My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PROJ00441
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
PROJ00441
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/19/2009 11:43:25 AM
Creation date
10/5/2006 11:55:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
C153459
Contractor Name
Loveland, City of
Water District
0
County
Larimer
Bill Number
XB 99-999
Loan Projects - Doc Type
Feasibility Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
113
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />to CBT for storage. <br />total diversions by <br /> <br />The WINDY GAP column represents the average annual <br />the Windy Gap project for the various drought levels. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />The values presented in Table 8-4 are the results of separate analyses for <br />each water supply source. Vhen considering the total supply from all four <br />sources, the amount of water available for a specified recurrance interval <br />is not necessarily the amount obtained by adding the individual supplies. <br />One reason for this is that the year that produces, for example, the <br />100-year event with respect to available ditch water will often produce <br />events of other recurrence intervals for the other supply sources, thus <br />producing a composite event that could be either less or more severe than a <br />100-year event. A second reason is that the large amount of storage <br />capacity in the CBT system reduces the impact on total yield of short-term <br />droughts on system yield; the quota system described earlier is actually <br />intended to provide more water per unit of ownership during dry years than <br />during wet years. The results of these analyses cannot, therefore, be <br />directly compared to the evaluation of total system yield (Task 7) <br />discussed in Section 9.0 of this report. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />8-15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.