|
<br />2358
<br />
<br />CHAPTER V
<br />
<br />COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES
<br />
<br /> Physical comparison of alternatives
<br /> With oil shale Federal en-
<br /> Without oil shale Oil shale vironmental
<br /> Sprinkler and MOP management
<br /> Surface and surface Coal irrigation compro- with private
<br /> irrili!;stion irrigation emphasis emphasis mise development
<br />Water supply (acre-feet)
<br />Irrigation
<br />Milk Creek Segment 8,500 8,500 1,500 8.900 8,500
<br />White River Segment 21.900 17,900 26,700 26,800 17.900
<br />Subtotal 30,400 26,400 28,200 35,700 26.400
<br />Coal industry
<br />Milk Creek Segment 7,200 5,000 12,500 6,900 5,000
<br />White River Segment 30,000 30,000 42.000 24,000 30.000 30.000
<br />Subtotal 37,200 35.000 54,500 30.900 35,000 30.000
<br />Oil shale industry 30,000 60,000 60,000 60,000
<br />Municipal and industrial water 5,000 5.000 5,000 5,000 1,500
<br />Subtotal 5.000 5,000 30.000 65,000 65.000 61,500
<br />Total 72 , 600 66,400 112.700 131,600 126,400 91,500
<br />Stream depletion (acre-feet) 55,100 52,800 101,700 113,300 112,800 90,500
<br />Increase in salinity concentration at Imperial
<br />Dam from stream depletion (mg/1) 5.7 5.5 10.5 11.8 11.8 9.4
<br />Areas served by irrigation (acres)
<br />Milk Creek Segment
<br />Full serv<lce 2,250 2,250 2,430 2,250
<br />Supplemental service 1.690 1,690 1,030 1.690 1,690
<br />Subtotal 3.940 3,940 1.030 4.120 3.940
<br />Little Beaver area
<br />Full service 5,750 6,550 6,550 10,000 6,500
<br />Supplemental service 1,450 1.450 1.450 1.450 1.450
<br />Subtotal 7.200 8.000 8.000 11.450 8.000
<br />Josephine Basin-Flag Creek area
<br />Full service 2.600
<br />Supplemental service 550
<br />Subtotal 3.150
<br />Total 11,140 11.940 12,180 15.570 11.940
<br />
<br />68
<br />
|