Could the Ardley dam proposal, studied for nearly a century, actually get built?

September 18, 2024 Canuck

A long-discussed, often-studied, never-built Red Deer River dam proposal dating back decades is being dusted off and resurrected by the provincial government.

A request for proposals (RFP) has been issued for a feasibility study of a new dam and reservoir east of Red Deer to address water availability concerns and provide irrigation for farming in east-central Alberta.

The project comes as the Prairies have continued to see significant drought in recent years. As climate change makes such weather events more frequent, concerns around water security have increased.

“I think sometimes when you’re in periods of drought like we have been, it brings these conversations back to the forefront,” said Kraymer Barnstable, a Red Deer city councillor.

“Regardless of the decision moving forward from the province, these conversations need to keep happening.”

A longstanding idea

The idea of a major water engineering project near the tiny hamlet of Ardley goes back more than a century, according to a 1972 study of the Saskatchewan and Nelson river drainage systems.

In 1914, irrigation engineer William Pearce devised a plan that would have diverted water from the Red Deer River for livestock and farming to an area of nearly 7.7 million hectares.

That plan evolved over the years as studies were done, governments changed and public finances fluctuated. In the 1940s, a dam project was proposed. Sites were surveyed, core samples were taken, and by 1951, a cost estimate for construction was prepared.

But the project never materialized, despite more studies in the 1960s.

In 1983, the Dickson Dam was built on the Red Deer River, upstream and southwest of the city of Red Deer. The reasons cited were similar to those for the proposed Ardley dam: reliable water supply, particularly during low winter flows, and flood control, as well as the creation of a recreational resource, Gleniffer Lake.

But population growth and increased demand from agricultural and industrial users, combined with significant drought years and the promise of more with climate change, has resulted in the Ardley dam being contemplated yet again.

Request for proposals

The $4.5-million feasibility study was announced in this year’s provincial budget.

In a news release last month announcing the request for proposals, the government said the study will “look at whether a new dam near Ardley can be designed, constructed and operated for a cost that provides value to Albertans and the economy.”

Irrigation, drought management, water security and flood protection were named as the central reasons for considering a dam and reservoir.

The RFP closes Sept. 30. The province wants the study completed by March 31, 2026.

An increasing regional population is a key element in water availability considerations. Red Deer’s population increased by more than 33,000 residents over the previous two decades to just over 100,000 today. Red Deer County, which surrounds the city, has a population of about 20,000.

“After the couple of years that we’ve had with water shortages, the province has made it known … that they were looking at all solutions on the table including potentially revisiting our licensing system,” said Tricia Stadnyk, Canada Research Chair in hydrologic modelling with the University of Calgary’s Schulich School of Engineering.

“But I always suspected that long before that would come a series of reservoirs to help increase the storage and therefore increase our resiliency to drought.”

A report this year, completed by a consulting firm for the Alberta Irrigation Districts Association, estimated that the project could provide water for 1.4 million additional people in the region, as well as irrigation for 51,000 hectares.

Determining an exact site for the project is one of the tasks of the study the province wants conducted. But the RFP specifies a study area of roughly 15 square kilometres, about 35 kilometres east of Red Deer.

The study will also consider the project’s potential for hydroelectric power and recreation, but underscores that these would be secondary considerations.

“People are wanting to see more green energy, you know, the potential of having some hydroelectric capability for a dam like this,” said Jim Wood, mayor of Red Deer County. “I would hope that they would include that in their study.”

Environmental concerns

Wood said he’s familiar with the area under consideration, and expects there would be minimal impact on existing farmland.

“There’s a deep ravine in the Red Deer River at this point. It holds a lot of water without taking a lot of cultivated lands out of production.”

But dams have environmental impacts beyond simply flooding a given area of land.

“I know people don’t want to hear it, but building reservoirs is an irreversible consequence for the land and for the biodiversity. It has significant impacts,” said Stadnyk.

Flooding nutrient-rich land can end up releasing carbon into the atmosphere, she said. Having a large volume of water sitting and absorbing heat from the sun can result in increased temperatures and decreased oxygen levels downstream.

A dam can interfere with fish migration. And creating a recreation site such as a lake increases human traffic, which can bring its own environmental consequences.

Evan Davies, a professor in water resources engineering at the University of Alberta, said drought conditions and the recent water main break in Calgary have highlighted the issue of water use and conservation in the public discourse.

A key function of an Ardley dam would be to provide water for irrigation. Davies noted that the irrigation system is already “really efficient” in Alberta.

“That said, you know, if you build the Ardley reservoir, we’ll certainly be consuming a huge amount more water than we do currently,” he said.

“Once that reservoir is in place, and given that there are no restrictions on new water licences in the Red Deer River … there’s quite likely to be additional development.”

Currently, about 46 per cent of allocated consumption for the Red Deer River basin is for irrigation, with industrial and fossil fuel production accounting for about 29 per cent.

Barnstable said the City of Red Deer hasn’t taken a position on the project, but the Red Deer River Municipal Users Group, to which he belongs, has been advocating for it for years.

“This is something that they’ve been trying to gain traction with the provincial government, so I think it’s definitely excitement from that group.”

Another group, the Red Deer River Watershed Alliance, said in an emailed statement that it is “interested to find more details on the proposed project and share with our partners and the public.”

The statement said the alliance is a science-based organization with a multi-stakeholder board, “and does not have a position on the Ardley dam.”

While the study for the province will try to determine a cost-benefit analysis of the project, Stadnyk said engineers often miss a key part of that calculation. The focus is typically on costs of construction, maintenance, or the risk of not building a given project.

“Where we do a poor job these days — and this is globally, not just here — is in quantifying the loss of the benefits of the ecosystem service of the land in its natural state,” she said.

“The environment in its natural state, wetlands, beavers, things that depend on natural water level fluctuations not being flooded — all of that is lost when we flood land, and we don’t have a good way right now of valuing the consequences of doing that.

“And if that’s not included in our calculations … then we might miss potential benefits or over evaluate the benefits of a project.”

Stadnyk added: “That’s where we have to be very careful.”

View original article here Source