% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

IdaCorp, Inc. Message Board

  • kosseattle kosseattle Feb 19, 2000 10:49 PM Flag

    Northwest Power get Japanese order

    Northwest Power owned by IDA got a fuel cell
    order from Tokyo Bokei, Japan (see yahoo news
    releases). I'm surprized this new release hasn't caused the
    stock to skyrocket. These are prototypes, however, it
    seems to indicate that Northwest Power might be doing a
    lot of business with Japan soon. I don't see how
    anyone can lose with thsi stock. You get a decent
    dividend, stability of owning a utility, and the huge
    potential upside with Northwest Power. Why isn't the stock
    going up?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • The pools are cooler in the afterbays, the
      quarter mile sections below each

      However, when the turbines are running, they
      super-saturate the water below the dams with to much disolved
      oxygen. The affect on the salmon smolts that get through
      is deadly. In other words they get the bends and
      die...if they aren't chewed up by the turbines.

      reservoir at Lewiston, Idaho receives 40,000,000 gallons of
      92-F toxic water daily from the Potlatch Corp who is
      discharging this "gunk" without a valid discharge permit. It
      expired in 1997. Go follow the soft money trail on that

      Take care on your trip and I hope you
      took your flyrod with you...or the favorite fishin'
      pole of choice.

    • RJ, if you are locked into a BPA contract, let it
      expire. BPA no longer sells wholesale power at the lowest
      rate in the country. Check the Wall Street Journal.
      They publish wholesale prices across the nation. I
      checked twice last week. On both days one could buy
      electricity more cheaply in NY, NJ, and PA, than in the
      Mid-Columbia...or Idaho.

      There is a co-op of rural
      cooperatives in Idaho, Oregon, and Montana that is buying
      power consistantly at a rate 10-12% cheaper than BPA
      prices. They buy on the open market. Seems that BPA is
      becoming less competitive. At last count there are 14

      All the more reason to get rid of the
      dams if BPA is losing their rural electric market
      segment. It seems that all that remains is the fully
      subsidised Aluminium industry and a group of Wasington State
      farmers that get pumping subsidies and then run the
      return flows of the irrigation water through ten
      subsidised hydro plants, and sell the power back to BPA for
      millions of dollars...and, yes, paid for at ratepayer

      I have some buds that fish the Frazier. I'll see
      what they have to say.

      In the meantime, ask
      yourself why the salmon numbers are the same as they were
      twenty years ago below the four lower Snake River dams,
      and almost gone above ? The biologists know. Now the
      Washington and California Departments of F & G have
      officialy blamed the dams also.

    • any report. Certainly, I could point out flaws in
      PATH, but I won't get into that. You are a breaching
      advocate and I respect that. Most of my fellow fish
      advocate friends share your views and bring up the same
      arguments. But I am kind of a renegade and pride myself as
      being an independent thinker. It kills my friends to
      hear this, but I am not impressed that 400 scientists
      support dam breaching/removal. I look at the data and
      analyses and it just doesn't add up in my mind, so I
      haven't jumped on that bandwagon. I have studied the
      temperature data in the 140 mile stretch of the Snake and
      find that the water is actually cooler in the pools
      behind the dams than before the dams were built. I still
      say the problem is much more complex. Look at the
      Frasier River sockeye run last year. The Frasier has no
      dams, yet last year's run was one of the worst on
      record and they had to shut down all harvest. Something
      else is going on. I would just like us to know what
      that something else is before we jump to the breaching
      alternative. And by the way, with all due respect, it isn't
      the taxpayers that paid for the PATH report and the
      $3 billion dollars of fish mitigation costs. It is
      the ratepayers of the customers of BPA. All fish
      costs are part of BPA's revenue requirement and are
      recovered in BPA's wholesale power rates. The consumers of
      the Region's rural electric cooperatives, public
      utility districts, municipal utilities, DSIs and other
      wholesale power customers of BPA pay the costs through the
      electric rates. If you buy power from an Investor-owned
      utility like Idaho Power or Avista like I do, you don't
      pay for fish costs. That's one point that I agree
      with Governor Kitzhaber on--Congress should
      appropriate money for fish costs so all taxpayers, not just
      the Region's ratepayers share in the costs of
      recovering our beloved salmon and steelhead. This will be my
      last post for several weeks. I am going on assignment
      outside the U.S. Enjoyed the dialog. Go IDA and bring
      back the salmon!

    • This is good dialog. The ALL-H paper is flawed.
      This after the earlier PATH report submitted by the
      agencies recommended breach as the best chance. Even NMFS
      publically admitted at an Idaho Water Users Assoc. meeting
      that the best chance for Idaho's fish was to return
      the river to a natural flow where the four dams sit.
      As you know, that stretch of the Snake is now a 140
      mile long reservoir that overheats much of the year to
      a lethal level for the migrating smolts and
      requires the flushing of upstream irrigation water to get
      them on the way to the ocean. But the PATH report,
      prepared at a cost of $20,000,000 taxpayer dollars, was
      thrown out because it was not politcally

      The flaws in the All-H (aka 4-H) are numerous. They
      fail to consider several major economic impacts. (1)
      The cost of the loss of Southern Idaho farm
      production (650,000 acres of crop land at a loss of
      $430,000,000 annually.(2) The benifit of a resurgance of a
      major recreational real estate and construction
      industry along the rivers estimated to be $350,000,000
      annually. (3) The results of a lawsuit on behalf of the Nez
      Perce and other tribes from the broken fishing treaty
      of 1855 (I might be wrong on the date) which will
      run into the billions. (4) and the addition of
      approximately 25,000 salmon and steelhead related jobs from
      commercial fishing to sports fishing from the ocean to
      Stanley, Idaho.

      The dams only produce 5% of the
      power produced in the Northwest by BPA, and run at only
      a 28% capacity. They were designed as
      run-of-the-river dams for barge traffic only, not even flood
      control. As far as shipping traffic. Two major industries.
      (1) Pottlatch Corp. in Lewiston which only ships 10%
      of their product via barge. The rest goes out by
      truck and rail. This info is in their annual report.
      (2) The grain shippers. Every ton that goes down
      river costs the taxpayer $12.60. The farmer only has to
      pay $1.40. Thus one of the concerns of Taxpayers for
      Common Sense.

      So far the taxpayers have spent
      $3,000,000,000 (billion) on salmon recovery that has failed,
      including twenty years of barging.

    • informed response. I apologize if my earlier
      posts seemed to demean the scientists that support
      breaching. That was not my intent. Its just that when I look
      at the All-H paper, its not clear to me that
      breaching is a better alternative than keeping the dams
      with the associated power and barging benefits. I
      certainly don't dispute that the science supports the fact
      that breaching will help bring back salmon. But when I
      see that breaching has a 20% probability of bringing
      back certain salmon runs over 50 years, it gives me
      pause. I do not dispute the figures you present in terms
      of the chinook returns in the Upper Salmon River
      tributaries. I have also participated in snorkel surveys and
      redd counts along many of those streams with my
      Sho-Ban fisheries friends. But its not clear to me that
      ocean conditions and long term weather patterns may not
      have a significant effect. My meteorologist friends
      tell me that we seem to have just ended a 20 year dry
      cycle and have entered a 20 year wet cycle. Ocean
      conditions have improved with La Nina. Last year's
      spring/summer chinook jack counts tell us that this year could
      end up with the largest return of spring/summer
      chinook since the mid-sixties--and that includes fish
      that will end up in the Middle Fork and Bear Valley
      Creek. There will most likely be a sports fishing season
      on this run in Idaho. And the dams are still there.
      I am open-minded on this. Just trying to observe
      and analyze the facts as I see them. Thanks again for
      your post. Regards, RJ

    • You are right about the problem being more than
      the four dams. And you are correct about IDA being a
      part of the demise of the fish. They once ran through
      Boise, up the Boise River, not far from Sun Valley. Runs
      even went south into Northern Nevada near Twin Falls
      as far as Jackpot. The irrigators Salmon Falls Dam
      took care of that run.

      However the science does
      support the breaching of the four dams as a must if the
      fish are to survive. Over four hundred "independent"
      scientists agree. A few "hired" scientists disagree. I
      myself studied fisheries biology in college.

      facts are the salmon and steelhead are thriving below
      the four dams in The Hanford reach of the Columbia,
      The Yakima River, The John Day, and The Umatilla.
      There was even a sports fishing season on them this

      Above the dams they are close to extinction. No
      Chinook returned to Marsh Creek near Stanley in two of
      the last three years. This year was zero. Bear Creek
      had only three. These are major haedwater systems to
      the Middle Fork of the Salmon.

      The Sawtooth
      federal fish hatchery near Stanley saw only 197 chinook
      return this year. Most were male jacks, one year in the
      ocean fish. Only 37 were wild. Of those only twelve
      were wild females. The Sawtooth stream section of the
      Salmon saw average runs of 18,500 in the 1970's prior to
      the completion of the four dams.

      I know these
      facts because I have worked on salmon census in the
      streams and have witnessed the pathetic efforts to take
      eggs from the few females to keep the strain alive. I
      know many of theses scientists personally. They are Us
      Fish& Wildlife people, Tribe people, Idaho Fish & Game
      folks, and College professors.

      Not to be
      offensive, but to say that their findings and
      recommendations to breach the four dams is flawed, is an insult
      to their dedication and professionalism.

      best to you, and I to look forward to your posts.


    • this and you are right, this is intensely
      political. Having been born and raised in Idaho and
      remembering the days when my father used to take us kids
      salmon fishing on the South Fork of the Salmon River, I
      consider myself a fish advocate. However, I do not abide
      by the notion that taking out the 4 lower Snake dams
      is the answer. I have studied this for years and
      can't go into all of the true science arguments here,
      but salmon and steelhead in coastal rivers with no
      dams are also suffering the drastic declines. I am not
      ready to join the mass hysteria around dam breaching,
      therefore. But I am with you in spirit. We need the fish
      back. But like I said earlier, the problem is a lot
      more complex than just dams. Actually, Idaho Power has
      to take huge responsibility for the demise of the
      fall chinook salmon runs. Their Hells Canyon Dam has
      no fish ladders and virtually wiped out the runs
      that used to go clear up to the Twin Falls area. At
      least the Lower Snake damas have fish ladders and
      despite the naysayers to barging, the true scientific
      evidence says that it works.

    • Nice of you to say that. I am interested in the technology and follow it as much as I can. Great potential in 2-5 years.

    • Hi Stealth! Nice to see a post from you. You are
      right on about signing petitions.

      organization is ligit. The Dam thing is only one of many
      issues they deal with. They constantly expose bad
      government programs spending tax monies. like $1,000
      hammers, $500 toilet seats, $2,000 rolls of duct tape,

      I believe their webb site is

    • should read posts 87 through 155, there are quite a few posts dedicated to just that subject.
      Do not sign petitions on anything unless you know what your signing.

    • View More Messages
73.79+1.02(+1.40%)May 4 4:02 PMEDT