Category Archives: Letters to the Editor

Landslide area is unstable

Posted by in Letters to the Editor | March 6, 2014

Published: Thursday, March 6, 2014, 1:00 a.m.

Thank you for the Monday article, “Federal agency approves PUD’s study of proposed dam.” It seems as though PUD senior management are willing say just about anything to advance this project. Just one example is their description of the Sunset Falls area as having “No known geological hazards or unstable areas.”

Read more ›

PUD needs to try listening

Posted by in Letters to the Editor | February 21, 2014

Published: Friday, February 21, 2014, 1:00 a.m.

In a recent Viewpoints guest commentary by Steve Klein, he characterized three opponents to the proposed dam on the Skykomish River. Years ago I worked with some of the bravest men our country has ever produced and I have never seen anyone minimize the efforts of hard working public servants like Sen. Kirk Pearson and others as Steve Klein has in relation to the SnoPUD hydroelectric project and damming of the Skykomish river. It is the sheer volume of complaints and objections by ratepayers that have continually been ignored or misrepresented or even intercepted by Mr. Klein that drove them to Sen. Pearson for protection.
Read more ›

Beware PUD’s dam propoganda

Posted by in Letters to the Editor | February 15, 2014

Published: Friday, April 26, 2013, 12:01 a.m.

I received the Snohomish County PUD’s spring 2013 Current newsletter entitled “Eyes on the Environment” just before Earth Day. It was most disappointing to read that the PUD is intentionally misleading and propagating false information to its ratepayers.
Read more ›

We must protect scenic Sky River

Posted by in Letters to the Editor | February 15, 2014

Published: Tuesday, January 14, 2014, 1:00 a.m.

Thank you for the Sunday commentary on PUD dam proposal. (“PUD’s dam proposal would do more harm than good.”)
I oppose the proposed dam on the Skykomish — Sunset Falls. There are much better uses of funds for power.
Read more ›

PUD downplays real costs

Posted by in Letters to the Editor | February 12, 2014

Published: Wednesday, February 12, 2014, 1:00 a.m.   Everett Herald

Thank you for the Feb. 9 article on the proposed Sunset Falls Dam.
PUD assures us that “no decision has been made” and asks the public to “hold judgment until they see the final proposal,” but that is becoming increasingly difficult because PUD is so obviously downplaying the real costs.
Read more ›

Plan for dam doesn’t add up

Posted by in Letters to the Editor | February 11, 2014

Published: Monday, February 10, 2014, 1:00 a.m.

Everett Herald

Steve Klein’s guest Viewpoints commentary, “Sunset Falls dam: Balance is possible,” just doesn’t add up. He asks how to ensure low-cost, renewable sources of energy to Snohomish County. The answer is: “Stop wasting ratepayer and taxpayer money on this low-power hydro. We don’t need it!”
His project is not low cost. No other PUD or utility in Washington (with 25,000 customers) is proposing new hydro — it doesn’t pencil out. The Northwest has more than we can use.
Read more ›

Important to evaluate all plans

Posted by in Letters to the Editor | January 25, 2014

Published: Saturday, January 25, 2014, 1:00 a.m.


It is rewarding to see recent letters from Snohomish County residents about some of the projects being planned by the PUD to generate electricity.
Perhaps this will awaken more citizen concern for trends within the PUD for other projects that have not been well planned. A review and scrutiny of the need and costs for other pet projects already in progress may prove informative. There may not have been enough oversight for such things as rate increases to provide for the expenditures and general costs to fund such projects. Is there a misuse of the public trust? Maybe not.
Ignacio Castro, Jr.

Focus on natural gas

Posted by in Letters to the Editor | January 22, 2014

Published: Wednesday, January 22, 2014, 1:00 a.m.

In regard to the proposed Sunset Falls power plant, the PUD should be thinking much bigger. They should drop this plan and build a gas turbine (jet engine) power plant. These are now being built all over the country under the radar. Even California built one in downtown San Jose and you can drive by it on the freeway without even seeing it. These plants are about 500 to 600 MW (about half the size of a typical nuclear power plant) and burn natural gas. If you remember your high school chemistry class, natural gas is mainly methane which consists of a one-carbon atom surrounded by four hydrogen atoms. When it burns, the hydrogen combines with oxygen to make water and the one carbon makes carbon dioxide. With the four hydrogen atoms and one carbon atom very little carbon dioxide is produced. This type of plant can be built close to the load so big cross-country power lines are not required. These plants can respond very quickly to load changes, and when combined with base load power from nuclear plants, would have a very low carbon footprint. Hydropower has been very good to us, but it is time to move on to power plants with less impact to the environment.
Brad Ipsen

Plan definitely not ‘balanced”

Posted by in Letters to the Editor | January 22, 2014

Published: Wednesday, January 22, 2014, 1:00 a.m.

When I hear proponents of a project argue that “balance” as a justification for his project, I know instinctively they are straining credulity!
Mr Klein’s, Sunday Viewpoints commentary, “Sunset Falls dam: Balance is possible,” claims he can have it both ways. SnoPUD claims it can build a dam on one of the few Wild and Scenic rivers left in America, the Skykomish, still hosting relatively, healthy salmon runs, and claim it is environmentally positive? Yet the power produced would be superfluous to the region’s needs, at the wrong time of year, only to be sold to California! That’s right, spend over $150 million of ratepayers’ dollars for a boondoggle, enriching contractors and Mr Klein himself, and destroy one of the last remaining salmon streams and most spectacular, scenic and recreational assets!
You call that “Balanced?” I don’t!
The “feasibility” Mr, Klein speaks of, is questioned by WDFW themselves in response to the PUD’s study plans, and by the Tulalip and Snoqualmie tribes in their comment letters. They question the feasibility of the dam location, and its likely impacts. Why has SnoPUD rejected the requests of WDFW and tribes to study these problems if their plan is so “balanced?”
If the plan is so “balanced,” what about the toxics released by the hole blasted in the mountain, the landslides already a problem there, the dangerous traffic jams that will threaten cross-state commerce and local businesses?
Please ask SnoPUD, how it can possibly claim this is a balanced plan for the ratepayers?
Janet Way

Renaming project doesn’t change it

Posted by in Letters to the Editor | January 19, 2014

Published: Sunday, January 19, 2014, 1:00 a.m.  The Everett Herald

I am writing in support of the commentary, “More harm than good” regarding SnoPUD’s latest attempt to insert a dam on the Skykomish River. Even the name of the project is misleading. Originally SnoPUD called it Sunset Falls Hydro Electric Project. They have renamed it Sunset Fish Passage and Energy Project in a marketing attempt to make this project appear less intrusive to the environment. Every other hydro project PUD has uses the word “hydro.”

Read more ›