Fishing is going to be over in the Colorado River soon

[Funk Shoal Brutha]

I was in Matagorda yesterday and stopped to talk to one of my guide buddies. He told me something that is almost unbelievable to me. The new coal plant they are trying to get approval for will require 18 barge trips from the Intracoastal per day to deliver fuel. That is about one barge every hour and 15 minutes coming and going night and day. Goodbye property values and bulkheads... Good bye winter trout. I have been fishing that river since I was a runt and can't believe how short-sighted the powers that be are down there. All squaking about the short lived construction jobs. It makes me sick to my stomach.

[dbarham]

what a drag!

[plugger]

Maybe it won't happen .

[Funk Shoal Brutha]

Maybe it won't happen .

I was hoping for that outcome but they are one permit away from starting construction last I heard. They apparently greased the rails real well.

[Gilbert]

is that the whitehorse I see signs for all over down there?

[Funk Shoal Brutha]

White Stallion

[Funk Shoal Brutha]

Here is why I think this will become a reality... check out the bold text below. Unbelievable! $55mil to the entity that is responsible for granting the water use permit.

LCRA delays coal plant decision



Local officials keep eyes on Matagorda County site’s water request

By JOHN S. MERCULIEF II
jmerculief@journal-spectator.com

Published: Saturday, June 18, 2011 2:08 AM CDT

A proposed Matagorda County coal plant’s request to the LCRA for an off-channel reservoir and at least 8.3 billion gallons of water a year has area officials watching with interest.

The Lower Colorado River Authority board decided this week to table the contract for a proposed coal-fired power plant near the Gulf Coast.

The White Stallion Energy Center, which would cost at least $2.5 billion, would be south of Bay City or roughly 25 miles south of Wharton, and would burn enough coal and petroleum coke for electricity to supply 650,000 homes. The reservoir would be off-channel, meaning it would not affect the flow of the Colorado River directly, as through a dam with massive floodgates such as in the case of the Highland Lakes.

The move to table a decision until Aug. 10 came after a parade of comments from the public, nearly all of them opposed to the plant.


“Water is a limited resource, and I don’t want you guys being careless with it,” said Sean Wicks, 19, of Austin, an intern with Sierra Club, according to the Austin American-Statesman. “I will live through the whole effects of this contract, and they’ll probably be negative effects.”

Published accounts of the hearing indicate Owen Bludau, executive director of the Matagorda County Economic Development Corp., told the board that with unemployment high in the county, “A vote for yes is a vote for the hope they get a construction job.

“A vote for delay,” he said, “says, ‘This is not important. Suck it up. We’ll eventually make a decision.’”

The LCRA must evaluate water requests using the same criteria and approve the ones that meet its requirements.

“As a legislatively created regional water supplier, if the LCRA has water available to meet a request for supply and the applicant complies with the LCRA rules, we must make that water available,” said departing LCRA General Manager Tom Mason, according to the Matagorda Advocate.

In e-mails to Wharton Economic Development Corp., LCRA Public Affairs Representative Amy Brandt cites benefits of the project including:

• No impact to Highland Lakes or agriculture.

• The new reservoir and future water projects made possible by the contract would benefit other customers throughout the basin.

Local desires

Wharton Economic Development Corp. officials say they have pushed for on-channel reservoirs in Wharton County.

They cite the extreme high cost of dirt work for impoundment, given the area’s extraordinary flatness.

WEDCO Executive Director David Schroeder says he has learned the LCRA will make the White Stallion contract available to local officials in the coming weeks so they can see what’s proposed for the Matagorda County site.

“We’re going to be interested in what the contract says,” Schroeder said, “and how it affects us here in Wharton County.

“Certainly, if they’re creating a reservoir in Matagorda County, I think that’s prudent on their part to examine the water situation, as it would be for us here in Wharton County.”

On-channel reservoirs in Wharton County could provide a secondary boost for the area.

“As far as the water storage, we prefer to have it in low-water dams,” Schroeder said. “As I understand it, the off-channel reservoir won’t allow access. You won’t be able to do boating, or fishing.

“You create no dual-purpose.”

Low-water dams are barely taller than the water surface, and in strong-flow times, water flows freely over the top (i.e. not typically through massive floodgates).

Schroeder said he did not have a specific number of dams in mind.

“How many do our farmers need?” he said. “We need to be able to supply a water source for us to be able to go away from groundwater.”

The move toward surface water and away from groundwater is mandated for parts east of here, including Fort Bend County, in an effort to prevent the land subsiding or sinking toward sea level.

LCRA response

LCRA’s position, based on analysis including study by an engineering consultant, and experience with reservoirs in the lower basin, is that, despite the excavation work required, costs can be lower for off-channel reservoirs and regulatory requirements are much less burdensome — and therefore less time is required.

The agency points to challenges for on-channel reservoirs including the requirement to construct a dam and spillway to withstand high flood events, potential increased flooding of land and existing structures, and obtaining permits since inundation of the riverbed can have significant impacts on the natural aquatic system. Also, due to the nature of flooding river valleys, an on-channel reservoir would need to be many miles in length to yield storage volumes similar to a comparable off-channel reservoir.

While excavation work is needed to construct an off-channel reservoir, the plans typically call for digging the appropriate amount of material from the site to use for the berms that surround the site. An off-channel site also avoids floodplain management issues such as increasing flood elevations for surrounding areas or flooding existing structures, the LCRA contends.

The agency points to the fact the last two reservoirs constructed in the lower Colorado River basin are off-channel reservoirs, Fayette Power Project and the South Texas Nuclear Project.

Water recreation is in abundant supply on Fayette County Reservoir.

White Stallion details

As part of the 40-year deal with White Stallion, the company has pledged to give the LCRA $55 million within a year of the signing of the contract.

The money can be used for reservoir construction.

LCRA would own and operate the 5,000 acre-foot reservoir that LCRA would plan to build if the contract goes through, Brandt said. The location has not yet been determined, but it would not be on White Stallion’s plant site.

White Stallion would also build a small amount of storage — about 500 acre-feet or 163 million gallons — on its site, in a reservoir or in tanks, she said. The LCRA estimates the 5,000 acre-foot reservoir would cost $40 million, to be paid for out of White Stallion’s up front payment.

Under current water rates, White Stallion would pay as much as $3.8 million a year for its 25,400 acre-feet of water. An acre-foot of water, or 325,851 gallons, is enough water to cover an acre 1 foot deep.

It would pay an additional $250,000 a year for future water supply projects and add enough water storage at its site to store a week’s worth of the plant’s water use.

White Stallion anticipates using 22,000 acre-feet a year at buildout, which would require a contract for 25,400 acre-feet. They would pay the LCRA Board approved rate, as amended from time to time.

The rate stands at $151 per acre-foot for water used, and $75.50 for water reserved but not used. As an example, if they used 10,000 acre-feet, they would pay $1.51 million for water used, and $1.16 million for water reserved under the contract but not used.

[Gilbert]

that's a lot of water. LCRA is a joke.

[dbarham]

terrible deal!

[C4E]

Awful deal there. Caught lots of fish at night from the El Pescador Lodge pier lights back in the day

[GHSmacker]

LCRA sucks at life.

I hate hearing stuff like this.

[Robalo]

LCRA-Let Criminals Run Amuck. They sux. They invested in oil and gas wells with state agency funds in caes ya dint know that-just ask them-got promoted on the deal too. They bought Bill Lehrer's water rights at Garwood for $100,000,000 (Garwood Irrigation District)

[Milkjug]

I heard they were gonna build another reservoir on the Colorado near Matagorda a few weeks ago. Didn't know it was gonna be an off-channel reservoir, but that still sucks for the bay. Seems like bad news for the grass, oysters, fish, and ducks.

[Moonpie]

Its always about the money Dude. LCRA could give a sheet about us.
Fishermen/women probably bring in a few million per year(practically nothing to LCRA).
This deal will bring in 5 times that every year for LCRA and the county.
Who do you think they'll listen to?

[corndog]

Where the fork is CCA in all this???