Klamath Dam Removal talking points

Dam removal will SAVE ratepayers money

PacifiCorp head Patrick Reiten is now saying that dam removal is the cheaper option for the utility and its customers.
Because keeping the dams would cost more than removing them, energy analysts with the California Energy Commission (CEC) sent a signed letter to Public Utilities Commissions in three states asking the PUCs to deny any ratepayer hikes for costly upgrades associated with relicensing the Klamath dams. In fact, they suggested only approving rate changes for decommissioning.
The CEC concluded keeping the dams could cost ratepayers $100 million more than dismantling them. Their report states, "Decommissioning the Klamath Hydro Project and procuring replacement power for 30 years would be less costly to PacifiCorp and its ratepayers than relicensing the project and mitigating its impacts."
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission released another analysis confirming the economics. According to FERC, Pacific Power customers will save $210 million by removing the dams.
The CEC and FERC studies do not factor in millions of taxpayer dollars in disaster relief for commercial fisherman that lost their livelihoods to the 2006 and 2008 salmon closures.

We know enough about the science and safety of dam removal to get the ball rolling

Dam removal opponents sometimes claim that we don't know if dam removal will save fish, or if it will be safe for local people. In fact, scientists are certain that these dams block salmon from half of their watershed, increase water temperatures that breed fish-killing diseases, and cause dangerous outbreaks of toxic algae.
The US Fish and Wildlife Service identified the lack of fish passage beyond Iron Gate Dam as a "significant impact" to Klamath salmon runs.
Meanwhile, consulting engineers have analyzed dam sediment for toxicity and deposition dynamics and found little risk from dam removal to downriver communities.
Dam removal would not take place until 2020, leaving plenty of time to continue scientific analysis and ensure safe removal.
Dams are being removed safely throughout the West. Check out PGE's safe removal of Marmot Dam on Oregon's Sandy River. Or the National Park Service's plan to take out Glines Canyon Dam, a 210-foot dinosaur on the Elwha River. Montanans will remove a major dam near Missoula, and it's toxic sludge, with little controversy.

We're a grass roots coalition speaking up for tribes, citizens, and commercial fishermen

The campaign to remove the Klamath dams is led by a unique and diverse collaborative of the Klamath's Native Tribes, the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, and river advocacy groups.
We are local people adversely affected by PacifiCorp's corporate politics and poor environmental practices. Commercial fishing closures in Oregon and California, due to failing Klamath salmon runs, have devastated fishing families, costing taxpayers millions in disaster relief. Native Tribes struggle to continue their salmon-based subsistence lifestyle, commercial salmon fishing, and salmon-centered ceremonial culture.

Dam removal will bring economic benefits to local communities

The dam removal gravy train has left the station - and it's time for Siskiyou County to get on board. Supervisors should be advocating for local contracts and ensuring dam removal dollars feed the local economy, not fighting the inevitable.
Dam removal means a $200-500 million investment in deconstruction, which means new jobs in Siskiyou County and a huge cash influx to local businesses.
After that, as salmon runs recover, toxic algae disappears, and the river regains its natural look, fishermen and recreationalists will flock to the Klamath. The local tourism and angling industry is currently in decline, and this investment in the “restoration economy” will turn that around, drawing visitors to raft, explore and fish the Klamath’s famous waters.
As economics studies typically predict, riverfront property values will likely increase as water quality improves, and struggling coastal fishermen will get their jobs back.
Rafting and angling businesses currently face seasonal closures of the river to recreational contact due to highly toxic algae blooms that are released from PacifiCorp's dams into 190 miles of the Klamath River.

Large-scale hydro is not necessarily clean and renewable.

Published science reveals that the world’s largest dams release 104 million metric tons of methane annually, the single largest source of human-related methane emissions on the planet.
Scientists have made preliminary estimates based on toxic algae and water quality conditions on the Klamath, and found that up to 1/8 of the carbon emissions displaced by the Klamath Hydro Project are regained from methane emissions.
When you factor in dwindling salmon runs, public health warnings from toxic algae, and large scale outbreaks of fish-killing diseases, the dams are looking pretty dirty.
Economic studies show that PacifiCorp can replace these dams with truly renewable energy sources at the same costs as it would take to engineer fish mitigation measures.

References:

Studies and information on Klamath dams, fish, and toxic algae