Laserfiche WebLink
<br />f. 1,500 tons of salinity enter the Colorado River from hot springs in the Glenwood Springs <br />area each day. Salinity contributed by the hot springs into the river stays constant, which <br />means that as more water is removed from the Colorado River, salinity levels increase. <br />Salinity levels increase the farther downstream measurements are taken, and by the time <br />water reaches the Gulf of California, it may be as high as 10% the concentration of seawater. <br />The salt load at Lee's Ferry below Lake Powell is 10 million tons per year; Glenwood's <br />annual salt load is 500,000 tons per year, which means that Glenwood contributes 5% of the <br />salt that enters the Colorado River annually. <br /> <br />g. Art Bowles asked about whether the water can be desalted. A $300 million desalination <br />plant was constructed in Yuma Arizona to desalinate 76 million gallons per day of water that <br />had 3,000 milligrams of salt per liter of water; by contrast, Colorado River water in <br />Glenwood Springs has salt content of 10-20,000 milligrams of salt per liter of water. The <br />Yuma desalination plant has not operated consistently since 1995 since it is so expensive to <br />operate. <br /> <br />h. Dale Tooker operates a reverse osmosis desalination plant for the Clifton Water District. The <br />plant desalinates 3 million gallons per day, which is equivalent to 15 acre feet per day, or <br />about 8 cfs on an annual basis. The plant cost $3.5 million, and annual operating costs are <br />$140,000. Once the salt is removed, it creates a disposal problem. Desalinating water is very <br />energy dependent and expensive. Dale can be reached at 970-434-7328, <br />dtooker@cliftonwaterdistrict.com. <br /> <br />1. If oil shale is commercially developed, it estimated that salinity levels will increase, and that <br />41,000 tons of salt per year, or about 112 tons per day, will be added to the Colorado River. <br /> <br />J. Front Range diversions are having an impact on salinity levels, and this is causing increased <br />costs to municipal water providers downstream. The impact varies with water levels, so that <br />diversions during spring runoff do not have as big an impact. Similarly, if high quality water <br />is stored and then released in the fall, water quality increases. Dave Mernrt noted that there <br />is a disconnect between water resource allocation and water quality, since there is no <br />requirement in water resource petmitting to consider the impact on water quality <br />downstream. Dave noted that water quality is one of the major issues being addressed in the <br />current negotiations with Denver. <br /> <br />12. Update on previous Water for the 21st Century Grant awards. <br /> <br />a. Grand County NCNA: Phase 1 has been completed, and a scope of work request for Phase <br />2 has been sent out; a draft report is expected by October 2007. <br /> <br />b. 10825 Study: Phase 1 is being wrapped up; in Phase 2, they will look at alternatives in more <br />detail. The next meeting is May 29. <br /> <br />c. Energy use subcommittee: John Sikora reported that the committee will be using HB 1400 <br />funds to gather data. The subcommittee's current focus is on oil and natural gas. An EIS <br />was just released detailing the water needs posed by energy development. Peter Barkman <br />reported that it is very lengthy; Chapter 4 alone is 385 pages. <br /> <br />1. There are only 5 paragraphs devoted to estimating the water requirements of oil <br />shale. Greg Trainor of Mesa County reported that it is very difficult to estimate <br /> <br />L\CWCB Imaging\Caleb\Minutes\Colorado\2007\Minutes May 2007 CBRTdoc <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />7/l< <br />