US-Canada Columbia River Management

From AquaPedia Case Study Database
Revision as of 13:35, 18 May 2017 by Yanisa (Talk | contribs)


Jump to: navigation, search
{{#var: location map}}


Case Description
Loading map...
Geolocation: 48° 59' 59.4902", -117° 49' 55.267"
Total Population 77,000,000 millionmillion
Total Area 670000670,000 km²
258,687 mi²
km2
Predominent Land Use Descriptors industrial use, forest land, urban
Important Uses of Water Agriculture or Irrigation, Fisheries - wild, Hydropower Generation

Summary

Natural, Historic, Economic, Regional, and Political Framework

Issues and Stakeholders

Canadian Entitlement. How should Canada be compensated for power benefits from downstream power generation?

NSPD: Governance, Assets
Stakeholder Types: Federated state/territorial/provincial government, Non-legislative governmental agency

Water storage in British Columbia allows for more predictability and control over the entire Columbia River Basin, thus hydropower facilities in the US Pacific Northwest can produce power more efficiently. The treaty requires the US to sell 50% of the estimated downstream power generated to Canada at a fixed cost. In revisiting this treaty, the US feels it is allotting too much power to Canada, while Canada feels like the share is justified and could be higher. Stakeholders • US State Department • Canadian State Department • US Army Corp of Engineers • Bonneville Power Administration, US federal power authority stationed in Oregon • BC Hydro and Power Authority, British Columbia’s public power authority

• Other electricity companies

Flood Protection. How should flood storage be operated so that the basin is protected from flooding without a large disruption to business-as-usual operations?

NSPD: Water Quantity, Ecosystems, Governance
Stakeholder Types: Federated state/territorial/provincial government, Non-legislative governmental agency

The Columbia River Treaty defines two types of flood protection that Canada provides to the US, “Assured” for day-to-day operations and “Called Upon” for emergencies. The treaty only guarantees assured flood protection until 2024, even if the treaty itself is not terminated. Called Upon flood storage will be the only measure if the treaty is not revised. The US and Canada disagree on when it is appropriate to call upon this measure. Stakeholders • US State Department • Canadian State Department • US Army Corp of Engineers • Bonneville Power Administration, US federal power authority stationed in Oregon • BC Hydro and Power Authority, British Columbia’s public power authority

• Communities along the river

Ecosystem Services. How can the US and Canadian entities ensure minimum damage to fish and surrounding ecosystems in the basin?

NSPD: Ecosystems, Values and Norms
Stakeholder Types: Federated state/territorial/provincial government, Local Government, Environmental interest, Community or organized citizens

The 1964 treaty only covers power and flood related issues and ignores environmental and ecosystem issues. Dams have killed off many salmon and steelhead populations. The new treaty should include clauses on protecting the ecosystem and revitalizing fish populations. Stakeholders • US State Department • Canadian State Department • US Army Corp of Engineers • Bonneville Power Administration, US federal power authority stationed in Oregon • BC Hydro and Power Authority, British Columbia’s public power authority

• First Nations and Indigenous Communities

Canadian Entitlement. How should Canada be compensated for power benefits from downstream power generation?

NSPD: Governance, Assets
Stakeholder Types: Federated state/territorial/provincial government, Non-legislative governmental agency

Water storage in British Columbia allows for more predictability and control over the entire Columbia River Basin, thus hydropower facilities in the US Pacific Northwest can produce power more efficiently. The treaty requires the US to sell 50% of the estimated downstream power generated to Canada at a fixed cost. In revisiting this treaty, the US feels it is allotting too much power to Canada, while Canada feels like the share is justified and could be higher. Stakeholders • US State Department • Canadian State Department • US Army Corp of Engineers • Bonneville Power Administration, US federal power authority stationed in Oregon • BC Hydro and Power Authority, British Columbia’s public power authority

• Other electricity companies

Flood Protection. How should flood storage be operated so that the basin is protected from flooding without a large disruption to business-as-usual operations?

NSPD: Water Quantity, Ecosystems, Governance
Stakeholder Types: Federated state/territorial/provincial government, Non-legislative governmental agency

The Columbia River Treaty defines two types of flood protection that Canada provides to the US, “Assured” for day-to-day operations and “Called Upon” for emergencies. The treaty only guarantees assured flood protection until 2024, even if the treaty itself is not terminated. Called Upon flood storage will be the only measure if the treaty is not revised. The US and Canada disagree on when it is appropriate to call upon this measure. Stakeholders • US State Department • Canadian State Department • US Army Corp of Engineers • Bonneville Power Administration, US federal power authority stationed in Oregon • BC Hydro and Power Authority, British Columbia’s public power authority

• Communities along the river

Ecosystem Services. How can the US and Canadian entities ensure minimum damage to fish and surrounding ecosystems in the basin?

NSPD: Ecosystems, Values and Norms
Stakeholder Types: Federated state/territorial/provincial government, Local Government, Environmental interest, Community or organized citizens

The 1964 treaty only covers power and flood related issues and ignores environmental and ecosystem issues. Dams have killed off many salmon and steelhead populations. The new treaty should include clauses on protecting the ecosystem and revitalizing fish populations. Stakeholders • US State Department • Canadian State Department • US Army Corp of Engineers • Bonneville Power Administration, US federal power authority stationed in Oregon • BC Hydro and Power Authority, British Columbia’s public power authority

• First Nations and Indigenous Communities


Analysis, Synthesis, and Insight

What is an ASI?

Individuals may add their own Analysis, Synthesis, and Insight (ASI) to a case. ASI sub-articles are protected, so that each contributor retains authorship and control of their own content. Edit the case to add your own ASI.

Learn more

No ASI articles have been added yet for this case



Key Questions

Hydropower Dams and Large Storage Infrastructure: Where does the benefit “flow” from a hydropower project and how does that affect implementation and sustainability of the project?

no description entered



Transboundary Water Issues: What kinds of water treaties or agreements between countries can provide sufficient structure and stability to ensure enforceability but also be flexible and adaptable given future uncertainties?

no description entered



Transboundary Water Issues: What mechanisms beyond simple allocation can be incorporated into transboundary water agreements to add value and facilitate resolution?

no description entered