Hydroelectric Position Paper

Alaska Hydropower Project Position Paper

Alaska Conservation Community

The Alaska Conservation Alliance (ACA), an umbrella organization comprised of 40 member groups with a combined membership of 38,000 Alaskans, supports regionally appropriately sized hydropower projects that are developed correctly with a strong emphasis on fisheries protection and sustaining Alaskans’ environmentally dependent economies and quality of life. The development and integration of clean, stably-priced energy sources will provide energy relief to Alaskans, strengthen the State’s economy, create new jobs and exportable technologies, and halt the acceleration of global climate change.

The Alaska conservation community will use this document to guide our evaluation of hydropower developments1 in Alaska to ensure the projects can both provide clean, reliable and stably-priced power and prevent or minimize impacts to fish, wildlife and habitat as well as the value of these resources.

Alaskans have consistently ranked energy issues second only to the economy in terms of the most important issue facing their local communities. While significant energy savings may be gained through conservation and efficiency measures, how Alaska will replace or supplement its power generation is of increasing concern. 

Hydropower projects are and will be a part of the State’s energy debate and if done properly, can be a part of the renewable energy solution.

The benefits of hydropower projects include a reduction in overall CO2 emissions; reliable, clean, and stably-priced power for Alaskans; the potential for new,high-paying jobs; and a mechanism to both diversify the State’s economy and help maintain Alaska’s prosperity2.

When developed correctly, in-state hydro resources can protect Alaskans’ environmentally dependent quality of life and support sustainable economies.

Further, hydropower offers additional opportunities to develop more widely distributed generation facilities, increasing local energy security. However, these benefits should not come at the unacceptable expense of existing resources. In the Pacific Northwest, misguided hydropower projects are in large part responsible for the declines and 1 Hydropower is defined as using the energy or force of water to generate electricity, including but not limited to dams, in-stream projects, tidal and wave power and thermal energy conversion.

The Renewable Energy Opportunity for the Railbelt: Summary for Policymakers by Mark Foster. extinctions of wild salmon runs. It is imperative that Alaska is willing to make every effort to avoid making the same or similar costly mistakes. Any new hydropower projects in Alaska must avoid and minimize fisheries impacts, ecological and cultural impacts, and impacts on existing recreational opportunities. Alaska’s fisheries are not only essential for subsistence and the Alaska way of life, but are a major economic driver, including in-state recreation, tourism revenues, commercial and sport fishing employment and revenues.

Hydropower projects must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Any hydro proposal requires full and open discussion among decision makers, the Alaska public and affected communities. Project applicants and regulatory agencies should provide for public consideration a range of alternatives, a demonstrated need, adequate baseline environmental data and proposed funding sources available.

Building on the wisdom of Governor Hammond’s criteria for supporting resource development projects in Alaska and the recognition that a sound economy and a sound environment go hand in hand, ACA has developed five principles and sets of questions to guide our evaluation of future Alaska hydropower projects:

1.) Adequate baseline information

• Is adequate baseline information available to determine project impacts to the public for the entire area that could be affected by the project? This includes but is not limited to information on water quality and quantity, wildlife and riparian resources, and climate changes in the basin.
• Are there current data for existing stream productivity, spawning and rearing habitat, aquatic organisms and in-stream habitats for fish?
• Is adequate fisheries baseline information available to the public for the entire area that could be affected by the project?

2.) Prevent or minimize fisheries impacts

• Does the project avoid existing fisheries habitat or adjacent habitat that supports the fisheries habitat?
• Does the project design utilize the best available science to prevent or minimize fisheries impacts, and provide for fish passage and protection?
• Is there a comprehensive fisheries protection and management plan in place for the watershed and river basin?
• Are there adequate mitigation plans, including the effectiveness of state-of the art proven mitigation techniques and technologies to reduce or eliminate adverse impacts to fisheries and other resources?

3.) Prevent or minimize environmental impacts

• Will there be impacts to the existing watershed, including downstream and flooded areas, and will these impacts be prevented or minimized?
• Will the hydropower project as proposed impact water flow and other water quantity and quality parameters?
• Will the timing of power generation mimic as closely as possible the water body’s natural ebb and flow?
• Will the project protect endangered and threatened species and the integrity of parks, refuges, critical habitats, preserves and conservation areas?
• Will there be significant climate impacts/benefits from the project?

4.) Provide maximum benefits to the citizens of Alaska at responsible levels of cost and risk.

• How will the project, in its entirety, be paid for?
• Will the project deliver flat-priced power at a short term and/or long term benefit to Alaska communities?
• If excess power is generated, how is it likely to be utilized?
• How will the project impact:

o Subsistence resources

o Cultural or archaeological resources

o Local communities

o Recreational resources

o Ship Navigation

o Commercial Fishing Zones

• Will there be a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) ensuring skilled workers receive fair wages and will Alaska Natives receive a fair share of jobs?

5.) Provide for full and open public participation, review and comment in all project stages, including planning, construction, operation, and decommissioning

• Is the integrity of the public process maintained, including the right of Alaskans to participate in the decision-making process, appeal agency decisions, and pursue judicial recourse and citizen initiatives?
• Is there government-to-government consultation with Alaska’s tribal governments in accordance with Executive Order 13175?
• Is there adequate information to assess plans for and costs of removal and restoration of the entire project at the time of license application? Are there adequate bonding requirements to achieve restoration?
• Does the project require Best Available Technology3 and Best Management Practices4?

February 2010

3 Best Available Technology, for purposes of this document, is the most environmentally protective technology that is readily available without regard to traditional “cost-benefit” analysis.

4 Best Management Practices, for purposes of this document, are the policies, practices, or structures which prevent (as the primary option) or reduce (as the secondary option) pollution or other forms of environmental harm.