Laserfiche WebLink
<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 />