<br />.
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />Page 5
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />Closing the Loop: RecydnInlg Western Wa~~Jf
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />In the last two years, the west has witnessed a growing
<br />market for reused water, Consider the following:
<br />. Four private duck hunting c1uhs have contracted with
<br />California's Eastern Municipal Water District to use treated
<br />water to irrigate feed crops in the spring and summer and to fill
<br />ponds during the winter's hunting season, The water used in
<br />ponds requires disinfectant in addition to secondary treatment
<br />and will be sold at $43/ af, The clubs take water only when there
<br />is a surplus of reclaimed water over the amount used by other
<br />contractors.
<br />. In 1990, Tucson Country Club signed a contract with the
<br />City of Tucson to begin using reclaimed water for 700 af/year
<br />of irrigation water, reducing its reliance on scarce groundwa-
<br />ter, The Club will pay the City $472/af for its new water
<br />supply.-8Q percent of tbe potable water rate, Conversion to
<br />reclaimed water will belp the club meet increasingly tight water
<br />use targets, Under tbe Second Management Plan for the
<br />Tucson Active Management Area, eacb af of reclaimed water
<br />used by the club is counted as only 0,95 af if reclaimed water
<br />accounts for 50-89 percent of use, and as only 0,90 af when the
<br />club fully converts, The sale of effluent water also belps tbe city
<br />fmance its water system,
<br />. A central Texas scbool district was unable to build a new
<br />school because no sites were served by tbe public sewer system
<br />and poor soil conditions prevented onsite drainage. On-site
<br />wastewater treatment and tbe use of reclaimed water to flusb
<br />toilets reduced wastewater discharge by 85 percent, aUowing
<br />tbe new school to be constructed,
<br />In this article, WS examines how slales and communities in
<br />tbe West are turning to reclaimed water to meet growing
<br />municipal demands, the considerations tbese plans must ad-
<br />dress, and examples of successful programs,
<br />
<br />THE GROWING IMPORTANCE OF RECYCLED WATER
<br />
<br />(U[l
<br />
<br />Recycling waste water is not new, In 1956, wben drought
<br />almost eliminated its surface water supplies, the smaU town of
<br />Chanute, Kansas, recycled tbe water from its rapid.sand-
<br />rutration plant directly into the intake point of its drinking
<br />water system--witb no ill-effects, Since 1970, tbe City of
<br />Aurora, Colorado bas been delivering 100 million gaUous per
<br />year of treated wastewater to Aurora HiUs golf course and bas
<br />added several municipal parks to the delivery system because
<br />of tbe success of tbe project. Since 1975, Water Factory 21,
<br />operated by Orange County Water District in California has
<br />been recharging up to 15 million gaUons a day of secondary
<br />effluent and injecting it in its coastal aquifer to prevent salt
<br />water intrusion.
<br />What is new is the level of activity and the expectations that
<br />state water agencies bave raised for recycling as a way to meet
<br />expanding water demands, The water plans of most western
<br />
<br />states call for large increases in the recycling of waste water,
<br />Recycling can serve two important goals for municipal
<br />supply systems, It reduces the need to develop new sources of
<br />water to meet growing demands and it helps the municipality to
<br />meet the standards ofthe federal Clean Water Act by reducing
<br />the level of effluent discbarges into surface water and ground-
<br />water.
<br />In 1991, California passed legislation setting the ambitiollS
<br />target of recycling 700,000 af/year of water by the year 2000
<br />(AB 673: Cortese), A state Water Conservation Task Force in
<br />California estimates that the state was already reusing 325,000
<br />af/year of municipal waste water in 1989, Over one balf of this
<br />(173,000 at) was used for agricultural irrigation, 21 percent for
<br />groundwater recharge, 16 percent for landscape irrigation, 6
<br />percent for wildlife habitat, 2 percent for industrial reuse, and
<br />the remaining 2 percent for recreation and other purposes,
<br />The Task Force estimated that, if aU the institutional, fmancial
<br />and technical obstacles were removed, the state could reclaim
<br />over 800,000 af by the year 2000,
<br />The second five year plan of the Phoenix AMA in Arizona
<br />calls for the use of effluent water to grow from 52,755 af/year
<br />in 1985 to 244,511 af/year by 2010,
<br />Texas' water plan projects a tripling of water reUSe be-
<br />tween 1990 and 2040--from 60 billion gaUons per year (184,000
<br />af/year) to 180 billion gaUons per year (550,000 af/year) (see
<br />"Planning for Today and Tomorrow," WS October 1990),
<br />To meet these goals authorities must address legal, techni-
<br />cal and even emotional considerations--considerations tbat
<br />vary in importance among states, depending on tbe steps
<br />already taken to create supporting regulatory and fmancin~
<br />reforms, A California survey of reclamation projects found
<br />tbat nearly 70 percent were trapped at the planning stage--with
<br />46 percent of respondents citing funding as the primary con-
<br />cern and 27 percent ranking legal and regulatory concerns as
<br />their top concern, Sometimes obstacles are more apparent
<br />than real--the natural response to baving to do things differ-
<br />ently, regardiug wastewater as waste to be disposed of rather
<br />than a resource to be creatively used,
<br />
<br />FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
<br />
<br />Manywater policymakers believe that state or even federal
<br />funding will be needed to help pay for reclaimed water projects
<br />large enough to meet increasingly ambitious state goals, Tbe
<br />major costs are the capital costs of the additional treatment
<br />facilities needed to meet established standards for the reuse of
<br />wastewater, tbe conveyance systems to deliver the water (since
<br />it cannot use existing conveyance systems for potable water),
<br />and tbe operating costs of tbe system and quality monitoring
<br />proced ures,
<br />
<br />continued on page 14 , , ,
<br />
<br />WATER STRATEGIST Published by Stratecon, Inc, P,O, Box 963, Claremont, CA 91711 (714) 621-4793
<br />
<br />
|