Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.... <br />co <br /> <br />~ <br />- <br />o <br /> <br />cooler fresh water at the lOP <br />serve as Insulation to prevent <br />heal from escaping back (olhe <br />Atmosphere The hOl saline <br />waler Is then used 10 boillreon <br />which drives a turbine and gener. <br />alor fa produce electricity The <br />closed loop system ensures no <br />pollutants are releaSed 10 Ihe air <br />or waler In Ihe winter or on <br />cloudy days. Ihe pol1(fs residual <br />hAat can still be used 10 generale <br />power <br />Reclamalion scientiSfS con. <br />sulled with Israeli specialists and <br />olhers in dE'veloping Ihe Er Paso <br />site Israel has successfully <br />operated a similar but much <br />larger, system althe Oead Sea <br />lor the past three years The Is- <br />raeli project covers a SO-Acre site <br />and generall?s 5.000 kiloW811s 50 <br />limes mOfe electricity than the <br />US site <br />Aquaculture International <br />Bia Resources. Ine and Denver <br />Engineering Corpor;:ltion com. <br />p1eted a contracl study on fhe <br />use 01 a Sail Toleranl Enmergenf <br />Planl (STEP) process 10 benefi- <br />cially use cono:ontrAfe, and dis- <br />pose of saline water Economics <br />of file STEP process were ap- <br />plied fa Ihe Glenwood.Dotsero <br />Springs Unit Allhough unit costs <br />under $100 per Ion were claimed <br />in [he study, technical issues reo <br />laled to production rale, evapora. <br />lion rate. lorage value etc_ could <br />nOI be addressed due to lach: of <br />field verification Moreover <br />remaining questions related to <br />heneficial use and .-valer rights <br />of Glenwood Springs coupled <br />with lack of government funding <br />lor continued research. halle <br />hailed Ihe study <br /> <br />San Juan River <br />(USBR) <br /> <br />San Juan Ri\ler Unit investiga. <br />tions area includes the entire <br /> <br />23.000 square mile watershed <br />from its headwaters in south. <br />cenlral Colorado fa its moulh at <br />Lake Powefl The drainage con. <br />tributes approximately one mil. <br />lion Ions of sail annually [0 the <br />Colorado Rwer Basin <br />The Hammond Pro;pcl. Na\lajo <br />Indian Irrigalion Project (NIIPI. <br />and Ihe Hogback Irrigation <br />Projecl (also a Na\lajo Indian <br />project) are Ihe principal irriga <br />tion sources of salt in the basin <br />Historic flow and waler quality <br />dal.. show lhat Ihe irrigflled area <br />conlributes about 18.500 tons Of <br />sail annually <br />The Hogback Projecl con. <br />Iributes heavy salt loading bUI <br />the mechanisms tla\le not yet <br />been explored Other manmade <br />salt contributions include aban- <br />doned gas or oil wefls which <br />have developed leaks al Ihe <br />wellhead cooIanl discharges <br />from powerplants and was. <br />lewater from a petrOleum refinery <br /> <br />Slnbad Valley (BLM <br />and USBR) <br /> <br />Sinbad Valley is In ....estern <br />Colorado. south of Ihe lown of <br />Gateway S<t!l Cre>el< drains Sin. <br />bad VaHey and has been iden. <br />tified as a point source of saline <br />ground water Contributing an es. <br />timated 5.000 to 8.000 tons per <br />year of salts to the Colorado <br />Rwer systf'm <br />The BLM initiated a feasibilify <br />repon for the interception and <br />disposal of Ihese saline wafers <br />during fiscal year 1982 and <br />prepared a report on Sinbad Val. <br />ley in April 1983 This repon <br />recommended fhat lead respon. <br />slbility and funding be assumed <br />by Reclamation Belore final <br />sefection can be made. the <br />feasibility study indicates that ad. <br />diltonal information is needed <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />Additional discharge and conduc. <br />tivlly measurements are required <br />10 define salt loads of high flows <br />onsite ellaporation data are <br />needed 10 further refine the <br />sizing 01 ellaporation ponds and <br />[he abandoned wildcat well. No <br />1 Sinbad Unit should be <br />ellaluated for injection suitability <br />Other Questions also need to be <br />resol\led ~ water rights and corn <br />paflbility of Ihe project wilh exist <br />ing land \lalues <br /> <br />Uinta Basin (USBR <br />and USDA) <br /> <br />The Uinla Basin Unil is in <br />northeastern Utah and inchxJes <br />portions of DUChesne and Uintah <br />Counlies Phase I ReclamAlion <br />sludies showed the only viable al <br />ternati\le is canal lining Abolll <br />555 mites of Ihe total 240 mifes <br />01 canals and laterals in Ihe Uinla <br />Basin would be lined with con. <br />crete Projecl implementation <br />would reduce the sail load 10 the <br />Colorado Ri\ler by all estimated <br />21.000 to 30.000 Ions per y",ar <br />and reduce canal seepage by <br />aboul 16,800 acre.fElel per YElAr <br />of which about 4 600 acre.feet <br />could be used 10 reduce Iniga <br />lion shOrtages <br />A planning report'draft environ. <br />menIal impaCI slalemenl on the <br />unit was filed with Environmental <br />PrOlection Agency and released <br />to the public on April 25. 1986 <br />The final document is SCheduled <br />10 be completed and hied wilh <br />the EPA in spring of 1987 <br />USDA - Over 80 percent 01 <br />accomplishments to dale in Ihe <br />Uinta Basin USDA onfarm and <br />supportive off-farm salinity con. <br />trolimprollements ha\le been im- <br />plemented lhrough ttle use 01 <br />LTAs (Long Term Agreementsl <br />More than ninely percent of the <br />participants who entered into <br />