Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => Fishing-related Issues & News => Topic started by: VAGAbond on April 30, 2010, 07:31:32 AM
-
The Stave River was undoubtedly once a fantastic salmon river. BC Hydro is planning to spent a huge amount of money to reconstruct the Ruskin Dam and power plant. A better option would be to remove the dam and let the river flow free through the existing reservoir. A fish ladder could be added to the Stave Dam and in future the newer Stave Dam might also be removed. Expanding the salmon habitat in such close proximity to our population would add a phenomenal asset to the Fraser Valley.
In the greater power system the energy from the Ruskin plant is small and is easily replaced.
Our American cousins are removing dams on their rivers. We should too.
-
Yah they have nuclear power plants, here in BC we dont'. ::)
-
In the greater power system the energy from the Ruskin plant is small and is easily replaced.
Yah replaced with another dam (likely IPP) to some other fish-bearing river. The existing infrastructure in the Ruskin area means that the environmental impact would be minimal in comparison to building a dam somewhere else where new roads, powerlines, etc. would need to be built.
-
Could be replaced elsewhere with a cogen plant instead of a dam creating alot of construction jobs.Up here at Suncor the entire plant is powered by cogeneration.
-
Most co-generation plants burn fossil fuels. This would also be a step backwards.
-
Taking the dam down would be a good thing the implications are great. For one the silt
build up behind the dam would choke the lower river right out. The lower Stave is not long enough
to be able to flush all the silt away. The Fraser would also be impacted by the amount of silt.
Watching a documentary on the removal of a small dam and the amount of silt behind it
shows what damage we have done by putting in the dams. It is not always a good thing to remove them.
As Dion has pointed out replacing the energy would be taking a step backward.
I would love it if we could remove all the dams but I am also a bit of a realist and know that this will never happen.
We must learn to live with some of the mistakes our forefathers left for us. But we can learn from them and hopefully
not make the same mistakes again.
Here is a good paper on dam removal:
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&ved=0CBkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fhome.comcast.net%2F~naprocopio%2Freadings%2FStanley_2003.pdf&ei=U1TjS6qAD4niNa68uJQD&usg=AFQjCNEP1Nnf8esib77SLDLAc0VhYoc8CA&sig2=ZCqGZE7FAPKBU3bSs5eDVw
Ross
-
Sediment scouring would definitely be a problem but remember the Ruskin reservoir has always had the Stave dam upstream to settle out the stream silt long before it got to the Ruskin reservoir so there probably isn't all that much there. The Fraser probably wouldn't even notice the extra load and the initial rush could probably be controlled.
Energy replacement is an issue but this is a small plant.
-
when they re vamp the stave;why don't they stuff it with springs instead of chum?imagine back trolling plugs for springs in the lower fraser :o
-
Is it unrealistic to dredge the silt from Hayward Lake before removing the dam?
-
With Hydro's rate increase becoming an issue for the new Preem, Hydro's expenditures are going under the knife. An early cut will probably be the Ruskin Powerhouse rehabilitation. So let's get rid of the dam and have the river back.
-
--Yep: just build Site "C" out of site out of mind!
-
With large scale shale gas (natural gas) deposits found in northeast BC, maybe clean burning natural gas power plants could be the least destructive of power plants available. Hydro is no longer as green as it was due to habitat destruction and greenhouse gases from decomposition of submerged vegitation. Also by going cogeneration close to large metro areas, excess heat from electric generation could be recycled to heat commercial or residential buildings as widely done in other parts of the world. Metro Vancouver with 2 million population has great potential for cogeneration if it is given a shot with active support from government to get the ball rolling in the early phase. Just my 2 cents. :)
-
So where do you live and do you want that co-gen plant right next to you bigblue ? ;D ;D
-
So where do you live and do you want that co-gen plant right next to you bigblue ? ;D ;D
I live in North shore of Vancouver, speycaster.
No easy answers to the problems we face in the energy front. :)
-
The Stave River was undoubtedly once a fantastic salmon river. BC Hydro is planning to spent a huge amount of money to reconstruct the Ruskin Dam and power plant. A better option would be to remove the dam and let the river flow free through the existing reservoir. A fish ladder could be added to the Stave Dam and in future the newer Stave Dam might also be removed. Expanding the salmon habitat in such close proximity to our population would add a phenomenal asset to the Fraser Valley.
In the greater power system the energy from the Ruskin plant is small and is easily replaced.
Our American cousins are removing dams on their rivers. We should too.
The Stave Falls Dam was constructed around an impassible falls, by removing the Ruskin Dam in essence you would only be opening up very little additional habitat. Granted Steelhead Creek would be accessible. From the name it is easy to figure out what species returned to it in the past.
Also worth noting, is that Hayward Lake is currently used for drinking water and that there are plans in place to use Stave Lake as a major water supply for Mission and Abbotsford. The other two alternatives considered for this were Harrison Lake and Chilliiwack Lake ::)
-
It was once believed dam is a net producer of greenhouse gases. However, new studies has shown otherwise. The older the dam the more CO2 it will take up due to it's ability to promote organic production and is responsible for the high uptake of CO2.
-
Ruskin and John Hart dams being reviewed for decommisioning: http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_north/northislandmidweek/news/119413609.html?mobile=true
-
cogens also burn renewable sources such as wood waste(hog fuel)
-
It was once believed dam is a net producer of greenhouse gases. However, new studies has shown otherwise. The older the dam the more CO2 it will take up due to it's ability to promote organic production and is responsible for the high uptake of CO2.
--I would say each is different and would have to be accessed.. for larger deep pondage dams.. one should conscider the amount of vegetation that was in the valley prior and how many years before aquatic veg will start to compensate for that loss in addition to the amount left to rot.
--Smaller shallow dams...especially in dry climate, I would expect... might produce aquatic veg much more rapidly and would not have had BC size trees all over the valley prior to the flooding.
--Just try fishing behind Mica dam without a spare prop... how many years has that been in place.
--I'm not hung up on Co2 just that its a complicated web that we could use less spin doctors and more thoughtful science.
--I think we should be working on more efficient ways to use and produce electricity with the dams we have and not get on the total back to nature band wagon... If you are going to have the same or increasing population... especially in cities you need to exploit resources from a much larger area.
--I've been a proponent of limiting populations since the early 70's... and looking to long term solutions. In practicing what I preach we had one child and waited until we were near 40 ... that was one of many proposals made in population ecology for limiting population growth.
-- I say we each must choose... to do something but choose your own path..
--I'm not always goody two shoes either... I have an aluminium boat and we all know that it takes a bunch of electricitly to produce one.
-
1 ton of CO2 is released for every ton of concrete produced. Food for thought.