We're going to blow up four paid-for green hydroelectric dams that provide cheap power and store huge amounts of water. Replace them with a smoky, wood-burning plant that will involve a lot of truck traffic, burning gas and putting out lots of exhaust to haul the wood, as well as heavy traffic at huge expense, both to blow up the dams and to construct the new power plant, and pay for all the trucks and gas and labor.

As for jobs, the ones lost at the dams will be about the same as the new ones at the wood-burning plant, long-term.

The above makes no sense in a physical-logic way. We will get dirty air, a lot of truck traffic and spend a huge amount of money both on the blow-up and new plant, resulting in higher taxes for most of us and higher electric rates.

Let's turn this thing on its head and see if it makes sense in a money-logic way.

Some corporations will make a lot of money; whoever owns the wood, the trucks, the land and will operate the new plant as well as whoever gets the millions to blow up the dams.

Battalions of lawyers will make money. They probably already have, writing up rules to make us do it via dam regulations, etc., and also the officials involved in the dam blow-ups and, who knows, maybe sums will change in some Swiss bank and who knows where else.

Ah, yes, clear as a bell.

Henry Edwards

Klamath Falls

Readers Comments:

LakeMtn posted at 8:06 am on Fri, Sep 3, 2010.

I will certainly agree that those dams should stay but I would disagree to his opposition of the bio-mass plant. If you think the DEQ & EPA are going to let the plant
spew unhealthly levels of smoke please think again. You basically have two choices when dealing with otherwise unmarketable wood products, let them torch the slash piles, wait for a forest fire both of which will dirty the air far more than a bio-mass plant ever would OR harvest the material for biomass which will dispose of unwanted wood waste and produce much needed energy. As far as the increased truck traffic goes that's a good thing as its putting people to work as well. Trust me the sky won't fall in KFalls.

jazz4949 posted at 5:58 am on Fri, Sep 3, 2010

Well I have to agree with leaving the dams in but the additional power from the biomass plant is needed and it will help eliminate costly forest fires that we pay millions to put out. Sorry the air won't be dirty and the power is useful. The landowners won't make much as there is very little profit margin in the process but it will employ some folks and maybe there is profit in the selling of power but that's ok. I like having both the dams and the biomass and I don't see how one competes against the other.

joefarmer posted at 1:11 am on Fri, Sep 3, 2010.

Dan,
If you are looking for common sense in any of this, you will be very disappointed, since there is none! Dam removal does make sense to a select few and that is all.
Politics as usual! This has to stop, and stop right now.
Thank goodness there is an election coming soon