Energy policy — hydroelectric: Projects in Silverton and Ouray score dough for micro hydroelectric

From the Telluride Daily Planet (Katie Klingsporn):

Telluride Energy was awarded a $20,000 grant from the USDA Rural Development Renewable Energy for America Program this fall to install an 8-kilowatt micro-hydro turbine at the Mayflower Mill in Silverton. The company will be working with the San Juan County Historical Society to tap into water that flows through an existing pipeline in the Arrastra Gulch a couple miles east of the town. Once completed, the project will reduce carbon dioxide emissions by roughly 80,000 pounds annually, Johnson said.

In Ouray, meanwhile, the city was last week awarded a $30,000 grant from the Colorado Governor’s Energy Office to install a 20-kilowatt micro-hydro unit at the city-owned hot springs pool. Telluride Energy will be managing the project, which will again entail using an existing pipeline. The electrical output produced will offset the electric use at the pool, and over the 30-year life of the project it will save the city an estimated $370,000 while cutting approximately 224,000 pounds of annual carbon dioxide emissions.

More hydroelectric coverage here.

Ouray: Stimulus dough to help with funding 20 kilowatt micro hydroelectric generation plant

From The Telluride Watch:

The City of Ouray has been awarded a $30,000 grant from the Colorado Governors Energy Office to install a 20 kilowatt micro-hydro generating unit to be located at the Ouray Hot Springs Pool…

The project will take advantage of an existing, currently underutilized pipeline adjacent to the pool site. The electrical output from the system will be net-metered to offset the electricity use of the pool complex, saving the city approximately $12,000 in annual electricity expenditures. The powerhouse for the project will be constructed by a shop class from Ouray High School. Once completed, the project will provide an added tourist attraction to visitors to Ouray Hot Springs. Over the 30 year life of the project, the city will save approximately $370,000 – not accounting for expected electricity price increases. The project will also provide an opportunity for local students to participate in development of a clean energy project, and will avoid approximately 224,000 pounds of annual carbon dioxide emissions.

More hydroelectric coverage here and here.

Carter Lake: Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Carter Lake hydroelectric retrofit update

From the Loveland Reporter Herald (Pamela Dickman):

The water district is on track to begin building a hydroelectric plant late next year that would provide power to the Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association by spring 2012. “We’re taking advantage of the elevation difference between the water level at Carter Lake and the canal downstream,” said Carl Brouwer, project manager with Northern Water. “Right now all that energy is just dissipated. We want to turn that into hydroelectric energy.” Northern Water received preliminary approval in November from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. And Wednesday, the Larimer County Planning Commission gave its nod to the project.

The small facility would be built at the south dam next to a new water outlet in an area that already has been disturbed by construction. And it would use water that already is being transferred, so it wouldn’t affect levels in Carter Lake, Brouwer said…

The plant would produce about 10 million kilowatt hours of electricity per year. “It’s roughly enough to supply a couple thousand homes,” Brouwer said.

More hydroelectric coverage here and here.

Hoover Dam: Quaggas in the pipes

From The New York Times (Scott Streater):

The organisms, which grow to about [20 millimetres], are clogging water lines that are used to cool the 17 massive hydropower turbines at Hoover Dam and have already forced dam operators to temporarily shut down the power plant that supplies electricity to 1.6 million people in southern Nevada, Arizona and California.

The mussels have caused similar problems at the downstream Davis Dam in Lake Mohave and Parker Dam in Lake Havasu, both of which provide electricity for thousands of people in Arizona and California. The mussels have also threatened to clog water intake lines in Lake Mead operated by the Southern Nevada Water System that supply water to more than 2 million people in the Las Vegas area.

“We’re very concerned,” said Fred Nibling, a Reclamation biologist in Denver who is helping lead agency efforts to combat the mussel invasion…

So the bureau has applied to U.S. EPA for an exemption waiver that would allow it to use an experimental pesticide that contains the freshwater bacteria Pseudomonas fluorescens, which in laboratory tests has shown great promise to kill quagga mussels, and their invasive cousins zebra mussels, without harming other organisms.

More invasive species coverage here.

Cortez: 2010 budget includes funding microhydroelectric plant

From the Cortez Journal (Steve Grazier):

Additionally, Cortez plans to complete construction of a micro-hydroelectric plant at its water treatment plant. Construction of the hydroelectric plant is funded by a $500,000 grant and approximately $1.4 million in loan funds.

More hydroelectric coverage here and here.

Telluride Energy scores $20,000 for hydroelectric plant at Mayflower Mill

From the Silverton Standard & The Miner (Mark Esper):

Telluride Energy has been awarded a $20,000 grant from the USDA Rural Development Renewable Energy for America Program to install an 8-kilowatt micro-hydro turbine at the Mayflower Mill near Silverton. The San Juan County Historical Society is in the process of developing the small power plant. “I am excited that USDA Rural Development can play a part in this project,” said Jim Isgar, USDA Colorado State director. “Through the REAP program, loan guarantees and grants can be used for renewable energy systems, energy efficiency improvements, feasibility studies and energy audits.” The project will utilize the currently unused energy available in the existing water supply pipeline which flows down Arrastra Gulch to supply water to the Mayflower Mill. “Once completed, the project will generate local clean energy, reducing carbon dioxide emissions by approximately 80,000 pounds annually and enhancing fire protection for a National Historic Landmark,” said Kurt Johnson of Telluride Energy.

More hydroelectric coverage here and here.

Aspen: City and area residents debating the benefits and possible streamflow loss of proposed hydroelectric facility

From the Associated Press via The Aspen Times via the Grand Junction Free Press:

City officials are taking public comments on the proposal and say a more comprehensive review is possible if there is enough concern or there are issues they haven’t considered. Aspen wants to build a 1,880-square-foot hydropower plant that would draw water from Castle and Maroon creeks to generate electricity. The 1.05 megawatt plant is expected to increase production of electricity by 5.5 million kilowatt hours annually. That would provide energy for several hundred households. City officials say getting that much electricity from a renewable source would eliminate an estimated 5,167 tons of carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power for a 0.6 percent communitywide decrease.

Some area residents, however, are concerned about the potential effects on wildlife and water rights if too much water is diverted from the creeks. Paul Noto, an Aspen-based water attorney, who represents several residents who live along Castle Creek, said if Aspen touts itself as an environmental leader, it ought to submit the project to a full environmental review.

More hydroelectric coverage here and here.

Aspen: Recap of public meeting for planned hydroelectric installation on Castle Creek

From The Aspen Times (Carolyn Sackariason):

Nearly two dozen people attended a public meeting held Friday concerning the Castle Creek Hydroelectric Project. City officials, paid consultants, hydrologists and aquatic biologists were on hand to explain the project and answer questions about the project. The purpose of the meeting was to determine whether the city should circumvent a full environmental review through a permit process with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). As it stands now, the city plans to apply for what’s known as a “conduit exemption,” which wouldn’t require a full-blown environmental review. But the city’s public works director Phil Overeyender said if public comment, which will be taken for the next 60 days, raises enough concern or potential effects that the city hasn’t considered, a full environmental review could be possible.

More hydroelectric coverage here and here.

Public comment sought on Moffat Project

Here’s the release from Denver Water (Stacy Chesney):

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has released the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Denver Water’s Moffat Collection System Project, which proposes to enlarge Gross Reservoir north of Boulder.

Denver Water is proposing the project to help resolve three major water supply challenges it is facing:

1. the risk of a near-term water supply shortfall;
2. the risk of running out of water in the north end of its system during a single dry year;
3. and a serious imbalance in its water collection system, in which about 80 percent of the supply exists on the south side of the system.

The project is part of Denver Water’s multi-pronged water strategy to increase supply and decrease demand by implementing an aggressive conservation plan, completing and expanding its recycled water distribution system and developing additional water supply.

“Our customers have done an excellent job of conserving water, and we have been completing our recycled water system,” said David Little, director of planning. “These strategies are helping extend our supplies into the future. It is imperative, however, that we develop additional supply to correct the imbalance in our system and secure water for our future. We believe the best solution is to produce new water supply by expanding an existing reservoir instead of building a new reservoir.”

The Moffat Collection System Project proposes raising Gross Dam by approximately 125 feet. Gross Reservoir is fed by tributaries of the Colorado River and South Boulder Creek, and feeds the north side of Denver Water’s system. If approved, the Moffat Project would produce 18,000 acre-feet of new supply — enough water for roughly 45,000 households annually.

“We have been working with interest groups and local agencies to develop plans to offset environmental impacts of the Moffat Project and to provide significant environmental enhancements for the communities affected by the project,” said Little. “Denver Water is committed to encouraging wise use of the water we serve and to using our facilities and resources to enhance the environment in the watersheds we use.”

Denver Water, Grand County, the cities of Boulder and Lafayette, environmental groups and others still are discussing the proposed environmental enhancements, which go far beyond what the Corps requires for mitigating impacts caused by the Moffat Collection System Project. These enhancements will benefit tributaries to the Colorado River in Grand County and South Boulder Creek in Boulder County, among other locations.

The enhancements offered by Denver Water include:

- up to 2,000 acre-feet of additional water for augmenting streamflow in Grand County;
- $2 million for improving water quality in Grand County;
- $2 million for stream modifications to improve aquatic habitat in Grand County; and
- a partnership with Boulder and Lafayette to provide 5,000 acre-feet of storage space in an enlarged Gross Reservoir to improve aquatic habitat in South Boulder Creek.

Denver Water is encouraging public participation in the two federal regulatory processes occurring for the Moffat Collection System Project. The two processes are:

An amendment to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Gross Reservoir hydropower license<br.
An application for a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
The Draft EIS and Draft FERC Hydropower License Amendment were published Friday, Oct. 30. Each document has a 90-day comment period ending Jan. 28, 2010.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will hold three Public Hearings on the Draft EIS. At each location, Denver Water will hold an Open House from 4 to 6 p.m. The Public Hearings begin at 6 p.m.:

Tues., Dec. 1 — Boulder Country Club, 7350 Clubhouse Road, Boulder, CO 80301
Wed., Dec. 2 — Inn at Silver Creek, 62927 U.S. Highway 40, Granby, CO 80446
Thurs., Dec. 3 — Doubletree Hotel, 3203 Quebec Street, Denver, CO 80207

See more information on how to comment on the Draft EIS and Draft FERC Amendment.

More Moffat Collection System Project coverage here.

Creede: Hydroelectric project retrofit scores stimulus dough

From The Aspen Times (Scott Condon):

[Aspenite Ruthie Brown] secured a $308,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and a $600,000 low interest loan to install a 340-kilowatt hydroelectric project at her family’s A.E. Humphrey Ranch in Creede. The system will produce roughly enough power to supply 230 homes once it is completed in spring 2011. Brown said she is a strong supporter of renewable energy and wanted to demonstrate to ranchers in the San Luis Valley that hydroelectric power is a cost-effective investment. Her family is negotiating with a local utility to sell the power generated back to the grid. That will provide the income to maintain the historic ranch and keep the land undeveloped for additional generations, she said. Her family tapped into a special program by the agriculture department to award $62.5 million in stimulus money to grants and loans for renewable energy and energy efficiency projects. The funds were awarded to 705 farms and ranches across the country. Flux Farms of Carbondale, a consulting firm on renewable energy projects, is helping Brown with the project…

The cost of the project is about $900,000. Utilizing the existing dam that her great grandfather constructed 90 years ago was key to making it affordable, Brown said. She is projecting that the project will show a small profit after just one year, thanks to the grant and low-interest loan through the agriculture department. Brown is working with state Sen. Gail Swartz of Snowmass Village to streamline the permit process for micro-hydro projects so that more landowners in Colorado will pursue them. Construction at the Humphreys Ranch is expected to begin next year.

More hydroelectric coverage here and here.

Delta-Montrose Electric Association hopes to provide 5% of maximum annual demand with small hydroelectric generation plants

From the Telluride Watch (Alan Best):

The co-operative announced [recently] that it will apply to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which administers the Gunnison Tunnel, to develop enough electricity to equal 5 percent of the co-op’s maximum annual demand. As the energy landscape changes, other jurisdictions across Colorado and the West have similarly been re-examining their assets. Small hydro-projects produce far less electricity than most coal-fired power plants, or the giant dams on the Colorado River. But they can do so without generating carbon dioxide emissions and often without increasing other environmental impacts…

The projects, says Joani Matranga, Western Slope representative for the Governor’s Energy Office, would use primarily existing infrastructure and diversions, resulting in minimal environmental impacts. “We’re not building any new dams,” she says. “We think there is still plenty of potential to go after.”[...]

The effort to harness the irrigation canal east of Montrose is part of a broad effort to reverse this decades-old trend toward centralized generation of electricity using fossil fuels. Delta-Montrose Electric Assn. officials say that local power generation produces local jobs, and will insulate electrical customers from rising costs for coal. Those costs will almost certainly rise even more if the federal government adopts a cap-and-trade regime on carbon dioxide emissions, as proposed in the Waxman-Markey bill.

“If this project moves forward through the federal permitting process – and I am confident it will – DMEA’s membership will benefit in many ways, “ said DMEA General Manager Dan McClendon. “Money we would have otherwise exported out of our community for wholesale electricity will be retained in our own community,” he said. He went on to explain that even without grants or other financial assistance, the cost – about $25 million to $30 million – will deliver electricity comparable to the existing wholesale rate…

Unlike some proposals of the past, DMEA has no plans to harness the full power of the falling water. Water from the Gunnison drops 372 feet in as series of churning, roiling steps as the irrigation ditch, called the South Canal, winds around the dun-colored adobe hills east of Montrose. DMEA plans to yoke power from just 120 feet in that fall…

Some small towns – including Hotchkiss and Cortez – have installed small hydro components into their existing water delivery systems, to harness the power of falling water. Aspen does the same, and Hines, that city’s utility engineer, points out that even towns in the Midwest with water towers could tap the power of falling water. Elsewhere in southwestern Colorado, Eric Jacobson has refurbished several small hydro-power plants, such as a 500-kilowatt plant at Bridal Veil Falls in Telluride and a 150-kilowatt plant in Ouray. A variety of other small hydro projects are also scattered across mountainous areas of Colorado.

More coverage from The Telluride Watch (Beverly Corbell):

Both President Teddy Roosevelt and President Howard Taft spoke at Saturday’s 100th anniversary celebration of the opening of the Gunnison Tunnel, but the biggest news of the day came from President Dan McClendon. McClendon, president of the board of directors of the Delta-Montrose Electric Association, announced that his cooperative and the Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association, sponsors of the event, would collaborate to build a hydroelectric plant on South Canal as it leaves the Gunnison Tunnel. “This will bring clean, renewable energy into DMEA’s system and will be one of the largest renewable electric facilities in western Colorado,” McClendon said. “It will keep money in our community and keep millions of dollars here in our area.”

More hydroelectric coverage here and here.

Colorado River District: ‘Dust in the Wind and Other Winds of Change’ seminar recap

From the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Gary Harmon):

…the U.S. Department of the Interior is conducting a water-supply and demand study of the basin from Wyoming and Colorado to California, an Interior Department official said Friday at the Colorado River District’s water seminar. The exact form of the study will be shaped by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and a variety of stakeholders from around the basin, said Anne Castle, assistant secretary for water and science. “We all know that every drop of the Colorado River is allocated,” Castle said. That makes it all the more important to put the water in the river to the best use as the population of people dependent on it grows and the amount of water it carries shrinks as a result of drought and climate change…

Castle, who lived for a time in the 1970s on Orchard Mesa, most recently was a partner in the Denver law firm of Holland & Hart. In her new position, she oversees Reclamation and the U.S. Geological Survey.

More Colorado River Basin coverage here.

Energy policy — hydroelectric generation: Morley’s and J-Power hope to get South Slope Project on Xcel’s preferred project plan

Here’s an update on the proposed hydroelectric pumpback project near Penrose, from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

The project, which would include two small reservoirs near Brush Hollow Reservoir, is still awaiting approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Construction is still seven or eight years down the road, Thome said. The project would require about 7,000 acre-feet of water, which would be obtained in a one-time purchase and replenished for evaporation. Water would be pumped to the upper reservoir when energy demand on the grid is lower and run downhill through generators during peak load periods. A total of 320 megawatts would be generated. While the system would be about 76 percent efficient, it would act as a battery to balance power transmission for other renewable technologies when the wind isn’t blowing or the sun isn’t shining, [Steve Thome, spokesman for J-Power USA] said…

The South Slope Project was one of 113 vendors who submitted proposals for Xcel’s plan to meet goals to shift at least 20 percent of its power from coal to wind, solar and other renewable sources. The plan is being evaluated by the Public Utilities Commission, which is expected to make a decision in November, said spokesman Mark Stutz…

The South Slope partners would be looking at a long-term contract that would allow Xcel to operate the hydro plant as needed, rather than simply selling the power on a spot basis…

Natural gas plants are called “peakers” within the industry and are valuable because they can meet peak demand needs, or in the case of renewable sources, supply energy when wind and solar sources go off-line. With a pumpback plant, there would be continued demand for power at night to move the water uphill, Thome explained. “The wind blows day and night in Colorado,” Thome said.

More hydroelectric coverage here and here.

Energy policy — hydroelectric: Aspen’s Castle Creek hydroelectric generation station update

Nearly three years ago Aspen residents approved bonding to fund a hydroelectric generation station on Castle Creek in town. Here’s an update on progress towards building the facility, from Carolyn Sackariason writing for the Glenwood Springs Independent. From the article:

John Hines, the city’s renewable energy utility manager, said the 1,880-square-foot facility will go through public review for final approval starting next month. If it’s approved by the Aspen City Council, construction could begin as early as the spring…

There has been minimal opposition to the facility, but some people are concerned about a decreased flow in the nearby stream because water will be drained out of it to generate power. Hines said the city will host a neighborhood meeting after Labor Day in which a hydrologist and an engineer will address water-flow concerns. He added that neighbors are generally in favor of the facility but are watching the design of it closely. “They are in favor of the hydro facility, but they want it done right; I don’t blame them,” Hines said.

A new water line is being built to replace the old one, as well as to accommodate the new plant, which will generate renewable energy for the city and increase its supplies by 8 percent over its current level of about 75 percent. The project would utilize existing water rights, head gates, and water storage of the original Castle Creek hydroelectric plant, which met all of Aspen’s electric power needs from 1892 through 1958, when the plant was decommissioned. When completed, the 1.05 mega-watt facility is expected to increase electric production by 5.5 million kilowatt hours annually.

City officials say that switching from primarily coal-fired energy purchases to hydroelectric power production would eliminate an estimated 5,167 tons of CO2 emissions — representing a 0.6 percent community-wide reduction in carbon emissions based on the 2004 greenhouse gas emission inventory.

The facility’s turbine and generator will be designed to convert the force of falling water into electric power. The water comes from the Thomas Reservoir, which is located at the top of Doolittle Drive and is the home of the water treatment facility. The water will travel down a 42-inch pipe, supplying the hydro plant with approximately 52 cubic feet per second. There are nearly 4.9 million gallons of water sitting above some residential areas and the hospital. The pipe would allow the city to quickly evacuate the water should the walls of the reservoir ever be breached. The electricity will be placed on the city’s grid and taken up to the water treatment campus to power those facilities, and to potentially produce hydrogen for hydrogen fuel cells and hydrogen vehicles.

More hydroelectric coverage here and here.

Energy policy — hydroelectric: Ouray to install small generation plant, Cortez micro-hydroelectric plant moving forward

From The Telluride Watch (Beverly Corbell):

{Ouray Mayor Bob Risch] said the city has applied for a grant from the Governor’s Energy Office for about $20,000 to use water from the old Biota water line to generate electricity near the city-owned Ouray Hot Springs pool…

The energy generated, about 20,000 kW, is not great, but would reduce what the city has to pay to San Miguel Power Association. “Anyway we can save energy is good,” Risch said.

From The Cortez Journal (Steve Grazier):

The city established a hydroelectric power enterprise during its Aug. 11 regular meeting and authorized loan documents for the approximately $2 million hydropower center, said City Manager Jay Harrington. “Basically, we’ll be taking energy (water pressure) that’s not utilized … to create electricity,” Harrington said. “It’s a 20-year project to recoup money. But in 20 years, the city will have an asset as a moneymaker.” Harrington noted that an agreement is in place with Empire Electric Association to produce power through the city hydroelectric plant. That power will go into Empire’s grid and help the cooperative’s renewable energy needs. “The pieces are continuing to move forward on the project,” he said.

In addition, a hydroelectric plant could generate electricity off an existing pipeline to provide enough power to run the water treatment facility altogether and produce additional power used for other resources, according to Jack Nickerson, the city’s public works director. “We could generate enough power to run the entire (water treatment) plant and have some left over to sell back to Empire Electric for credit,” Nickerson has said. “We want to utilize the energy that’s there, and lower the city’s carbon footprint (in burning electricity) at the same time.”

More hydroelectric coverage here and here.

Aspen: FERC transfers Ruedi hydro plant license to Aspen

From the Aspen Daily News:

The federal license to operate the hydroelectric plant at Ruedi Reservoir has been approved for transfer to the city of Aspen by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Prior to the July 14 ruling, the hydro plant license had been held jointly by Pitkin County and the city.

More Coyote Gulch hydroelectric coverage here and here.

Lake Mead: Water shortages predicted for lower Colorado River Basin

From the New York Times (Henry Fountain):

The scope of those potential problems is detailed in a study being published in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Tim P. Barnett and David W. Pierce of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography report that under various forecasts of the effects of warming temperatures on runoff into the Colorado, scheduled future water deliveries to the seven states are not sustainable.

The work builds on an earlier study by the researchers that looked at whether Lake Mead, the huge reservoir behind Hoover Dam, would eventually go dry. For the current study, they tweaked their model of river inflows and outflows and looked at the delivery shortfalls that would be needed to keep Lake Mead at the lowest functioning level. The modifications in the model “didn’t really change any of our answers,” Dr. Barnett said. “It just made the study a lot stronger.”

The study found that, with a 20 percent reduction in runoff, by 2050 nearly 9 of every 10 scheduled deliveries would be missed. But the problem may be even worse, because the allotments were determined in the 20th century, when, according to tree-ring data, the region was wetter than normal. So if drier conditions persist, delivery shortfalls will be even greater.

Colorado-Big Thompson Project scores $14 million in stimulus dough

Here’s the background on Reclamation’s plans for the $14 million in stimulus funds slated for the Colorado-Big Thompson Project, from Pamela Dickman writing for the Loveland Reporter-Herald. From the article:

The Bureau of Reclamation will hire a crew to scrape away and replace the coating of the pipes that carry water from the Colorado-Big Thompson Project to the Flatiron Power Plant. The entire cost of the project, $14 million, will be paid for with federal stimulus money…

The penstocks are large pipes that snake about one mile down Bald Mountain near Carter Lake. They bring water from the Colorado-Big Thompson project to the hydroelectric plant to generate power that is doled out through the Western Area Power Administration grid. This is the first time the coating will be replaced since the penstocks were built in 1962. The replacement coating is a new, upgraded product that should increase reliability and integrity, according to Lamb. Crews will scrape the old coating from the outside of the pipe, which drops 1,064 feet vertically, Lamb said. They also will go inside the pipes, which are 6 feet in diameter, to re-coat the inside.

Meanwhile, from email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

If Carter and Horsetooth are in your plans for Sunday, here is a quick update: The work on the Charles Hansen Feeder canal has completed. Currently, we are running about 150 cfs to Horsetooth. We will turn the pump to Carter off over the weekend. Once the pump goes off, expect another 300-or-so cfs to begin flowing to Horsetooth. Carter remains pretty full. Horsetooth is still at a water elevation of 5404, but will begin rising Monday.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

Reclamation scores $1 billion for infrastructure, Colorado-Big Thompson to get $14 million

The stimulus dough from the American Recovery and Investment Act keeps flowing. Here’s a report from Kelly King writing for the Fort Collins Coloradoan. From the article:

U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar announced Wednesday that the Bureau of Reclamation will use $1 billion from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to repair water infrastructure across the country, including a $14 million upgrade to water-delivery pipes at the Flatiron Hydroelectric Plant west of Loveland…

The Flatiron Hydroelectric Plant is stationed at Flatiron Reservoir, one of several facilities used by the Colorado-Big Thompson Project, or C-BT, to deliver water from the Colorado River on the Western Slope for use as supplemental water on the Eastern Plains…

Dubbed one of the larger infrastructure improvements in the overall national upgrade, the $14 million will be used to recoat 50-year-old linings on the interior and exterior of water-delivery pipes called penstocks. The dual water pipeline is one mile long and drops water down more than 1,000 feet from the Pinewood Reservoir to the Flatiron Power Plant, creating the most electricity in the C-BT system, according to the Bureau of Reclamation. The C-BT Project was built from 1938 to 1957 and features equipment from 60 to 70 years old that spreads across 250 miles to store, regulate and divert water. The project also generates enough electricity to power 58,300 homes for one year, equal to 759 million kilowatt-hours of electricity, according to the Bureau of Reclamation. The C-BT project provides supplemental water to 800,000 people in Northeastern Colorado.

Energy policy — hydroelectric: Aspen’s new Castle Creek plant

Here’s a letter to the editor — running in the Aspen Times — written by Phil Overeynder, Utilities and Environmental Initiatives Director, City of Aspen, explaining the benefits of the new hydroelectric plant approved in 2007 by Aspen voters, along with the City’s committment to instream flow in Castle Creek:

In the near future we plan to provide additional information about this important and environmentally responsible project. What Aspenites gained in approving this project on the 2007 ballot is the annual production of 5.5 million kilowatt-hours of environmentally responsible electricity. That power production will prevent more than 5,000 tons of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere every year. This represents more than 25 percent of the remaining carbon emissions resulting from power generation for Aspen’s electric utility.

The production of clean, renewable energy at the Castle Creek Hydroelectric Project will depend on the use of water drawn from Castle Creek. There is simply no way around this basic fact. However, the city is doing its best to limit the impact on Castle Creek. The only change the hydroelectric project will make in the city’s water use regime is that a portion of the water diverted by the city will return to the creek at a point approximately three-fourths of a mile downstream of the present point of return, which is below Thomas Reservoir. The new point of return will be at the Castle Creek Bridge.

From the beginning of the Castle Creek Hydroelectric Project, the city of Aspen has been aware of the critical importance of maintaining a viable, healthy stream in Castle Creek. The Colorado Water Conservation Board’s (CWCB) decreed instream flow right for Castle Creek is 12 cubic feet per second (cfs), and is decreed for the purpose of protecting the natural environment.

This is a fairly junior water right. To help assure that Castle Creek actually receives this instream flow, which applies to all of Castle Creek, the city has already voluntarily committed to operate its own, more senior, water rights in a way that will support the 12 cfs instream flow. The city currently honors this commitment, and the proposed Castle Creek Hydroelectric Project will not alter this commitment. This means it is possible that, under certain conditions, the flow in Castle Creek upstream of the hydroplant will be 12 cfs. Historical low stream flow conditions in Castle Creek (generally reaching the lowest values in late winter) have averaged in the range of 20 cfs. When the hydroplant is operating in times of low flow in Castle Creek, flows in the reach of the creek between the hydroplant intake and the plant may be reduced to 12 cfs instead (the value established by the CWCB as necessary to protect the natural environment).

Arkansas River Basin Water Forum day 1

Here’s a recap of the Colorado Water Conservation Board Executive Director Jennifer Gimbel’s keynote on the first day of the Arkansas Basin Water Forum, from Chris Woodka writing for the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

Water for energy – whether that means hydroelectric, biofuels, oil shale or power plant cooling involves choices for Colorado in a time when shortages are nearing critical points, a top water official said Tuesday. “When you are dealing with water, you are dealing with our future. It’s going to take choices, and it’s going to take trade-offs,” Colorado Water Conservation Board Executive Director Jennifer Gimbel said. Gimbel made her comments during the keynote speech of the Arkansas River Basin Water Forum being held at Colorado State University-Pueblo. The event continues today with the topic “Water to Fuel Our Future.”[...]

the state’s population is expected to triple by 2050, and climate change will mean warmer temperatures, a longer growing season, decreased flows in river, more rain, earlier runoff and increased variability in the weather, Gimbel said. Conservation and reuse will go only so far to meet anticipated shortfalls, she said. “We need to continue building infrastructure,” Gimbel said. “However, the infrastructure we do have needs to be managed collectively. That means more multiuse projects.”

Construction of dams, given a black eye in the public consciousness, benefits rivers by moderating flows and improving fisheries, Gimbel said. Her primary example was the Arkansas River voluntary flow agreement – made possible by balancing water accounts between dams – that created sufficient flows for the Arkansas River Headwaters State Recreation Area, which draws more rafters that any other American stretch of river.

New water projects are increasingly more difficult during tough budget times, however. About $45 million has been cut from CWCB construction funds to make this year’s state budget balance and deeper cuts could be looming in the future, Gimbel said. Other forms of energy development have varying impacts on water supplies. Wind farms use little water, but could impact birds; solar power may use more water than previously believed; ethanol production of 7 billion gallons annually eats up 19 million acres of farmland; oil shale has the potential to use more than double the amount of water imported into the Arkansas Valley each year; and coal-bed methane produces poor-quality water that state law deals with uncertainly.

Energy policy: Hydroelectric

From the Summit Daily News (Allen Best):

President Obama last week talked about efforts to pass cap-and-trade legislation yet this year, in effect imposing a tax on the burning of fossil fuels.

If that happens, the electricity produced by burning coal will become somewhat more expensive, and the electricity gained from renewable sources will look that much less expensive. In anticipation of such a shifting landscape for prices, local water and energy officials in the Gunnison Basin are investigating whether a 200-foot-high earth dam on the Taylor River built to hold back spring runoff for irrigation purposes later in the season can be retrofitted to generate electricity. “It seems like a waste of a resource not to tap into hydropower there,” said Mike Wells, chief executive of the Gunnison County Electric Association. The Crested Butte News suggests $30,000 in local and state funds are being collected for the feasibility study.

For all its falling water and now its wind farms and solar panels, Colorado still gets the majority of its electricity from burning coal, about 70 percent, and most of the rest from burning natural gas. Utah is even higher, with 85 percent of electricity coming from coal, while Wyoming is at 97 percent.

Well before the alarm about global warming Aspen in the 1990s began looking at ways to prune its purchases of coal-fired electricity. It subsequently paid for installation of a hydroelectric unit in the Ruedi Dam, located about 25 miles from Aspen.

Aspen city officials have also investigated the potential to install a hydroelectric component in the dam that creates Ridgway Reservoir, between Telluride and Montrose. However, the payback on that investment looks less attractive, according to Phil Overeynder, the director of public works.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

Taylor Park Dam hydroelectric retrofit

Here’s an update on the proposal to retrofit the Taylor Dam with hydroelectric generation facilities, from Evan Dawson writing for the Crested Butte News. From the article:

Last fall the Colorado Water Resources and Power Development Authority announced they would offer $15,000 in matching grants for entities willing to study potential small-scale hydropower projects across the state.

Hearing this, the UGRWCD invited several members of a hydropower-engineering firm from the Front Range out for a tour of the Gunnison Valley to see if the local waterways had any potential. The engineers from TCB Aecomm said the Taylor Park Dam could be easily outfitted with a hydroelectric generator capable of generating one megawatt of electricity. With a little more work, the engineers estimated, the dam could generate even more electricity, but how much more was hard to say without further study.

Following [a recent] tour, the UGRWCD met with representatives from GCEA and the Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association (which holds rights to the water in Taylor Park Reservoir) and the three entities agreed to become partners in a hydropower feasibility study of the dam and split the necessary matching grant funds, which totaled $15,000. The Water Resources and Power Development Authority ended up approving 11 grant requests across the state, including the UGRWCD’s. The district will be sending out a request for proposals soon to engineering firms interested in completing the feasibility study, which should commence sometime this spring. “We’re going to make it an open process by sending out an RFP. We hope to have a contractor selected by the end of March,” Kugel says.

If a hydropower project is determined to be feasible, the UGRWCD will step back and GCEA will oversee the construction, generation and sale of power from Taylor Dam. “Our main goal was to have a hand in the feasibility study,” Kugel says. A lease for power production would also need to be obtained from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which owns the dam itself. Kugel says the Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association would be the most logical entity to apply for that lease. “With this feasibility study we’ll really be able to quantify the value [of a hydropower project] and hopefully move ahead,” Wells says…

Taylor Park Reservoir sits about nine miles northeast of Almont, at the end of a winding narrow canyon that is well known for its incredible fishing.
The reservoir is held back by a 200-foot-high earthen dam that stretches more than 600 feet across the narrowest section of Taylor Canyon before it opens up into the high plains of Union Park.
Two giant pipes, or penstocks, carry water from the bottom of Taylor Reservoir to a gatehouse on the other side of the dam. The penstocks lie in a tunnel carved through solid rock on the north side of the canyon…

Beyond the gatehouse, the two penstocks stretch more than 200 feet down a narrow tunnel. One of the penstocks is slightly larger than the other, and is the primary target for installing a hydroelectric generator…

Taking up most of the space in this room were a pair of large hydraulic pistons that control the intake gates. Most of the work to install a hydropower turbine would take place back in the tunnel.
There, workers would have to remove a section of the larger penstock and install a turbine. The penstock was divided into eight-foot sections that were held together by no fewer than 25 large bolts. Since the penstocks themselves are four feet in diameter, and the tunnel they are situated in is a little more than 10 feet in diameter, there would be very little room for error…

From the turbine’s installation point, electric cable would be wired to a transformer that sits just outside the gatehouse. Wells says there is an electric line in place between the transformer and the main line on County Road 742. Wells says the existing line has a carrying capacity of one and a half to two megawatts. “There would be some fairly sophisticated metering that would go on. That transformer would more than likely be the point, but it is an old service point. We might want to upgrade that line out to the road. It’s a new chunk of line going forward after that. We want to plug into the most reliable source,” Wells says. Kugel says the power that could potentially be generated by the dam could satisfy all the homes between Almont and Tincup.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.