Hydro Plant, Letter to the Editor 2012

I'm posting some old letters to the editor. This is so I can remember what I wrote, and to keep myself honest.  I'm posting them in the order I wrote them so this goes back a couple of years.

The more things change…..

This is from the Fall of 2012:

Thanks to all of you who responded to my previous letter asking for more information on the Hydro Plant. I've gotten some excellent information from both sides of the issue (in private and in public). The Chamber presentation at the Limelight and the special issue of "Cross Currents" were particularly informative. What a great job of keeping the Electorate informed and I'm proud to be part of such a passionate and concerned community.

If I had the option to write an "advisory" on the ballot it would be this:  Add two things to the Hydro plan. The first is add oversight by experts in stream bed restoration who focus on connected habitats. The second is get some large scale battery storage for Aspen (invite Donald Sadoway here to test drive his liquid metal batteries).

Here's why:The 800 lb. gorilla in the room is Water Right Law. Above all the other questions on this issue this one will have the most permanent and far reaching effect. Is my choice really picking which City gets to ruin Castle and Maroon creeks, Aspen or one on the Front Range?  This needs a Water Lawyer (which I am not) and I haven't gotten a definitive answer. The worst case scenario is that the second the City ramps down the Hydro initiative some other Entity will snag those Rights and drain both Maroon and Castle down to dust. Anyone who thinks that is a specious argument hasn't seen Colorado Water Law at work.

There are plenty of other questions.

1. Is it an Environmental disaster? Yes.  I do believe that the plant running at full power will kill the riparian zone of Maroon Creek - taking the flow down 7 months of the year  to minimum for fish will kill it. I believe this because I've seen it happen in other small stream beds in the area and I've been talking to permaculture experts (proponents of Van Clothier and Bill Zeedyk) about what it would take to restore riparian zones around my own little gully on Missouri Heights. It's possible, maybe,  but it ain't cheap.

2. Am I throwing away my vote on an "advisory" which has no political teeth? No, there are no magic ESP decoder rings handed out to Representatives when then enter office. If I don't let them know my opinion then it isn't a Republic.  I don't believe this vote will change how the City proceeds with the Hydro Plant. I believe the City Council majority tends to vote with our Mayor and our Mayor is solidly for this advisory. Why then is the discussion so heated? The Hydro vote is basically one of Confidence in our Representatives.  It will also be fodder for an ongoing law suit so there is more than just  pride at stake.  Regardless of how you feel about the Electorate being used as a pawn in litigation (I believe both sides are guilty of this)  you can decide which side of the law suit you favor and vote that way.

3. Overspending? Yep, I'm shocked, my local government has overspent it's budget, shocked I tell you shocked. First. Time. Ever.

 I'm convinced that even with the fiscal ballooning of the Bond that our financial outlook is better if we proceed.  Hydro pays back longer and better than any other Green energy alternative currently available.  I asked a local Solar installer and their estimate was  $10 million and 30 acres will get you 4 megawatts. Solar does "burn out" over time. Hydro running full blast will get you 5 megawatts and those turbines last.

4.The motives of both proponents and opponents are rife with hidden agendas? I'm shocked I tell you shocked. First. Time. Ever. Throw facts my way, not aspersions; this isn't high school.

5.I'm convinced that multiple sources of non- coal, non-fossil fuel energy is good thing (belt and suspenders).

6.I am equally convinced that killing Maroon Creek isn't worth paying less for electricity.

7. Can we have it all? Can we keep the riparian zones in Castle and Maroon and get Hydro and keep the Water Rights? Possibly, but I don't believe the current monitoring system is sufficient and we will have to  spend a lot more money to slow down the streams so that they meander. I say this because no-one has mentioned measuring soil moisture content on the banks of either creek. The measurements are for water flow, water temperature and aquatic organisms - not how the stream feeds the vegetation on it's banks and that is what determines the quality of the habitat.

8. Does the "slow start" protect the stream?  I doubt it. It's counterintuitive but by lowering the water level when it's at it's highest you're starving the banks of the stream- and that's what a good riparian system needs- not too much not too little- flooding on the low lying areas on either side of the stream. Add to this that no-one has mentioned our changing weather patterns which will likely reduce the number of inches of moisture per year while increasing the number of flood events (like Hunter Creek in 2006) the streams will probably be cut deeper and "dewater"  the vegetation on the banks even more. As we begin to depend on Alternative Energy sources which are less "reliable" we need to pay attention to ways of storing Energy for usage "on demand".

Let the Water do the Work

9. Which brings me full circle: Under Colorado Water Law is my choice really picking which City gets to ruin Castle and Maroon creeks? I hate this question. It's Sophie's Choice but you get to shoot both the kids, oh joy.

I want some good to come of this and there is only one action I can think of which is a positive action.

Please don't ignore the 800 lb gorilla in the room: use it or lose it draconian Water Law. As long as our Feudal system encourages Senior Rights holders to drain the river dry to guard their "share" then there can be no vote of Confidence in that system. I may still be confused about the Hydro debate but I am not confused about this. Please, write your State Representative and tell them we want riparian areas protected, we want stream flows defended, we want some of that 2.8 billion in lottery money to go for protecting the water as well as "parks, recreation, open space, conservation education and wildlife projects" because without the water there is no wildlife to protect, open space for recreation, or a park to conserve. You don't have to be a voter in Aspen to voice that opinion you just need to be a voter in Colorado. It's a Western Slope issue, We can, and should, stand together on this one.

http://savethecolorado.org