WSP00978

• File Number: 8271.300
• Description: Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program - General Information and Publications-Reports
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Water Division: 5
• Date: 6/1/1982
• Title: Optimizing Salinity Control Strategies for the Upper Colorado River Basin
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

.

^

.;.
N
~
~

,
,

.

.

.,

'..

.'

been brought to the surface during the procluction of gas sncl oil. The oil
fielcl brines are usually reinjected into the same formation in which they
originated, ancl there is presently a consiclerable effort in using the rein-
jected brine in the secondary recovery of oil.

Injection wells have also been used for the permanent undergrouncl storage
of inclustrial wastes, radioective wastes, "Wastes from small scale c1esalination
plants ancl some from advancell waste treatment plants. However, the injection
of these wastes has usually been on a fairly low volume at less than 3.16 Ips
in wells ancl on a short-term basis, unless some types of unclerground chsmbers
had been preparecl. For example, chambers have been made in salt c10mes for
waste disposal ancl oil storage in places where the brine prollucecl by the
making of these chambers coulcl be c1isposecl by other means. Another method of
making. chambers is the use of nuclear explosives which has been demonstrated.
in Coloraclo and Wyoming to help in natural gas procluction as part of the
... ".Plowshare Program.

Deep well injection is generally not a long-ierm solution to a continuous
'1J:isposal progrem. because of reservoir limitation and the need to drill new
wells at further ancl further c1istances from the eource. The new wells are
very expensive to construct and new piping systems are requirecl. Bouwsr
(1974) indicated that well costs, up to about 1,000 meters deep in 1974, were
about $160/m. In 1980, these costs "Would be about $265/m. Deeper wells would
be much more expensive on a unit cost basis because of the different types of
equipment required. In acldition, the pressures involved in t:he injection
process often exceed 100 atmospheres, and the pumping power requirement can be
large.

(#;\

{j:<

"I,

Other Brine Disposal Possibilities--
The USDI, WPRS (1980a) is presently assessing several alternatives to the
brine disposal problems for their salinity control projects in the Colorado
River Basin. One possible alternative which they are examining is supplying
the brine water to industries, such as oil shale, for their use. Another
possibility is to construct a collection system and convey all of the brine to
a suitable salt sink such as Sevier Lake in Utah or even to the Pacific Ocean.

Collection, Treatment, and/or Disposal of Other Saline Flow--
The Upper Colorado River Basin contains a number of natural saline seeps,,.,
ancl springs which adcl substantial amounts of salt to the river. . Alternatives
for eliminating these salts include desalination as discussed earlier ss well
as c1irect collection and disposal through evaporation pond to c1eep well injec-
tion. The desalination cost-effectiveness for the nature saline springs ancl
seeps are the same as c1escribed for the treatment of agricultural return
flows.

",.~

,"",

Hagan (1971) ancl EPA (1971) estimated that the salinity contribution from
point sources in the Upper Colorado River Basin is about 9 percent of the
total salt loacl at Lee's Ferry, Arizona. The majority of these point sources
are thermal springs, and Iorns et al. (1965) calculated that the annual dis-
charge anll dissolved solids concentration by all the thermal springs in the
upper basin to ba 7,287 ha-m ancl 491,500 .Mgm, respectively. Divicling the
flow and concentrations due to thermal springs among the three c1ivisions is

67