Peninsula Poll Question: Do you miss the Elwha River dams?
http://archive.peninsuladailynews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2013308069990
With the declared drought underway, do you miss the Elwha River dams and the reservoirs behind them?
Number of votes cast: 636
With the declared drought underway, do you miss the Elwha River dams and the reservoirs behind them?
Number of votes cast: 636
posted by Tom Harper at 10:43 AM
30 Comments:
What do we need reservoirs for? Everything is fine.
City said the fish in the river are toast, but we didn't care too much about them when the dams were up, anyways.
I'd like to see them poll if readers miss PA ha ha.
We need reservoirs but those damns were both harmful to the salmon runs and not built to safe, modern standards. The first moderate earthquake would have knocked them down.
The Elwha dams were managed as "run of the river" dams, i.e. water flowing in equalled water flowing out-not as storage reservoirs. If the dams were to be used as reservoirs, the agency running them would have to change the operating mandate. I doubt that could have been done in the course of the first year of a water shortage.
What seems not to be under discussion is the future. Okay, yes, Port Angeles doesn't show much interest in doing much of anything, really. And the future? That is for somebody else to worry about.
But, all climate modelling, and recent history reveal that the region is headed for exactly what we're experiencing now. Hotter, drier. It has been heading this way for a while now, but few want to acknowledge it. A few consecutive years of dry seasons, and then what? Even with deeper wells drilled, areas all over are finding that their aquifers are getting depleted faster than they are being replenished.
So, what is the area going to do?
"I'd like to see them poll if readers miss PA ha ha."
I damn sure don't...
Many regional water shortages, massive numbers of asylum seekers worldwide, no evidence of cuts in greenhouse gasses...but no one talks about the root cause-too many people.
@ 3:10
I won't disagree that there are too many people on the planet, but I think we will agree that the average American's attitudes and habits of over consumption are a far greater contributor than the starving peasants in "pick a country". People in other countries live for weeks and months on what Americans go through in a day.
From Reuters article: "Americans throw away nearly half their food every year, waste worth roughly $165 billion annually." Consider all the water, fuel and energy involved in that waste. All the resources stripped from countries around the world, funneled to the US to support the US lifestyle.
And, each one of us here contributes.
If we called ourselves what we really are, consumers, we might introduce a mindful attitude. Just walk down the pet aisle in any market with a critical eye. Jeez, so many choices for that substitute for human companionship.
It looks like the United States per capita GHG production is #10 in the world for the period 2010-2014. We are not numero uno according to the World Bank stats. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?order=wbapi_data_value_2010%20wbapi_data_value%20wbapi_data_value-first&sort=asc
Of course. If you take an island nation of 100 people, and develop an oil well on that island, the "per capita GHG" generation is going to rate very high, on that kind of scale. Compared to the daily emissions generated by the 16 lanes of single occupant cars on one single day in Los Angeles, the actual amount of CO2 coming from that island nation is a tiny percentage point. Those kinds of figures are really limited in their value.
You REALLY think, as the stats you reference, that tiny island nation of Trinadad and Tobago is a bigger producer of GHGs than the US??
But, if you compare the population of each country and the GHGs they generate, and compare apples to apples, you see the USA ranks numero uno, and in a big way.
This graph shows a more realistic picture, but even it is not "apples-to-apples":
http://www.statista.com/statistics/271748/the-largest-emitters-of-co2-in-the-world/
It ranks China as number one at 23%, and USA second at 14%. But given a couple factors, is this as clear as it could be? First, China's population is 4 times that of the US. So adjusting for that, one quarter of China's 23% would put it at around 6%, and we see the US actually, proportionately, produces twice as much at 14%.
But even this is not really accurate. Who thinks all those US and European factories that moved from the US to China to take advantage of cheap labor, less regulation, etc are producing all those goods for Chinese consumption? How much of the CO2 and other pollution is actually generated by US and European companies operating in China? How much of Chinese production is actually FOR China?
Is it fair to say the pollution generated by US companies using cheap labor to produce goods for the US market is attributable to China? Yes, to the extent they allow it. But technically, no.
India has surpassed everyone and is now the worlds largest importer of thermal coal for their power generation.
But in Port Angeles we are trying hard to bring some of the most toxic waste to our most pristine environment by our lovely port commissioner McAleer. Now the Feds like Cantwell want to help our lovely commissioner pollute our home.
Sure would be nice to have those lakes back above the gone dams to dip in to for fire fighting water.
India is striving to be the "new China", luring international manufacturing with cheap labor, etc. But, like many other countries now, it is also pursuing renewable power at an aggressive rate. It seeks to quadruple it's renewable capacity to 175 gigawatts by 2022. That is 7 years from now. Currently, India 34 Gigawatts of renewable energy capacity.
By contrast, the US has no federally defined renewable energy targets. Last figure I saw, the US had 17 gigawatts of solar.
But, Oil is the US number one export now. And, we've got fracking going on, everywhere. If you haven't seen how fracking has taken over the US landscape, do take the time to look into this. Really, you won't believe the scale of it. Towns surrounded on all sides by wells. People unable to sell their homes now (Who wants to spend $400K to look at and smell a flaring gas well?), and banks won't lend on them. Talk about CRAZY!
This Year Is Headed for the Hottest on Record, by a Long Shot
www.bloomberg.com/.../this-year-is-headed-for-the-hottest-on-record-b...
Jun 18, 2015 - Last month was the hottest May on record, and the past five months were the warmest start to a year on record, according to new data released ..
Oh, what do they know? They are all alarmists. Everything is fine. The Peninsula Daily News says so.
Local news the PDN didn't think was important enough for you to know about:
http://nwifc.org/2015/05/jamestown-sklallam-reconnects-creek-to-strait-to-save-fish/
What? Me worry?
If you lived in Forks, you would be worrying.
In 1878 John Weley Powell spelled out the west's water scarcity and his watershed management ideas to sustain limited development. Did ANYBODY, ANYWHERE listen?
The Elwha is dropping like a rock today. Guess the recent heat wave is taking effect.
Honestly. That stuff's all online. The Elwha stands exactly where it was a week ago.
Anon 5:02 What are you looking at?
Are you paying any attention to what is going on in the area, with things being described as "critically dry", "record low", "record drought", etc?
With no snow pack, and no snow, where do you think the water is going to come from? Why are the wells that supply Forks "dropping rapidly"?
Usually, if you don't keep adding more water into the system, it dries up. Like it is.
I'm a bit puzzled by the person who keeps trying to tell everyone the water situation is fine, and there is nothing to worry about. What they are saying goes against everything that is happening. Listen to the radio, and there are endless stories of rivers at record lows. July 4th fireworks cancelled because things are so dry.
Why is this person telling people not to worry, when they should be preparing before things go really badly? How is that helping?
The river flow may be the same as it was a week ago but it's 1/4 of where it was this time last year, and there are 3 long hot months with no rain to go.
From a local realtor:
"When you go to sell a home or acreage, you must disclose to a buyer about the water situation here."
Good luck with that.
PUD people now saying Deer Park, Township and O'Brien area could lose water within a week.
I'm looking at the US Geological Survey's Elwha gage. Yesterday it was exactly where it was a week before. A small rain last week did that. A decent rain can bump it up for ten days or more. I'm also looking at the NOAA National River Forecast Center's forecasts.
And today, I'm looking at the National Weather Service's Advanced Hydrological Services forecast for the Elwha, just updated for the next twelve weeks, based on current and predicted weather and river conditions. They say we will see the river drop another 6-8 inches by late Sept. Flow will drop to 185 cfs or so by then. Their previous forecast, in mid-May, was right on the nail for June 30.
185 cfs will be rough on some fish. Last year it sat at 215-225 for almost a month. The City uses less than 4 cfs in Sept. Nippon runs around 12 cfs (at capacity), occasionally peaking to 20.
There is of course extreme fire danger all over. Only rain will fix that. Has nothing to do with what's in the Elwha. Separate issue.
The NWS does this forecasting year-round at 4000 sites, and have done for decades. They predict river flooding really well. They also predict drought really well. This is why the City can say we're not running out of water. Of course you can say whatever you like. I will leave it that. I can see a lot of people have more fun doing it their way.
Yes, I have been watching the USGS Elwha guage as well. It stands at 366 cfs this morning. It dropped almost 40 cfs in one day, just a few days ago. And, thinking that sprinkle of rain actually did more than "keep down the dust" (to quote the Forks official) is revealing.
Of course, I disagree with your views. The area has never seen conditions as they are now. People in Upper Fairview are being told they have a week or so of water. In the first week of July! Did that happen last year?
Forks is saying their well levels are dropping rapidly. Did that happen the first week of July, last year?
But, it is supposedly a free country. People can choose to believe what ever they wish. Based on what I'm seeing, I'm looking into where I can move to by September, if not sooner. You may like the prospects of no bathing, no water to flush toilets, no laundry, and lining up at the water trucks, but after a week or two, that is going to get real old. Two months or more of it?
Upper Fairview may give us our first look at how the area responds to this.
Post a Comment
<< Home