Energista - Trading fish for carbon emissions - Comments

whoops

Tue, 24 Apr 2007 15:23:48 -0500

forgot to log-in - that comment is mine.

farmers

nobody — Tue, 24 Apr 2007 15:20:01 -0500

Rane & I had a class debate on this issue - part of the problem is also the water provided for irrigation by the dams. Many of the areas in the NW do not receive enough rain to support agricultural endeavors, thus they rely on irrigation. It is a complicated issue, so I agree with you, Joe, that it makes sense to take it on a case-by-case basis. I wonder whether it is an issue that will have a successful compromise, though, since the participants seem sharply divided and have been for years.

Trading fish for carbon emissions

Joe — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 15:14:18 -0500

The NY Times has an interesting article today on the debate in the Pacific Northwest over removing hydroelectric dams to restore wild salmon populations. The article talks about how Indians and commercial fishermen have been hurt by the decimated salmon populations, and how farmers could stand to lose if the dams are removed My personal position is this should be carefully evaluated on a case by case basis. If the dam is fairly small, then it may be worth removing. If the dam is relatively large, then firm plans must be developed to replace it with other renewable sources. Simply saying replace it with solar or wind is not sufficient since those are intermittent sources. If dams are haphazardly removed, it is likely they will be replaced with more coal or natural gas plants.