January 1982 RAIN Page 13 f f' f ■ i paid for by ratepayers. Because virtually all of the water in the Snake/Columbia system is used to produce hydropower, any increases in streamflow diversions for agriculture or other purposes result in a loss of hydropower production. The problem with losing hydropower is that this relatively cheap energy source will have to be replaced by more expensive power supplies. The Northwest has long enjoyed low- priced electricity due to the abundance of hydropower in the region; but recent and upcoming large rate increases on the part of the region's private and public utilities reflect their growing reliance on coal and nuclear sources, which produce power at 30 to 60 times the cost of existing hydro facilities. Planned irrigation development, which will divert large quantities of river water, therefore involves a direct tradeoff with energy production. According to Dr. Norman Whittlesey, a Washington State University economist, if only 5% of the Northwest's hydro- power production (about 5 billion kilowatt hours per year) were lost and replaced with thermal generation, the average cost of Northwest electricity would rise nearly 30%. Unfortunately, not everybody benefits from new irrigation development, but virtually everybody pays the higher rates. Furthermore, irrigation development requires large amounts of electricity to pump water onto the land. Since most land with easy access to water has long since been developed, the new sites either have high pump lifts, as much as 800 or 900 feet in some places, or are located long distances from the river, sometimes 15 to 30 miles. The amount of electricity to pump large quantities of water that far is staggering. The rising electricity rates that accompany new agricultural development compound the problem for existing farmers. Unlike utility companies, small irrigators simply cannot pass on the increased costs of electricity production to the consumer. As evidenced by the WET FIELDS OR WATER POWER?
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz