DOCSLIB.ORG

BC Hydro's Dam Safety Program and Risk Management Processes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
BC Hydro's Dam Safety Program and Risk Management Processes BC Hydro’s Dam Safety Program and Risk Management Processes Stephen Rigbey Director, Dam Safety, BC Hydro BC Hydro Overview COMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURE . 80 dams at 41 sites . 31 hydroelectric facilities . ~ 9500MW installed currently . 1100 MW started construction . 3 thermal generating plants . Off-grid diesel stations . 18,500 kilometers of transmission lines Provincial ownership, but international implications 2 Concrete Gravity Dam BC Hydro has 19 Major Concrete Gravity Dams: Aberfeldie Buntzen, Clayton Falls Clowhom Comox Eko Elliott Falls River Ladore Peace Canyon Puntledge Diversion Quinsam Diversion Quinsam Storage Ruskin Seton Seven Mile Spillimacheen Stave Falls & Whatshan Large Embankment Dams WAC Bennett 183 m high; 2 km crest length Volume = 44 million m3 Large by height ; volume Mica 243m high 4 Consequences – Extreme category Columbia River : breach at Mica Dam - flood reaches US border in 22 hrs - peaks at 48m above river bank the next day Flooding all the way to Portland >>> 10,000 people US Nuclear Plant Fraser River : breach at La Joie, Terzhagi still about 10,000 people at risk All BC rail and road transportation routes All Power interconnects 5 Issues Database and Vulnerability Index Deficiencies Actual – known to exist, measureable Potential – require further investigation Normal Conditions Unusual Conditions flood seismic 6 Vulnerability Index- VulnerabilityRisk = Probability Index (Actual of- Dam) Failure = (Concern x Consequence Rating(AD)) x (Frequency of Demand Scaling Factor), or, 3 Vulnerability Index (AD) = 10x (Magnitude_ of _"Concern") ) x (1-(0.1 x Ln(1/AEF)) INDEX OF VULNERABILITY AND Logarithmic Scaling Factor FREQUENCY OF MAGNITUDE OF "DEMAND" OF THE "CONCERN" 1.0 "FEATURE" 0.8 AND 0.6 0.4 ScalingFactor 0.2 MAGNITUDE OF "IN"- 0.0 THE GAP CRITICALITY OF EFFECTIVENESS (bewteen actual THE "FEATURE" OF INTERIM 0.00E+00 2.00E-01 4.00E-01 6.00E-01 8.00E-01 1.00E+00 and preferred) MEASURES Annual Exceedance Frequency Vulnerability does not equal Risk Developed simply as a way to track and prioritize issues Does not justify need/urgency NOT a robust method to track risk Different consequences in many cases Different levels of residual risk not quantified 8 Quantifying the Proposedissues New Dam we’re Safety Indices dealing with… (All Dams) 180 Coursier decommissioning 160 New Coquitlam Dam Seven Mile upgrades Elsie rebuild 140 Known deficiencies Potential Deficiencies 120 100 80 Vulnerability Index Vulnerability 60 40 Combination of increasing knowledge (positive) 20 and deteriorating conditions (negative) 0 F02 Q2F02 Q4F02 Q2F03 Q4F03 Q2F04 Q4F04 Q2F05 Q4F05 Q2F06 Q4F06 Q2F07 Q4F07 Q2F08 Q4F08 Q2F09 Q4F09 Q2F10 Q4F10 Q2F11 Q4F11 Quarterly Reporting Metrics Vulnerability Index 250 200 150 VI Increases VI Decreases 100 Total VI Total Vulnerability For comparison against investigations and capital plans 50 0 F04 F04 F05 F05 F06 F06 F07 F07 F08 F08 F09 F09 F10 F10 F11 F11 F12 F12 F13 F13 Q1 Q3 Q1 Q3 Q1 Q3 Q1 Q3 Q1 Q3 Q1 Q3 Q1 Q3 Q1 Q3 Q1 Q3 Q1 Q3 10 Quarterly Reporting Metrics Reporting Quarterly F11 Q1 Risk Overall Very Low Low High Very High Extreme Consequence Consequence Consequence 20 15 10 Vulnerability Index Vulnerability 5 * Active risk reduction reduction risk Active project 0 Elko Elsie Elliott Mica* Seton* Wilsey Jordan Comox Ruskin* Ladore* La Joie* Duncan* Buntzen Terzaghi* Clowhom Aberfeldie Wahleach Puntledge Coquitlam Whatshan Alouette* Falls River John Hart* Seven Mile Revelstoke Sugar Lake Strathcona* Stave Falls* Quinsam (2) Bear Creek Cheakamus* Clayton Falls Spillimacheen WAC Bennett*WAC Dam Peace Canyon Walter Hardman Kootenay Canal* Heber Diversion* Salmon River Div. Hugh Keenleyside* Spillway Gates AN AU PU & PN Reduction Prioritization of Projects Vulnerability Index – only the starting point Vulnerabilities relative to Consequence (LOL, PAR, Economic) . Compile, sort and compare parallel lists Management practicality . Time to effect repairs . Sequencing with other planned work . Resource availability Enabling projects Corporate considerations BC Hydro’s 10-yr Capital Plan ~$20B 13 Corporate Risk Matrices - prioritization 5 Decreasing Probability RISK(logarithmic) = Probability X Consequence Decreasing 4 4+3=7 Frequency Additive if both are logarithmic or Probability 3 2 2+2=4 2+5=7 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 Increasing Consequence 14 Plants - General Safety, Environment and Business Dam Safety Quantitative: Financial 23 different descriptors Reliability Metrics Qualitative: Environmental Reputational Mixed: Accidents/Life Loss Corporate Risk Matrices How to equate consequences?? moral and ethical issues… And how to put them in logarithmic buckets? YOU DON’T! Consequences Corporate Response Try to Major Insurability Limit : Complete avoid, but Crisis Change of Corporate Corporate Business Leadership Restructuring as Usual Financial Health and Safety Reputational 18 Corporate Risk Matrices How to equate consequences?? moral and ethical issues… And how to put them in logarithmic buckets? Great for broadbrush representations to a Board, but Someone will eventually have to make the hard tradeoffs on the basis of corporate values 19 After the tradeoffs… we can’t do it all… Reduce the Hazard Reservoir lowered Nmax in effect at LAJ Reduce the Consequences Restricted Land Use underway at JOR Interim Risk Management Enhanced emergency preparedness Public Education 20 But what about the justification? - VI not the right tool - Corporate Risk Matrix simply not granular enough …..must discuss Tolerability of Risk 103 atalities f 4 10 Additional risk N control is required 5 CDA Revised Guidelines 10 Figure 6-2: Risk is tolerable, if 6 ALARP Example Societal Risk 10 Levels for Dam Safety 107 Risk is broadly Probability of Probability more than acceptable 1 10 100 1000 Number of fatalities, N 21 A quick history of Risk 1967 – The Farmer curves - Nuclear 22 1980’s: UK and Netherlands – other hazardous industries Different slopes based on different “anchor points” UK : chemical/nuclear industries Netherlands : dykes/large scale flooding Documented/ defensible - adopted nationally 1986: USBR “Guidelines to Decision Analysis” - no criteria 23 By 1993… move into hydro industry Early ANCOLD lines…. BC Hydro : Significant interaction with USBR Specific Risk and Cost Criteria for a single dam: 1 x 10-3 /yr $10,000/yr 24 BC Hydro use of Probability of Failure Use of Event Trees and the 10-3 line throughout the latter 1990’s: Concrete dam and spillway stability - Alouette, Ruskin, 7Mile, Stave Falls, Wahleach Debris Passage, Spill Capacity - LaJoie, Rip Rap Erosion - Terzaghi Internal Erosion - Coursier Liquifaction - Coquitlam - Hugh Keenleyside (>1 yr, > $1M !) 2 years later…. A major change in course: - Scientific, political and legal difficulties - Societal Risk concepts problematic - Vetting had not taken place - Use of probability without true understanding of uncertainties could not be justified in the BC Hydro context - Wouldn’t pass a ‘transparency test’ with Public Utilities Commissions - Use of both Subjective and Quantitative Probability discontinued - Moved to the Vulnerability Index approach 26 Why use of specifically defined risk criteria still won’t work... …at least for public utilities and private dam owners . Origins vs Current Practice . Variability in its use • Axes, mathematics • Definition of zones . Different Societal Risk Tolerances? . Ethics, transparency and public acceptance . Prioritization or Justification? . How to apply in real situations? 27 Origins BC Hydro and USBR (1993) . Specific Risk and Cost Criteria for a single dam . 1 x 10-3 /yr “Needs discussion: and vetting…” USBR (1999) • Rational for 10-3 line documented, but • “Logic needs to be re-evaluated…” 28 Origins Vetting and discussion STILL has not taken place… . Line ‘justified’ on basis of historical dam failure data set ..until recently: See P. Regan (2016 ASDSO): . Dam failure data set is now inappropriate for the purpose of evaluating current societal risk tolerance . Key numerical values based on possibly flawed calculations . Inconsistent with current guidance given by world-wide risk experts and with data compiled for other industries. Needs further discussion 29 Current Practice Although: - 1993/1999 thinking has not yet been tested/revisited - rarely if ever stated in laws and regulation for any other industry… - Approach is used in Dam Safety by various parties: . USBR, USACE, ANCOLD: NSW, HYDROTAZ… All show the 10-3 line, all look the same, but… 30 Definition of Axes vs Probability of Failure 103 atalities f 4 10 Additional risk N control is required 105 Risk is tolerable, if 106 ALARP 107 Risk is broadly Probability of Probability more than acceptable 1 10 100 1000 Number of fatalities, N 31 Definition of Axes Why fatalities? PAR? 103 atalities f 4 10 Additional risk N control is required 105 Risk is tolerable, if 106 ALARP 107 Risk is broadly Probability of Probability more than acceptable 1 10 100 1000 Number of fatalities, N 32 Choosing a Tolerability Line 103 atalities f 4 a)Follow the10 crowd Additional risk N ….but don’t ask questions control is required b) Attempt10 to5 logically select one? Risk is tolerable, if c) Have a 10societal6 debate? ALARP 107 Risk is broadly Probability of Probability more than acceptable 1 10 100 1000 Number of fatalities, N 33 Choosing a Tolerability Line for Canada? 1 0.1 Empress of India Halifax munitions explosion 0.01 0.001 Canadian disasters 0.0001 1918 flu epidemic 0.00001 0.000001 Comet strike (10-7) Annual Exceedence Probability (F) Probability Exceedence Annual 0.0000001
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Columbia River Treaty History and 2014/2024 Review
    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers • Bonneville Power Administration Columbia River Treaty History and 2014/2024 Review 1 he Columbia River Treaty History of the Treaty T between the United States and The Columbia River, the fourth largest river on the continent as measured by average annual fl ow, Canada has served as a model of generates more power than any other river in North America. While its headwaters originate in British international cooperation since 1964, Columbia, only about 15 percent of the 259,500 square miles of the Columbia River Basin is actually bringing signifi cant fl ood control and located in Canada. Yet the Canadian waters account for about 38 percent of the average annual volume, power generation benefi ts to both and up to 50 percent of the peak fl ood waters, that fl ow by The Dalles Dam on the Columbia River countries. Either Canada or the United between Oregon and Washington. In the 1940s, offi cials from the United States and States can terminate most of the Canada began a long process to seek a joint solution to the fl ooding caused by the unregulated Columbia provisions of the Treaty any time on or River and to the postwar demand for greater energy resources. That effort culminated in the Columbia River after Sept.16, 2024, with a minimum Treaty, an international agreement between Canada and the United States for the cooperative development 10 years’ written advance notice. The of water resources regulation in the upper Columbia River U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Basin.
    [Show full text]
  • The Columbia Basin Tribes and First Nations Jointly Developed This Paper To
    Agenda Item E.2 Attachment 1 (Electronic Only) March 2021 a | EXECUTIVE SUMMARY he Columbia Basin tribes and First Nations jointly developed this paper to Tinform the U.S. and Canadian Entities, federal governments, and other re- gional sovereigns and stakeholders on how anadromous salmon and resident fish can be reintroduced into the upper Columbia River Basin. Reintroduction and res- toration of fish passage could be achieved through a variety of mechanisms, includ- ing the current effort to modernize the Columbia River Treaty (Treaty). Restoring fish passage and reintroducing anadromous fish should be investigated and imple- mented as a key element of integrating ecosystem-based function into the Treaty. Anadromous fish reintroduction is critical to restoring native peoples’ cultural, harvest, spiritual values, and First Foods taken through bilateral river development for power and flood risk management. Reintroduction is also an important facet of ecosystem adaptation to climate change as updated research indicates that only the Canadian portion of the basin may be snowmelt-dominated in the future, making it a critical refugium for fish as the Columbia River warms over time. This transboundary reintroduction proposal focuses on adult and juvenile fish pas- sage at Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee dams in the U.S. and at Hugh Keenleyside, Brilliant, Waneta and Seven Mile dams in Canada. Reintroduction would occur incrementally, beginning with a series of preliminary planning, research, and ex- perimental pilot studies designed to inform subsequent reintroduction and passage strategies. Long-term elements of salmon reintroduction would be adaptable and include permanent passage facilities, complemented by habitat improvement, ar- tificial propagation, monitoring, and evaluation.
    [Show full text]
  • Dams and Hydroelectricity in the Columbia
    COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN: DAMS AND HYDROELECTRICITY The power of falling water can be converted to hydroelectricity A Powerful River Major mountain ranges and large volumes of river flows into the Pacific—make the Columbia precipitation are the foundation for the Columbia one of the most powerful rivers in North America. River Basin. The large volumes of annual runoff, The entire Columbia River on both sides of combined with changes in elevation—from the the border is one of the most hydroelectrically river’s headwaters at Canal Flats in BC’s Rocky developed river systems in the world, with more Mountain Trench, to Astoria, Oregon, where the than 470 dams on the main stem and tributaries. Two Countries: One River Changing Water Levels Most dams on the Columbia River system were built between Deciding how to release and store water in the Canadian the 1940s and 1980s. They are part of a coordinated water Columbia River system is a complex process. Decision-makers management system guided by the 1964 Columbia River Treaty must balance obligations under the CRT (flood control and (CRT) between Canada and the United States. The CRT: power generation) with regional and provincial concerns such as ecosystems, recreation and cultural values. 1. coordinates flood control 2. optimizes hydroelectricity generation on both sides of the STORING AND RELEASING WATER border. The ability to store water in reservoirs behind dams means water can be released when it’s needed for fisheries, flood control, hydroelectricity, irrigation, recreation and transportation. Managing the River Releasing water to meet these needs influences water levels throughout the year and explains why water levels The Columbia River system includes creeks, glaciers, lakes, change frequently.
    [Show full text]
  • Revelstoke Generating Station Unit 6 Project Factsheet-December 2018
    Revelstoke Generating Station Unit 6 Project Factsheet-December 2018 This project would install a sixth generating unit into an empty four units were installed when the facility was constructed. bay at Revelstoke Generating Station. Revelstoke Unit 6 would The fifth generating unit was recently added and began add approximately 500 megawatts of capacity to our system service in 2010. and provide a significant amount of electricity when our Revelstoke Generating Station produces, on average, about customers need it most – during dark cold winter days 7,817 gigawatt hours or roughly 15 per cent of the electricity when furnaces, appliances and lights are all in use. BC Hydro generates each year. With the five generating units, Revelstoke Generating Station has a combined capacity of REVELSTOKE DAM AND GENERATING STATION 2,480 megawatts. Electricity generated by the plant is Revelstoke Dam and Generating Station are located on the delivered to the grid by two parallel 500 kilovolt transmission Columbia River, 5 kilometers upstream from the City of lines that run from Revelstoke Generating Station to the Revelstoke. The facilities are part of our Columbia system Ashton Creek substation near Kamloops. with Revelstoke Reservoir and Mica Dam located upstream and the Hugh L. Keenleyside Dam and Arrow Lakes Reservoir downstream. The Revelstoke Generating Station, completed in 1984, was designed to hold six generating units but only Project Timing We do not have a timeline for construction. Revelstoke 6 is an important contingency project in case demand grows faster than we expect. 1 Revelstoke Revelstoke Dam Reservoir Hwy 23 BRITISH COLUMBIA Hwy 1 Hwy 1 Hwy 23 Revelstoke Revelstoke Generating Station PROJECT BENEFITS AND OPPORTUNITIES The work to install the sixth generating unit at Revelstoke Generating Station would be very similar to the Revelstoke ○ Jobs .
    [Show full text]
  • BC Hydro Climate Change Assessment Report 2012
    POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON BC HYDRO’S WATER RESOURCES Georg Jost: Ph.D., Senior Hydrologic Modeller, BC Hydro Frank Weber; M.Sc., P. Geo., Lead, Runoff Forecasting, BC Hydro 1 EXecutiVE Summary Global climate change is upon us. Both natural cycles and anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions influence climate in British Columbia and the river flows that supply the vast majority of power that BC Hydro generates. BC Hydro’s climate action strategy addresses both the mitigation of climate change through reducing our greenhouse gas emissions, and adaptation to climate change by understanding the risks and magnitude of potential climatic changes to our business today and in the future. As part of its climate change adaptation strategy, BC Hydro has undertaken internal studies and worked with some of the world’s leading scientists in climatology, glaciology, and hydrology to determine how climate change affects water supply and the seasonal timing of reservoir inflows, and what we can expect in the future. While many questions remain unanswered, some trends are evident, which we will explore in this document. 2 IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON BC HYDRO-MANAGED WATER RESOURCES W HAT we haVE seen so far » Over the last century, all regions of British Columbia »F all and winter inflows have shown an increase in became warmer by an average of about 1.2°C. almost all regions, and there is weaker evidence »A nnual precipitation in British Columbia increased by for a modest decline in late-summer flows for those about 20 per cent over the last century (across Canada basins driven primarily by melt of glacial ice and/or the increases ranged from 5 to 35 per cent).
    [Show full text]
  • The Columbia River Treaty
    The Columbia River Treaty John Shurts General Counsel Northwest Power and Conservation Council Portland, Oregon CREW May 2014 Northwest Power and slide 1 Conservation Council Columbia River Treaty (1961/64) 15 maf of storage in Canada (Mica, Duncan, Keenleyside/Arrow) Downstream flood control and power generation benefits Sharing of downstream benefits – incl. Canadian Entitlement to ½ of downstream Northwest Power and Conservation power benefits Council Columbia River Treaty (cont’d) US authorized to build Libby Dam on Kootenai River – no sharing of benefits – operations coordinated Entities designated to implement Treaty are BC Hydro in BC; Bonneville Admin and Corps Div Commander Northwest in US Power and Conservation Council Canadian Outflows for Power and Flood Control on Planning Basis Arrow+Duncan Treaty Outflows (60-yr Avg.) 140000 120000 Unregulated 100000 04AOP Regulated 80000 60000 40000 20000 Arrow+Duncan Outflow in cfs in Outflow Arrow+Duncan 0 SEP FEB JAN DEC OCT NOV MAR MAY JULY NorthwestJUNE 15-Apr 30-Apr 31-Aug 15-Aug Power and slide 5 Conservation Council Columbia River: average regulated flows average flows at The Dalles -- natural and regulated 500000 400000 Natural Regulated 300000 200000 Cubic Feet per SecondFeet Cubic per 100000 0 Northwest Power and slide 6 Conservation Council Bonneville Dam 1948 Northwest Power and 1996 Conservation Council Kinbasket Lake (Mica Dam) slide 9 AVERAGE ANNUAL RUNOFF AND USABLE RESERVOIR STORAGE MAJOR WESTERN RIVER BASINS 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 Average Annual Runoff 150 Usable Reservoir Storage 140 130 120 110 100 90 MILLIONS OF ACRE FEETACRE MILLIONS OF 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Columbia Colorado Missouri Northwest RIVER BASINS Power and Conservation Council Northwest Power and Conservation Council U .
    [Show full text]
  • Downie Slide Very Large Rockslide Stabilization Project
    Canadian Geotechnical Society Canadian Geotechnical Achievements 2017 Downie Slide Very Large Rockslide Stabilization Project Geographical location Key References Imrie, AS, Moore, DP and Enegren, EG. Along west side of Revelstoke Reservoir; 65 km north of 1991. Performance and maintenance of Revelstoke, British Columbia. the drainage system at Downie Slide. In Landslides, D Bell (editor), Balkema, Rotterdam. When it began or was completed Kalenchuk, KS, Hutchison, DJ and Downie Slide was identified in 1956; investigations and initial Diederichs, MS. 2009. Downie Slide - drainage works began in 1974; the main drainage system was Interpretations of complex slope installed between 1977 and 1981; monitoring, assessment and mechanics in a massive, slow moving, maintenance continues. translational landslide. Proceedings, Canadian Geotechnical Conference Halifax, NS, pp 367-374. Why a Canadian geotechnical achievement? Photographs Downie Slide is located on the Columbia River within BC Hydro’s Revelstoke Reservoir. The slide is in mica schist/gneiss bedrock with multiple water levels. At nearly 10 km2 in area, 250 m deep and approximately 1.5 billion m3 in volume, this is the world’s largest known landslide stabilization project. Construction of the Revelstoke Dam was contingent on the stabilization of Downie Slide. Key safety issues were the potential for reservoir blockage, a landslide-generated wave, and upstream flooding of Mica Dam, approximately 70 km to the north. After a thorough site investigation by BC Hydro and many consultants, and an extensive public consultation, drainage was selected as the appropriate method for stabilization Aerial view of Downie Slide (outlined in red) looking up the Revelstoke Reservoir and Columbia The drainage included 2,450 m of adits, primarily located in the River valley.
    [Show full text]
  • Columbia River Treaty Field Course, June 2018 PROGRAM
    Columbia River Treaty Field Course, June 2018 sponsored by The Pacific Northwest Canadian Studies Consortium; the Canadian Studies Center, Henry M. Jackson School of International Studies, University of Washington; Indigenous Studies, Department of Community, Culture and Global Studies, University of British Columbia, Okanagan PROGRAM Monday, June 18: Opening dinner, Center for Canadian-American Studies, Western Washington University; Keynote, “An International Law Perspective on the Columbia River Treaty,” by Dr. Richard Paisley, Executive Director of Global Transboundary International Water Governance Initiative, University of British Columbia (UBC), Vancouver Tuesday, June 19: Chief Joseph Fish Hatchery Tour, by Dr. Michael Marchand, Chairman for the Coleville Business Council for Confederated Tribes of the Coleville Reservation “Chief Joseph Dam: Role in Managing Dams and the Columbia River Treaty,” by Carolyn Fitzgerald, representative, Army Corps of Engineers Tour of Chief Joseph Dam, with Sydney Hudson, Park Ranger Wednesday, June 20: “Kettle Falls Traditional Fishery,” by Dr. Melodi Wynne, member, Spokane Tribe Thursday, June 21: Day-long presentation and field experience at Keenslyside Dam “Healing the Columbia,” by Eileen Delehany Pearkes, author, A River Captured: The Columbia River Treaty and Catastrophic Change (2016) Evening, guided dialogue, by Dr. Mary Tuti Baker (Kanaka ‘oiwi), Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Political Science, Brown University Friday, June 22: Drive to Revelstoke; Evening, guided dialogue by Dr. Baker Saturday, June 23: Self-guided visit to Mica Dam Evening, “Basic Principles of Interest-based Negotiation and Their Relationship to the Developing Renegotiation of the Columbia River Treaty,” by Eric Finke, Mediation and Facilitation for Environmental and Natural Resources, Bellingham, Washington Sunday, June 24: Drive Columbia River to Kelowna, British Columbia Monday, June 25: Salmon Ceremony, presentation, by Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Mid-Columbia Ecosystem Enhancement Project Catalogue
    Mid-Columbia Ecosystem Enhancement Project Catalogue March 2017 Compiled by: Cindy Pearce, Mountain Labyrinths Inc. with Harry van Oort, and Ryan Gill, Coopers Beauschesne; Mandy Kellner, Kingbird Biological Consulting; Will Warnock, Canadian Columbia River Fisheries Commission; Michael Zimmer, Okanagan Nation Alliance; Lucie Thompson, Splatsin Development Corporation; Hailey Ross, Columbia Mountain Institute of Applied Ecology Prepared with financial support of the Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program on behalf of its program partners BC Hydro, the Province of BC, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, First Nations and public stakeholders, and Columbia Basin Trust as well as generous in-kind contributions from the project team, community partner organizations and agency staff. 1 Table of Contents Background ................................................................................................................................................... 3 Mid- Columbia Area ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Hydropower Dams and Reservoirs ............................................................................................................... 4 Information Sources ...................................................................................................................................... 5 Ecological Impacts of Dams and Reservoirs .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Columbia River Operations Summary Fall 2020
    Pend d’Oreille Reservoir. Photo by Fabio Moscatelli. Columbia River Operations Summary Fall 2020 This publication provides an overview of BC Hydro’s operations on the Columbia River. At 2,000 kilometres long, the Columbia River is the fourth largest river in North America. The headwaters of the Columbia River are in Canal Flats, British Columbia (B.C.). The river then flows northwest Canada through the Rocky Mountain trench before heading south through B.C. and Washington, emptying into the Pacific Vancouver Ocean at Astoria, Oregon. Other major tributaries of the Columbia River in Canada include the Kootenay and Pend U.S. d’Oreille rivers. Seattle Only 15% of the Columbia River basin lies in Canada. The Montana Canadian portion of the basin is mountainous and receives a Washington lot of snow producing, on average, 30 to 35% of the runoff for Canada and the United States (U.S.) combined. The river’s large annual discharge and relatively steep gradient Idaho gives it tremendous potential for the generation of Oregon electricity. The hydroelectric dams on the Columbia’s main stem and many more on its tributaries produce more hydroelectric power than on any other North American river. BC Hydro’s facilities in the Columbia basin include 13 hydroelectric dams, two water storage dams, and a system of reservoirs. Four of the larger reservoirs within Canada are operated according to the Columbia River Treaty and other agreements signed between Canada and the U.S. BCH20-712 Columbia River Operations Update | 1 Columbia River Treaty compensated for energy losses at its Kootenay Canal operations that result from the timing of water releases The Columbia River Treaty between Canada and the United from the Libby Dam.
    [Show full text]
  • Columbia River Treaty
    An Overview: Columbia River Treaty WHAT IS THE COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY? KEY DATES: 2014 AND 2024 The Columbia River The Columbia River Treaty (CRT) is The years 2014 and 2024 are key dates an international agreement between for the CRT for two reasons: Basin is a transboundary Canada and the United States for the 1. The year 2024 is the earliest date watershed that crosses joint development, regulation and either Canada or the U.S. may one international and management of the Columbia River terminate the CRT, provided seven state boundaries. in order to coordinate flood control 10-year advance notice is given and optimize hydroelectric energy (2014); and production on both sides of the border. 2. The Assured Annual Flood The CRT has no official expiry date, Control provision of the CRT BC AB CANADA but has a minimum length of 60 years, expires automatically in 2024 U.S. which is met on September 16, 2024. It (unless renegotiated) and flood wa MT is possible that one or both countries control specified under the CRT may wish to renegotiate parts or all of changes to a Called Upon Flood Wy the CRT, or terminate it entirely. Control operation. id or Photo: Kinbasket Reservoir behind Mica Dam. William D. Layman, courtesy of Wenatchee Valley Museum & Cultural Center. Right: Map shows the Columbia RIver Basin in Canada and the U.S. in lighter green CA UT and the Columbia Basin Trust region in darker green. NV www.cbt.org/crt Why Was the CRT Signed? Key Provisions of the Columbia River Treaty THE CHALLENGE DAMS AND RESERVOIRS DOWNSTREAM POWER BENEFITS Canada and the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of the Range of Impacts and Benefits of the Columbia River Treaty on Basin Communities, the Region and the Province
    A Review of the Range of Impacts and Benefits of the Columbia River Treaty on Basin Communities, the Region and the Province Prepared for: Ministry of Energy, Mines and Natural Gas Columbia River Treaty Review By George E. Penfold, M.Sc., RPP Community Planning and Development Consulting December 5, 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................................... i Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... vi A. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT .............................................................................................. 1 B. SCOPE ...................................................................................................................................................... 1 C. THE COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY (TREATY) ........................................................................................................ 4 D. COLUMBIA RIVER AND TREATY DAM AND RESERVOIR DEVELOPMENT ................................................................. 7 Figure 1: Columbia River Treaty Dams and Reservoirs ......................................................................... 7 1. Mica Dam and Reservoir ............................................................................................................... 9 a) Description ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]