Dear editor:

After reading that Powell is preparing to raise electric rates because wholesale power costs are going up, I had a thought that may be dangerous for a person with no engineering degree:

Why are we not studying whether our canals can help make electricity?

I realize that sounds like something a guy says right before someone smarter gently takes away his coffee. But this is not a wild idea. We already have a working local example. Shoshone Irrigation District has operated the Garland Canal Power Plant for decades. It uses existing canal infrastructure, irrigation water that is already moving, and gravity — which, so far, remains one of the more reliable government programs.

The Garland plant is reportedly a 2.9 megawatt facility using about 52 feet of head. Its average annual generation is around 9.4 million kilowatt-hours. Even at a modest value of 3.5 cents per kilowatt-hour, that comes out to roughly $329,000 per year in gross power value.

That number caught my attention because Powell’s upcoming wholesale power increase is expected to cost the city about $300,000 per year.

I am not saying we can slap a propeller in every ditch and make the electric bill disappear. If that were possible, every farmer in the basin would already have a turbine, a hot tub, and a glowing yard sign that says “You’re welcome.”

There are real questions. How much usable drop is there? How much water is available during different seasons? What would construction cost? Who would own the equipment? How would the canal companies be compensated? How would irrigation delivery and water rights be protected? How would the power connect to the grid? Would grants help pay for it?

Those are exactly the questions a feasibility study is supposed to answer.

The Big Horn Basin was built by people who understood water and gravity. They dug canals across this country with equipment that would make modern contractors file a workplace complaint before breakfast. Those canals still move water downhill through drops, checks, gates, siphons and control structures. Every place water drops, energy is being spent. The only question is whether any of it can be captured economically.

This is not about chasing a fad. It is not about building new dams. It is not about taking water away from agriculture. Irrigation must remain the first priority. This is about looking at existing infrastructure and asking whether it can do one more useful job.

Powell is being told that electricity costs are rising partly because hydroelectric production elsewhere is less dependable. That may be true. As one councilman said, “It’s physics.”

Fair enough. But if it is physics when water levels fall somewhere else, then it is also physics when water is dropping through canals right here.

The city does not need to commit millions of dollars tomorrow. But it should commit to finding out what we have. A cooperative feasibility study with local canal companies, irrigation districts, Garland Light & Power, WMPA, and grant officials would be a sensible first step.

We may find out the idea does not pencil out. But if we do not study it, we are basically watching water fall downhill while raising electric rates and pretending gravity is none of our business.

James Andrews

Powell