Exec Summary Report_11-15-04 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Executive Summary Table ES-5 Potential Benefits and Issues of Families of Options for Resolving Supply and Demand Gaps Indirect Potable Reuse Improves M&I reliability Can be very expensive Maximizes successive uses of water ~ Must have consumable effluent to reuse The capture of legally reusable return flows ^ Maximizes beneficial use of water ^ Raw water treatment plant and/or pump and reintroduction of these captured flows ^ Lesser environmental impacts than a new back station needs to be constructed into the municipal raw water supply. water supply project . Existing and future regulatory compliance ^ May not require new diversion structures ^ Disposal of treatment waste stream ^ Previously unused reusable effluent historically resulted in reduced or more junior river calls controlling the river ^ River calls may become more senior, impacting all users ^ Public acceptance of the use of return flows for drinking water must be achieved Control of Non-Native Phreatophytes Control of Non-Native Phreatophytes ^ Benefits all users: M&I, Agriculture, ^ Any water saved would be administered Environment, and Recreation under the water rights system The reduction or elimination of non-native ^ Reduces non-beneficial consumption of ^ Does not benefit specific users and thus plants that consume significant volumes of water funding by water users will be a challenge water along rivers and streams. . Creates additional supplies without new . Would require regional cooperation and water storage or other infrastructure funding from a regional, state or federal agency . Demonstration projects may provide better information on costs and benefits ^ It is not clear that the vegetation that replaces the non-native species will use less water ^ Demonstration projects are planned in the Rio Grande and Arkansas and USGS is updating potential water savings estimates Examples of those multi-objective options are described in Table ES-6. The options that perform well in meeting more than one of the objectives have the ability to provide the supply necessary to fill the demand gaps, in the basins where these exist. This is particularly true when the options are implemented conjunctively, as balanced alternatives to meet demands while also meeting many of the management objectives. It is important to note that not all of the multi-objective options are feasible in every basin. For example, the predominance of hay production and orchards in certain areas of the West Slope may render a rotating fallowing program impractical. Agricultural efficiency, while having multiple benefits, also must be carefully evaluated in terms of its impacts on return flows, other water users, compact requirements, and the environment. Many of the Identified Projects and Processes, as well as the family of options developed during the SWSI process, include some storage components. Options that are not storage options per se, either require, or may be enhanced by, the addition of storage to: ^ Firm M&I and/or agricultural supplies by storing the additional supply generated by the option ^ Firm agricultural supplies by storing during wet years when a given agricultural user could have economically irrigated Provide environmental and recreational pools for storage projects whose primary purpose is meeting M&I needs Clearly, multiple solutions will be needed in each basin to meet the multiple and diverse demands for water that have been identified and projected. Water supply challenges exist and will intensify in the coming years, and many unique solutions will be needed. ~ $~ole'ri~ice Wo~e' $upplY Initia~ive ~~ S:\REPORT\WORD PROCESSING\REPORT\EXEC SUMMARY 11-10-04.DOC ES-35