Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1 <br /> <br />SUMMARY <br /> <br />These alternatives can be best viewed by comparing one alternative with <br /> <br />another. A comparison of the Column 1 alternative with the Column 2 <br /> <br /> <br />alternative shows what would happen to the project if the Southern Ute <br /> <br /> <br />Tribe M&I water were reduced from 55,000 to 20,000 acre-feet. A com- <br /> <br /> <br />parison of the Column 2 alternative with the Column 3 alternative shows <br /> <br /> <br />the result of providing a full water supply to the lands north of the <br /> <br /> <br />Ridges Basin Canal. The Column 3 alternative can be compared to the <br /> <br /> <br />Column 4 alternative to show what would happen if the Lower Animas Canal <br /> <br /> <br />were deleted. <br /> <br />Alternative #4 has several worthwhile considerations that should be dis- <br /> <br />cussed. <br /> <br /> <br />(1) Deletion of the Lower Animas Canal would lower the total con- <br /> <br /> <br />struction cost ..a and have an improved benefit-cost ratio. <br /> <br /> <br />(2) The 6,000 acres north of the Ridges Basin Canal could receive <br /> <br /> <br />a full water supply without the environmental problems associated with <br /> <br /> <br />the construction of Parrott Reservoir site as in alternative #3. <br /> <br />(3) Three Buttes Reservoir site would provide more efficient regu- <br />lation of the La Plata River flows. <br />(4) The potential. geology problems associated with construction <br />of the Lower Animas Canal would be avoided. <br /> <br />The project constructed,Animas Powerplant would provide about 88 million <br /> <br />kilowatt-hours annually of energy in all four plans to meet project re- <br /> <br /> <br />quirements. Alternatives (1), (2) and (3)' need about 140 million kilowatt- <br /> <br /> <br />hours while alternative (4) requires about 185 million kilowatt-hours <br /> <br /> <br />annually. <br />