A Checklist of River Function Indicators for hydropower ecological assessment

Brenda May Pracheil; Ryan A. McManamay; Esther S. Parish; Shelaine L. Curd; Brennan T. Smith; Christopher R. DeRolph; Adam M. Witt; Shannon Ames; Mary Beth Day; Will Graf; Dana Infante; Dana N. McCoskey; Kelsey Rugani; Corey Vezina; Timothy Welch; Anna West

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.049

A Checklist of River Function Indicators for hydropower ecological assessment

Brenda May Pracheil, Ryan A. McManamay, Esther S. Parish, Shelaine L. Curd, Brennan T. Smith, Christopher R. DeRolph, Adam M. Witt, Shannon Ames, Mary Beth Day, Will Graf, Dana Infante, Dana N. McCoskey, Kelsey Rugani, Corey Vezina, Timothy Welch, Anna West

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

18 Scopus citations

Abstract

Hydropower generation has advantages for societies that seek low-carbon, renewable energy alternatives, but sustainable hydropower production will require an explicit consideration of potential tradeoffs between socioeconomic and environmental priorities. These tradeoffs are often explored during a formal environmental impact assessment process that can be complex and controversial. The steps taken to address stakeholder concerns through impact hypotheses and field studies are not always transparent. We have created a Checklist of River Function Indicators to facilitate stakeholder discussions during hydropower licensing and to support more transparent, holistic, and scientifically informed hydropower environmental analyses. Based on a database of environmental metrics collected from hydropower project studies documented by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the International Hydropower Association, the Low Impact Hydropower Institute, and peer-reviewed scientific literature, our proposed Checklist of River Function Indicators contains 51 indicators in six categories. We have tested the usefulness of the Indicators by applying them to seven hydropower projects documented by FERC. Among the case study projects, 44 of the 51 Indicators were assessed according to the FERC documentation. Even though each hydropower project presents unique natural resource issues and stakeholder priorities, the proposed Indicators can provide a transparent starting point for stakeholder discussions about which ecological impacts should be considered in hydropower planning and relicensing assessments.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1245-1260
Number of pages	16
Journal	Science of the Total Environment
Volume	687
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.049
State	Published - Oct 15 2019

Funding

This research was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under the Water Power Technologies Office. Oak Ridge National Laboratory is managed by UT-Battelle, LLC for DOE under contract DE-AC05-00OR22725 . Copyright Notice: This manuscript has been authored in part by UT-Battelle, LLC, under contract DE-AC05-00OR22725 with the US Department of Energy (DOE). The US government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the US government retains a nonexclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for US government purposes. DOE will provide public access to these results of federally sponsored research in accordance with the DOE Public Access Plan ( http://energy.gov/downloads/doe-public-access-plan ).

Keywords

Ecological impacts
Ecological indicators
Hydropower

Access to Document

10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.049

Cite this

Pracheil, B. M., McManamay, R. A., Parish, E. S., Curd, S. L., Smith, B. T., DeRolph, C. R., Witt, A. M., Ames, S., Day, M. B., Graf, W., Infante, D., McCoskey, D. N., Rugani, K., Vezina, C., Welch, T., & West, A. (2019). A Checklist of River Function Indicators for hydropower ecological assessment. Science of the Total Environment, 687, 1245-1260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.049

@article{9f708202c4d54bacbcf2f986430bca4f,

title = "A Checklist of River Function Indicators for hydropower ecological assessment",

abstract = "Hydropower generation has advantages for societies that seek low-carbon, renewable energy alternatives, but sustainable hydropower production will require an explicit consideration of potential tradeoffs between socioeconomic and environmental priorities. These tradeoffs are often explored during a formal environmental impact assessment process that can be complex and controversial. The steps taken to address stakeholder concerns through impact hypotheses and field studies are not always transparent. We have created a Checklist of River Function Indicators to facilitate stakeholder discussions during hydropower licensing and to support more transparent, holistic, and scientifically informed hydropower environmental analyses. Based on a database of environmental metrics collected from hydropower project studies documented by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the International Hydropower Association, the Low Impact Hydropower Institute, and peer-reviewed scientific literature, our proposed Checklist of River Function Indicators contains 51 indicators in six categories. We have tested the usefulness of the Indicators by applying them to seven hydropower projects documented by FERC. Among the case study projects, 44 of the 51 Indicators were assessed according to the FERC documentation. Even though each hydropower project presents unique natural resource issues and stakeholder priorities, the proposed Indicators can provide a transparent starting point for stakeholder discussions about which ecological impacts should be considered in hydropower planning and relicensing assessments.",

keywords = "Ecological impacts, Ecological indicators, Hydropower",

author = "Pracheil, {Brenda May} and McManamay, {Ryan A.} and Parish, {Esther S.} and Curd, {Shelaine L.} and Smith, {Brennan T.} and DeRolph, {Christopher R.} and Witt, {Adam M.} and Shannon Ames and Day, {Mary Beth} and Will Graf and Dana Infante and McCoskey, {Dana N.} and Kelsey Rugani and Corey Vezina and Timothy Welch and Anna West",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2019 Elsevier B.V.",

year = "2019",

month = oct,

day = "15",

doi = "10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.049",

language = "English",

volume = "687",

pages = "1245--1260",

journal = "Science of the Total Environment",

issn = "0048-9697",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Pracheil, BM, McManamay, RA, Parish, ES, Curd, SL, Smith, BT, DeRolph, CR, Witt, AM, Ames, S, Day, MB, Graf, W, Infante, D, McCoskey, DN, Rugani, K, Vezina, C, Welch, T & West, A 2019, 'A Checklist of River Function Indicators for hydropower ecological assessment', Science of the Total Environment, vol. 687, pp. 1245-1260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.049

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Checklist of River Function Indicators for hydropower ecological assessment

AU - Pracheil, Brenda May

AU - McManamay, Ryan A.

AU - Parish, Esther S.

AU - Curd, Shelaine L.

AU - Smith, Brennan T.

AU - DeRolph, Christopher R.

AU - Witt, Adam M.

AU - Ames, Shannon

AU - Day, Mary Beth

AU - Graf, Will

AU - Infante, Dana

AU - McCoskey, Dana N.

AU - Rugani, Kelsey

AU - Vezina, Corey

AU - Welch, Timothy

AU - West, Anna

PY - 2019/10/15

Y1 - 2019/10/15

N2 - Hydropower generation has advantages for societies that seek low-carbon, renewable energy alternatives, but sustainable hydropower production will require an explicit consideration of potential tradeoffs between socioeconomic and environmental priorities. These tradeoffs are often explored during a formal environmental impact assessment process that can be complex and controversial. The steps taken to address stakeholder concerns through impact hypotheses and field studies are not always transparent. We have created a Checklist of River Function Indicators to facilitate stakeholder discussions during hydropower licensing and to support more transparent, holistic, and scientifically informed hydropower environmental analyses. Based on a database of environmental metrics collected from hydropower project studies documented by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the International Hydropower Association, the Low Impact Hydropower Institute, and peer-reviewed scientific literature, our proposed Checklist of River Function Indicators contains 51 indicators in six categories. We have tested the usefulness of the Indicators by applying them to seven hydropower projects documented by FERC. Among the case study projects, 44 of the 51 Indicators were assessed according to the FERC documentation. Even though each hydropower project presents unique natural resource issues and stakeholder priorities, the proposed Indicators can provide a transparent starting point for stakeholder discussions about which ecological impacts should be considered in hydropower planning and relicensing assessments.

AB - Hydropower generation has advantages for societies that seek low-carbon, renewable energy alternatives, but sustainable hydropower production will require an explicit consideration of potential tradeoffs between socioeconomic and environmental priorities. These tradeoffs are often explored during a formal environmental impact assessment process that can be complex and controversial. The steps taken to address stakeholder concerns through impact hypotheses and field studies are not always transparent. We have created a Checklist of River Function Indicators to facilitate stakeholder discussions during hydropower licensing and to support more transparent, holistic, and scientifically informed hydropower environmental analyses. Based on a database of environmental metrics collected from hydropower project studies documented by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the International Hydropower Association, the Low Impact Hydropower Institute, and peer-reviewed scientific literature, our proposed Checklist of River Function Indicators contains 51 indicators in six categories. We have tested the usefulness of the Indicators by applying them to seven hydropower projects documented by FERC. Among the case study projects, 44 of the 51 Indicators were assessed according to the FERC documentation. Even though each hydropower project presents unique natural resource issues and stakeholder priorities, the proposed Indicators can provide a transparent starting point for stakeholder discussions about which ecological impacts should be considered in hydropower planning and relicensing assessments.

KW - Ecological impacts

KW - Ecological indicators

KW - Hydropower

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85067448487&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.049

DO - 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.049

M3 - Article

C2 - 31412459

AN - SCOPUS:85067448487

SN - 0048-9697

VL - 687

SP - 1245

EP - 1260

JO - Science of the Total Environment

JF - Science of the Total Environment

ER -

A Checklist of River Function Indicators for hydropower ecological assessment

Abstract

Funding

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this