This is an opinion piece. We value the diverse opinions of our readers and we welcome robust, wide-ranging thoughts and ideas on subjects relevant to Mendocino County. The following opinion is not representative of The Mendocino Voice, its publisher, editor or staff. Opinion pieces can be sent to info@mendovoice.com.
PG&E mostly agrees with a recent opinion piece urging the removal of Scott Dam due to a better understanding of the seismic risks. As described in our draft decommissioning plan, PG&E considers the expedited removal of the Scott Dam to be in the best interest of PG&E customers. It is also the most appropriate long-term mitigation to address the seismic risk. In the meantime, PG&E has implemented interim measures to reduce near-term seismic risk — the most prominent being the restricted maximum reservoir storage elevation.
However, contrary to the opinion piece, PG&E’s decision not to seek a new license for the Potter Valley Project — a hydroelectric facility — is based on the fact the project is not economical for PG&E’s customers. PG&E can acquire energy from the market at much lower expense than producing it at the project’s Potter Valley hydroelectric powerhouse. Economics drove the license surrender decision. Later, seismic studies were completed. The hazard risk is one of the key factors that led to the decommissioning plan for expedited removal of Scott Dam in the decommissioning plan and schedule.
Ultimately, the project not being economic means we made the decision in the best interest of our customers and their energy bills.
The Potter Valley Project was developed for power generation, but a byproduct of power production was water diverted from the Eel River to the Russian River watershed, which over time was utilized by communities in Mendocino, Sonoma and Marin counties. PG&E recognizes the communities’ water concerns and continues to work with the Eel-Russian Project Authority in their development of future water diversion infrastructure so water can continue to flow to the Russian River watershed.
What is often missing from recent news stories is that nearly 10 years ago, when PG&E determined it was no longer interested in continuing to operate the Potter Valley Project, we approached water users about taking on the facility. We did this because PG&E understood how the users had grown to depend on the water.
Eventually we issued a request for offers to any potential buyer. With no takers, in 2019 PG&E decided to withdraw its preliminary application for notice of intent to file an application for a new hydropower license from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The agency then initiated its “orphan process,” which allowed another opportunity for interested parties to seek ownership by taking on the relicensing, but again none did. In response, FERC directed PG&E to develop a surrender application and decommissioning plan.
PG&E plans to engage a broad set of stakeholders in development of the details of the decommissioning plan. The filing of PG&E’s surrender application and decommissioning plan to FERC in July 2025 is not the end of the process. While we have been already working with the Eel-Russian Project Authority on their future diversion, PG&E’s filing of the surrender application and decommissioning plan is really the beginning of the regulatory proceeding and development of detailed management plans.
In 2023, seismic studies at Scott Dam completed by PG&E and its consultants raised some concerns. To mitigate potential risks, PG&E implemented a reservoir restriction of 10 feet below the usual maximum reservoir elevation. To maintain this reservoir restriction, PG&E is not closing the dam’s spillway gates. With the gates open, there is less water in the reservoir and less pressure on the dam, which leaves more capacity to resist damage from earthquake shaking.
Lastly, PG&E is not “abandoning” the project and remains committed to safely operating the facility until the eventual decommissioning and to acting transparently and with integrity in engaging all interested parties throughout the process.
Dave Canny is vice president of PG&E’s North Coast Region and a resident of Marin County.
The logging, timber, sawmill industry has been reduced to the point there are only a few jobs left. The pot industry had the bottom of the market fall out leaving few jobs there. Tourism just muddles along at a break even pace. What’s next to destroy? How about the wine industry that needs a reliable water supply. It’s time to take out the dams and drain Lake Mendocino so that it hurts the water supply heading south to the vineyards. That’s a great idea!
That IS a great idea !! Vineyards, and the people who own them, take away millions of gallons of water each year from both the Russian River, and the Eel River drainage systems. They have destroyed, or significantly morphed, so much of California’s waterways along with the land we call home, that the landscape is no longer recognized by its own residences. Now, with so many years , no wait, “decades” of ever expanding vinyards and their self made dependancy on the majority of water that flows down the Russian each year we have to say to them, enough is enough! Making wine, an alcoholic beverage, is grown for nothing but profit. Vineyards have been allowed to expand their water needs which demands too much on the river system. I’m sorry but, just like the failing banks in the early 2000’s, I don’t think anything is too big to fail. It wasn’t like they didn’t know the fact that someday the water would run out, because they did know. Take away 1/2, or 3/4 of the vinyards in Northern california and everyone would have as much water as they want flowing naturally down the river channel.
There was pear orchards, apple orchards, green beans etc. In the past. Potter valley corn & beef are some of the best. And there is a new visionary movement now in Potter Valley. Blueberries and other crops are going in. Electricity is needed for a governor that is legislating cars. Water is life. A future of food source could be seen locally, if visionary peoples, were not so narrow minded. We need cannarys, dairy farms, and yes butchers, to serve locally and provide a new source of income. Food. Canadian beef? Chinese green beans? Milk from ?? This river will help with these future transitions. But once the Russian goes…it goes…it will never come back. There are many tributaries also in the Ukiah area that spawn Steelhead. Without the Russian…they cannot have deep enough pools to grow & go back to the ocean. Pilsbury needs to be saved for so many good reasons.
The water diversion to Lake Mendo is needed for so many solid reasons. Agriculture, recreation, fire suppression.
We have built our lives around it for so long it is now a dependency. Water is life, for without it death. Period. In the year 2025, with all our knowledge, with all the technology there is solution. There are new water taxes on ag and personal property paying for the data logging of it all in this area. Lets not screw this up.
In non-drought periods, similar to the good fortune we’ve had the past three years, it’s easy to forget how dry our lakes and rivers can become during periods of multi-year drought. If not for Lake Pillsbury, the Russian and Eel rivers would both run dry during these extended droughts that seem to be occuring with evermore frequency in recent decades . This scenario would be a disaster not only for the AG and population interests in Mendo and Sonoma Counties, but also for the fish population of the Eel river. Water in this state is a commodity of extraordinary value. To diminish or destroy an asset that provides storage for this precious commodity makes no sense whatsoever.
Since PG&E has been gifted a monopoly on electricity sales on the north coast, who in their right mind would take over a power generation project? The only possible customer they would have is PG&E, who would pay them whatever they felt like paying. They are abandoning this project and the people that depend on it, no matter how they try and spin it. If you don’t like it, only recourse you have is to turn off your power. As if we have any choice. Some social responsibility should be the cost of enjoying their monopoly, and maintaining and protecting the environment and residents around Lake Pillsbury is the cost a responsible company would bear. Maybe it’s time Congress broke this monopoly and gave us a choice between competing electrical providers.