|
<br />OJ1575
<br />
<br />2002]
<br />
<br />THE IAST GREEN lAGOON
<br />
<br />931
<br />
<br />ppm increase in salinity at Imperial Dam cost irrigators in
<br />Imperial Valley a total of $108,000 in direct and indirect costs -
<br />costs that were estimated to reach $240,000 in the year 2000.174
<br />The impact of salinity on municipal users is equally
<br />severe. 175. A City of Los Angeles study concluded that each
<br />additional ppm of salt causes $300,000 in damage to the city's
<br />water delivery system annually.176 For individual consumers,
<br />"[i]ncreases in the concentration of salinity and hardness lead to
<br />added soap and detergent consumption. . . [damage to] water
<br />heaters, accelerated fabric wear, [and] added water softening
<br />costs . . .".177 Recent MWD estimates predicted that a reduction
<br />of 100 ppm in its water supplies would save its customers
<br />approximately $95 million annually in adverse impacts.178 The
<br />overall economic cost of Colorado River salinity is far greater,
<br />reaching nearly $1 billion annually in the U.S. alone,179 and,
<br />according to BOR estimates, totals approximately $2.5 million
<br />per 1 ppm of increased salinity in the Lower Basin as a whole. ISO
<br />High salinity water also poses recognized human health risks
<br />and harms fish and wildlife. 181
<br />
<br />174. DONALD WORSTER, RIvERS OF EMPIRE: WATER, ARIDl1Y, AND THE GROwrH OF THE
<br />AMEmCAN WEST 323 (1985). Some observers criticize such studies as alternatively
<br />underestimating or overestimating the costs of increased salinization by failing to
<br />account for non-linear relationships be~een increasing salinity and the costs
<br />imposed (costs tend to increase at an'increasing rate). They also note the existence of
<br />salinity j cost thresholds. For example, once salinity reaches a certain point, a large
<br />cost may be imposed due to the necessity of switching to. salt tolerant crops; however.
<br />after that point has been passed, increased salinity will not impose as great a cost.
<br />See, e.g., Richard L. Gardner & Robert A Young, An Economic Evaluation of the
<br />Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program, 10 WESTERN JOURNAL OF AGmCULTURAL
<br />ECONOMICS 1 (1985).
<br />175. See PONTIUS, supra note 3, at 67.
<br />176. See REISNER, supra note 1, at 483.
<br />177. KLEINMAN & BROWN, supra note 167, at 3. A 1980 DOl study estimated the
<br />annual damages incurred by Lower Basin consumers (in terms of increased
<br />household costs from detergent use, appliance replacement. and so forth) at
<br />$240,500 for each 1 ppm increase in Colorado River salinity, in 1976 dollars. See
<br />generaUy UNITED STATES BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, COLORADO RIvER WATER QUALl1Y
<br />OFFICE, COLORADO RIvER SALINITY: EcONOMIC IMPACTS ON AGRlCULTURAL, MUNICIPAL, AND
<br />INDUSTRIAL USERS (1980).
<br />178. See Josh Newcom, Getting Serious About Salt; Urban Water Puroeyors Seek
<br />Solution to Mounting Problem, WES'tERNWATER, Sept.-Oct. 1999, at 8.
<br />179. See PONTIUS, supra note 3, at 67.
<br />180. See BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, U.S. DEPARfMENT OF THE INTEmOR, COLORADO
<br />RIVER INTEmM SURPLUS CmTERIA DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT [hereinafter
<br />"DEIS"), Section 3.5-7 (July 2000), availab~ athttp://www.lc.usbr.gov.
<br />181. See Newcom. supra note 178. at 4. Human health risks include congestive
<br />heart failure, liver disease, and kidney disease. TEXTBOOK OF INTERNAL MEDICINE 839
<br />(William N. Kelley, M.D. ed., 2nd ed. 1992).
<br />
|