Laserfiche WebLink
<br />H::oo <br />~.,... <br />00 <br />c..v <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />I <br />t <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Diffe1'ences among tha various studies have been inevitable and have been <br />primarily centered around ~uant~tative h~stori~alsalinity cenditiO'ns, salt <br />J.oadingll,. concentrating affects and, respective, magnitude' ef' con.tributionfrom' <br />thevarieus SOurces and cembinatiens ef seurcas. These numerical differences <br />have been the result ef nenu1:\ifermity in data ~ets, precadures, assumptions, <br />and, semetimes, incor1'ect extrapolationef eventsend/er'data. Hew.....a", the <br />g.naral qualitativecenclusiens and the stated:neads fer control ef mest ef <br />thes.. stud:l.es ara basically similar. Tha majer seurces ef salinity are "",n- <br />peint netural seurces, irrigatien ,,-enpoint seurces, natural and man-made point <br />seurces, reserveir evaperatien, out-et-basin transfers and municipal and <br />indust1.'ia.l uses. Thesa studiaswill be mentiened in succeeding paragraphs <br />whera pert:inent. Tha"e have alsO' bean studias similar to' this ene and a briaf <br />review of thase may be halpful in setting fe"th the centributiens ef this <br />werk. <br /> <br /> <br />There a1'e basicallythrae sats ef optimi~atien studias in tha Upper <br />Celerado River Basin which specifically identify salinity as a gea1. These <br />are discussed in the fellowing paragraphs. Other indirect ecenomicinput- <br />eutput studies such' as Howe at al. (1.972) and}!erria (1977) als'e evaluated <br />salinity effects but did nO' eptimizatien. BiShop et a1. (1975) 'Perfomed a. <br />linear pregramming enalys~s ef the effects ef energy davalepment in the Upper <br />, Basin en water reseurces in Utah. <br /> <br />Erlenketter and Scherer (19-77) developed a fairly comprehensive deter- <br />minis~ic investment planning mixed-integer eptimizatien medel fer salinity <br />centrel en the Celerade Rivar. They as,sumed givan values of future diversiens <br />and asseciated salt ,leads andexaminad the b.nefit.,cost balance between a1<- <br />penditures fer salinity reductien,assedlltedwith given projects, and the <br />econemic damagas which weuld be incurred if the expendituras were not made. <br />The deterministic simulatienpertienefthe model alse.permittedtheprejec- <br />tien efwhan and which prejects sheuld be undertaken ina general sense. <br />Scherer (~977) also developed e etatic net benefit~aximizing medel for irri- <br />, '. gat1enre.lated salinity centro~ meaSuras. However., theaemodels enly indi- <br />'catadwhen to' tal aggregate prejects sheuld ceme en-line and did not. previde <br />fer eptimal combinatiens ef individuel compenents from within the varieus <br />prejec-ts fer the, mostC<>st-effective program. Erlenkotterand Sch.1'er.(1977) <br />and Scherer (1975) censiderad 15 basin-wide Water and Pewer Resources Service <br />(W11RS) .prej ects iMluding minimal en-farm pregrema in the Grand Valley and <br />Uncompahgre Vallay. Censequently, the majerity of the projectsw'era' compesed <br />ef only canal and latera.l linings. Desalinatienwas net cons:l.dered. Much ef <br />"""'...,d/lita 'us.ed fer the Grand Valley and Uncompahgre Valle)! inColerado was from a <br />....,study,.:byWestasen(1975). .,,' .... . <br /> <br />, , }'lug etal. (1977)deve1.e1'ed.a multi-level minimum..cost li:>ear pregram- <br />mingmodel to' evaluate impacts on the salinity and quantity ef flem'in' the <br />Upper Celerado River Basin by petential anergy develepment. The results of <br />thia model indicated that water aveilability would be the largest censt1'aint <br />to energy develep.ment in the Upper Basin. Develepment policies which utilized <br />high salinity weters ceuld actual1.y result in a net decrease in salinity at <br />Lee's Ferry, Arizona. <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br />. <br />