Webber Dam Future Uncertain

Spring 2020 wasn’t only the beginning of the pandemic with waves of COVID cases also brought literal waves high profile stories of dam collapse in Midland, Michigan. Over 10,000 people were displaced from their homes amidst the devastation that left $250 million dollars in damage in its wake. In the years since then aging dams across the state have received renewed scrutiny. Governor Gretchen Whitmer ordered the review of dam safety standards, and infrastructure across the state. An independent engineering report that came out of that task force found that a major cause of the disaster was inadequate government inspections and maintenance by Boyce Hydro, the energy company owners of the affected dams. Federal regulators levied a $15 million dollar fine on the company in response.

Independently, Consumers Energy, the owner of the Webber Dam, and 12 other hydroelectric facilities across the state has been taking a closer look at the future of their dams. According to the energy utility, many dams across the state are near or more than 100 years old and contribute decreasing amounts of energy to the electric grid. The Webber Dam is among the oldest the company owns, built in 1907. Maintenance costs continue to rise causing the cost of electricity produced from hydropower to be as much as nine times the cost of alternatives including green alternatives like wind power. At the same time, the government licenses for many of their dams expire in the next decade with the Webber dams expiring in 2041.

At a public meeting in Muir on September 27th, Consumers Power representatives shared their progress toward future plans for the Webber Dam. Representatives of the utility and a consulting company shared results of a public feedback survey and economic impact study. An overwhelming majority of respondents (86%) prefer the utility relicense and continue operating the dam. Consumers Energy staff shared how since the dam was built in 1907 that regulations around acceptable environmental impacts have dramatically changed. In the past it was common practice to shut a dam during the day allowing water to build up behind it then let it loose at night to generate electricity. The impact to the ecosystem both up and especially downstream of this sort of operation is drastic. In recent years, environmental regulations requiring what is called “run of river” operations have become the industry standard nationwide. That change however cut the generating capacity of Webber Dam from 3.25 megawatts to 1.3 megawatts. Halving the production of electricity means a dramatic increase in the cost of the energy that is generated.

The economic impact study the utility commissioned by Public Sector Consultants and Michigan State University looked not only at the direct impacts of the dam in terms of electricity generation but also the knock on economic impacts. They found that the dam resulted in 16 local jobs and an addition of $600,000 dollars added to the local GDP. In terms of property values the study looked at nearly 800 properties within 2 miles of the dam and determined that the collective value added to those properties by the presence of the dam was $3.9 million dollars resulting in more than $40,000 dollars annually in property tax rolls to fund local government and schools.

The positive economic impacts aside, in consideration of the diminishing returns in terms of power generation, Consumers is weighing all its options. It is looking at the possibility of either selling their dams to other companies who will continue operating them for electricity generation, replacing the dam with an impoundment that maintains the pond behind but does not generate electricity, or removing the dam and restoring the river to its natural state.

The company stressed that while maintaining and relicensing the dams would be expensive they remain open to that if they can secure state or federal funding. Currently that does not look likely as federal programs to promote alternative energy projects through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) require larger impacts on total power generation that the company’s dam portfolio provides if maintained. Consumers Power officials continue to work with state and federal officials on this issue however.

If the dam is sold, company officials at the meeting said, the “dream scenario” is to see the Webber Dam sold to a local power company like the Portland Board of Power and Light that has local connections as well as experience operating a hydro power plant. However, the company has not ruled out selling their entire portfolio of dams across the state as a package detail either. They anticipate putting the dams on the market in the last quarter of 2023 after which they will undergo a serious process of review to look at buyers with real interest and experience in safe hydro operations.

While they plan to accept bids on their dams across the state, the company is also open to the possibility of removing the dam and replacing it with an impoundment. Doing so would maintain the dam pond but not generate electricity. Such a proposition is not without cost. However, the company is not willing to pass the cost of such a project onto statewide electric customers. Such an option would envision a local entity or government taking over ownership and responsibility for maintaining a replacement impoundment.

The option of removing the dam and restoring the river flow is obviously not popular with property owners, many of whom were in attendance at the public meeting, who have had lakefront property as long as they have lived there. Consumers officials at the meeting shared that such an eventuality would likely uncover the complex patchwork of property deeds in the area, most of which were first written over a century ago. If the dam were removed and the river went back to its natural boundaries, some property owners would see their property extended to the edge of the river, while others would find themselves cut off from the water altogether. Some property owners sold frontage to the utility many years ago so that any “bottom land” revealed by the removal of the dam would be property of Consumers. Plans for the bottomland would be made in conjunction with the community in terms of redevelopment or restoration to a natural state.

Representatives of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Fisheries Division were on hand after the meeting as well. They said that whatever is ultimately decided, they are committed to managing the Grand River fisheries for future generations. If the dam is removed, the fishery will be a more riverine composition and if it remains in some form it will remain more of a lake composition. DNR fisheries staff also stressed that the Webber Dam is not considered essential for the containment of sea lamprey. The 6th Street Dam in Grand Rapids serves as the line the DNR holds against the spread of the invasive pest.

Regardless of the eventual outcome, the company intends to make decisions not only with local input but in partnership with stakeholders. In 2024 they plan to unveil plans to designate local committees or organizations of stakeholders to speak for the community as the process moves forward. To learn more including materials from previous public meetings, visit the Consumers Energy website. While there you can also register to attend a virtual public meeting on November 16th.

PHOTO: Courtesy Consumers Energy.