My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC06132
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
17000-17999
>
WSPC06132
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:04:38 PM
Creation date
10/9/2006 5:42:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.700
Description
Colorado River Basin General Publications - Augmentation-Weather Modification
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
3/1/1983
Title
Simulation of the Costs of Removing Snow from County Highways in Colorado
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
50
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 />000015 <br /> <br />Seeding has been proposed qy the Bureau of Reclamation as the most <br />promising means of augmenting the flow of the Colorado River (CRE'.ST <br />Briefing Document, 1982). Additional water is needed in the Colorado <br />River Basin to meet local demands (population and industrial expansion, <br />recreation, and hydroelectric power generation) and to fulfill a <br />national obligation to provide Mexico with 1.5 million acre-feet of <br />water annually. The Westwide Study Report (1975), which analyzes <br />critical water problems facing 11 western states and compares weather <br />modification to other augmentation measures like importing water, <br />deSalting seawater or geothermal brines, and managing, vegetation, <br />concludes that "weather modification appears to be the most promising <br />source of new water supply in the Western United States." <br /> <br />Cloud seeding is controversial. First, some scientists are not <br />convinced that it works (Morel-Seytoux, 1977; Katz and Glantz, 1979). <br />others are convirx:ed, after two decades of experimentation, that it can <br />work--if it is conducted carefully and knowledgeably (Elliott et al., <br />1978; Mielke et al., 1981). The Weather M;)dification Advisory Board <br />(1978:35), charged with assessing weather modification, corx:luded that <br />"there is strong evidence that snowfall from winter storms over Colorado <br />mountains can be increased tly 10-20% provided that seeding can be <br />limited to' clouds having certain well-defined characteristics." <br /> <br />Second, the benefits of winter seeding are not distributed <br />uniformly. The people who may suffer adverse effects are, in general, <br />not the ones who enjoy the benefits (Sonka, 1979:31). In ColoradO, the <br />disparity is probably most evident in small mountain communities whose <br />residents experience the irx:onvenience of additional snowfall but reap <br />few of the benefits enjoyed downstream tly municipal water-users and <br />irrigation interests. The potentially adverse socio-economic impacts of <br />seeding on mountain areas include costs of early-season supplemental <br />feeding of cattle, more avalanches, and irx:onvenierx:e and threats to the <br />health of the elderly (Rudel, Stockwell and Walsh, 1973; Weisbecker, <br />1974; Farhar and Rinkle, 1976). Another impact often mentioned is the <br />cost of removing snow from highways. <br /> <br />-2- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.