Friday, August 3, 2012

Yet More on the Susitna Dam Project

2 August 2012
9:39 PM

Sunrise at4:56 AMin direction42°NortheastNortheast
Sunset at10:55 PMin direction317°NorthwestNorthwest
Duration of day: 17 hours, 59 minutes (6 minutes, 57 seconds shorter than yesterday)


Civil twilight ends at 12:33 AM, begins at 3:22 AM


I don't use this blog to speak about my opinions on controversial topics much.  I have chosen to use it as a way to describe my life in Alaska.  I have used it as forum for trying to make the unique qualities of my life real for family and friends who live Outside.  Today's post is a departure from that approach as I take more time to explore my values with respect to society, growth, and the necessities.  I also know what I see today may be not be the same view I have tomorrow.


I was raised in the electrical and water management shadow cast by the Hoover Dam.  For decades, the dam had sufficient power to meet the growth and needs of Southern California.  Today, it remains a major supplier of electricity to the Southwest. Built in the 1930s, my mother was 10 when the Bureau of Reclamation began offering tours of the dam, tours which are still available today.

As a child, I was in awe of the dam.  What was there to not like?  Structurally, it was and is phenomenal.  In terms of power and water management, it is still integral to the well-being of Southern California.  While it produces energy, it does not emit the same high levels of air pollution as fossil fuels.  Growing up in the time when the nation moved forward as a major player in world politics, it never crossed my mind to doubt its value and desirability.

Things change.  There are many discussions on the unforeseen environmental impacts of Hoover Dam, but my thoughts today revolve around its societal impacts.  What does virtually unlimited power offer a civilization such as ours?  Reading statistics here and there, it appears that our nation consumes far more resources for the sake of power than any other nation.  It appears while many people live in famine, unsanitary conditions, and use little power, we can't get enough of it.  We must power not only those things necessary to our existence, but our many, many toys.  This is what we are as a people - in general.

In general - that is the key.  When I think of those in the Mat-Su borough who are so violently opposed to the dam that they want my son to leave KTNA because he reports the news without bias, I think of people who do not want to discuss what they abhor, but who are probably not far from the mark when they think the dam is not necessary for a comfortable and well-lived life.  From what I can see, by looking at the village itself, those who have lived in Talkeetna for many, many years - the pillars of the community as my son says - have thrived while living in a small-footprint.  They do not stress the land, and manage to maintain comfort without excess.

In contrast, how would all that energy created by the proposed dam be used?  I doubt it would be used conservatively.  It would be squandered and taken for granted.  It would power several TVs throughout the house, multiple appliances, lots of computers, many gadgets, power tools, garage door openers.  And while it does that, few people making use of the power would bother to turn off lights as they leave rooms, unplug computers when not in use, or make a point of buying the most energy efficient appliances.

In fact, isn't it a status symbol to not have to worry about the cost of the energy we consume?  I remember at the height of our excess, before the economy took a powerful downward swing in the last decade, watching bigger and bigger SUV cars being driven by one woman doing errands.  Wasn't that communicating affluence in every way possible?  Not having to worry about the cost of electricity also conveys status.

Why does that bug me so much?  Why do I feel anxious and unhappy that the flora and fauna of a whole ecosystem can be compromised to power computers not being used?  I don't know, but I do .. I just do.  Shouldn't we be stewards of the planet instead of ravaging it?

So, while I think people do need readily available energy, I do not think they need readily available, cheap energy.  I think we all need to pay prices high enough that we are not quite comfortable with the cost.  Many of us are motivated to evaluate our use of energy, whether it is fuel to power cars or electricity to power homes, when it affects our pocket book.  Our demand for more efficient products motivates our suppliers of energy and goods. A clean environment can also be a by-product of people's desire to reduce cost as well as conscientiously caring for the planet and its creatures.

Fight on villagers of Talkeetna, making sure you fully understand your opponents reasoning and viewpoint.  Any triumphant Olympian will tell you the many times they have watched the performance and techniques of the competition in order to best them.






No comments:

Post a Comment

Thanks for taking time to comment.