What we've been saying for some time is now obvious. The "management plan" in use by the US Army Corps of Engineers does not work and has not for many years now. There is a saying that accurately explains our situation. THE HEIGHT OF INSANITY IS TO CONTINUE DOING THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN EXPECTING THE RESULTS TO CHANGE. If you have any input to the Corps please see if you can get them to listen to reason because our best efforts to get them to heed our warnings have failed up to now.
The Corps has failed to live up to one of the 7 responsibilities they have in managing Lake Thurmond. Once the lake drops 6' recreation is badly damaged. What is so disconcerting is that the Corps could have dropped release rates to 3600cfs back when the lake level started falling and we would be at full pool. The only responsibility that would be impacted by such a change is power production but this is more than offset by avoiding damage to the economy around the lake. The Corps insists that economics is not one of their responsibilities but such a claim is ludicrous. First the only defense for holding power production at the expense of lake level is the economics of buying more expensive power elsewhere. But if you compare the savings in power costs to the economic losses around the lake, increased power cost is dwarfed by eonomic losses. In other words it is my opinion that the responsibility concerning power production is strictly an economic one which defeats the Corps claim of no responsibility in that arena. There are other arguments why power production should not be put ahead of recreation and economic concerns:
Thurmond is a peaking power source. As such it is much better to have a full lake when high demand hits than to have the lake at a greatly reduced level and be unable to provide peaking power.
Hydro power is desirable because it is a renewable energy source. But if you are releasing more water to produce power than is coming to the basin from rain it is no longer a renewable energy source.
In summary if the Corps would make a simple change to their drought plan all the problems we repeatedly experience from severe droughts could be avoided and all responsibilities the Corps has would be met without any problems except for possible temporary reductions of power production. These temporary reductions in power reduction would cost far less than the economic damages done around Lake Thurmond with the current drought plan.
Jerry Clontz, Spokesman for Save Our Lakes Now
No comments:
Post a Comment