everyone is convinced that preserving the surface diversion makes sense. New federal drinking water rules, which were a big impetus for starting the conversation on the future of the Bridge Creek supply, apply only to surface water, but require from Bend an investment somewhere between $17 million and $30 million to meet new federal treatment standards. There’s also the question of the hydropower feasibility. While the physics are pretty straightforward – water comes downhill and turns a wheel – the economics are a little murkier. Due to the various tax incentives incorporated in the initial outline of the project the city would have to find a private partner to pick up as much as half of the initial investment in the project, or about $41 million when the pipe is included.

Yet there are some upsides to the project. The revenue from the hydro plant would help cut down on planned water-rate increases to the city’s customers. Under one scenario outlined by city staff, the annual-rate increase would be about half what it otherwise would over the next five years if hydro is included. There is also paradoxically an environmental incentive. Wells and pumps (the alternative if Bridge Creek is retired) are huge energy consumers. If the city went that route, it would be importing more energy, likely from coal plants and salmon-killing Columbia dams, to run its wells, rather than exporting hydropower from an existing pipeline.

While staff has pushed these benefits, some councilors are still eyeing the project cautiously.

“There are just so many moving parts with this issue. My main point from the get-go is let’s try to turn this into a series of manageable decisions, rather than just say let’s go forward with treatment and the whole piping, or let’s not do that. There’s no reason why right now we have to make the ultimate management decision,” said Bend City Councilor Jeff Eager.

In the meantime, if the city can’t find a partner for its hydro project, Eager said it might make sense for the staff to start looking at the possibility of moving away from surface water and relying on more wells. In the end, it may just come down to dollars and cents. City staff estimates that energy sales from the hydro project would generate $176 million over the next 50 years, an attractive proposition for a city that has been through several rounds of lay-offs.

But without a private partner, the hydro project is a bust and city-rate payers would have to shoulder the entire cost of the new pipeline through rate increases and charges on new development, which under one scenario could amount to an annual rate increase of up to 10 percent through 2014.

“That’s really the linchpin of the hydro project, if that doesn’t materialize or it looks like we can’t do that, then maybe a great reliance on groundwater makes sense,” Eager said.

‘Boom’ begins Juniper Ridge hydro, canal piping project
KTVZ.com news sources – October 12, 2009

A thunderous roar from a small explosive charge marked the official start of construction Monday on the $26 million Juniper Ridge Project, an unprecedented project that will return water supplies to the Deschutes River and generate carbon-free energy.

U.S. Congressman Greg Walden, along with state officials, representatives from the Central Oregon Irrigation District, Deschutes County, the Deschutes River Conservancy and Portland General Electric Company attended the groundbreaking ceremony five miles north of Bend along Highway 97.

Immediately following the ceremony, construction crews began replacing 2.5 miles of open irrigation canal, owned and operated by Central Oregon Irrigation District (COID), with underground steel pipe and an innovative, small hydropower system.

By conserving water supplies previously lost through the porous canal, the Juniper Ridge Project will benefit Deschutes River salmon and reintroduced steelhead.

Approximately 20 cubic-feet per second of water presently diverted from the Deschutes River for irrigation purposes by COID will be permanently returned to the river, increasing instream river flows for fish and wildlife species.

Once the new pipe is in place, a small hydropower unit will be installed in the summer of 2010. This state-of-the-art unit will generate up to 3.37 megawatts of clean, renewable electricity annually, or enough power for roughly 2,000 homes.

Irrigation district patrons will also benefit because the project will modernize district conveyance facilities and improve overall system efficiencies.

“We appreciate the support we’ve received from the State of Oregon, the federal government and many others,” said Carroll Penhollow, chairman of COID’s board of directors. Penhollow added, “Our farmers, ranchers and everyone else who relies on our district should be proud that we’re improving district efficiencies while protecting the environment.”

The State of Oregon, along with several business and conservation groups played an instrumental role in financing the project.

“We are very pleased to help fund this important project through a state tax credit and small energy loan,” said Mark Long, Director of the Oregon Department of Energy. “This project not only benefits fish and wildlife species, it will provide economic benefits to the local community.”

“This project will improve water quality and fish habitat in a very important part of Oregon,” said Dick Pedersen, Director of the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. “DEQ is pleased to work with a group of people who share our goals of improved water quality. The collaboration between the irrigation district, Oregon Department of Energy and DEQ worked very smoothly.”

“This project is a great example of how we can generate clean renewable local power in Oregon,” said Betsy Kauffman, senior program manager with Energy Trust of Oregon. “We’re happy to be involved with a project that has benefits for the district, the community, and the watershed.”

“The City felt it was important to step forward as a partner in this project,” said Bend City Manager Eric King. “The benefits to the community and the environment are truly significant.”

“Projects like this don’t come along every day. It is gratifying to see so many people come together to make the project happen,” said Julie Keil, Director of Hydro Licensing for PGE. “PGE and the Confederated Tribes are happy to be a part of the effort.”

Total project costs are estimated at $26 million. Oregon’s Department of Energy has provided a $4.2 million Business Energy Tax Credit (BETC) to COID, and a $12 million low-interest loan. Oregon’s Department of Environmental Quality awarded the District a $2 million grant along with a $2 million zero interest loan from federal stimulus funds.

The Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board awarded COID a $1 million grant and the Deschutes River Conservancy is providing a $1 million grant for the project from federal Bureau of Reclamation stimulus funds. Energy Trust of Oregon is providing a $1 million grant.

The City of Bend is contributing $278,000 and the Portland General Electric Company is contributing $250,000. The District is financing $5 million in upfront capital costs and will repay approximately $19 million in loans and debt service.

During the project’s construction in 2009/2010, COID will provide eight landowners with a supplemental water supply to compensate for the shutdown of the irrigation canal. These eight landowners have large livestock herds and no alternative water supply. The District will finance a six-day per week water hauling service to each landowner; the hauler will provide a 2-day supply. District costs for this service are roughly $100,000.

The project’s construction will be managed locally by the Slayden Construction Group along with Jack Robinson & Sons. Materials for the project are being produced by the Northwest Pipe Company of Portland, OR, and the James Leffel & Company of Central OH. All of the project’s materials are made in the U.S.

The Juniper Ridge Project is scheduled to be complete and producing energy by next summer.

Central Oregon News Digest • Summer 2009
Compiled by The Garner Group – August 24, 2009

ENERGY

Hydro plants in the pipeline, literally and figuratively

Federal stimulus grants to two Central Oregon irrigation districts, directed at water conservation, will fund canal piping and construction of small-scale generating plants. The Swalley Irrigation District will receive $2 million to complete enclosing 5.1 miles of its main canal north of Bend, including an 0.75-mW hydro plant near Highway 97. Three Sisters Irrigation District was awarded $1.3 million to initiate a pipeline project that will increase stream flows in Whychus Creek. This project eventually will include a 1.5-mW hydro plant. Both generating plants are “in-conduit” designs that utilize water flow within the pipeline.

County approves wind farm, with conditions

The Crook County planning commission has approved the West Butte Wind Power Project, proposed for a 20-acre site near Millican. Conditions include formation of a technical advisory committee to address wildlife concerns. Access will require a right-of-way permit from the Bureau of Land Management, in turn requiring an environmental impact study. Work on the $220 million project, which will involve from 32 to 54 turbines, is expected to start in spring 2010. The 104-mW project falls below the threshold that would require approval beyond the county level.

La Pine may yet see a biomass power plant

While one company’s plans to build a biomass-fueled power plant in La Pine are on hold, another has moved into the arena. Biogreen Sustainable Energy Co. of St. Helens, Ore., will buy a 10-acre parcel in the La Pine Industrial Park and build a $55-$60 million, 19-mW electricity generating plant fueled by thinnings from private and public forests nearby. The project will support 100 construction jobs and employ 20 people directly upon completion, plus another 80-90 indirect jobs in forestry and transportation. Silvan Power Co. has an option to buy 28 acres in La Pine for a biomass power plant but plans apparently have stalled over fuel availability issues.

Oregon canal piping projects win stimulus funds
From KTVZ.COM news sources – August 20, 2009

Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar announced Thursday that the Bureau of Reclamation has identified two Challenge Grant projects in Central Oregon that will receive a $3.3 million share of $40 million coming to Oregon under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.  

Through the Challenge Grant Program’s Water Marketing and Efficiency Grants, Reclamation provides 50/50 cost share funding to states and irrigation and water districts for projects focused on water marketing, conservation and efficiency.  Projects are selected through a competitive process, based on their ability to meet the goal of improving sustainable water supplies in the western United States.  The projects include:

Main Canal Piping Project and Ponderosa Hydro plant, Swalley Irrigation District: $2,058,935 for this three stage/phase project that would complete piping of ¾ miles of canal, the design and construction of a 0.75 megawatt hydropower plant, and a solar telemetry project that would allow the District to use solar power for a system that monitors, measures and controls water.

While there are a number of important issues addressed in the article, the energy related paragraph reads:

Water saved through piping would also feed a TSID [Three Sisters Irrigation District] hydroelectric plant at Watson Lake. The energy generated by the hydroelectric scheme will be sold to Central Electric Cooperative and provide about $300,000 annual income for the district.

# # #

Piping project draws fire from neighbors
By Jim Anderson – Nugget News – August 11, 2009

Since 1888, Whychus Creek irrigation water has been running through an open ditch east of Sisters. If current plans come to fruition, it will end up in a buried dual 54-inch pipeline instead.

The small pioneering irrigation ditch was enlarged between 1891 and 1920, and eventually became the Three Sisters Irrigation District (TSID) Main Canal, where it looks like a quiet and picturesque mountain stream flowing across 3.8 miles of sagebrush and pine.

The canal begins at the diversion dam in Whychus Creek and terminates in 80-acre Watson Reservoir, on the east side of Highway 20 near the Sisters/Bend KOA campground.

Because of the sandy soils and cracks in the native lava rock substrate that makes up most the geology of the Sisters countryside, about six cubic feet per second of water – and more through evaporation – is lost to irrigators and fishery projects. That amounts to around 7,500,000 gallons of water going somewhere else between April and October, water that could be used in the efforts to reestablish salmon runs in Whychus Creek.

Water saved through piping would also feed a TSID hydroelectric plant at Watson Lake. The energy generated by the hydroelectric scheme will be sold to Central Electric Cooperative and provide about $300,000 annual income for the district.

If the Forest Service, Bureau of Reclamation and TSID – with the help of the Deschutes River Conservancy (DRC) – have their way, the piping project will save water for salmon and trout. The project would also keep the district from being sued by NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) Fisheries Service for more water to rebuild the salmon fishery. Farmers on the end of the irrigation canal may have enough water in dry years, and the irrigation district would be richer by $300,000 annually by selling electricity.

However, several residents living nearby and recreating throughout the project area do not want to give it a thumbs up.

Because of the scope and legal status of the proposed project, the Forest Service didn’t believe it was necessary to have a “public meeting.” However, of the written responses received as a result of the first announcement of the proposed project, several were adamantly opposed to it. To provide the opportunity for those voices to be heard, the Forest Service arranged a meeting last Monday at 4 p.m. where nine interested people were in attendance in the TSID main offices, adjacent to Walton Lake.

While the water-users were all in favor of the project, the most outspoken opponents were John and Vicki Hornbeck, and Guy Monte, all nearby residents and recreational users of the area where the main canal is located. Guy Monte questioned, among other things, the savings of water by piping the canal over that lost by seepage and evaporation from Walton Lake and other ditch losses in the District.

TSID Manager Marc Thalacker (who did not attend the meeting, but was in contact via speakerphone) pointed out it would be financially restrictive to line the bottom of the reservoir, and that piping the main canal flowing north from the reservoir was almost completed.

Vicki and John Hornbeck were opposed to the pipeline project because of the loss of the scenic values, and possible decline of native plants and wildlife when the project is completed.

“When it (the canal) is put into a pipeline, the scenic beauty will be gone, and will never return,” Vickie said.

Her husband, John, reminded Bill Anthony, Sisters District Ranger, that there are hundreds of people who recreate throughout the National Forest land who cannot be notified of the proposed project, and will be shocked to see the canal flow buried in a pipeline.

Steve Pyke, another opponent to the project, voiced similar concerns.

Steven George, Wildlife Biologist with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, doesn’t see any serious losses for wildlife by piping the main canal.

“Most of the deer and elk usage in that area is in winter when the canal is turned off,” he said, “while in summer big game are up in the higher elevations where water is plentiful.”

Monty Gregg, Sisters District Wildlife Biologist commented along similar lines:

“Putting the main canal in a pipeline will save a lot of water that can be used for renewal of the fisheries,” he said. Gregg also pointed out the hardwoods (alders) now growing in the riparian zone supply habitat and food for small birds and foraging bats, but a blight hits the alders frequently, creating gaps in food production.

“The recovery of the riparian of Whychus Creek will provide adequate habitat and provide wildlife needs lost to piping the main canal,” he said.

TSID and DRC figures estimate that by piping the main canal, not only will the 6 cfs loss be regained, but that, added to the already 14 to 15 cfs saved by earlier projects, will allow enough water to remain in the creek to help bring about the success of various salmon recovery plans.

“We can best reach these objectives by piping the main canal,” Bill Anthony said.

Seeking green power solutions for hazy days
Bend Bulletin – August 2, 2009

Portland General Electric got a lesson in one of the shortcomings of renewable energy last week.

With temperatures above 100 degrees in Portland, the company broke its all-time record for summer power consumption Monday, then again Tuesday, and also on Wednesday.

All the while, the company’s Bigelow Canyon Wind Farm 140 miles east of Portland was producing next to no power. The winds that usually suck cool air up the Columbia River and keep summers mild had ceased, baking Portland and idling the turbines at Bigelow Canyon — just when they were most needed.

If wind and solar are going to play a bigger part in meeting the country’s electrical demand, utilities will need to get faster at reacting every time the wind dies down or a cloud moves in front of the sun. Bend’s PV Powered is working on solving a part of the problem.

The federal government recently awarded the company $3 million to get to work building the machines needed to create a future network of thousands or even millions of small-scale solar generating systems.

The Solar Energy Grid Integration System is an initiative of the Department of Energy that seeks to make solar power cost-competitive with other forms of power generation by 2015. Right now, solar power makes up only a tiny fraction of the total energy consumed in the United States, but that could change quickly if current treends continue.

According to a 2007 Energy Department report, 5 to 10 percent of electricity customers could be using some form of solar power within 10 years if homeowners continue adding solar panels to their homes at the current rate.

In 2007, the Oregon Legislature passed a law requiring the state’s largest utilities to generate 25 percent of their power from renewable sources by 2025. Several other states have adopted similar goals.

Steve Hummel, vice president of engineering for PV Powered, said the goals are attainable, but only with a coordinated effort involving the government, the American people, the utility industry and companies like his.

“Obama has said we need a man-on-the-moon type of effort to do it, and I believe he’s right,” Hummel said.

Moving from large hydroelectric dams and coal- or gas-fired power plants toward rooftop arrays of solar panels or small stands of wind turbines has potential advantages for the individual consumer, but for the utility industry, it’s a potential headache.

Distributed generation, as it’s known, would allow a homeowner with a home solar system to use the power from a utility at night, and sell excess solar power back to the utility during the day, effectively running the electric meter in reverse.

For the utilities, renewable energy means uncertainty — a sluggish wind turbine can’t be turned up, and a solar panel can’t be quickly moved out of the shade. It’s estimated that if such sources are used for as little as 5 to 10 percent of the total power supply, brownouts and blackouts could occur when they inevitably stop producing electricity from time to time. When the generation is distributed across a large area and is subject to different weather patterns — rather than concentrated at a single plant — predicting the spikes and drops in the current and reacting accordingly becomes even more difficult for utilities.

The problem, Hummel said, will likely be solved by building a better inverter, the device produced by PV Powered. If the company succeeds in building that better inverter over the next year, it’s likely to receive another $3 million from the Department of Energy in 2010 to help bring it to market.

Improving today’s technology

An inverter’s primary purpose in a home solar generating system is to convert direct current electricity into alternating current, the type that runs lights and washing machines and consumer electronics. The inverter also manages the two-way flow of power, sending electricity into the grid when the home system produces a surplus, and drawing electricity from the grid when the home system is generating too little.

Current inverter technology is adequate for providing supplemental solar power to a home, Hummel said, but is ill-suited for coordinating hundreds or thousands of home solar generating systems to help power the grid as a whole. When an inverter detects fluctuations outside a narrow range in the current flowing in from the grid, it shuts off automatically to protect the system, much like a circuit breaker or a power strip. If, for instance, a high level of power usage creates a voltage drop within the grid, all of the solar generating systems connected to that grid could be shut down, further reducing the available power and increasing the risk of brownouts or blackouts.

“It’s very crude. If (the current) is outside of the acceptable voltage and frequency range, it goes down,” Hummel said.

Erick Petersen, the vice president of sales and marketing for PV Powered, said the government’s willingness to fund exploration of how to solve this problem is encouraging for people in his industry.

“It’s one thing to say we want to put renewable energy out there — it’s another to sit down and go, ‘If we do it, what happens?” Petersen said. “So all of this money is going to address some of the fundamental challenges, and create new technology that doesn’t exist today to go with this mass deployment.”

The goal for PV Powered, Hummel said, is to create an inverter that can “talk” to the grid more effectively, and better react to the needs of both the generator or the building it serves, and the grid as a whole.

With a smarter inverter, a home with a solar generating system could maintain constant communication with the utility company, monitoring the price of electricity for sale or purchase in communities where prices fluctuate to reflect demand, as well as weather forecasts, and past patterns of power usage in the building it serves. This information could allow the inverter to independently decide when to sell, buy or store power, while the utility company would be able to better predict how much power it can draw from the distributed solar generation system.

Making the transition

Hummel said it’s likely improved inverters will first be used by utility companies, improving the efficiency of converting solar energy into usable electricity at solar farms, and helping to better manage power generated at wind or solar farms. When a cloud moves over a solar farm, a more sophisticated inverter could detect the drop in power generation immediately, cueing a coal, gas or hydropower generator elsewhere to step up production.

PGE spokesman Steve Corson said that while the Portland utility is pursuing renewable energy sources, even though technical limitations and their unpredictably prevent them from providing a significantly larger share of power production today. The utility is a partner with PV Powered in its grant-funded research and will be helping test whatever products the company develops in a yet-to-be-determined Oregon community next year.

“I think there’s a little bit of a misperception out there among many in the public that this is a simple trade-off — you can get rid of some of these older fossil fuel resources and simply bring on new renewables and energy efficiency, and you’re good to go,” he said. “And the reality is, while there are certainly advantages to these resources, there are also significant challenges in how we manage those resources, and sometimes they simply are not going to produce.”

While the jury is out on this idea – there is a scheduled feasibility report due later this summer – it pains CO Renewable that before it is more than an idea the anti-tax folk start a negativity campaign.  The only way Central Oregon – or the nation for that matter – will wean its way off of energy produced outside of our boundaries is to build local power production facilities and incorporate them into a Distributed Generation energy system.  And the only way such a thing can happen is for money to be raised by the eventual users – local taxpayers – via some sort of  tax so these renewable energy projects can be built.

# # #

Bend Considers Building A Hydroelectric Project On Tumalo Creek
By Ethan Lindsey – OPB News – June 10,2009

Many cities and irrigation districts across the state have developed new plans to build small-scale hydroelectric projects.

These aren’t your grandparents’ dams – they are smaller generators — on pipes — that take advantage of the energy in the stream flow.

More than ten miles west of Bend, up in the mountains toward the Three Sisters, a small house was built in the 1920s.

Back then, it wasn’t a quick drive from downtown Bend – especially in the winter when the snow comes down.

The house was for the city’s water caretaker.

The flow from Tumalo Creek provides much of the city’s drinking water, and the caretaker made sure the pipes were working.

Tom Hickmann is the city’s interim assistant public works director.

At the top of a cramped stairwell, Hickmann opens the door to the caretaker’s bedroom.

Tom Hickmann: “The story goes that in the 20s and 30s, when they lived here, this window – we’re two stories up right now – this window was the front door for them in the winter time, because the snow got that deep.”

The house isn’t the only piece of antique workmanship here.

The two main pipes that carry water 11 miles from the mountains to the city are also from the 20s.

And, the city’s water system must be upgraded, to meet federal standards. 

Hickmann says depending on what the city decides to do, the fixes could cost anywhere from $10 to $70 million.

If the city spends more to replace the ancient pipes, it could build a hydroelectric generator along the route.

Tom Hickmann: “The hydroelectric potential here was an afterthought. It was one of those, whether you want to call it an a-ha moment or a duh, what were you thinking moment, either way the reality became we have 1000 feet of potential energy.”

The hydro power could produce an estimated $1.5 million for the city.

And that gives Bend more control over its own energy future.

But residents are concerned they’d have to pay more on their water bills, up front, to build it.

At a city budget meeting where this project was discussed briefly, anti-tax residents and councilors expressed skepticism.

Environmentalists, though,  aren’t inherently against it.

Remember, it’s not a dam – so concerns over fish kill and habitat destruction are reduced.

Ryan Houston is the executive director of the Upper Deschutes Watershed Council.

Houston’s job is to look out for fish and habitat concerns. He says his fear of climate change makes him very supportive of renewable power sources like this.

Ryan Houston: “The questions I have are generally over potential future scenarios.”

Houston points out the hydro project may reduce the amount of water farmers can use from Tumalo Creek.

Those farmers instead could choose to pull their water from the bigger Deschutes River.

And that could have a devastating affect on fish restoration.

Ryan Houston: “Whenever you change a system, there is always that added element of complexity because it is now a new situation.”

Back at the caretaker’s Tumalo Creek house, Tom Hickmann says he’s an engineer – and he knows the numbers can be figured out beforehand.

But a lot of this comes down to values.

Tom Hickmann: “Our parents, our grandparents, made this investment – the investment we’re standing on right here, right now. And it was painful when they made it! And we’ve benefited from their investment for the last 80 years.”

Hickmann says the city will get a feasibility report over the summer.

Councilors will then have to decide whether the increased rates now are worth it in the end.

The following is excerpted from the COID Manager’s Report of May 12, 2009:

# # #

Central Oregon Irrigation District Manager’s Report
COID Website – May 12, 2009

The federal economic stimulus package picture continues to develop for COID’s Juniper Ridge Piping and Hydroelectric Project scheduled to begin construction in October 2009.  Several other irrigation districts in Central Oregon also have good chances of their projects receiving some funding also.  The planning and work on water conservation projects over the past few years allowed the irrigation districts to be fully positioned with readily available projects eligible for stimulus funding.  The recently approved federal appropriations of nearly $400,000 for the Deschutes Project will inject available funding for further conservation work.  The Deschutes Basin Board of Control has requested to our congressional delegation for a $5 million appropriation for FY 2010.

The Juniper Ridge Hydroelectric and Piping Project is continuing on schedule.  May 1st was the deadline to receive bids on the project.  As anticipated a total of five (5) bids were deemed complete and officially received.  Review of the bids has commenced with a ranking of the bids completed.  It is anticipated that a project team will be officially selected by the Board of Directors by May 15.  Construction will begin in early October 2009 with completion of the piping by April 2, 2010 and the hydro facility up and running by late summer 2010.

STATUS REPORT
Juniper Ridge Piping & Hydroelectric Project

Pre-Proposal meeting with potential bidders on March 10

Submitted grant application to OWEB with Deschutes River Conservancy for $3.75 MM.

ODOE Small Energy Loan Program application submitted along with pursuit of commercial and federal loan guarantee financing.  ODOE loans carry only a revenue obligation of the project and can not encumber patron assessments.

Business Energy Tax Credit application submitted in early February

DEQ State Revolving Fund application accepted. Ranked #5 project in state for funding – funding request $5million. $2.5 MM in grant and $2.5MM in 20 year 0% interest loan.

FERC and State permit application to be submitted after natural resource consultations completed in late April

City of Bend Juniper Ridge Management Advisory Board agreed to coordinate and plan with COID on their joint Juniper Ridge activities.  Bend will participate in some of the cost of burying the pipe and execute an Intergovernmental Agreement with COID.

Federal economic stimulus funding thru Bureau of Reclamation request of $5 million pending. Notification expected early summer.

Key sentences in this article: “Longtime Oregonians remember when hydro constituted more than 90 percent of the state’s power a few decades ago. [But] now, Oregon gets just 42-percent of its energy from hydroelectric power.”

# # #

Hydropower: It’s Renewable, But Is It Green?
By Ethan Lindsey, OPB News -  May 11, 2009

A federal judge in Portland is considering how the hydroelectric dams on the Columbia Rver interact with salmon.

At the same time, environmentalists continue to push the Obama Administration to remove several of the hydroelectric dams on the Columbia River.

Hydroelectric power has long been part of the Northwest’s fabled history. In fact, Woody Guthrie wrote a whole album about building the Columbia River dams.

But in our clean energy future, is hydropower really “green” enough?

Hydro power and the Northwest. They’re nearly synonymous, even for people who’ve never heard Guthrie’s “Roll on Columbia.” 

In fact, when Fran Halpin graduated from college in Massachusetts, it just made sense to move West and work on one of the country’s biggest renewable energy projects.

Fran Halpin: “I came here and got a job with Bonneville, and I said, this is like my dream job. I get to do engineering and I get to be environmentally conscious, and work with fish survival and renewable energy and conservation. Being an engineer, I am not that much of a braggard. People have to pry this stuff out of me. It is a job I am very proud to be doing and happy to be doing. I’ve loved it ever since I came out here.”

Halpin works in the Portland offices of the Bonneville Power Administration.

Today, he heads up a team that watches the water flow of the Columbia River system and markets power accordingly.

Through Halpin’s eyes, the hydroelectric power generated along the Columbia is one of the best answers we’ve got to our energy questions.

His office sits next to a trading floor and monitoring room – both of which feature banks and banks of computer screens.

Fran Halpin: “I have a couple of displays here that I can show you if you want. Ok, so this is about midnight here. So we’re at 1500 megawatts or 1700 megawatts at Grand Coulee. And then it’s dropping off between midnight and 1 o’clock. Turning off the Late Show, electric heaters are turning off. And then, early risers start getting up, so you start seeing the load picking up, people are coming into schools or offices, so the load does come way up.”

The Bonneville Power Administration sells and markets electric power generated from the federally-owned energy projects in the Northwest – that includes wind and nuclear power, as well as BPA’s bedrock business: hydroelectric dams.

On a tour of the Bonneville Dam, the sheer scale of the engineering is breathtaking.

The dams are operated by federal agencies, notably the Army Corps of Engineers.

Dams make up the biggest piece of the Northwest’s hydroelectric pie.

They’re a reliable source of base load power. That and their ability to respond to increased demands at peak times are key selling points of hydro.

Longtime Oregonians remember when hydro constituted more than 90 percent of the state’s power a few decades ago.

Inside the dam, next to the energy turbines, it’s hard to believe that hydro’s share of the regional power mix has now been cut in half.

Population and energy growth has been coupled with a push to sell cheaper power to California.

So now, Oregon gets just 42-percent of its energy from hydroelectric power.

Still, hydro is one of the cheapest – if not the cheapest – power source we’ve got.

The Bonneville Power Administration says its average price per kilowatt-hour over the past year was 2.73 cents.

The only rival is coal – but hydro supporters like to point out the dams don’t pump any pollution into the sky.

And on top of all that, it’s renewable.

Steve Wright: “Well, hydro is clearly renewable. I don’t think there’s any question about that. The fact of the matter is, it’s the cycle of water that we are able to take advantage of.

Steve Wright is the Administrator of the Bonneville Power Administration.

He says it’s also sustainable, and in his mind, green.

Steve Wright: “I believe the fundamental value of the electric power system in the Northwest resides in that river. This is a huge river, and it sits on the side of a very steep hill. And that’s a unique opportunity. Hydro power is the best renewable resource because it is the lowest cost and most reliable renewable resource. And I think that’s why so many people in the Northwest feel connected to the Columbia.”

But Wright, as well as anyone, knows and acknowledges the environmental costs of the dams.

They damaged the nearby habitat, forever changed cultures, and killed lots and lots of fish.

And to Brett Swift at the conservation group American Rivers, a label like “green” or “sustainable” or “renewable” just doesn’t fit.

Brett Swift: “Dams absolutely have an adverse impact on the environment. The important question is ‘what is the role of hydropower in the future of our energy mix. And how we label it doesn’t necessarily inform that.”

Swift says American Rivers knows that hydropower will be a part of the region’s future energy reliance – but says that doesn’t mean we should start building new dams or dismiss getting rid of old, inefficient ones.

One model for future hydro is small-scale, low impact dams.

Jerry Bryan stands next to a small hydroelectric project in the Farmers Irrigation District outside Hood River

The entire facility is about the size of a 7-11.

Jerry Bryan: “You are looking right now at the control panels for both of those generators. I still think that I am staring at engineering technology from the 40s and 50s.”

Unlike a traditional dam, this project allows fish to swim by unimpeded and yet provides local irrigators with the water they need to grow their crops.

Many in the state say little hydro projects like this could serve as models for low-impact, small scale power generation in the future, but Bryan is reluctant to take any praise.

Jerry Bryan: “If I am going to stand here and say a project I am working on is a model for everyone, I am justly accused of affected arrogance. So I am not willing to say that, but what I am willing to generalize is that if people sit down, then wonderful models emerge.”

Bryan says his project isn’t perfect. Every energy source has drawbacks.

And that’s the crux of the hydro debate, says Angus Duncan, with the non-profit Bonneville Environmental Foundation.

Angus Duncan: “There’s a tendency to exalt some sources of energy, and demonize others. And for better or worse, hydro has been demonized in the Northwest. Right now, a far greater threat to salmon runs generally, is global warming. That is a bigger threat than the hydroelectric system.”

Duncan says inefficient and destructive dams are being torn out around the region right now. And that should continue.

But he says if we tear out the big dams,we’ll need to replace that energy with something else.

And until hydro power can be replaced by something other than coal, it’s “green” enough for most.

Even In Hydro-Rich Northwest, Coal Still Major Power Source
BY APRIL BAER – April 13, 2009

Today we begin a series of special reports on energy in the Pacific Northwest: where we get our power from now and what kind of energy we’re likely to switch to in the future.

When you flip the switch, where does your power come from?
And what will power Northwest homes and businesses in the future?
We’re asking these questions and more for our special series The Switch.

A Few Coal Facts : >
> Contribution to current Oregon energy mix — 41%

> Cost per kwh currently — Ranges from $ 0.012 to $ 0.037 This assumes a medium- to long-haul from coal mine to coal-fired power plant. This cost does not reflect the carbon costs that may become a reality within the next few years. Depending on what value regulators assign for coal burning, this could raise the cost per kwh considerably.

> Is this power source renewable? — No

> Is it intermittent or baseload power? — Baseload

The switch is all about reducing the greenhouse  gases that cause climate change, and so we’re kicking off our series with coal — a power source that comes from fossils.

While there’s lots of coal on the planet now, like other fossil fuels, coal is not renewable — when it’s gone, it’s gone.

Coal is also relatively cheap, and it’s abundant — so it won’t be easy to kick the coal habit.

One of the most common misconceptions about Oregon’s power is that it’s practically all nice clean hydroelectric from the Columbia River. But the reality is this.

To turn on their lights, Pacific Northwesterners use about forty percent coal — and about the same amount of hydro, plus a mosaic of other power sources making up the last twenty percent.

To show you what I mean, I want you to meet three people, who live within twenty minutes drive of each other.  One’s a high-powered business consultant.

Mark Chussil “I’m Mark Chussil, I live in SW Portland.”

OK, Southwest Portland. That makes him a PGE customer.  

We also found a Port of Portland retiree on a fixed income.

Carollynn Smith   “My name is Carollynn Smith, Northeast Portland. I have my five grandchildren that lives with me.”

Carollynn’s owned her home for thirty years, and her electric’s from Pacific Power.  Rounding out our trio is a 30-something arborist who lives just over the Columbia from the other two.

John Butrell  “I’m John Butrell, I live in Vancouver, Washington, and I trim trees.”

April Baer: “Who is your power provider?”

John Butrell  “Clark Public Utilities.”

Three people, three utilities, three different electric bills for March. We did a rough number crunch.

April Baer: “Can you tell by looking how many kilowatt hours you consumed?

Mark Chussil  “Uh — yeahhhh. Twenty–Twenty point three per day.”

April Baer: “OK so for the month, let me get my calculator here….”

Power bills reflect complex calculations, factoring in where the power comes from, and what it costs to get it to you. In the case of Mark’s utility, PGE,  a little over half its power comes from coal and natural gas, the rest from hydro, solar, and wind plants

April Baer: “ Seventy three divided by 550, OK that’s looking like — thirteen cents per kilowatt hour?”

Mark’s paying a little more than average, because he signed up for a PGE program that lets him subsidize new renewable power projects.  We’ll do Carollynn’s bill next.

Carollynn Smith  “1196 k-w-h. Whatever that means.   I don’t know what that means!”

Actually, neither did I. What it means according to our rough guide is that she’s paying about ten cents per kilowatt hour. Her utility, Pacific Power, mostly burns coal, with some natural gas, hydro, and wind power mixed in.

April Baer: “And then John’s got — how about you John, what do you got over there?”

John Butrell:  “I owe a hundred eight-ten. Total kilowatt hours used, fourteen hundred ninety.”

April Baer: About seven cents a kilowatt hour.”

Mark Chussil “I should run a long cable.”

As a Public Utility District customer, John’s consuming about sixty percent hydro power, some natural gas, nuclear, and a small fraction fueled by coal. 

All three of our power customers have heard the news about global climate change. Mark speaks for all three when he says it’s past time to go green.

Mark Chussil  “I would much prefer that we switch to different sources of electricity so that we are emitting less carbon in the first place. This stuff is not sudden. This was coming up on this and was seen decades ago.”

But the problem of moving to a more sustainable mix is ensuring that Mark, John, and Carollynn, can afford the changes.

Right now, coal is the region’s most inexpensive and reliable power source. It’s also the dirtiest.

Most of the Northwest’s coal-fired power plants are sited pretty far away from the people who use them–places like Wyoming and Montana.

PGE operates one plant in Boardman. But for most Oregonians, the closest coal plant is one-hundred miles north.

Sam Garst has a good view of the place.

Sam Garst:   “Right there is Transalta. And there you can see Mount St. Helens and Mount Rainier.”

He lives outside Olympia, about forty minutes north of the massive Transalta power plant in Centralia, Washington. But he’s at a high enough elevation that on some clear days, he can see the cloud of pollutants hovering over Centralia.

Sam Garst:  “It’s not that it’s a bad view or anything, but it is a reminder that it is the biggest emitter of CO2 emissions in the state of Washington.”

Transalta’s plant is far from being the worst pollutor in the nation, but it’s part of a class of coal-fired plants that cause global environmental problems.

Since its adjacent mine closed down in 2007, coal for the plant has been shipped in by freight, on boxcar lines so long, they stretch as far as the eye can see down the Lewis County tracks. Mind-boggling as it is, it’s still cheaper to truck it in like this than to rely on another energy source.

The roar of the plant is deafening, even when you’re standing outside.

But the demand for cheap, stable coal power is louder.  The United States has lots of coal. Also, it’s baseload power.  That means it’s there whether the sun is shining or the wind is blowing. And power companies are required to deliver power, whenever you flip your switch.

But the game is changing.  The race is on to invent technology to make renewable energy more reliable.

And the federal government is closer than it’s ever been to putting a dollar value on the harm coal does to the environment. That would give clean power industries a huge business advantage.

And coal plants are facing new mandates from Oregon and Washington to slash greenhouse gas emissions.

Melinda Eden sits on the Northwest Power and Conservation Council. In 2007, the Council produced a report that concluded Northwest plants will have to kick the coal habit.

Melinda Eden  “The region is not going to be able to meet carbon emissions targets without reducing carbon emissions at the existing plants.” 

So what kind of fuel has the reliability of coal, but with fewer carbon emissions? Next time on The Switch we’ll talk about the leading contender, natural gas.