WSP04400 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

o en For a 1.5 million barrel per day industry, a crude order of magnitude estimate CO ~ for the capitalized cost of developing the necessary water supplies is $1 billion. By way of comparison, this would not be more than one or two percent, if that much, of the capitalized costs of constructing and operating the coal gasifi- cation and oil shale facilities proper. Second, it must be recognized that the above conclusion only takes into account projections of other consumptive uses. However, the increased depletions and hydrologic regulation attributable to EETs could have both beneficial and adverse impacts on nonconsumptive (i.e., instream) water uses. Based upon the analyses performed' in this assessment, it appears that adverse impacts on instream uses and values would most likely be experienced in the White River and in the Colorado Main Stem River (within the State of Colorado). This is due to the likelihood of a high concentration of oil shale developments in these two basins. It is to be emphasized, however, that impacts on instream uses are highly site specific and will require further investigation at a much greater level of deta~l than was possible' in this study before any definitive conclusions can be reached. Third, the above conclusion as to the availability of surface water takes into account only those institutional factors which are embodied in each State's water rights system and in the "Law of the River" (Le., interstate compacts, u.S. Supreme Court decrees, and acts of Congress governing the operation of ColoLado River reservoirs). While not part of the traditional body of laws governing the use and allocation of water in and among the Upper Basin States, there are numerous other institutional factors, primarily in the form of federal environmental regulatory laws and programs, wAich may affect the timing, manner, location, and even ultimate extent of water resources development in the Upper cii