Hey Flyn' - I don't think anyone in their right mind is advocating pulling down every dam on the Columbia and Snake. First of all, it couldn't be done because 26 of the 55 dams on these rivers are privately owned. What some of us want is to think seriously about breaching some or all of the four lower Snake River dams. (Note that Columbia/Snake salmon and steelhead runs have crashed by 90% since these dams were built in the 1960s. Moreover, something like 50% of all Columbia River fish originate or historically originated from the Snake and its tributaries. Obviously, the dams are the major reason for the decline and - though the feds are trying to convince us otherwise - a major impediment to meaningful, long-term recovery of wild Columbia/Snake salmon and steelhead.) According to the BPA, the four lower Snake dams have about a 3500 megawatt production capacity, which is roughly 15 - 16% of the total production capacity of the roughly 30 dams owned by the Army Corps and Bureau of Reclamation on the Columbia/Snake rivers. The BPA markets power from all the federally owned dams on the Columbia/Snake. BPA represents somewhere between 45 - 50% of the total energy production in the Pacific Northwest, and since some BPA power comes from sources other than dams, the four lower Snake dams probably represent about 6 - 8% of PNW power production. That is nothing to sniff at, of course, but it should not be that difficult - using a combination of efficiency initiatives and other production sources - to make up for the lost production capacity without major impacts to the price of electricity in our region. Look, the days of building hydro dams are dead (anyone who doesn't recognize that needs to wake up). All new energy production in this region is going to come from other sources. Most of the new sources in the West now consist of natural gas-fired plants. Gas-fired plants representing many multiples of 3500 megawatts have either come on line in the last few years or are being built. I'm not a huge fan of gas-fired plants, but what I'm saying is that finding that 3500 megawatts is not as difficult as you make it sound. Sure, it's a real problem and would cost money, but even the feds, in the Columbia/Snake biological opinion (which has now taken dam removal off the table), estimate that their hodge podge of techno fixes to keep the lower Snake dams around are going to cost $6 billion over the next 10 years. I guarantee you we could build 3500 megawatts worth of production for a hell of a lot less than $6 billion. That $6 billion represents a MASSIVE SUBSIDY to agricultural interests that are growing crops where naturally crops don't belong, to the barging industry, which ships agricultural and other products along rivers that have perfectly adequate railroads streamside, and to waterskiers. It is also a massive subsidy to our electricity rates here in the PNW. Maybe the rest of the country would not be all that thrilled about throwing $6 billion our way just so we in the PNW can continue to pay lower electricity rates than the rest of our fellow Americans. But anyway, to answer your question, I'll be happy to raise my hand to cut back my electricity use to pave the way for this.