Re: Hetch Hetchy might get a rent increase

Hell, why not? They are basically getting it FREE now.

Well... the main reason would be that then SF would have to come up with that cash.
Where they gonna come up with it? Trickling it down to wherever they can get it...
If it were a private corporation... maybe... a Municipality... not sure it's that great of an idea.

But what to I know?

---

from the article:

"The city agency that operates the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, defended the unchanged $30,000 annual fee, noting that the agency also pays $5 million a year to reimburse the federal government for security, trail maintenance, water monitoring and other services around the reservoir."

So they are paying $5 million per year, hardly free. It implies that it is covering the costs of the dam so the federal government isn't losing any money on it.

and also, pretty much what I said is in the article:

"The extra money would be a drip in the country’s deep financial hole, but it would drive up the city’s municipal power costs and reverberate through the water bills of 2.5 million Bay Area residents."

---

I would be willing to pay extra for my Hetch Hetchy water if the money from the increased rent went into an escrow account that would later help fund the raising the New Don Pedro Dam by an additional 20 feet. That would be sufficient to hold all the water that the Hetch Hetchy reservoir currently holds. Then the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir could be dismantled.

---

That may be true... but I think many people don't realize that all the water in Don Pedro...
none of that goes to San Franscisco. Additionally there are a number of power plants that would
no longer be producing... and all the boating on Don Pedro would probably have to cease...
along with the removal of the House boats.

Of course it's a shame that the valley was ever flooded.
If you want a glimpse of Hetch Hetchy... you can just go down to Poopenaut.

And then what of Eleanor... and Cherry?

Anyway, I don't want to really get into the argument for or against.. but I just wanted to maybe
get people to look at the entire Hetch Hetchy Water and Power system.
It's not all just the dam.

---

Quote
chick-on
That may be true... but I think many people don't realize that all the water in Don Pedro...
none of that goes to San Franscisco. Additionally there are a number of power plants that would
no longer be producing... and all the boating on Don Pedro would probably have to cease...
along with the removal of the House boats.

San Francisco owns 730,000 acre-feet of storage in Don Pedro, for which it paid half of the construction costs. This is twice the storage of HH reservoir. So, while Don Pedro isn't directly connected to the HH system, it allows SF to divert additional water upriver while still meeting their obligations under the Raker Act to the Turlock and Modesto irrigation districts, which hold the senior water rights to the Tuolumne.

Also, even without the HH dam, all the Tuolumne power plants would continue to operate. Only Kirkwood, which is the powerplant fed by HH, would be significantly impacted--if I recall, a 50% reduction in output if water continues to be diverted from just below the damsite into Canyon Tunnel. The changes in output at Holm (Cherry), Moccasin, and Don Pedro depend on where replacement storage for HH is located--less when this storage is added to Cherry/Eleanor, and more when it's outside the Tuolumne system (e.g. groundwater exchanges in the central valley).

Lastly, boating at Don Pedro would be possibly affected only under restoration scenarios that incorporate a direct Don Pedro-HH connection. This is the configuration that Sarah Null proposed in her thesis which kicked off the current round of restoration discussions. My sense is that the Don Pedro intertie is a non-starter politically--mostly due to issues between SF and Turlock/Modesto. It's more likely that instead, a Cherry/Eleanor intertie--between Holm powerplant and Early Intake--would be used, mainly to maintain water quality and minimize losses in Holm power generation. With the Cherry intertie, boating would probably have to be restricted on Cherry (and Eleanor)--especially if a filtration waiver is received for those drainages.

Funny how that works, eh? We'll make Don Pedro bigger so we can take more water upstream.
Yes, you are right about the powerhouses. Anyone heading towards Cherry should take the
few minutes to drive down to Holm Powerhouse to see Cherry Creek and the works there.
Been meaning to put some stuff together w/r to the Hetch Hetchy System. The pipe system
is almost more impressive than the dam.

Wife would not be pleased... but here's a pict. of the Cherry Power Tunnel pipe where
it comes out of the mountain from Cherry Lake:


Gives you an idea how big it is... from here on to Holm it's above ground.

---

Quote
chick-on
Funny how that works, eh? We'll make Don Pedro bigger so we can take more water upstream.
Yes, you are right about the powerhouses. Anyone heading towards Cherry should take the
few minutes to drive down to Holm Powerhouse to see Cherry Creek and the works there.
Been meaning to put some stuff together w/r to the Hetch Hetchy System. The pipe system
is almost more impressive than the dam.

Wife would not be pleased... but here's a pict. of the Cherry Power Tunnel pipe where
it comes out of the mountain from Cherry Lake:


Gives you an idea how big it is... from here on to Holm it's above ground.

What? You posted a picture of me standing on a pipe! No supper tonight, dude.

O o o ... Mr. Disco...

You heard the saying "that kitten has claws?"

Well...

Old Dude on Ice:
http://yosemitenews.info/forum/read.php?3,50396

This is what Old Dude looks like after he has felt her wrath:

---

I don't think it will get anywhere. The best I could find was that SF makes $10 million from the sale of the electricity. It probably costs more than that to wheel the electricity to SF.