The Oroville dam crisis is on temporary reprieve, as the main spillway is holding up so far, allowing enough water release to lower the reservoir to a safe level.  But with more rain coming tonight, we’ll find out if dam operators have been unable to draw the lake down far enough to withstand further spillway compromises.  In the meantime, residents below the dam have been able to return to their homes.

As I wrote on Monday, if the spillways fail, this could be a monumental environmental disaster for the state.  Not only (in the worst case) could it lead to a devastating flash flood, it would undermine long-term water supplies for much of the state and create energy problems as well.  As Bloomberg reports, the reservoir feeds an 819-megawatt hydropower plant, capable of supplying about 600,000 homes.  It’s the equivalent of two natural gas-fired power plants that may need to be fired up to replace the lost power.

But the policy implications may already be taking shape, as the White House is using the crisis as a justification for a big infrastructure package.  Per the San Jose Mercury News story on yesterday’s White House news conference, it may become a rallying cry to build unnecessary dams — and not just repair existing ones:

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer addressed the Oroville Dam emergency in a press briefing Tuesday, calling the evacuation of more than 180,000 residents a “textbook example” of the consequences of the nation’s aging infrastructure.

“The president’s been keeping a close eye on the Oroville Dam situation in California,” Spicer said. “The situation is a textbook example of why we need to pursue a major infrastructure package in Congress.

“Dams, bridges, roads and all ports around the country have fallen into disrepair. In order to prevent the next disaster we will pursue the president’s vision for an overhaul of our nation’s crumbling infrastructure.”

I agree that an infrastructure funding bill is badly needed in this country.  We have significant needs and low interest rates, making borrowing to build and repair a smart move.  But all signs indicate that a Trump infrastructure bill would mostly favor new, environmentally harmful projects that aren’t cost effective, like more highways, when we should be building more transit and high speed rail and maintaining existing roads rather than expanding them.

The idea of building more dams fits squarely in the former category.  Dams are expensive, environmentally destructive, and, as we now are seeing, prone to the occasional failure.  We certainly want funds to maintain existing dams, but we shouldn’t be building new ones over far more cost-effective options, like water conservation, recycling, and groundwater storage (as opposed to reservoir storage).

Many agricultural groups in California, and now their ally in the White House, have been clamoring for more pricey dam projects for years.  If this Oroville crisis becomes a rallying cry to boost their call for more dams, it would be yet another tragic result.