|
Columnists
Sustainability
and Sustainable Development
Nicholas
R. Hild, PhD Professor ASU
Polytechnic
Nicholas
R. Hild, PhD., Professor, Environmental Technology Management, Arizona
State University College of Technology and Innovation, has extensive
experience in Environmental Management in the southwestern U.S. Dr. Hild
can be reached at 480-727-1309 and by email at DrNick@asu.edu.
...
Water, water, everywhere, but ...
Apr/May
2008
If
you’ve been in Arizona very long, you know that our water (supply) is
diminishing and in danger of drying up altogether—this is particularly
true for Tucson which depends on groundwater and the CAP (Colorado River)
water that replenishes the aquifers of that metroplex which 1.2 million
people depend upon.
It
is also true of the entire arid southwest: with climate change (global
warming), and more people to serve (Arizona has gained a million and a
half people in just the past decade), water is becoming more precious
every day as the volume of supplies from the Colorado River diminish.
Arizonans
have been aware of our ‘future’ water shortage for over 40
years, politicians chose to ‘solve’ water shortage problems by
bargaining with the devil, most notably the State of California, to get
the CAP designed and built as a ‘stop gap’ measure to postpone the
inevitable— that is, they postponed our (then) ‘future’
water shortage and saddled the state’s major metropolitan areas with
solving the problem on the backs future generations.
A
recent Viewpoints article in the Arizona Republic, written by Brad Udall,
who is the son of the late Representative Morris K. Udall, one of the
great conservationists who helped Arizona become a place that is revered
for its federally protected natural resources and habitats. Brad is
director of Western Water Assessment at U. of Colorado who has been
studying the Colorado River for some time. Among other things he has
concluded is that climate change (warming) effects on states in the
southwest, will likely require "unused" allocations of Colorado
River water (which Arizona is NOW using from Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico and
Colorado’s share), to soon be cut back as those states need the water to
meet their own increasing populations demand—and, to make it worse,
Nevada (Las Vegas) will tap Lake Mead water more and more, as its
population soars toward 2 Million people, meaning even less water for
Arizona.
What
that all means, according to Udall, is a major CAP supply reduction for
Arizona in the not-too-distant future. This is a result of Arizona’s
1968 agreement with California which basically said that, in the event
that water shortages in the Colorado River require a reduction in Arizona’s
allocation, it will not effect California’s supply, in Udall’s
words, because…"not a drop of California’s allocation will be
cut back until ALL Arizona’s CAP has been totally shut off…"
Thus,
its time to make another deal with the devil—it seems prudent to suggest
that Arizona should help California find alternatives to its source of
water (supply) NOW, before our own CAP supplies begin to be reduced—a
bold and unprecedented cooperative effort to help fund (yes,
that means with real monies from Arizona coffers), the
building of desalination facilities in strategic locations along the
coast, from San Francisco all the way south to San Diego.
After
all, they have the largest source of water in the world lapping at their
western shores so why not use that instead of the Colorado River? Even the
delivery system that has been in place for Mono Lake waters, can be
interconnected for conveyance of those waters. And, at the same time, the
California’s use of Colorado River waters can be reduced, thereby giving
that supply back to Arizona.
The
’68 deal with the State can be renegotiated so Arizona gets the water
from California’s allocation just as soon as we pony up funding to help
pay for the desalination facilities. And, with all the new energy-making
technologies like ocean-wave-generated power and solar PV systems, those
plants could all be powered with no carbon emissions contributing to
global warming. What a ‘sustainable’ concept!
Jerry
Grott, one of our Journal subscribers, wrote to me recently to share some
proven and tested technologies and uses for the tons of salt that’s
generated in desalting plants (see waterecyclinc.com). Among them
are applications of brine waters to calcareous soils for root rot in
irrigated agricultural areas up and down the Colorado River and EPA-
permitted applications of salts for dust control and soil stabilization,
to mention a few—waste ‘salt’ that previously was a major
"cost" of desalination, can now be a cost recovery center to
help offset costs of the desalination facilities.
Critics
of desalination ranging from die-hard environmentalists to politicians who
decry the high cost of construction and energy for operations can be
swayed now by designing the facilities with alternative power generation
technologies to run them and salt recovery/use opportunities that are
already working—its been done for decades in the Middle Eastern
countries that have no other water supply choices—and its clear that
desalination for California would solve the problem of future water needs
in Arizona. It’s a win-win for our children’s, children’s, children.
2008/1234
|
