Totally agree with the gentleman below with the addition that, with so many entities involved and the expectation that the TMDL can be met, which is absurd, means that the project -whenever it gets started- is doomed to being years longer and billions of dollars in cost more than it should be and than is necessary. Face it, stirring up the muck at the base of the dam is going to result in an appreciable amount getting sent over and down to the bay. Why not default to this result, place recovery and mitigation efforts immediately downstream ,get in there and quickly (not to be confused with sloppily or hap-haphazardly) extract the sediments? Otherwise this will be another political boondoggle doomed to end up in the courts and the dam will still be full. We may have to accept diminished Bay water quality and clarity for the life of the project (=short term) but the long term gains are worth it. Furthermore, near site temporary or even permanent storage and settlement sites should be identified (if any) and used - especially should an emergency arise.To expect the project to be completed without any spillage is unrealistic.
Who is responsible for the Susquehanna watershed and pollutants coming from it? That's my question. Maybe more could be done to clean up the watershed rather than catching it at the damn.
You have too many hands in the fire already.
I suggest that you dredge the river haul the debris by rail car north to Brunner Island they have a de-watering facility and then burn the solids.
Thank you!
Your comment has been received. Before it can be published, the comment will be reviewed by our team to ensure it adheres with our rules of engagement.
Comments
Totally agree with the gentleman below with the addition that, with so many entities involved and the expectation that the TMDL can be met, which is absurd, means that the project -whenever it gets started- is doomed to being years longer and billions of dollars in cost more than it should be and than is necessary. Face it, stirring up the muck at the base of the dam is going to result in an appreciable amount getting sent over and down to the bay. Why not default to this result, place recovery and mitigation efforts immediately downstream ,get in there and quickly (not to be confused with sloppily or hap-haphazardly) extract the sediments? Otherwise this will be another political boondoggle doomed to end up in the courts and the dam will still be full. We may have to accept diminished Bay water quality and clarity for the life of the project (=short term) but the long term gains are worth it. Furthermore, near site temporary or even permanent storage and settlement sites should be identified (if any) and used - especially should an emergency arise.To expect the project to be completed without any spillage is unrealistic.
Who is responsible for the Susquehanna watershed and pollutants coming from it? That's my question. Maybe more could be done to clean up the watershed rather than catching it at the damn.
You have too many hands in the fire already.
I suggest that you dredge the river haul the debris by rail car north to Brunner Island they have a de-watering facility and then burn the solids.
Thank you!
Your comment has been received. Before it can be published, the comment will be reviewed by our team to ensure it adheres with our rules of engagement.
Back to recent stories