Laserfiche WebLink
<br />18 <br /> <br />CLOUD SEEDING <br /> <br />crease with the size of the target area of successful precipitation enhance- <br />ment. These results stem from changes in the regional and national bal- <br />ances of supply and demand. An increase in revenue for producers from <br />added precipitation over time favors multiyear use of precipitation modi- <br />fication technology over one year isolated use. However, it is cautioned <br />that successful precipitation enhancement continued over several years <br />may change production and technological responses within and outside <br />the target areas, and thus change consumer and producer benefits (Garcia <br />et al. 1990). <br />The econometric models and crop response models are continually <br />being improved. Experiments such as those that directly measure the <br />effects of added rain on crops can reduce the uncertainty in inputs to and <br />results from the models. Even so, it will always be true that different <br />models applied to the same situation may give conflicting results. The <br />guidance obtained from them is nonetheless much preferable to no guid- <br />ance concerning the ultimate economic effects of adoption of a new <br />technology. <br /> <br />2.2.2 Economic Aspects of Winter Cloud Seeding <br /> <br />Winter cloud seeding to augment snowfall in high elevation areas is <br />designed primarily to increase runoff for hydroelectricity and water <br />supplies for lower elevation, semiarid areas. In this situation, the benefi- <br />ciaries usually do not reside in the project area. Projects conducted to <br />enhance winter sports activities are an exception. In either situation, the <br />economic value of additional water can be calculated somewhat more <br />readily than in cases in which crop response is directly involved. <br />Managed water is normally assigned a value equal to the cost of <br />obtaining it, storing it, transporting it to the region of use, and distribut- <br />ing it to the users (Dennis 1980). However, water and electricity supply <br />and demand also influence its value. Favorable effects on the net eco- <br />nomic productivity of a hydroelectric utility system include more effi- <br />cient use of storage capacity, a favorable change in the ratio of peak to <br />average plant capacity, and a reduction in the overall capital intensity of <br />the hydrogenerating system (Crutchfield 1969). Snowpack managed for <br />the winter sports industry is used where it falls, and it directly benefits <br />the many industries associated with skiing. The availability, and direct <br />benefits and costs, of the managed additional snowpack or runoff will <br />have ripple effects in other economic sectors. One might think that factors <br />affecting the value of additional water would be the same throughout the <br />western United States. However, there is actually considerable diversity <br />in the factors that determine the cost and value of (added) water. <br /> <br />2.2.2.1 Arizona and Nevada. Arizona receives some 90% of its renew- <br />able water supply from winter precipitation. This state relies on ground <br />water for 40% of its water supply, even with the newly opened aqueduct <br />provided by the Central Arizona Project. According to the Arizona De- <br />