Cheap Water With No Added Environmental Disaster
January 27th, 2008The Southern Nevada Water Authority seems hell-bent on the senseless, wickedly expensive pipeline way up to northern Nevada as the solution to Clark County’s demand for more water. Quietly, the government agency has doubled its pipeline cost estimate, to around five billion. This is well in advance of actually starting it, when we can expect the cost to double again. That’s just the way government gets things done.
Last week, the Wall Street Journal ran this article on water desalinization. (Thanks to Tom Bath in Ely for sending me a copy).
The idea for Nevada is to pay for constructing a California desalinization plant in exchange for drawing an equivalent amount of fresh water out of California’s Colorado River allocation.
Amongst other interesting things in the article, it says a brand new plant just went operational in Tampa, Florida, for less than $200-million - likely less than 1% of what the Southern Nevada Water Authority will soon start extracting from Clark County residents in order to finance its pipeline.
Why won’t SNWA pursue this obvious, inexpensive, environmentally friendly alternative?
January 28th, 2008 at 8:37 am
Apparently you didn’t read the article that you put in the blog because the biggest and perhaps only major obstacle to desalination in CA and why they aren’t doing it themselves is the major environmental impacts. Sure, the plant costs 200 million - how much do you think the coastal property for the plant and the required associated power plant cost?? Now we aren’t only killing coastal marine species with the brine from the plant but we have another coal burning power plant right on the pacific coast. And then what, build a pipeline to NV? Or better yet, lets store the water in a reservoir that by the time the plant is opperational will be 25% full and below intake pipes.
January 28th, 2008 at 9:40 am
I agree that Californians’ profound misunderstanding of environmental science is a giant hurdle to implementing desalination plants.
My reading of the article leads me to believe the $200-million was all-inclusive.
Again, the idea for Nevada is to pay for constructing a California desalination plant, have them use the water while we draw the same amount of water out of California’s allocation from the Colorado River.
January 28th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Pat Mulroy, General Manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority was on Nevada News Makers about a week ago and was talking about this very subject. If I recall correctly, she said the Water Authority had looked into desalination in California and was unsuccessful, but did say they were looking into a desalination plant in Mexico. A link to the show is below.
http://www.nevadanewsmakers.com/video/nnmstreamb.asp?showID=563
January 28th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Here’s a silly question: What are the realistic ramifications of simply taking what we (southern Nevadans) need? No, really, what would happen?
January 28th, 2008 at 9:43 pm
REST ASSURED Sen. Beers, I am doing everything in my power to end the future construction of coal-fired power plants in Nevada…as well as work against politicians who are willing to take “managable risks” with Nevadans’ health and welfare.
Very truly yours, Eric C. Blumensaadt, Sierra Club, S. NV Group Conservation co-chair
January 29th, 2008 at 10:39 pm
I am sure that Sierra Club will never be happy unless our electric bill is around $1,0000 a month and having brown outs every other day.
January 30th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
The Sierra Club, a purely Sociallistic movement is hell-bent on returning America to the stone ages. No Coal plants, although clean burning, no nuclear plants, no water pipelines, no offshore drilling, no AlaSska drilling, save the spotted owl, the polar bear but when it comes to mankind…Oh..apparently they are saying…’To hell with mankind.’ When will they wake up and realize..Harry ‘HAnds Up’ Reid cannot protect them forever…
February 1st, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Bob, your idea for California is excellent, but based on California’s self destructive greeny mind set, there is no hope of moving them to build anything like desalinization plants. Nevada really does need a Nevada solution. But the northern pipeline is definitely an ugly solution.
I know next to nothing about water supplies, but how about reservoirs up in the mountains catching the snow melt and rain from the mountains near the valley?
February 2nd, 2008 at 1:10 am
Would those so concerned about the birds and the bees -
REALLY prefer to sit in the dark and freeze?
February 2nd, 2008 at 5:01 am
There is another alternative. It is a new technology that
takes grey water, breaks down the molecules, super oxygenates it and returns 99% of the used water into fresh clean water.
The current system that we are using in Las Vegas only returns
30% and dumps the polluted water back into Lake Mead. It is cost effective and certainly environmentally friendy and could be done immediately. Just think, if we continue to reuse
our existing resources? I sell this technology. You may have seen a story on CNN last week that showed how they are already using this type of technology to treat water.
February 3rd, 2008 at 8:01 am
1. “This [$5bn] is well in advance of actually starting it [the pipleine]“….actually it has started! The bid request for the 250+ miles of water pipe was in the R-J legal section last week.
2. Don’t forget the argument is not a coal fired plant or we all die of heat or cold, for this is a false choice argument! Seventy percent of our electrical plants are natural gas fired. Sierra Pacific wants to have a balance forty percent gas and forty percent coal, with the remainder from renewables. SP says that coal prices are more stable than natural gas. This is not true. Natural gas prices are fairly stable over the past three years while coal prices increase fifty nine percent in 2007 alone! And, coal prices are going to accelerate in 2008 because China, CHINA!, is importing US coal (the equity price of coal miniing company Archer has increased 45% in January 2008!), because even though they have the second largest coal reserves after the US is closing mines because the fatality level of coal miners has finally exceeded that nations ability to sociall accept.
February 3rd, 2008 at 9:29 am
Desaliinization is the future solution for Southern California. I am aware of Long Beach currently having such a plant. There may be others.
Pat Mulroy, an exceptionally astute lady, tells me that the possibility of Lake Mead dropping even lower would negate such an exchange of water. We need water in Nevada and we must proceed to import unused water from Lincoln and White Pine Counties. Water is our life blood here in the desert
where it rains less than four inches each year.
Twenty five years ago we were happy to see the Colorado River surging 50,000 cubic feet per second into the Sea of Cortez with little damage in these United States. Now we would like to have some of that water returmed.
Today is far different than the 1920s when the Colorado was apportioned. 300,000 Acre feet per year was a huge amount for the three or four thousand people living in Clark County in 1930.
The times, they are achanging.
February 3rd, 2008 at 10:05 am
Other potential alternatives to the Northern Nevada water pipedream:
Construct nuclear power plants in California to generate both electrical power for distribution and energy for the desalination process.
Purchase the water rights of Southern California farmers who grow government price supported crops with Colorado River water.