Bigger isn't alway better when it comes to energy in Alaska

[unhappycamper]

http://www.adn.com/article/20140902/bigger-isnt-alway-better-when-it-comes-energy-alaska

?

The Susitna River below the proposed Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project on the Susitna River north west of Talkeetna. The dam site is at mile 184 of the Susitna River.

Bigger isn't alway better when it comes to energy in Alaska
John Schandelmeier
September 2, 2014

PAXSON -- It is easy to become entrenched in our thinking. Alaska is an enormous place. We have colossal mountains and big rivers. The tundra and forests seem endless. Alaskans think nothing of a weekend 500-mile round trip to Chitna to dipnet a couple dozen salmon. Think big or stay home.

We have a mammoth oil pipeline. We are deliberating the feasibility of a huge gas project. And we are considering building one of the largest hydroelectric projects in the world. Does the Susitna Dam make sense, though? Maybe we should contemplate more small projects.

The Susitna project can be looked at in many ways, as the many op-ed articles pro and con have pointed out. I’d like folks to look at things a little bit differently.

Wildlife habitat is often foremost in my mind. The Susitna Dam will draw down a couple hundred feet over the winter months. The peak drop will be in the spring when the Nelchina caribou are migrating to their calving grounds. Our Fish and Game Advisory Committee at Paxson questioned the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) about the possible effects of a steeply slanting ice sheet on traveling caribou. We were told that there would not be a slanting ice sheet. “The ice will drop straight down with the water.” Really?