TWG General Context Performance Indicators Key Assumptions Fungibility Secondary Impacts Baseline Condition Key Trends Consequences of trends Adaptive Behaviors Risk assessment Sensitivity Analysis Authors/Review Process
Coastal above the dam Assessed value of affected properties approximately $5 billion based on 25,000 properties. Approximately 60% of the shoreline is developed.  From Niagara to the east side of Toronto there is approximately 90% protection. Three Lake Ontario/Upper St. Lawrence River PIs: 1) LO-Flooding damage - The economic damages to developed properties based on high water levels; 2) LO Erosion of Developed Parcels - This PI quantifies damage based on the cost of adding shore protection once the shoreline is within a defined distance from the house - value of lost material is not determined; 3) LO Damage to Shore Protection - The cost of replacing shore protection damaged by water levels Erosion PI:   Assume riparian land owners will continue to armour the properties and regulatory authorities will continue to let them. Flooding PI:  Assume riparian doesn't do anything to address future flood risk since assessing 101, one year experiments.  This is necessary to properly assess damage potential. Shore Protection:  Assume that once a structure fails due to a storm event during high lake levels or simply degrades due to age, the riparian will fix the structure. Assume the walls/revetments are built on the same footprint.    
  
Erosion PI:  Assumed the riparian will accept the least costly alternative to adapt to erosion risk.  This is comparable to others (light loading for shipping). Flooding PI: Running the algorithm without adaptive behavior is necessary to compare to Lower River and other performance indicators. Shore Protection PI: Similar procedures upstream and downstream.
Erosion PI: erosion impacts quantified by cost of shore protection. Have not included the value of land lost to these developed properties. Shore Protection: in theory, you can simply build bigger and higher shore protection to address future hazards. However, at some point the increased height of the shore protection affects the quality of life associated with waterfront ownership.  Lost  aesthetics and  access to the waters edge due to shore protection structures are secondary impact not considered. Riparian land owners now live in coastal hazard areas and future development of new parcels will continue for residential or commercial uses. Increase in shoreline development from 1990 to 2000 of approximately 6% expected to continue. Shoreline property values have doubled in the past decade. Small homes/cottages being converted to much larger homes. More development  means potential for greater damages. Existing protection has been built to current regulation regime. Historically people have adapted to both high and low water level conditions. During highs and after flooding and erosion events they generally take action to protect themselves from future events by floodproofing their homes or building or improving their shore protection. During extended lows there is a tendency to encroach on the shoreline. Approx. 600 homes are at imminent risk to losses from flooding and erosion. Test impact of 80% shoreline development. Test impact of adaptations (flood proofing, improved shore protection) Pete Zuzek; Reviewed by TWG co-chairs.
Above the Dam     Flooding PI:  Assume riparian doesn't do anything to address  future  flood risk  since we are assessing this in terms of 101 , one year experiments.  This is necessary  to properly assess damage potential.                   
Coastal below the dam Only 3% of shoreline is developed. Development is isolated to Montreal, Sorel, Trois-Rivières, Longueuil and Repentigny. Sorel Islands have extensive seasonal development. In 2003, the existing residences had an approximate total value of 460 million dollars CAD. There are over 400 km of shore protection along the St. Lawrence River downstream of Cornwall representing an infrastructure investment of over $200 Million US. Lower St. Lawrence River Economic PIs include  1) LSL Flooding - damages associated with high water levels; 2) LSL Erosion -The dollar value of land lost due to erosion; and 3) LSL shore protection - The cost of replacing shore protection damaged by water levels. Non-Economic PIs include: LSL Erosion below dam - Area of land lost; LSL Flooding below dam - Number of Expropriated Homes;Kilometres of roads flooded; and Area of flooded land.
Shore Protection:  Assume that once a structure fails due to a storm event during high lake levels or simply degrades due to age, the riparian will fix the structure. Assume the walls/revetments are built on the same footprint.         Based on existing ship traffic in the St. Lawrence River (causing erosion). Models based on existing development. Assumes no adaptations by riparians such as flood proofing. Conversion of cottages to permanent dwellings. Construction of cottages on vacant land. Natural protected areas not at risk of development. Since1980, several laws and regulations have been progressively implemented for the management of construction within the floodplain. Could see some increase in damages, but not considerable as no major changes to shoreline development are expected in the near future. Existing houses are expected to become better protected over the years.   There are numerous (how many?) properties just slightly above the floodline. Any increase in peak levels will see increase damages. Not required as little change in development is expected.  
Recreational Boating $429.7 million spent on boating related trips in 2002; 133,000 US boaters; 177,000 Cdn boaters; Operate in warm-weather months (April through Nov). Rural portions of Lake Ontario, Thousand Islands and Lake St. Pierre very dependent on tourism related to rec. boating. Most sensitive to low water conditions. Net economic benefits lost by recreational boaters and charter boat patrons as water level varies from ideal levels for boating Population includes all boaters who used Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River from principal US counties.  May underestimate US by 36%.  Cdn includes all boaters withih basin, but not few living outside.  Assumes boaters behave consistently with stage damage curves. Assumes boaters don't move to another area during time of water level problems. TWG believes dollars may be somewhat understated, but not to a large degree. Net benefits lost based on willingness to pay data. This method is sometimes criticized due to hypothetical nature. Methods used approved by resource economists and survey researchers. Defined and eliminated outlier estimates and asked boater if numbers they gave were inflated. Of the $178 million in total U.S. expenditures, $68 million resulted from tourist-related spending. Using IMPLAN to estimate indirect and induced impacts, total output from tourist-related spending was $96 million.  Two-thirds of this tourist-related spending occurred in the Jefferson-St. Lawrence County region. Tourism activity was not measured in Canada. Assuming economic conditions similar to recent past and no major rises in gas prices. Based on Willingness to Pay. Number of US boaters increased 10% between 1994 and 2002.  Number of boats in Quebec increased 22% between 1995 and 2000. Trend towards slightly larger, faster boats. Boaters are loyal to boating and unlikely to leave the sport.  They will adjust to changing economic conditions and gas prices likely by varying the number of trips taken. Boaters have adjusted to high water levels with construction of floating docks. Dredging is most common adaptive behavior for low levels. Can take up to two years to implement due to  costs and difficulty in obtaining permits. Not feasibile for private dock owners.  Some, especially those using boat launch ramps, can adapt by going elsewhere (inland lakes and rivers). Over extended lows boaters may adjust by buying smaller boats. Primary risk with water levels below the critical levels of the stage damage curves. Biggest gains in having higher levels in the fall. Test impact of a 25% increase in rec. boating numbers. Test impacts of adaptive behaviors to numbers. T. Brown, J-F Bibeault, N. Connelly and J. Brown. Reviewed by co-authors. Received TWG support Jan 18, 2005. Reviewed by Frank Lupi
Commercial Navigation Marine commerce on the Great Lakes / Seaway System each year generates more than $4.3 billion in personal income, $3.4 billion in transportation-related business revenue and $1.3 billion in federal, state and local taxes. Over 30 million tones per year, representing some 3300 ship movements move annually through the Montréal-Lake Ontario section of the system. About 85% of total tonnage consists in iron ore, coal, limestone and great. Montreal Habour is the most important container harbour in Canada and one of the most important in North America. Total cost of transportation between Becancour, Quebec and Port Weller Ontario. Transportation costs include vessel capital and operating costs, fuel costs, seaway tolls, piliotage charges and Canadian Coast Guard fees. Cost curves were derived for each QM for 3 sections (LO, Seaway, below Montreal. Costs related to three factors: costs due to ship transits , costs due to currents and costs due to high gradient delays. Uses the 1995-1999 commercial navigation traffic as representative of commercial activities, cargo and vessel mix. Assumes vessels resume navigation simultaneously after a gradient or current delay.   Does not consider secondary impacts to Port economics or to the consumer. Based on existing Seaway size and depth. Assumes existing fleet composition. Based on actual vessel transit data from 1995-1999. Assumes Seaway operating at 50% capacity. Vessel size and draft has increased substantially over past 40 years. Vessels of up to 225 m and 23.8 m beam now regularly transit the system. Vessel draft has increased to 8.8 m (26'6") Difficult to determine if this sector is increasing or deteriorating. If Seaway changes, all analysis must be redone. Reduced vessel speed; light load (more ships, more trips); deepen channels and harbors (requires environmental assessments) PI won't get at importance of consistent water levels over extreme fluctuations. Need to use criteria metrics for this. Montreal Harbor has already exhibited a shift to larger sized vessels. If navigation were eliminated, releases would not change much since recreational boating and M&I targets would remain, and are higher.  Exceptions when special releases are made to help overloaded ships transit, but this would have little effect on average annual damages. Luc Lefevbre and Roger Haberly
Environment Lake Ontario coastal marshes provide breeding and feeding grounds for all coastal life, including several species-at-risk.  Water level patterns have a direct physical influence on the breeding and nesting success of marsh birds and fish that inhabit the marshes. More varied water levels create more variety in marsh plants, which creates a more productive and robust coastal ecology and habitat. Water levels below the dam can strand or drown fish and bird eggs. Societal value expressed through laws protecting habitat (i.e., wetlands) and specific faunal species (special interest or endangered). 32 Key Performance Indicators (1- Lake Ont Veg, 5-Lake Ont Fish, 1-Lake Ont Birds, 4-Lake Ont Species at Risk, 6 USL Fish, 1 USL Bird, 1 USL Mammal,  3-LSL Fish, 4 LSL Birds, 1 LSL Herptiles, 1 LSL Mammals, 4 LSL Species at Risk) Assumes existing population densities. Do not account for all interactions within food chain, nor secondary impacts (e.g. impacts to sport fishery). Do not take into account other stressors on the system (e.g. pollution, invasive species). Studies based on field investigation (2-3 years) and literature reviews. Assumes existing Seaway configuration. Environmental PIs are not fungible with economic PIs. Within Environmental PIs all are developed using different metrics. Measures of improvement have been converted into ratios of improvement relative to the baseline 1958DD. These cannot be added or averaged. They can be used to determine if one plan is better than another. The ETWG is working on a weighting system for the environmental PIs based on the certainly, sensitivity and significance. Secondary impacts relative to the environmental performance indicators include impacts to the fishing industry, to hunting, bird watching and ecotourism. Secondary impacts to ecosystem function such as water quality benefits supplied by wetlands has not been addressed. Assume existing Seaway configuration. Assume existing population densities. Do not account for all interactions within food chain, nor secondary impacts (e.g. impacts to sport fishery). Do not take into account other stressors on the system (e.g. pollution, invasive species). Studies based on field investigation (2-3 years) and literature reviews. Trend towards containerization. Ontario plans to close coal-based power plants (no need to ship coal). Growth is North- South while Seaway is east-west.  Aging infrastructure. Fewer Seaway sized ocean vessels. Seaway navigation study underway. Given other stressors, it may be difficult to determine if expected improvements to the environment from changes to a regulation plan will be realized. The environment is adaptable to change. However, many of the human induced alterations of the system have affected natures ability to adapt. For example, on the lower St. Lawrence River wetlands were once able to adapt to high water levels conditions by migrating upland, however with the development of farmland on the upland side of wetlands this ability to adapt has been bounded by development. Anthropogenic adaptations have also taken place to try to rehabilitate natural functions. Wetlands have been dyked, fisheries stocked, and man-made wetlands have been engineered. These activities have had mixed success. Environmental PI studies are based on short term data gathering (2-3 years) which may not be sufficient to accurately estimate impacts. Depending on which factors drive plan formulation, a sensitivity analysis will be conducted to establish whether or not adaptive management is necessary. Joe Atkinson
Hydropower Operated by New York Power Authority, Ontario Power Generation and Hydro Quebec. Annual Hydropower production of approx. 25 million Mwh (13 million Mwh at Moses-Saunders and 12 million Mwh at Beauharnois-Les Cedres). Market value of energy produced is approx. $1.5 billion (US) at current market rates. Enough energy produced is produced for consumption of approx. 2 million homes. All three companies operate in different market environments. NYPA works under a competitive market and price is determined by the most expensive block of power per hour. OPG works under a real-time wholesale pricing structure based on both regulated and market prices based on daily forecasted demand. Hydro Quebec operates under a regulated system based on the lowest possible cost. Up to 165 TWh of electricity per year must be supplied to service Quebec residents and anything above this can be sold at market prices. 3 Performance indicators are used 1) Value of energy produced based on station head, flow, efficiency rate and price of electricity. 2) Cost of Foregone Peaking Opportunities (NYPA and OPG only)  based on weekly averaged regulated release and value of peaking opportunity, and 3) Predictability/Stability of flows to maximize efficiency based on changes in flow and foregone energy production. Assume market prices on a seasonal basis based on a consultant report (Synapse). Market prices are difficult to estimate as they are based on fuel prices, technology, environmental factors, and electricity demand. All impacts are reported in terms of average annual net dollar benefits and are fungible with other net benefits. Hydropower production provides approx. 2000 high paying manufacturing jobs to the local economy in New York. Hydro provides low cost electricity to the ALCOA Aluminum Recycling Plant and GM Powetrain production facility in Massena which contributes over $250 million  annually in payroll, taxes and purchases to the local economy. Secondary impacts to the local economies of the region are not addressed by the current PIs. Secondary impacts to air quality is not being addressed. If St. Lawrence River hydro production were replaced by fossil fuels another contribute 18,000,000 tons of CO2 would be discharged annually to the atmosphere. Assuming a market similar to today's with the same mix of energy producers and same influence of the navigational needs of the St. Lawrence Seaway. U.S. and New York State air quality laws are expected to reduce coal fired energy production and further limit control emissions from fossil fueled generation which will affect the electricity supply market. In Canada, the Province of Ontario has announced its intent to reduce coal fired generation by 1350 MW by 2007 and by 2700 MW by 2010. Canada is a signatory of the Kyoto Treaty with emission reduction target of 6% from 1990 levels by 2012. There is considerable uncertainty about future fuel prices of natural gas which strongly influences the marginal cost of electricity. It is expected that gas prices will decline by as much as 30% by 2010. Overall, given environmental and economic advantages of hydropower and importance to regional economy the overall value of hydropower is expected to increase in the next few decades. The value of energy estimated in the SVM may well underestimate the future value and almost certainly will not overstate its future worth. When hydropower is not available, it is replaced with other forms of electricity. However, as noted in secondary impacts these other forms will have an impact on hydro prices and possibly air quality. There is some risk that the value of energy estimated in the SVM will underestimate the value of future production. Substantial changes to the pattern of water supply experienced in the past century could reduce the dependable capacity of these plants and capacity benefits are not directly addressed in the SVM. Varied hydro prices especially higher market prices. John Osinski, John Ching and Sylvain Robert
Municipal and Industrial Water Uses 6.3 millions residents on Lake Ontario and Upper St. Lawrence (both Ontario and the US) and 2.3 millions residents on the Lower St. Lawrence River that rely on system for water. No production value to water, but very high social, political and economic costs if water not provided. Two Performance Indicators: 1) Water Quality Infrastructure Costs Avoided (LSL) - based on cost of upgrading municipal drinking water treatment plants to treat taste and odor compounds. 2) Water Supply Infrastructure Costs Avoided (LSL) - based on costs required to adapt plants to lower than critical levels. A low water level for 1 QM over three consecutive years is needed to activate water quality taste and odor PI. This PI assumes a clear link between water level and severe taste and odor problems. Infrastructure costs are based on estimations to build a new intake structure. Based on costs avoided to municipalities. Shoreline wells, groundwater contamination and sewage overload were evaluated but not represented as performance indicators in the SVM as the impacts were found to be marginal. In addition, there were no significant impacts identified for Lake Ontario. Critical values calculated for the SVM consider the nominal capacity of the plants, thus taking into account the future population growth (for the existing plants). Impacts were evaluated for the actual Seaway configuration. The use of water for municipal and other purposes is not expected to change significantly in near future. It is expected that any new plants would be designed for greater variability in levels Other solutions to relieve at least part of the problem would likely be implemented such as lowering water demand. Extreme levels could create a crisis condition for Montreal. Not required beyond stochastic and climate change scenarios Annie Carriere and Benoit Barbeau. Reviewed by Denis Peloquin.