The time is fast approaching when the NB Power Commission will make a decision on the future of the Mactaquac Dam. In 2013 they announced that the generating station was deteriorating to the point that it would not be useable beyond 2030, and that a decision on what to with it would have to be made in 2016.
During the last year, the Power Commission has conducted wide ranging public interest consultations on three options of what to do, and has solicited the thinking and advice of anyone interested in being part of the deliberations. March 31st brings this open consultation period to a close, after which the gears of decision-making start to turn in earnest.
So all those in the region who have something they want to say about what should happen to Mactaquac dam and headpond, should go to this website and make their contribution before March 31st. http://www.mactaquac.ca/
If you don’t know about what is going on with the dam and why it has become a big problem, this is also the website that will put you in the picture.
In brief, this is what is facing NB Power and the provincial government. The dam and generating station was projected to last 100 years when it was built in the late 1960s, but will now remain operational for only about 60 years. What to do? This is a royal headache. Whatever is done will end up costing billions of dollars. Here are the three options that NB Power has on the table.
- take out the dam, return the St. John River to its original channel, and replace the lost generating capacity from other sources;
- take out the generating station, replace its capacity from other sources, but keep the dam and headpond in place ;
- retain the dam and rebuild the generating station.
What should the province do? The final decision will be by government. Here are some points to consider:
First, retaining the dam and rebuilding the generating station is the most expensive option. Hydro-power qualifies as renewable energy, but by the time the facility is rebuilt, other forms of renewable energy are likely to have made huge advances in efficiency and cost reduction.
Widespread, medium and small-scale renewable electricity generation hooked up through a smart grid is the wave of the future. For example, in the news this morning is a report that the third largest airport in India is now powered 100% by solar electricity. NB Power understands this is what is happening and is hard at work figuring out how to evolve into this new energy future. So we’ve got to ask the question, is rebuilding the dam and generating station a wise investment?
Second, if the generating station is not rebuilt, should NB Power, or the province (taxpayers), sustain the cost of refurbishing and then maintaining the dam for the benefit of keeping the headpond in place? Those who have now built homes on the banks of the headpond would like to see it retained, but should NB Power or NB taxpayers foot the on-going bill for this amenity?
Third, if the dam is taken out and the St. John River returns to its original channel, will it become once again the beautiful and bountiful river it once was? Will the salmon return? There is some question about this. With climate change, the water temperature of NB rivers is rising and salmon need cold water.
But again, they might show up. More breaking news is encouraging; salmon have now returned to the Connecticut River for spawning for the first time in 200 years, and the Connecticut has got to be warmer than the St. John. So there’s a reasonable hope that the salmon would come back. Imagine, the Hartland salmon pool alive with fish and fishermen again. It could happen.
If the dam were taken out, over 13,000 hectares of land would again be available for human and wildlife use. Some of this land was the best agricultural land in the province and would be again. Studies show that the river’s islands and intervals have not eroded away. They are pretty much intact under the headpond.
Experience with dam removal elsewhere shows that the newly exposed land is rapidly reclaimed by vegetation. Within a year grass cover appears and the plant succession back to rich wetlands or woodlands steadily proceeds. This reclaimed ground could be a good set up for the careful management of highly productive agricultural and woodland environments with accompanying livelihood and job creation.
It would be a big experiment. We can’t know for sure how it would work out, but the long-term benefits of a restored river valley might be even more than we can imagine. It would certainly be a major transition of great scientific interest.
Transition Town Woodstock is holding a Public Forum on the future of Mactaquac dam at NB Community College on March 29 at 7 p.m. The Director of the Mactaquac Project, George Porter, will provide an update and be available for discussion. Whatever you think should happen to the dam, this event will help us all engage in a major decision-making process on an issue of great public interest.
Written by Keith Helmuth, member of the Woodstock Sustainable Energy Group.
Energy Futures column published in the Bugle-Observer, March 16, 2016.