Since there are no currently active contests, we have switched Climate CoLab to read-only mode.
Learn more at https://climatecolab.org/page/readonly.
Skip navigation
20comments
Share conversation: Share via:

Sergio Pena

Jul 19, 2014
10:07

Catalyst


1 |
Share via:
Dear All, you haven´t fulfilled all the parts of the project.Best. S

Climate Colab

Aug 6, 2014
08:16

Member


2 |
Share via:
Thank you for your submission to the Climate CoLab adaptation contest. This is a strong and well-thought-out proposal. The judges like the 3 stage approach and are very positive about the idea of shifting to a regional instead of a city-by-city approach to providing potable water. The notion of adding a desalination plant rather than suggesting it as an alternative for LA makes a great deal of sense. Providing energy for the desalination plan through a massive solar plant is appealing, although there are (as in Israel) many technological issues that need to be addressed. It would be nice to see this idea get a lot of visibility. In stage 1 to produce informed public support, it will be necessary to suggest some method of collaborative problem-solving that goes beyond the current set of institutional arrangements. So, please consider what the design of a multi-stakeholder dialogue might look like: Should it be put in motion by the US Department of Interior? Who would need to be at the table (in a problem-solving, not decision-making mode)? The judges suggest creating an independent technical or scientific advisory panel to support the problem-solving effort. It would help if possible sites for the desalination plant and the power plant were listed in the proposal. What cost is involved in acquiring these sites? There needs to be some careful modeling of the supporting infrastructure and its costs (and what those are likely to mean for water users under different scenarios). Desalination has now been used in other parts of the world and costs are coming down, but the proposal can use more detail. There should also be an analysis of what it would take to amend the current agreements regarding the use of the Colorado. There are a lot more compelling and instructive references with regard to the history of Colorado water sharing, integration of desalination into larger water systems and the use of renewable energy to operate desalination plants. It would be good to put together a better annotated reading list to support the work in Phase I. Congratulations on advancing to as a semi-finalist, and the adapation contest team looks forward to seeing your revised proposal for the final submission.

Mark Capron

Aug 8, 2014
01:44

Member


3 |
Share via:
As a water resources engineer, I love it. How about we think larger all around and connect a few more dots. 1. The Salton Sea is below sea level and drying up (about -226 feet or -70m). 2. When dry, the old sea bed is a tremendous source of air pollution from salty dust storms. 3. WaterFX claims to be a relatively inexpensive, doesn't matter how salty, or dirty, solar thermal desalting process which produces rock salt for easy salt disposal (or mine the rock salt for minerals). (I've had no luck with specific inquires on leasing their product for a wastewater application, but their claims on economics are not ridiculous based on the science.) Hyperlight is another inexpensive solar thermal or concentrating solar PV arrangement. 4. There are plans to spend a few hundred million to add fresh water and arrange the circulation such that the sea bed stays wet with some recreation opportunities. (A well developed, but under funded, Save the Salton Sea organization and promises from Sacramento, Los Angeles, San Diego, and others to compensate for past water trades.) You could readjust your LA-Vegas water trade to address more issues as follows: A. Connect the Salton Sea to the Gulf of California. (Distance about 150 miles. Might be all gravity flow with pipe/tunnel buried as much as 70 feet deep. Pipe would need a vacuum pump air release at the high point.) B. Use the drop from sea level to Salton Sea level to generate hydropower. C. Desalt seawater at several points around the Salton Sea as desired for the product water. (You have a lot more room for solar PV or solar thermal around or floating on the Salton Sea (reduce evaporation?) than coastal Los Angeles. D. You could then offer more Colorado River water to both Los Angeles and Las Vegas. Or either might prefer the more pure desalted water. A pipe to Las Vegas might run in the Colorado River channel. The Colorado River Aqueduct to LA is only about 10 miles north of the Salton Sea's north coast.

Mark Capron

Aug 10, 2014
09:12

Member


4 |
Share via:
Average flow of 176,655 af/yr with a 60 meter drop from sea level at 60% efficiency would average 2.6 MW of electricity worth $1.16 million/yr at $0.05/kWh. However, if we flow enough seawater to make up for evaporation from the Salton Sea (not accounting for the agriculture runoff), average flow would be 1.3 million af. The electricity (average 20 MW power) would be worth $8.6 million per year. Reverse osmosis to provide 176,655 af/yr of product water from seawater would average near 70 MW power demand with current technology, expect that to decrease. The solar thermal processes would need very little electricity to pump water through the process. Because the Salton Sea is below sea level, energy would be required to lift it out of the basin, if desalted product water is shipped to either Las Vegas of Los Angeles. That extra energy would be less than the energy produced by flowing all the evaporation (1.3 million af/yr) from the Gulf of California. Additional adaptation features: 1. As sea level rises the available hydropower increases. Sea level rise should take a few centuries to get “over the hump” and flood the valley. 2. As the U.S. Southwest warms and evaporation increases, the available hydropower increases. 3. The Gulf of California is quite deep in places. We might import water that is less than 10C (50F). This cold water could be used to cool geothermal power plants (increasing power output more than 10%) or as a heat sink for air conditioning units. 4. The Salton Sea is currently way too salty for typical ocean life (more than twice as salty as the ocean). If the salinity is brought back to ocean levels, we could operate Marine Agronomy and Ocean Forestry in the sea. (See Global Plan – Reversing Climate Change with Ocean-healing Seaweed Ecosystems) 5. There are other places (Dead Sea for one) where these same water-trading and regional-water thoughts are important adaptations to avoid violent conflicts over water.

Thomas Manaugh

Aug 10, 2014
10:35

Catalyst


5 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
"Oceanforesters, Thank you for your suggestions. You might be interested in looking at Johnnie Buttram's "Strategically Transitioning To Global Adaptation!" at https://www.climatecolab.org:18081/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300701/planId/1306821. We mentioned it as a related proposal in our proposal, though space limitations required us to keep our proposal simple -- not as extensive as you suggest is possible. We like the idea of extending our proposal in innovative and productive ways. Please keep us in the loop if you decide to write a new proposal that incorporates the ideas you mention.

Mark Capron

Aug 11, 2014
10:36

Member


6 |
Share via:
Tmanaugh, The judges asked you to fix up your proposal in ways which are easier or more important at the Salton Sea: 1. They like regional. Go for all of Southern California because seawater is essentially unlimited especially without brine disposal issues. A million af or more is sustainable. 2. The Judges want to know the cost of land and the size/location for the solar powered desalting. The surface of the Salton Sea (might be bottom mounted) should be essentially free for the necessary area. You can calc the area from data on the WaterFX website. 3. The Judges appear to favor a lot of stakeholders. The Salton Sea option offers enough water for all of Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. MWD could surrender all its purchases of Northern California water (which may not be available often). MWD could indicate they won't be buying water from the proposed peripheral Delta tunnels. You do have 4 days to revise your proposal.

Climate Colab

Sep 3, 2014
12:24

Member


7 |
Share via:
Thank you for submitting a final proposal. The judges appreciate what appears to be a refocus of your proposal at the local / state level, since there was some concern over the national focus previously. It will also be interesting to see how the new projects that have been added (Piermont) will go. As you move forward with your proposed actions, you are strongly encouraged to continue using the judges’ feedback to help guide your work. There is always room for improvement, and the judges would like to see you respond further to the questions and comments that were raised during semi-finalist selection. For ease of reference, the judges’ initial suggestions have been summarized by a contest fellow below: - Provide more detail o Technical issues need to be addressed o Method of collaborative problem-solving (e.g. independent technical or scientific advisory panel) o Possible sites for the desalination plant and power plant • Costs involved with acquiring said sites? • Modeling of supporting infrastructure and its costs? o Analysis of what it would take to amend current agreements regarding the use of the Colorado - Better annotated reading list to support the work in Phase 1 Congratulations on a strong proposal, and the adaptation contest team wishes you the best of luck!

Saïd Majdi

Sep 12, 2014
12:58

Member


8 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Response to Judging-Results First we would like to thank the judges. We are very excited about our proposal being declared among the finalists. Our team is composed of individuals who have experience dealing with the hard sciences (engineering and technology) as well as soft sciences (social and political). The topic of our proposal has a heavy dose of both and that is what makes it interesting to us. We understand that in order for the Desalination Plan to reach the implementation phase, people involved in a problem-solving or decision-making capacity will have to be “sold” on both sets of issues—hard and soft. In the next few postings, we will address comments posted by Judging-Results. Our response is divided into the following categories: 1. Site selection 2. Collaborative problem solving 3. Technological issues 4. Amending the Colorado River water allotment agreements 5. Annotated reading list

Saïd Majdi

Sep 12, 2014
12:04

Member


9 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Response to Judging-Results (1 of 5) 1. Site selection Site selection is an important task that will be undertaken early on in Stage 3 to allow inviting requests for proposals (RFPs) for building the plants and installing equipment on the basis of already identified sites of well known geographic and geometric characteristics; thereby, reducing proposers’ risks and facilitating the evaluation and comparison of submitted proposals. In an initial phase, a site selection committee will define and agree on a comprehensive set of site selection criteria. In Table 1 of our proposal we show what the main criteria are. The site selection criteria are then used to review relevant documents and databases, and preliminarily identify candidate sites. An inspection of existing and planned District water transmission, storage and distribution facilities, as well as determining the location of power utility transmission lines will help to prepare a final candidate site list. To reduce cost and expedite the selection process, we recommend using geographic information system-based multi-criteria decision analysis (GIS-MCDA) followed by field visits to produce a list of, preferably, three best candidate sites. Environmental impact assessment (EIA) studies will then be ordered for the three best candidate sites for each of the plants. Further analysis and costing of mitigation measures for each best candidate site will help determine the best site for each of the plants. The following is a non-comprehensive list of California agencies and interested parties that will be consulted in order to complete the desalination plant site selection process. A similar list will be generated later to show the California agencies and interested parties that will be consulted during the site selection process for the power plant. 1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Clean Water Act compliance) 2. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Fishery habitat) 3. U.S. Department of the Interior (Historic and cultural resources) 4. U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service (Fishery habitat) 5. U.S. Coast Guard (Impact on navigable waters) 6. California Department of Boating and Waterways (Impact on navigable waters) 7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Environmental impacts) 8. California State Lands Commission (Land use along shoreline) 9. California State Water Resources Control Board (Water rights) 10. California Water Quality Monitoring Council (Waste discharge compliance) 11. California Department of Transportation (Right of way and lease permits) 12. California Department of Fish and Game (Fishery habitat) 13. California State Department of Health Services (Finished water quality) 14. Sierra Club (Environmental impacts) 15. The Audubon Society (Environmental impacts) 16. Homeowner Associations (Environmental and land use impacts) 17. County and City Governments (Environmental and land use impacts) 18. Fish Angling Groups (Fishery habitat) 19. District Customers (Economic and environmental impacts). Preliminarily, we estimate that it will take 12 to 18 months to complete the site selection phase at a cost of approximately $120,000 to $180,000, not including the cost of the environmental impact assessment studies.

Saïd Majdi

Sep 12, 2014
12:26

Member


10 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Response to Judging-Results (2 of 5) 2. Collaborative problem solving In our proposal, we recommend forming a Special Advisory Committee (SAC) that draws on expertise from institutions of higher learning and professional organizations, such as the National Research Council (NRC) and the American Water Works Association (AWWA). The SAC will recommend solutions to issues in the following areas: technical, economic, social, environmental, legal and institutional. Regarding building consensus among stakeholders within a collaborative problem-solving environment, we recommend using the method of charrettes. Charrettes bring stakeholders together in a series of non-confrontational sessions that use facilitated creative processes to build consensus and yield joint-ownership solutions. They are very popular in land use planning and have been successfully used in many other disciplines.

Osero Shadrack Tengeya

Sep 17, 2014
04:54

Fellow


11 |
Share via:
Hi Majdi and your friends, kindly consider voting for my proposal shown on this link. https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300206/planId/1002 Thanks.

Saïd Majdi

Sep 19, 2014
09:19

Member


12 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Response to Judging-Results (3 of 5) 3. Technological issues Many of the technological issues related to the Desalination Plan have to do with the desalination plant and its technologies. In the context of the execution of the Desalination Plan, a full comparative analysis of desalination technologies will be conducted to make sure the best solution is selected. However, for the purpose of our current proposal, we would like to address the issue of disposal of brine discharge from desalination plants, given its importance and the fact that it is often brought up as an issue of potential adverse environmental impact on the marine ecosystem. First, desalination was long considered too expensive to adopt, except in countries with affluent economies. Recent technological advances have made desalination more affordable. Over the past decade, decreasing production costs have resulted in expanded desalination use in many arid and semi-arid regions of the planet. At the start of 2012, approximately 16,000 desalination plants were operating worldwide at a total installed production capacity of 71.9 million m3/day, or 19 billion gal/day. At the same time, the following countries made the major contributions to the global desalination capacity: Country Percentage of Global Desalination Capacity Saudi Arabia 20% UAE 19% Spain 13.8% USA 13.5% China 11% Algeria 6.2% Australia 4.8% India 4.5% Israel 3.8% Qatar 3.3% Regarding the issue of disposal of brine discharge from desalination plants, we find many studies that were conducted to devise brine dispersal methods achieving required dilution rates capable of minimizing potential impact on the marine environment. Brine, which is simply seawater with about half of the water removed, is a byproduct of the reverse osmosis process. A crucial point to be made is that discharging brine back into the ocean can be done so that marine life is not harmed by excessive salinity. Briefly, here are some important facts:* • Brine can be added to waste water or water that has been used to cool power plants. That is a benign and inexpensive way to reduce salinity of the brine as it dissolves into a larger volume of water before the solution is discharged into the ocean. • Outflow of brine from a desalination plant to the ocean is monitored so that it does not increase the salinity of the ocean to a level that is toxic to marine plants and animals in the locale of the desalination plant. • Discharges of brine into the ocean will not sink to the bottom of the ocean and accumulate there, when outflow is designed to diffuse brine into mixing areas where it will dissolve—areas near the surface of the sea and areas where there is sufficient wave and current action to aid in dispersing and dissolving the brine. It should also be noted that inflow of seawater to a desalination plant need not harm sea life. Seawater can be taken from inlets placed below the seabed, where an overlay of sand serves as a natural filter. *Source: "Seawater Concentrate Management," Reuse Water Assn, retrieved from the Internet on 8/10/2014 at https://www.watereuse.org/sites/default/files/u8/Seawater_Concentrate_WP.pdf.

Saïd Majdi

Sep 19, 2014
09:20

Member


13 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Response to Judging-Results (4 of 5) 4. Amending the Colorado River water allotment agreements In our proposal we suggest that Nevada could negotiate with California for more water from the Colorado River. One can view a precedent for the kind of negotiation that would achieve that result at http://www.riversimulator.org/Resources/LawOfTheRiver/HooverDamDocs/Supplements/2007Drop2FundingAgreement.pdf. Specifically, prior to the negotiation California was losing the benefit of some Colorado River water that would occasionally flow in excess through lower California and into Mexico. A storage dam was needed to hold back water in excess of Mexico's agreed-upon allotment of Colorado River water. A storage dam would allow stored water to be used, later, as needed by California's farmers. Nevada contributed millions of dollars for construction of the needed reservoir. In compensation for it contribution, Nevada received rights to a designated amount of water stored in Lake Mead. The above-described kind of negotiation is allowed through a program authorized by Congress to encourage development of intentionally created surpluses within the Colorado River system. Thus, legalities for the exchange suggested in our proposal are not overly complex or daunting because the Bureau of Reclamation can approve and administer certain agreed-upon exchanges, based on existing laws and guidelines. (See https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2008/04/11/E8-7760/colorado-river-interim-guidelines-for-lower-basin-shortages-and-coordinated-operations-for-lake.)

Thomas Manaugh

Sep 22, 2014
03:25

Catalyst


14 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
California should work with Nevada and the Bureau of Reclamation to implement the Desalination Plan. There are several very good reasons. Though a somewhat similar plan was informally advanced in the past as a solution to water scarcity in Nevada (1), we don't think sufficient attention and weight has been given to economic and environmental benefits to California that would come from implementing the plan. The truth is California, Nevada, and the planet would benefit from implementing the Desalination Plan -- a win-win-win plan. Presently, California gets "free" water from the Colorado River, but the water is not really free because of costs associated with transporting it from Lake Havasu on the eastern California border to where it is treated before being used by customers of the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) in Southern California. One cost is wasted water that comes from evaporation, leakage, and seepage as the water is transported through the Colorado River Aqueduct. That cost is loss of at least five percent of water that enters the aqueduct (2). Thus, 100 acre feet of "free" water turns into no more than 95 acre feet of water at the tap. (An acre foot of water is enough water for two families for a year.) Another cost is energy needed to transport "free" water for 242 miles, including the cost in energy of lifting the water over and across several mountain ranges during its journey. The energy cost per acre foot of water is approximately 2000 kWh per acre foot (2). Unfortunately, that energy is now mostly generated from burning fossil fuels; and that creates greenhouse gases. Adding more greenhouse gases to the planet exacerbates costs from global warming -- heavy costs that Californians are becoming well aware of because of unrelenting drought, failed crops, wild fires, lowered air quality, and coastal damages from rising seas. Another cost is that the "free" water will need to be treated before it is considered to be potable for customers of the MWD. The cost of treatment is estimated to be 44 kWh per acre foot (2). Finally, there is a cost associated with risk of having much reduced access to drinking water if a major earthquake or other disaster were to disrupt operation of the aqueduct. Generally speaking, it is good public policy to reduce dependence on any one source of water. The question is whether or not California should exchange some of the so-called "free" water it gets from the Colorado River for some actually free, perfectly potable water it might get from a desalination plant on its own Pacific coast. Nevada might be willing to finance the Desalination Plan plan which would be implemented under the auspices of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to provide desalinated drinking water to California customers in exchange for access to an equal amount of water to be taken from the Colorado River. The Desalination Plan includes California authorizing that exchange. Below are listed other important elements of the Desalination Plan (3). 1) Energy for desalination is provided from one or more concentrating solar plants (CSPs) to be constructed in the Mojave Desert, already the location of other CSPs. Thus, the Desalination Plan would allow for making high-quality drinking water available to customers in California without creating greenhouse gases and, thereby, adding to global warming. 2) No loss of rights to Colorado River water will occur as a consequence of California's participation in the plan. There is a recent precedent for an agreement between the Bureau of Reclamation, California, and Nevada where California benefited from getting a facility to store water where the water would otherwise be lost for use by California farmers. Nevada paid for the storage facility but benefited from getting access to water in the Colorado River system under a plan to encourage development of intentionally created surplus water (4). 3) The plan will involve no interruption in delivery of water to users in California. Any water from California that is exchanged with Nevada as part of the plan will be compensated at least 100% by desalinated water procured for the benefit of California water users as part of the plan. 4) It is reasonable to expect that implementation of the desalination plan will be welcomed in many areas of California because of a boost that would be received to a local area's economy from construction and operation of a CSP or desalination plant. 5) It is expected that desalinated water for the plan will be obtained from (a) one or more newly constructed seawater desalination plants and/or (b) existing seawater desalination plants that might expand their operations. Generally, expanded operations can result in production of less expensive water per volume because of economies of scale. Possible existing sources of desalinated water for the plan are the following plants (5): Long Beach Pilot Project-The City of Long Beach intends to develop a 10,000 acre-foot per year seawater desalination facility consisting of a seawater intake, pretreatment, membrane desalination, post-treatment, and a brine disposal system. Long Beach is researching an under ocean floor seawater intake, pretreatment and discharge system. With the under-ocean-floor seawater intake and discharge method, collector screens will be extended horizontally out into the ocean below the beach floor. Long Beach has also developed a proprietary technology for desalination using a two-pass nanofiltration system. Los Angeles Pilot Project-The City of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is proposing implementation of a pilot project to assist in evaluating the technical, environmental, institutional, and economical merits of desalinating seawater within its service area. The proposed pilot project at the Scattergood Generating Station is aimed at collecting the needed information from which LADWP can make an informed decision. Municipal Water District of Orange County Pilot Project-The Municipal Water District of Orange County intends to develop a 25 million gallon per day seawater desalination facility in Dana Point. The subsurface feedwater supply intake system will be situated within Doheny State Beach and the desalination plant will be located a short distance inland just east of San Juan Creek. The project consists of a subsurface slant well intake system, pretreatment, membrane desalination, post-treatment, power supply, brine conditioning (if needed) and disposal, and a pumping station connection to the regional distribution system to serve customers in south Orange County. San Diego Full Scale Project-Poseidon Resources (Channelside) LLC (Poseidon) plans to construct and operate an approximately 50 million gallon per day Carlsbad Seawater Desalination Plant to produce potable water through reverse osmosis. Associated facilities include an intake pump station and pipeline, concentrate return pipeline, sewer connection, solids handling building, electrical transmission lines, and product water pipeline. From the Desalination Plant, desalinated water would be distributed along several pipeline routes (some proposed, some planned and some existing) to the City of Carlsbad and various local water districts as wholesale water purchasers for ultimate use in Northern San Diego County. Source water for the project will come from once-through-flow seawater in the existing cooling water discharge system at the Encina power plant. Concentrate will be conveyed to the power plant cooling water discharge canal, and then the concentrate will be blended with the power plant cooling water prior to discharge of the blended stream into the ocean via the power plant discharge canal. West Basin Desalter-The West Basin Desalter includes a 1.5 million gallon per day reverse osmosis desalination system, yard piping, and brine disposal piping. Treatment facilities consist of threshold inhibitor and acid injection systems, cartridge filters, booster pumps, reverse osmosis membrane units, decarbonation facilities, chlorine disinfection, and an on-site storage reservoir. Brackish water is pumped from the West Coast Basin. Product water is delivered to the California Water Service Company. Brine is disposed and conveyed to the Los Angeles County Sanitation District's Carson Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant. West Basin Pilot Project-West Basin Municipal Water District (West Basin MWD) intends to develop a 20 million gallon per day seawater desalination facility within its service area. The project would employ a combination of proven technologies, including microfiltration and reverse osmosis, to reduce salt content levels to at or below that of imported water being delivered to the area. Water would be used by customers of West Basin MWD. References 1. H. Brean, Water authority touts pipeline while foes pursue desalination plant, Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 20, 2011, retrieved from the Internet on 9/21/2014 at http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/water-environment/water-authority-touts-pipeline-while-foes-pursue-desalination-plant. 2. R. Wilkinson, Analysis of the Energy Intensity of Water Supplies for West Basin Municipal Water District, retrieved from the Internet on 9/21/2014 at http://www.westbasin.org/files/general-pdfs/Energy--UCSB-energy-study.pdf 3. S. Majdi & T. Manaugh, Stop Groundwater Plan -- Save $8 Billion, retrieved from the Internet on 9/21/2014 at https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300208/planId/1309211. 4. AGREEMENT AMONG THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU OF RECLAMATION; THE COLORADO RIVER COMMISSION OF NEVADA; AND THE SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER AUTHORITYFOR THE FUNDING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER DROP 2 STORAGE RESERVOIR PROJECT, retrieved from the Internet on 9/21/2014 at http://www.riversimulator.org/Resources/LawOfTheRiver/HooverDamDocs/Supplements/2007Drop2FundingAgreement.pdf. 5. Exhibit M: Metropolitan Funded Water Supply from Desalination at http://www.riversimulator.org/Resources/LawOfTheRiver/HooverDamDocs/Supplements/2007Drop2FundingAgreement.pdf ;(pages 103-108).

Anne-marie Soulsby

Sep 23, 2014
04:40

Member


15 |
Share via:
Hi Majdi & Manaugh, Please consider voting for my proposal, https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300801/planId/1309001 Good luck with your entry! Asante/Thank-you @conserveaction

Saïd Majdi

Sep 24, 2014
03:40

Member


16 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Response to Judging-Results (5 of 5) 5. Annotated reading list • Southern Nevada Water Authority. Clark, Lincoln, and White Pine Counties Groundwater Development Project Conceptual Plan of Development, November 2012, retrieved from the Internet 7/19/2014 at http://www.snwa.com/assets/pdf/ws_gdp_copd.pdf. The plan involves gaining water for Las Vegas by extensively pumping and transporting groundwater from wells located in a number of rural counties in eastern Nevada. • R. Kearn, Giant Nevada water transfer for Las Vegas under fire. CourthouseNews Service, retrieved from the Internet 7/19/2014 at http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/02/18/65413.htm. “The court found that the state engineer had arbitrarily granted the Authority access to more water than the valleys contained, which was unfair to the public and to future generations. The court also found that the mitigation plan for the project was inadequate. It ordered the [Southern Nevada] Authority to prepare a new one that included ‘objective standards or thresholds for determining when an environmental impact is unreasonable,’ and additional analyses of the water available from each valley.” • Desalination. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, retrieved from the Internet 7/19/2014 at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desalination. Approximately 16,000 desalination plants operated worldwide 2011, producing 66.5 million cubic meters per day. Production is expected to reach 120 million cubic meters by 2020. • Largest Solar Plant in the World Goes Through Last Test Before Opening, retrieved from the Internet 8/9/2014 at http://science.kqed.org/quest/video/largest-solar-plant-in-the-world-goes-through-last-test-before-opening/. The $2.2 billion project will deliver 377 megawatts of power, enough electricity for 140,000 homes. • Commissioner’s Office, U.S. Department of the Interior and Western municipal water suppliers reach landmark collaborative agreement, retrieved from the Internet 8/9/2014 at http://www.usbr.gov/newsroom/newsrelease/detail.cfm?RecordID=47587. Arizona, California, Nevada and Colorado and the federal government have signed a landmark water conservation agreement called the Colorado River System Conservation program. Central Arizona Project, Denver Water, The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California and Southern Nevada Water Authority are partnering with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to contribute $11 million to fund pilot Colorado River water conservation projects. The projects will demonstrate the viability of cooperative, voluntary compensated measures for reducing water demand in a variety of areas, including agricultural, municipal and industrial uses. All water conserved under this program will stay in the river, helping to boost the declining reservoir levels and benefiting the health of the entire river system. • N. Tsiourtis, Criteria and procedure for selecting a site for a desalination plant, Desalination, Volume 221, pp. 114-125 (Elsevier, 2008). This paper presents and analyzes site requirements to accommodate a desalination plant, the need for early site selection, the identification of concerned parties, the composition and setup of a special committee, the terms of reference for the special committee, the criteria that should be taken into consideration, the time period, and the procedure to be followed for the selection of the most appropriate site. • A. Fong and J. Tippett, Eds., Project Development in the Solar Industry, (Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, Florida, 2013). This book provides an overview of utility scale solar project development and the various tasks required to bring large solar power plants from plans to realities. The various topics have been organized and presented in a way to clearly define important development fundamentals including basic business and legal considerations. • A. Olufemi, et al, Adapting a GIS-based multicriteria decision analysis approach for evaluating new power generating sites, Applied Energy, Volume 96, pp. 292-301 (Elsevier, 2012). To assist utility and energy companies as well as policy-makers in evaluating potential areas for siting new plants in the contiguous United States, an adaptation of a geographic information system (GIS)-based multicriteria decision analysis approach is presented in this paper. The presented approach has led to the development of the Oak Ridge Siting Analysis for power Generation Expansion (OR-SAGE) tool. The tool takes inputs such as population growth, water availability, environmental indicators, and tectonic and geological hazards to provide an in-depth analysis for siting options. • E. Grubert, et al, Where does solar-aided seawater desalination make sense? A method for identifying sustainable sites, Desalination, Volume 339, pp. 10-17 (Elsevier, 2014). This work demonstrates a quantitative global analysis that identifies favorable sites for solar-aided seawater reverse osmosis desalination (SWRO) based on specific target criteria. Location-based data about natural conditions (solar insolation, ocean salinity, and ocean temperature) are integrated and mapped with social indicators (water stress, prevailing water prices, and population) to identify regions where solar-aided SWRO has the highest potential. • K. Lovegrove and W. Stein, Eds., Concentrating solar power technology, principles, developments and applications (Woodhead Publishing, 2012) This book provides a comprehensive review of concentrating solar power (CSP) technology, from the fundamental science to systems design, development and applications. It reviews the fundamental principles of concentrating solar power systems, including site selection and feasibility analysis and socio-economic and environmental assessments. It provides an overview of technologies such as linear Fresnel reflector technology, parabolic-trough, central tower and parabolic dish concentrating solar power systems, and concentrating photovoltaic systems. • R. Roggema, Ed., The Design Charrette Ways to Envision Sustainable Futures (Springer, 2014). This book provides a theoretical foundation establishing the benefits of organizing a design charrette for community-based planning, supported by many practical examples. It includes sections on collaborative learning, practical guidance, theory and case studies in many different contexts: long and short charrettes, urban and rural subjects, and Dutch, Chinese, Australian, Indian and European examples. • K. Thompson, Last straw: How the fortunes of Las Vegas will rise or fall with Lake Mead. Popular Science, retrieved from the Internet 7/19/2014 at http://www.popsci.com/article/science/last-straw-how-fortunes-las-vegas-will-rise-or-fall-lake-mead. Two intake pipes already carry water from Lake Mead to Las Vegas, about 25 miles to the west. Because of drought, Lake Mead has only about half of the water it can hold. If the water drops another 50 feet, the first intake pipe that sucks water for nearby Las Vegas will start sucking air. Underneath Lake Mead a massive custom-built tunnel-boring machine is plowing through bedrock. That new tunnel, known as the Third Straw, or Intake No. 3, “will reach 200 feet deeper into the lake—and keep water flowing for as long as there’s water to pump.” • N. Rott, The search for drinking water in California has led to the ocean. National Public Radio, retrieved from the Internet 7/19/2014 at http://www.npr.org/2014/02/26/281984555/the-search-for-drinking-water-in--has-led-to-the-ocean84555/the-search-for-drinking-water-in-california-has-led-to-the-ocean. Discussion is presented about benefits, costs, and environmental concerns regarding desalination of seawater to provide potable water to consumers in California. • Ivanpah solar power facility. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, retrieved from the Internet 7/19/2014 at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivanpah_Solar_Power_Facility. Large concentrating solar power facility in the Mojave desert provides clean electric power to consumers in California. • H. Brean, Water authority touts pipeline while foes pursue desalination plant, Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 20, 2011, retrieved from the Internet on 9/21/2014 at http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/water-environment/water-authority-touts-pipeline-while-foes-pursue-desalination-plant. This article reports the earliest incident, to our knowledge, when a suggestion was made that California and Nevada should negotiate a swap of some of California's Colorado River allotment for desalinated water paid for by Nevada but provided from one or more desalination plants on the Pacific coast. • R. Wilkinson, Analysis of the Energy Intensity of Water Supplies for West Basin Municipal Water District, retrieved from the Internet on 9/21/2014 at http://www.westbasin.org/files/general-pdfs/Energy--UCSB-energy-study.pdf. This essay provides comprehensive information about energy requirements to provide water to consumers in California from various sources. • S. Majdi & T. Manaugh, Stop Groundwater Plan -- Save $8 Billion, retrieved from the Internet on 9/21/2014 at https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/plans/-/plans/contestId/1300208/planId/1309211. This is an entry in the CoLab Climate contest in 2014. It proposed a Desalination Plan to help solve a water scarcity problem in Las Vegas, Nevada. It is meant to replace an expensive and environmentally destructive Groundwater Plan. • AGREEMENT AMONG THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU OF RECLAMATION; THE COLORADO RIVER COMMISSION OF NEVADA; AND THE SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER AUTHORITYFOR THE FUNDING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER DROP 2 STORAGE RESERVOIR PROJECT, retrieved from the Internet on 9/21/2014 at http://www.riversimulator.org/Resources/LawOfTheRiver/HooverDamDocs/Supplements/2007Drop2FundingAgreement.pdf. This is an extensive document that details operating guidelines followed by the Bureau of Reclamation in administering control of waters in the Colorado River system. • Exhibit M: Metropolitan Funded Water Supply from Desalination at http://www.riversimulator.org/Resources/LawOfTheRiver/HooverDamDocs/Supplements/2007Drop2FundingAgreement.pdf; (pages 103-108). A reservoir was needed in California to store water from the Colorado River that otherwise would have flowed into Mexico in excess of Mexico's legal allotment. Nevada paid for construction of the reservoir and was compensated by gaining access to some water stored in Lake Mead.

Victor Blanco

Oct 4, 2014
11:50

Member


17 |
Share via:
Congratulations!!! Please check the "Discusion Section" in the "Community" label... Proposal of activity during the Conference Session of 2014 Winners... https://www.climatecolab.org/web/guest/discussion#discussion%3DpageType%3ATHREAD%2CthreadId%3A1337218

Gabriele Schubert

Oct 6, 2014
02:48

Member


18 |
Share via:
Great collaborative thinking! I'd like to suggest another collaborator: tech company, EcoloBlue, which make water from air (.4-1million gal/4days in the "dry" desert of Qatar) using solar and wind power, thus completely avoiding the brine production issue inherent in desalination (which uses 5x as much energy). http://tinyurl.com/q2cvkcj The Salton Sea Authority Board plans to interview EcoloBlue in early November 2014. Lake Mead evaporates 1 million acre-feet per year, and recapture of this vapor and condensation back into water would clearly benefit Las Vegas. NOAA and NASA-JPL have all confirmed that every part of California has sufficient atmospheric moistures (30%+) required to efficiently operate atmospheric water generating installations, and Scripps Institute of Oceanography has offered to provide micro-climate data starting December 2014, which can identify the best sites for EcoloBlue atmospheric water generation plants. Humidity levels around the world are rising with global warming (as noted in the 2014 US Climate Action Plan by Dr. John Holdren; and in the 2007 Lawrence Livermore National Lab report specifying that each degree Celsius of warming adds ~7.5% of water vapor to the air, with a positive feedback loop further increasing global warming: https://www-pl.llnl.gov/?url=science_and_technology-earth_sciences-moisture ). Given the simplicity of the EcoloBlue design (no more than a solar-covered parking lot to shelter modular units), and the fact that they can use wind and solar to make huge volumes of "a new renewable", water from air, anywhere, I encourage the MIT Center for Collective Intelligence to look further at this exemplary company, for increasing our water resilience to the droughts that are expected to intensify with climate change. Public notice of this efficient and decentralized water-making option, is one of the great results of the MIT Climate Colab initiative.

Thomas Manaugh

Feb 11, 2015
05:23

Catalyst


19 |
Share via:
Proposal
contributor
Said Majdi and I recently completed a fact-finding trip to Nevada and California, where we interviewed stakeholders regarding the processes whereby clean water is made available to consumers. Our desalination plan was generally well accepted. Some environmentalists felt that the Ivanpah concentrating solar power plant was not a good model for how a source for power for desalination would be obtained. That too many birds were killed by intense beams of concentrated reflected sunlight was the concern. Therefore, we have decided to look further to identify other possible sources of renewable energy that could supply electricity to power desalination. Any candidate to replace concentrated solar power in our Desalination Plan would need to meet requirements for technical and economic feasibility. Another idea came to us when discussing our plans for siting of a power plant. Why not develop a plant in Nevada near Hoover Dam? An electricity-generating facility in that locale could make good use of underutilized power transmission capabilities. Except during times of peak demand, power generation from Hoover Dam stays at only 50 to 55% of capacity. It is likely that reduced generation is caused by lower flows of water in the Colorado River that have resulted from ongoing drought that has lasted for more than a decade. Electricity from Hoover Dam transmission lines could supply the same grid that would be used by desalination plants on the California coast. Both Hoover Dam and desalination facilities could benefit from sharing costs for transmission resources. A new power plant in Nevada in the locale of Hoover Dam would be a boost to Nevada's economy that would come from constructing and operating of a new clean-energy power plant in Nevada. That would be a further incentive for Nevada to consider our proposed alternative to groundwater pumping.

Rick Spilsbury

Aug 27, 2015
05:39

Member


20 |
Share via:
Congratulations on your MIT recognition. Maybe I can help. You suggested a solar power plant near Hoover Dam to utilize those underutilized power lines. May I suggest a floating PV solar power facility on Lake Mead. There are two good reasons for doing this: One, the solar facility would shade a part of Lake Mead, thus reducing evaporation losses. And two, no land would have to be bulldozed to accommodate the facility. The extra costs for building a floating solar facility could be covered by the monies collected from delivering the conserved water. And some of the power generated could be traded for water from desalination facilities on (or off) the Coast. SNWA could enter into agreements with Coastal communities whereas; the coastal community would pay for the desalination facility, and SNWA would provide the electrical power to desalinate the ocean water. Consequently; those Coastal communities could deliver water to their customers for far less, and SNWA could trade for more water from the Colorado River for the cost of generating the power to desalinate Coastal water. Of course, there is one hurdle to cover. The SNWA and the Coastal community would have to pitch in to help desalinate farm runoff waste water for reuse on California farms (who might otherwise lose out in this Colorado River water trade). ...And since the PV solar power facility doesn't have to be solely owned by SNWA, other interested communities (such as Phoenix or Tuscon) could join in to pay for it – and receive a proportional amount of water from the Colorado River. For more information: Check out my blog – NoShootFoot.blogspot.com