What’s the dam problem anyway?

There is a serious dam problem in the United States negatively affecting the biodiversity of the future.

Hydroelectric energy constitutes a small sum of U.S. power yet contributes a large amount to the depletion and the total extinction of biodiversity.

So why do we use it? For a couple of reasons: ultimately, hydroelectric power is a renewable energy source that requires very little start up energy and utilizes natural flowing water, lakes and streams. Secondly, the longevity of hydroelectric dams – a span of 50 to 100 years – benefits multiple generations by yielding an excellent electricity constant.

In 2012, hydroelectric power contributed to roughly seven percent of the yearly national energy output, according to the U.S Energy Information Agency. This may sound like a huge energy production, but 276,250,000 kilowatt hours (2012 national energy output) is theoretically enough to power only 315,000 households for a month.

Although this source of power is significant, and the energy output and low maintenance cost seem tantalizing, the negatives surely outweigh the positives.

High initial investment costs equate to troves of money from sometimes less than willing constituencies. Variations in stream quality dilute fresh, drinkable water and turn it putrid and unusable. Bottlenecking the natural flow and building reservoirs backlogs the water onto wildlife habitats which drown and destroy terrestrial ecosystems and culturally indigenous populations.

In some cases, the depletion of biodiversity is irreplaceable and more than “20 percent of the 10,000 known freshwater fish species have become extinct or imperiled,” according to National Geographic.

The problem is greater emphasized close to home in the Palouse.

Due to the intense human presence, damming of the Snake River and the incessant need for agriculture, the Palouse Prairie is one of the greatest endangered ecosystems yielding all but one percent of its former biodiversity state.

Moreover, the four dams that choke the Snake River – Ice Harbor, Lower Monumental, Little Goose, and Lower Granite – are palpable evidence of the worse construction project to touch the state of Washington since the Army Corps of Engineers built them in the 1960s as tax dollars go toward the preservation of these dams without adequate economic supplementation.  

Clearly hydroelectric dams do not appear to be the error-free utilities we think they are.

So how do we go about changing such disastrous circumstances?

We could start by implementing restrictions on the construction of dams or greater regulations on wetlands and freshwater withdrawal. The only problem here is that, according to the Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, of the 75,000 national dams, only roughly 2,400 produce power.

Moreover, federal entities own and operate only 52 percent of the 2,400; private and public utilities, municipalities and others own the remaining 48 percent. Regulation becomes extremely hard-pressed when private businesses and cities are involved – not to mention a “McCarthyesque” approach by members of congress claiming that the removal of dams is merely a left-wing, nation-wide demolition project to restore earth to her natural splendor.  

The elimination of dams is relentlessly harder given the laundry list of requirements from local, state, and federal governments including congressional removal approval. However, grassroots movements in association with tribal governments and pro-environmentalists continue to seek the resolve and restoration of heinous environments that will surely plague the future.

To merit meaningful action, this needs to be a national matter. If congressional approval is a necessity, then the education of dam’s effects on the wildlife and indigenous cultures therein should also be a necessity. With an ever-depleting water supply, and nationally endangered species of biodiversity, it is only a matter of time before the myopia of the past leads to the extinction of progression for the future.