Laserfiche WebLink
<br />W <br />-...l <br />o <br /> <br />~ The long distance transport alternative addressed pipeline collection <br />systems for, the Upper Basin, lower Basin, and entire Basin with terminus <br />locations assumed at Sevier Dry lake in Utah (for Upper Basin) and Danby <br />Dry lake in'Ca1ifornia (for lower Basin and entire Basin). The long <br />distance pipeline systems were sized to provide water for local use <br />as well as export in order to provide system cost sensitivities. The <br />systems were then developed with sufficient level of detail to estimate <br />relative cost-effectiveness. <br /> <br />Finally, a base case provides a reference from which to measure the rela- <br />tive cost-effectiveness of the local use or long distance transport alter- <br />natives. In this case, the current cost-effectiveness for structural <br />salinity control measures such as evaporation ponding and desalting are <br />presented. ,The base case assumes that the most cost-effective measures, <br />such as onfarm irrigation improvements and canal and lateral lining, where <br />app1icab1e,'wi11 generally have a higher priority of implementation than <br />structural measures and would be implemented before more expensive measures <br />involving desalting treatment and/or disposal of saline waters. <br /> <br />Potential for Cost Savings Beneficial Joint Use of Saline Water <br /> <br />Potential beneficial uses of saline water are found in both the local use <br />and export alternatives. Two beneficial use cases were studied to establish <br />the general 'level of savings in joint development with private industry. <br />Detailed eCQnomic analyses were not attempted in these cases since new <br />techno10gy,!variab1e market conditions, and lack of data limited the <br />depth of the investigation. The most promising beneficial use cases appear <br />to be: <br /> <br />1. local use of saline water for powerp1ant cooling (see figures <br />1 and 2); In this case, the unit costs of water supply presently <br />facing utilities were estimated to derive monetary credits that could <br />occur if saline water were sold to utilities. The incremental costs to <br />the user,of saline water for cooling in place of alternate freshwater <br />sources were considered in the estimated credit. <br /> <br />2. A coal slurry pipeline carrying 50 or 100 million tons of coal per <br />year to southern California using saline water as the transport medium <br />(see figQres 3 and 4). In this case, the primary cost savings are <br />derived from providing a pipeline collection system and reliable water <br />supply source for coal transport. <br /> <br />Cost-Effectiveness and Performance Summary <br /> <br />Table 4 summarizes the net cost-effectiveness estimates for the most <br />promising alternatives developed in this study. Costs reflect net Federal <br />costs after'adjustments for savings or added costs resulting from benefi- <br />cial use of ' saline water. In order to show relative cost-effectiveness and <br />total salt removal potential, comparative estimates are also displayed for <br />the base case and long distance pipeline transport alternatives. On this <br />relative cost-effectiveness basis, the local use and coal slurry pipeline <br />alternatives appear very attractive. On the other hand, the long distance <br /> <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />, <br />,; - ~~ <br /> <br />..-L. -~.-. :..Jl, -;,;_...;.;;i.::.:,~- ,~~:,&. <br />