Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />~. .)? <br /> <br />POTENTIAL CONSUMPTION OF.WATER'BY EMERGING ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES <br /> <br />~) <br />00 <br />~ <br />~ <br /> <br />Along with the future conventional water uses described above, <br />consumption of water by oil shale and coal gasification facilities may <br />occur. The amount of water consumed will be a function of potential <br />future levels of EET development and the water use characteristcs of the <br />EETs. <br /> <br />Potential Emerging Energy Technology Developments, <br /> <br />The DOE has directed that two estimates of potential levels of EET <br />development be employed for the purposes of this assessment. These <br />estimates came from one of the many national energy demand studies which <br />DOE and its predecessors have conducted in recent years. The estimates <br />were derived by projecting national energy demand and then assuming, <br />more or less arbitrarily, that a certain portion of that demand would be <br />satisfied by synthetic fuels development. National levels of synfuel <br />production were then disaggregated to a regional level using another <br />series of assumptions. <br /> <br />The resulting estimates, referred to as the baseline case and <br />accelerated synfuel case, were disaggregated only to ASAs. Thus for the <br />purposes of this assessment, additional assumptions had to be made in <br />.order to generate the siting pattern to be assessed (see table 6.2). <br />However, the availability of water was not considered when the siting <br />pattern was being chosen. <br /> <br />As one can see, the postulated levels of EET development, especially <br />in the accelerated synfuel case, are extremely large. Indeed, one doubts <br />that they are reasonable representations of the potential for oil shale <br />and coal gasification development by the year 2000 (although the baseline <br />case may be a plausible projection of development by that date given the <br />events which were in progress. when this'report went to press).. This judg- <br />ment is borne out by the fact that the annual compound growth rates that <br />would accompany the postulated levels of EET development would range from <br />4 to 8 percent. These rates are so large as to strongly suggest,that it <br />would be exceedingly difficult for the regional economy of the Upper Basin <br />to bear $uch development over only a 20-year time span (i.e., 1980-2000). <br />Thus, these DOE projections are more properly viewed as depicting levels <br />of coal gasification and oil shale development which, if they occur at <br />all, are not apt to be attained until after the turn of the century.. <br /> <br />wnile this assessment is directed at potential oil shale and coal <br />gasification developments, conventional energy conversion processes may <br />also be expected to expand. ,This fact is explicitly recogn~zed in the <br />"without EET" scenarios, which depict increasing amounts of consumption <br />by the thermal electric sector. In terms of increases in the megawatts <br />(MW) of installed generating capacity, these are projected to range <br /> <br />~ <br />