Breaching a dam

It would require a much larger dam than the Edwards to hold back the hyperbole that will flow in Augusta today as politicians and environmentalists gather to celebrate the breaching of the dam that has restrained a portion of the Kennebec River for more than 160 years. And while removing the Edwards Dam is unquestionably good news, it does nothing to answer how Maine regards the value of hydropower or how decisions will be made about the continued lives of other dams.

Edwards Dam was an ideal candidate for removal after its license expired. Its output was small; the price for what should have been inexpensive energy was high; the potential for renewing fish runs on an additional 18 miles of the Kennebec River, realistic. Even so, persuading federal regulators and affected parties to tear down the dam wasn’t easy.

A coalition of environmental groups, beginning in 1989, used the Electric Consumers Protection Act, passed three years earlier, to press their case. The act directs the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to include environmental issues surrounding the presence of the dam when considering a re-licensing request. The Kennebec’s fame as a fishery should have been reason enough not to renew the license. Still, eight years passed before FERC indicated that it agreed with groups such as Trout Unlimited, the Natural Resources Council of Maine, American Rivers and the Atlantic Salmon Federation that the dam should be removed. Both Gov. John McKernan and Gov. Angus King supported removal.

Expensive power comes off line. Fish habitat is restored. New economic benefits, in the form of enhanced recreational opportunities, accrue to Augusta. Who could argue with that? Generally, no one. Specifically, more than a few environmentalists outside the coalition are going to unhappy with how the dam removal and remediation is paid for.

Bath Iron Works, downstream, will put up $2.5 million of the needed restoration money as an offset to its 15-acre expansion in Bath. Upstream, other hydropower operators will contribute a total of $4.7 million to the project, and in trade get a 16-year extension on the deadline to install fish ladders at their dams. Deals involve compromises, but it is unlikely that these sorts of compromises would be publicly acceptable on a broad scale.

And that raises the question of the futures for the 1,500 remaining dams in the state. Already, environmental groups have begun identifying for removal other dams in use, including those on the Penobscot. Hydropower once was considered a nonpolluting, renewable source of power, but in the last few years has increasingly made it onto the environmental hit list. Gov. King has so far displayed the most sense regarding these issues. He recognized the value in removing Edwards Dam, but added, Generally, hydropower makes sense and shouldn’t be discarded lightly.

A growing anti-dam feeling, however, suggests he will be making this point often during the remainder of his term.