Hydropower policy of the United States
Hydropower policy in the United States includes all the laws, rules, regulations, programs and agencies that govern the national hydroelectric industry.
While federal policy regarding interstate waters dates to the constitutional landmark decision under the Commerce Clause in 1824, its implementation was initially limited to development of navigation and its safety, among other demands for such internal improvements.
By the 1850s and increasingly later, flood control was added to the demands for improvements, as well as recognizing the need to investigate and better understand the science involved.
Water is required for all life, but since ancient times, mankind has also employed this natural resource for other specifically human productive uses.
It took time before ancient cities learned to separate water supply from effluent and develop independent drainage for wastewater.
Over time these waterways became the transportation and trading routes which yielded the new world's vast riches, and soon became the object of rivalry between competing colonial powers.
With the country's vast unsettled western frontier, early policy and precedent was set in 1787 in the Northwest Ordinance, which established free usage of its interior waterways and connecting portages;[5] these conditions would be included in the lands of Louisiana Purchase in 1803, which doubled the country's size, and later territorial acquisitions.
[4] Following the court decision and passage of the General Survey Act, subsequent rivers and harbors acts were passed throughout the 19th century generally, except during financial crises and the Civil War;[6] after the war, internal improvement spending rose considerably, particularly in the eastern states with abundant water resources.
With much the same technical expertise as needed for earlier roads and canals, the Corps was assigned involvement; they also initiated scientific studies of rivers and their engineered improvements and structures.
Where railroads were not so directly involved, the decline in canal traffic developed alternative uses for the water power contained behind these dams and former locks.
In the 1870s and deriving from uses in the mining industry, the high efficiency Pelton wheel impulse turbine was developed to use hydropower under very different flow and pressure conditions.
[7] Legislation specifically regarding hydropower in the United States first appeared in 1901 with the first Federal Water Power Act, which required special permission for a hydroelectric plant to be built and operated on any stream large enough for boat traffic.
The Federal Power Act was enacted in 1920 with the purpose of organizing and regulating hydroelectric projects at the national level.
Subsequent amendments to the Act included some wildlife provisions and more recently, stipulations that called for studies looking into the feasibility of increasing U.S. hydropower capacity using existing dams.
[13] FERC is responsible for licensing, relicensing, and oversight of ongoing project operations such as dam safety inspections and environmental monitoring.
After FERC approves the use of a traditional licensing process, joint agency and public meetings are conducted along with site visits and written comments are accepted.
Warren Co. v. Maine Board of Environmental Protection, the states have the power to impose restrictions on federal licensing or relicensing of hydropower facilities.
They can lead to soil erosion, the spread of disease, the loss of species and even, as one scientist claims, a change in the Earth's rotation due to huge amounts of water being moved to reservoirs.
[26] Also, the major amounts of concrete needed for these dams mean more CO2 being discharged into the atmosphere and promote runoff that limits the recharging ability of underground aquifers that provide potable water.
The reason it hinders the hydropower licensing and relicensing process is because it has priority over any government activity and therefore supersedes any construction project.
"[28] The major consequences of the ESA and the Supreme Court's ruling in terms of hydropower proliferation are added costs, delays and site analyses that make dam construction much more difficult and less attractive to investors.
[27] Because of the incredibly high construction and maintenance costs of dams and generation equipment, outside investment is key to the hydropower industry.
The protected species are largely aquatic types whose migration patterns and feeding habits might be affected by the construction and subsequent operation of a dam.
Another provision stated that FERC must work with fish and wildlife agencies to mitigate the environmental impacts of existing dams.
[32] Hydroelectric facilities placed into service after August 8, 2005 and before January 1, 2014 may apply for a tax credit for incremental production gains from efficiency improvements or capacity additions.
The determination of incremental hydropower production shall not be based on any operational changes at a facility not directly associated with the efficiency improvements or additions of capacity.
The innovative Loan Guarantee Program was created by the EPAct Title XVII to “support the deployment of the deployment of innovative, clean energy technologies that reduce, avoid or sequester carbon dioxide & other air emissions.”[35] The Federal government has authorized up to $42.5 billion in loan guarantees.
CREBs are not limited to hydropower, and are qualified for use with all technologies listed in the federal renewable energy production tax credit.
They say that an expediting 2-year licensing process for minimal impact projects would allow hydro to be on an “equal footing” with other renewable technologies.
Hydropower currently receives half of the rate per kWh under the Production Tax Credit, and the NHA thinks that it should be increased such that it is equal with other renewable technologies.
