Northern Star buys a piece of Svensen Island

Northern Star has taken out all sorts of pretty ads to trumpet an agreement to purchase the western portion of Svensen Island for use in salmon mitigation. They also have options to buy 80 percent (which must be the rest) of the island. The salmon mitigation plan calls for removing dikes to flood the island, creating "shallow marshes where migrating salmon could rest away from the Columbia's main channel." Will this work? (and do salmon rest areas have free coffee and cookies like the ones on the highway?) Seriously, do salmon rest in marshes? Where's a wildlife biologist when you need one?

Northern Star is promising $7 million between the start of terminal construction and 2010, when the proposed plant would open. After that, they promise $1.3 million a year as long as the facility operates. But what happens if they have negative impact on the salmon during construction (or operation) and then abandon the project for economic or other reason? (Not that I think the Columbia River would end up with an idle energy project waiting to be demolished. Random fact: there's 4,700 tons of nuclear waste sitting at Trojan, at least The Daily News says there is. Did you know that? I sure didn't. But I digress...back to the current proposed energy plant.)

One problem with this plan is that Columbia Land Trust had already raised funds to buy the island and was talking with the owners about a conservation purchase when Northern Star stepped in. While the two offers may appear similar on the surface, they aren't necessarily the same thing. After all, one of these groups is in the conservation business and one is not.

I do have to give it to Northern Star, they got some good soundbites out there:

They say they undertook a "rebooting of the project to make sure it was in tune with regional values" Now rebooting sounds good and all that: technical, modern...and meaningless. One has to wonder how much rebooting can be done in the ten days between when they announced their plans would damage the salmon and now. I'm also not sure what they mean about regional values, although they are calling the salmon "ours" in those full page ads. 

They say they have "virtually eliminated" the threat to fish from engine cooling and ballast water intake and discharge. (so why the list? what about the threats that aren't related to engine cooling and ballast? or are we supposed to believe that other than that, salmon are safe?)

They say they have found "a very elegant solution" to the problem of killing salmon during engine cooling and ballast uptake: screens. Water will come in through these "special" (meaning small, I guess) screens and be used to cool the engine, then used for ballast. This will help with the issue of discharging heated water into the river. It still means they are taking huge amounts of water for ballast and the rest of their proposed operation isn't exactly good for salmon. But I suppose the salmon have their rest area.

btw, this elegant solution: brand new. Untested. (sounds like it's still on the drawing board) Not in use in the industry. No ships have it. But Northern Star promises they'll pay for installation on ships.  (No surprise there, they are promising money to lots of folks these days.)

There are three articles listed here, each of them with a slightly different take on the island deal. It's interesting to read all of them and see how the approach varies at different sources. The article at the Astorian has the most detail.

Island purchase shines for Northern Star   (Daily Astorian)

Proposed gas terminal vows salmon protections   (The Columbian)

Company offers $50 million to help salmon in exchange for terminal   (Coos Bay World)

Since you read this far, tell us what you think. This site is more interesting and useful when everyone plays along.