Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />w <br />~ <br />N <br />.Q') <br /> <br />I <br />-.-'-1 <br /> <br />. TOWN <br />E:J OIL SHALE <br />IZl TAR SANDS <br /> <br />Figure 5. Oil shale and tar sands deposits in the Upper Colorado River Basin (Colorado River <br />Regional Assessment Study, Utah Water Research Laboratory, Utah State University, <br />1975), <br /> <br />Table 2, <br /> <br />Flow and quality <br />Rafael River Basin <br />areas. <br /> <br />within the San <br />below irrigated <br /> <br /> Minimum Approximate <br />Stream Flows IDS Range <br /> (cfs) (mg/l) <br />FCl;ron Creek 4 - 8 2,000 - 4,000 <br />Cottonwood Creek 4 - 9 1,000 - 4,000 <br />Huntington Creek 6 - 20 2,000 - 7,000 <br />Upper San Rafael 6 - 100 2,000 - 4,000 <br />Lower San Rafael 11 - 100 2,000 - 6,000 <br />------ <br /> <br />Saline springs. Other possible sources <br />of high TDS water for energy development <br />are mineral springs and uncapped arte~iBn <br />flows from oil exploration test wells. One <br />constraint on this concept is the very <br />high salinity levels of many such flows. For <br />example, a natural salt dome in the Paradox <br />Valley, Colorado, creates drainage at 260,000 <br />mg/l TDS. Obviously use of such water would <br />entail major difficulties. <br /> <br />However, flows such as the 11,000 to <br />14,000 TDS from Crystal Geyser, an abandoned <br />oil test hole in Utah, are more usable. The <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br />