Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Geothermal Energy in WA (Split from Garland HS Thread)
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
Ringangleclaw
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 1559 | TRs | Pics
Ringangleclaw
Member
PostMon Oct 31, 2011 5:07 am 
Green power isn't

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Cameron Sharpe
Member
Member


Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 4 | TRs | Pics
Cameron Sharpe
Member
PostTue Nov 01, 2011 1:12 pm 
smile.gif It has been interesting to see the various perspectives presented on the subject of the PUD exploration of the Garland site. There have been many thoughtful posts with useful information, and (unfortunately) some rather wild assertions. Site appearance: One cannot see or hear any of the test equipment or any of the site unless one goes past the no-trespassing signs. It is totally shielded by old growth forest. Fish Habitat Restoration: For the past 50 years, the Sharpe-Mooney family has not had the resources to restore the fish habitat destroyed by the river. If the PUD project is successful, it will fund the environmentally friendly work to restore the destroyed salmon and steelhead spawning grounds. Fish friendly woody debris will be used to build stable embankments, protect remaining land and old growth trees from further damage, and provide consistent spawning grounds. Noxious Gasses: One person commented on the noxious sulfur fumes from the Geothermal plant. The Garland site has no sulfur content. Transmission Lines: There has been some hysteria about destroying the wilderness with TX lines from Garland. Up to 10 MW can now be transmitted in each buried conduit. Clear Cutting: No old growth trees will be removed at the Garland site. The river braiding process however, has taken large numbers of old growth trees and polluted the river and Puget Sound with many acre feet of silt (more than 10-acres from Garland). Unfortunately, some outdated conservation and fisheries policies and well-intentioned but excessive regulation have prevented any attempts to save the river and the site. The braiding river has destroyed much of the Garland site and damaged the springs. What's in it for Me? This writer will not likely live long enough to see any revenue from the PUD project. The family joke is that each grand child will possibly see 35-cents per year in revenue if the project goes forward. No "Trust Babies." The truth is that Garland has suffered extreme destruction from the unchecked river, and is headed for total extinction. The PUD project provides a vehicle for the site to carry on the heritage of giving something back to society. If we can improve the fish spawning grounds, stop the erosion of soil and old growth forest, and reduce carbon dependency, it is win win for all involved. Many of us were concerned with the environment long before it became a popular cause. As with anything, there are some trade-offs we need to evaluate. When the Sharpes and Mooneys purchased the Garland site in 1953, the goal was to serve others. We sincerely hope that whatever happens will be a blessing and benefit for all concerned. Cameron Sharpe II Garland Mineral Springs

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
iron
Member
Member


Joined: 10 Aug 2008
Posts: 6391 | TRs | Pics
Location: southeast kootenays
iron
Member
PostWed Nov 02, 2011 12:03 am 
Cameron Sharpe wrote:
Fish Habitat Restoration: For the past 50 years, the Sharpe-Mooney family has not had the resources to restore the fish habitat destroyed by the river. If the PUD project is successful, it will fund the environmentally friendly work to restore the destroyed salmon and steelhead spawning grounds. Fish friendly woody debris will be used to build stable embankments, protect remaining land and old growth trees from further damage, and provide consistent spawning grounds.
could you please expand on this as i'm not familiar with the history of this site? why is the S-M family responsible for restoring a river to some point in time? did it destroy it? also, isn't nature pretty good at creating fish-friendly environments? my understanding is that there used to be so many fish running in WA you could catch them in your hands from any number of streams. then white settlers came and, well... if i recall correctly: the managers of the cedar river watershed did some studies ~30 years ago and determined that woody debris in the river was bad for fish. so, they decided to clear the river. well, that didn't work as expected, so ~20 years later, they have new studies that say fish like logs in the river b/c they alter the current in a way to create deep, cool pools underneath the trees and near the rootballs as the water rushes under. so, they cut down a bunch of trees (2nd growth, i believe), spend a boatload of money to anchor them into the river with driven piles, and presto walla, good fish habitat. i look forward to the research in 2020. i guess my skepticism is: how is the river's random braiding and erosion of the shoreline a bad thing? isn't that kind of what nature does and kind of how the cascades got their look?

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Klapton
Member
Member


Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 940 | TRs | Pics
Klapton
Member
PostWed Nov 02, 2011 2:56 pm 
My very limited understanding is that braiding poses two problems to salmon spawning: 1) The water is usually too fast and 2) continual movement of the streambed causes deposited eggs to be washed away before they can hatch. Whether Nature or Nature's God intended that part of the river to be braided is unknown. We do know that we can manipulate the river to create better spawning grounds than currently exist. And we know that within Mr. Sharpe's lifetime, the river was far LESS braided, and was better spawning ground. The problem with any of this is that the river changes every time there is a major flood, and there is precious little that can be done to stop MAJOR flood damage. That is how the river got the way it is now. Some of it could probably have been mitigated if Mr. Sharpe had been able / permitted to make modifications in the past. But you never know. There's only so much that can be done, and if the next flood is big enough...

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Cameron Sharpe
Member
Member


Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 4 | TRs | Pics
Cameron Sharpe
Member
PostThu Nov 03, 2011 8:12 pm 
smile.gif In response to a couple of thoughtful questions, I can testify from 50-years of personal observation of the N. Fork of the Skykomish at the Garland area. The Sharpe-Mooney families had nothing to do with the damage to the spawning grounds at the Garland site. They were however present during the 1,000 year high flood of November 1959. I can assure you that it was a terrifying experience as the floodwaters ran 4 feet deep past the lodge. The lodge was pounded by full sized old growth trees, each large enough to build a house. The lodge shuddered, cabins and vehicles rushed past in the swift current. The occupants had never heard wild animals scream before, as they did that night. There were some serious discussions with our creator during that night. About midnight, the pounding suddenly stopped. A huge (woody debris) log jam had formed just ahead of the lodge, diverting the river and saving the 15 or so occupants in the lodge. The Sharpe-Mooney family purchased an old D8 Cat, returned the river to its channel and cleared the log jam from the river. Eventually, lack of funds and constant regulatory pressure forced the family to abandon rebuilding the woody debris embankment protection. One of the regulatory concerns was that moving the log jams might stir up a slight amount silt, impeding Salmon migration. No one said a word about the 10-acres of silt (18" deep) washed downstream from not managing the river. The family has no requirement to restore the fish habitat, but does wish to be good stewards of the environment. That's all. Regarding woody debris embankment protection. It is true that fish like to hang out and relax in "fish friendly" pools, backwaters and eddies. The "fish friendly" woody debris embankments provide that environment for them. The unchecked braiding however, causes valuable fish eggs to be stranded and lost as they reach their time limit. Some have estimated that the braiding has caused the loss of 10 to 20 % of the salmon eggs each year. Continuing to ignore this source of loss is probably not prudent. The Sharpe-Mooney descendents have met a number of times in recent years. The consensus is that they all appreciate the heritage they experienced, want to see Garland saved from the river if possible, and all want to do what they can to allow as many as possible enjoy the wonderful environment they were able to enjoy. In recent years, family members have been meeting with Fisheries, USFS, and wildlife leaders to explore the most productive approaches. The family continues to work to find a consensus that will work out for all concerned. Thanks to the many of you who continue to express interest Cameron Sharpe II Garland Mineral Springs

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
rap
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Sep 2011
Posts: 28 | TRs | Pics
Location: king/snohomish county
rap
Member
PostSun Nov 06, 2011 10:01 am 
(Site appearance) You say you cant see the site unless you go past the no trespassing signs. My understanding is the signs are on the old county road, which was the PUBLIC road we all used to get to Jacks Pass. When did you obtain the road? The point you are making is out of sight, out of mind. I would invite everyone to go up to Garland and see the desecration. You can not say you are good stewards of the land, and have done what you have done. (Fish habitat restoration) You say you didn't have the money to restore the fish. Don't worry about it. That is up to God and the river. Besides most of the place is on the flood plain. (Noxious gasses) You say there are none at Garland. You would not know that. There is no equipment at Garland to measure hazardous materials' releases. However, nearly every geothermal well ever drilled has them. (Transmission lines) You say that up to 10 megawatts can now by run underground. The PUD hopes for much more than that. Also they will not say the method of transmission or even the route. They know there are BIG problems, both physical and PR wise awaiting them down the road in trying to get the power out. They don't want to face the problems and incur the wrath of the public until the well comes in. They will not talk about it. Also there are many problems associated with underground transmission, including maintainance and cost--It is way, way more expensive. I invite you to tell us all in a reply as to the route and manner in which they are going to get the power out. (Clear cutting) You say there will be no old growth clear cutting on the Garland site. Are you aware the PUD is in for permits now to clear another field of similar size as the one they are set up on now in the old meadow? Whether old growth or newer growth, there are many big trees where the PUD plans to CLEAR CUT across the stream from where they are now drilling. More importantly, what about all the trees from Garland to where they will hook to the grid? Are they going to cut all the trees down when they go through Skyko 3 & 4, Troublesome Creek and San Juan? You parse your words. (What's in it for you?) (You say you won't live long enough to see any revenue.) You are currently receiving checks for leasing the land to the PUD. You also will keep the improvements such as the shored-up concrete wall the county put up to keep the hill from sliding and the entrance road they fixed to your site. You also have written into the lease that you can tell the county to not remove the improvements, such as the pad they have placed over the entire meadow. And now they are planning on logging more of your land for another pad. Your property improvements are worth more than a $million. I am sure you are still young enough to go up to your land and see the mess that they have made. The problem is they are going to mess up a lot more than just your place. I invite you to post you lease agreement with the county on this site. (You talk about your environmental concerns and your goal to serve others. You say there are environmental trade-offs, etc.) What you have traded off is Garland for money and watts. Even worse than that--the entire area is now in danger.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostMon Nov 14, 2011 9:26 pm 
It's looking a lot like no matter what you find to generate power some folks are never happy.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 11272 | TRs | Pics
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostTue Nov 15, 2011 6:48 am 
MtnGoat wrote:
It's looking a lot like no matter what you find to generate power some folks are never happy.
Exactly. I'm thinking somebody better come up with some solar type stuff that works well here, cuz things are going to either get expensive, or short, if the dams get regulated more. The only thing is to think small, and do house by house. Or is that controversial too? I like salmon. I like cheap power.

What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Schroder
Member
Member


Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 6696 | TRs | Pics
Location: on the beach
Schroder
Member
PostTue Nov 15, 2011 7:35 am 
You're not going to have cheap power building micro-hydro, low-heat geothermal or something else house by house.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
rap
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Sep 2011
Posts: 28 | TRs | Pics
Location: king/snohomish county
rap
Member
PostSat Nov 19, 2011 5:59 am 
The only difference between what the utility companies did before when they damned all the big rivers, and what the Snoh. cnty. PUD is doing now is--SCALE OF DESTRUCTION. The big places are all gone and they are moving into all the little places--like Garland. In essence, they are down to scouring the forest for a watt here and there. Calling it GREEN is just a political justification for doing what they always do, which is to destroy. rant.gif

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 11272 | TRs | Pics
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostSat Nov 19, 2011 8:38 am 
rap wrote:
The only difference between what the utility companies did before when they damned all the big rivers, and what the Snoh. cnty. PUD is doing now is--SCALE OF DESTRUCTION. The big places are all gone and they are moving into all the little places--like Garland. In essence, they are down to scouring the forest for a watt here and there. Calling it GREEN is just a political justification for doing what they always do, which is to destroy. rant.gif
OK, so you don't allow any more projects. What is you proposal? People are flocking to live here, we have more toys that require electricity being promoted and used, what is YOUR solution? It is easy to whine and complain, but trying to come up with answers takes a bit of work. Are there solar panels that work in November and December for us? Do you want to slice and dice birds with windmills? Are you willing to shut down your computer at peak hours to conserve energy? Give up your hairdryer? What are YOU willing to do without?

What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostSat Nov 19, 2011 11:05 am 
The poster seems to be very uncomfortable in grappling with the idea that destruction is necessary, and I have little doubt when pressed would fall back on the idea of determining what others 'need' as an argument about 'waste'. The constant is all these threads is of course the other guy's waste. The universe in which these arguments are set is typically one in which 'nature', pure and 'unspoiled' is some default state of grace, perfection, balance, or what 'should' be, with humans as the despoilers, bad element, 'wasters'..etc. Usually the fact that these are anthropocentric ideas to start with, isn't even noticed! I don't want to presume too much about the poster but the seeds are clear in the argument, to me anyway. They almost always wind up in the same place...nature as pure, man as despoiler or waster, and the need to judge and decry other people's 'waste' and the search for resources said 'waste' results in.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
rap
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Sep 2011
Posts: 28 | TRs | Pics
Location: king/snohomish county
rap
Member
PostSat Nov 19, 2011 12:10 pm 
You make good points. I could respond on many levels. For instance I might tell you the answer is natural gas, conservation or population control. There are quality arguments for all of these things. You might counter with solar, wind or even geothermal. There are equally convincing arguments for these as well. However, I am trying to stay away from these larger and political-driven arguments. My argument is simple and pure and non-political. I may very well be the only one, but I am fighting to preserve 'the little places', places like Garland, before they are all gone too. Why do they have to come up here and scrounge through our forest for a watt here and there like bums going through a dumpster. There is so little remaining, yet now they have come for that too. Garland is the face of the new movement that the utilities have undertaken to take and develope what they haven't allready ruined. Someone has to love and cherish Garland and these little places. If not us, then who? There is always a need and a good reason (or rationalization) to take and develop and destroy.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 11272 | TRs | Pics
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostSat Nov 19, 2011 5:06 pm 
One person's destruction is another's construction. Those clearcuts you abhor support wildlife that prefer openings to old growth forests. Ah, poop, why bother?

What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Cameron Sharpe
Member
Member


Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 4 | TRs | Pics
Cameron Sharpe
Member
PostSun Nov 20, 2011 5:57 pm 
smile.gif Thanks to the many of you who have seen the wonderful place that was Garland Mineral Springs, and the many lives and families that were positively impacted there. After the damage from the 1,000 year high flood of 1959, and destruction of the lodge from fire, the Sharpe and Mooney families were unable to continue for long. They were forced to move to the Sultan Valley in order to make a living and support their families. As time went on, the River braiding began to wash more and more of the trees and land from Garland, down to the Puget Sound. Although dozens of old growth trees were being destroyed and literally many acres of land washing downstream, well-intentioned, but misguided regulations prevented doing much of anything to protect the trees and land. Given enough time, money and about $100,000 worth of environmental studies, the river could probably have been tamed, but our government regulations in their infinite wisdom, dictated that the old growth trees would be destroyed, and the land would silt the river and Puget Sound. I am sure that our federal and state regulations must have saved a tree or Salmon somewhere, but not at Garland. As the river braiding became increasingly destructive, Salmon eggs were stranded, and tree after tree fell into the river. The end result was more and more destruction and less and less fish. As with the second law of thermodynamics; "All things go from a state of order to disorder." Garland Mineral Springs (natural temperature was 85 F), has been slowly destroyed by the river. In recent years, it has become apparent that the entire site was doomed, along with the valuable and historic Springs. The PUD interest in exploring for clean geothermal energy appears to be the only way that Garland, and the Springs can survive. At present, another old growth tree is about to be undercut by the river, but the permitting process is so complicated that it will be lost before anything can be done. Regarding clear cutting: When the river took about 100 old growth trees, we heard no screams of protest. The PUD exploration will not clear cut anything. It is true that a few recent growth maples, and vine maples that are not visible from anywhere, will be removed, but claims of clear cutting at Garland are simply false assumptions. Most feel that the possibility of Geothermal power from Garland is a responsible and positive win-win option that we should explore. Our thanks to the many of you who have asked questions, and have expressed responsible opinions. Cameron Sharpe Garland Mineral Springs <attachment deleted by admin - feature is only to be used for attaching GMap files>

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Geothermal Energy in WA (Split from Garland HS Thread)
  Happy Birthday noahk!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum