WSP00401 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

GGSS Conclusions The physical possibility of artificially recharging the ground water in the South Platte study area was determined by analyzing four selected test areas in detail. Recharge requirements were then estimated for the remainder of the study area and three alternative means of conveying water to recharge sites were considered, These alternatives are (1) construction of all new conveyance facili~ies, (2) use of existing canals in the area, and (3) a combination of new and existing facilities. The analyses indicated that it is physically possible to recharge the alluvial aquifer in the study area, but some problems associated with high water tables and differences in water quality may be expected in some areas. Costs and benefit analyses were then made for the combination system since this appeared to be the most reasonable approach, The ground-water recharge alternative examined during this study is not economically justified with a direct benefit cost ratio of 0.82 at the current interest rate. In addition, this alternative would serve only the single purpose of irrigation and would provide only about 58 percent of the water supply to irrigation that could be provided by the multiple-purpose Narrows Unit, It would not meet any of the flood control, recreation, or fish and wildlife needs that would be met by the construction of Narrows Dam and Reservoir. Therefore, it is concluded that the multiple-purpose Narrows Unit is a more effective project economically and would meet a greater portion of the needs for the-area. Furthermore, the recharge alternative will require pumps to recover the ground water with an estimated annual energy requirement of 5,700,000 kilowatt-hours (equivalent to 3,350 barrels of oil annually). The results of the ground-water recharge analysis have been arrayed in comparison with pertinent data from the Narrows Unit as shown in table 8. 55