MegaDrought Threatens HydroPower in US West

[sightseer 895]

Theres a 'once in 1200 years' drought occurring in the US western states that is threatening both hydroelectric power and the cooling needed for thermal based energy plants as well as drinking water supply at some point.  Choices will have to be made.  Neither Solar PV nor wind need any water so they shouldn't  be threatened.

 

[dmwalker 605]

1 hour ago, sightseer said:

as well as drinking water supply at some point.

Don't forget agriculture, especially in California. Perhaps they could consider desalination plants on the coast. 

[birdguy 3,943]

California's Imperial Valley will be the first to go.  It depends almost entirely on Colorado River water.

And California is not the only state threatened. Southern Arizona is also facing a water crisis.

The Four Corners power plant decommissioned 2 of it's coal fired generating plants in 2013, almost 20 years ago.  They will probably have to be brought back up to provide power for Arizona and perhaps as far away as California if Colorado River hydro power becomes unavailable.  That means more coal mining in Colorado and Wyoming if the power plant is brought back to full production.

Once water and power become a crisis strict rationing of both will have to be enforced.  Many people will be forced to leave Southern California, Southern Nevada and Arizona.

Right now virtually no water from the Colorado River is making it to the Gulf of California.

Noel

[sightseer 895]

Desalination through the use of excess electricity seems much smarter than cycling base power plants on and off. 

I was reading about the increase in battery storage systems across the US here https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/electricity/batterystorage/

and the complete report made mention of one area (PJM) that had to curtail its use of batteries because it was causing them to have to cycle the more base power plants and it got me to wondering why they wouldn't just use the extra electricity for some other purpose (like desalination or water purification).  I really wonder why we don't have networks of pipelines to pump sea water all over the place the same as we do for oil?  It could be desalinated and then sent all over the country (areas that needed it) for crops and refilling reservoirs.

[birdguy 3,943]

There are major disadvantages to desalinization for large populations.

1. There are significant chemical waste disposal needs to consider.
Desalination creates several byproducts which require specific disposal steps that must be followed to keep people and the environment safe after making fresh water for use. There are pre-treatment and cleaning steps that help to make the process more efficient than a simple strainer. Most facilities use hydrogen peroxide, chlorine, and hydrochloric acid to prepare the water for this process. Once the chemicals are used, then must be disposed of correctly to prevent them from entering the water table.

2. Desalination creates plenty of brine that must be managed as well.
The side product of a desalination effort is brine. Facilities will send the purified water for further processing once the salt is gone, but the remainder is a super-saturation product of sodium that requires careful disposal. Many facilities just put it back into the ocean, but there are numerous marine species which are ill-equipped to manage the higher sodium levels. Too much salt will decrease the oxygen levels in the water, which can cause local life to suffocate if there is too much brine dumped into the local supply.

3. It impacts the smallest creatures the most often.
When there are chemical discharges or brine dumping activities that occur around a desalination plant, then it is the smallest creatures of the food chain that experience the most severe impacts from these activities. Phytoplankton helps to form the base of all marine life, which means reducing food levels for other creatures will impact the entire ecosystem. There are also issues with entrapment when a facility brings in water for processing as well, a concern that is referred to as impingement.

4. There are health concerns to manage with desalination.
Although desalination can provide a significant portion of the water supply to some countries, especially those in the Middle East where the climate is challenging, it is not a perfect technological solution. There are times when the water released by the facility is harmful to human health as well. The chemical byproducts can leech into the system, exposing people and plumbing systems to the acidic nature of the purification process. If the pH balance is off, then the lead and other problematic elements in some plumbing systems could literally poison you at the same time you think that you’re drinking something safe.

5. Desalination plants consume a lot of energy.
Energy is becoming a precious commodity for us these days as we seek to reverse some of the issues that climate change is bringing our way. Some scientists suggest that we have until 2030 to begin reversing the processes that got us to where we are today before we cross a point of no return. Using desalination for water can be beneficial in several ways, but it requires a significant portion of power to create something usable. There are other water treatment options that require less energy while still providing us with the drinkable water needed for our survival.

6. The capital cost of desalination technologies is quite high.
Home-based desalination pumps and filters that a single household might need in a coastal community to have daily usable water can cost upwards of $5,000. If you want to look at what the investment is at an industrial or national level, then proposed projects in the United States or the Middle East show us that it can be up to $6.50 per gallon when all processing needs are accounted for in the cost profile. Even highly affordable facilities, like one that recently opened in the state of Florida, can create freshwater resources at $1.10 per gallon.

7. Energy costs can be very high for desalination plants as well.
The average household in the United States pays about $0.45 per gallon for their municipal water access. Homeowners that live on personal wells can spend even less than that. Even in places like the Middle East where the need for desalination is clearly established, the cost of access for the average consumer can be up to 75% higher. When you consider the taxpayer expenses to construct a facility in the first place, only the places where water scarcity issues are prevalent frequently typically benefit from this technology.

8. Some desalination efforts remove the electrolytes from the water supply.
Desalination efforts through reverse osmosis require the fluid to travel through a membrane. This activity removes the impurities from the water so that it can become a usable product. It will also remove all of the nutrients that are in the water, including the magnesium, potassium, and calcium that are needed for healthy living. Industrial plants typically add these items back into the supply before distributing the fluid for consumption, but this disadvantage adds even more to the cost of the product.

9. Desalination does not create a helpful water ratio.
When desalination facilities process saltwater to create freshwater reserves, then the return can be as low as 5%. That means we get 5 gallons of usable water for every 100 gallons of processing. These facilities then send the unusable water to a local wastewater treatment facility, which then discharges the fluid where it usually goes back to its original point of processing to start the battle all over again. That’s why the power and cost disadvantages are such an important element of this technology to consider.

Noel

[Reader 2,021]

I'll write a contribution to this in the expectation that the topic will be summarily removed or deleted once spotted by the moderators.
My contribution is that while the human race insists on living in places that mother nature never intended us to live in, we will
continue to engineer our own self-destruction, as evidenced by the subject matter of this topic.
Whether this choice is the result of there being too many of us, or simply the result of our arrogant assumption that we can manipulate
nature to suit ourselves is not really relevant, as the end result is the same, catastrophe. 

[jbcallender 53]

2 hours ago, dmwalker said:

Don't forget agriculture, especially in California. Perhaps they could consider desalination plants on the coast. 

They are about ten years too late in developing them to be of any help.  People in Cali would never approve the permits.

[sightseer 895]

45 minutes ago, birdguy said:

Most facilities use hydrogen peroxide, chlorine, and hydrochloric acid to prepare the water for this process. Once the chemicals are used, then must be disposed of correctly to prevent them from entering the water table.

Noel - you've created a long bullet point list that starts from an incorrect starting point.  I'm talking about "electrodialysis desalination" which does not use those chemicals to do its job but rather electricity.  Thats why I referred to power plants being cycled ona nd off because they were providing 'excess' electricity.

It seems to me we could use that.

[dmwalker 605]

4 minutes ago, jbcallender said:

They are about ten years too late in developing them to be of any help

Better late than never. Israel seems to have well developed technology for desalination as well as wastewater reclamation so what additional development would be needed?. Reverse osmosis seems to be the way to go since no chemicals are used in the process. What alternatives do we have?

[RichieFly 730]

To add other scenarios to the list:

Salt Lake City will likely be added to the list of abandoned areas. The Great Salt Lake is soon to be no more and will create a ecologic nightmare. I read they are now considering building a pipeline(s) from the Pacific to Utah (LOL) to attempt to save the lake.

I also read a threatening opinion piece in an Arizona newspaper that suggested that California should be 'compelled' to 'give us some water'. (Can't find the article...)

[fppilot 4,371]

Too little water?  Or too much population and population growth?

[birdguy 3,943]

To all...instead of posting quotes let me say that after posting what I did earlier I did more reading on the subject.  I have to backtrack on what I wrote.

The largest desalinization plant in the Western Hemisphere has been up and running for a few years.  It's located in Carlsbad California and supplies drinking water to San Diego.  This article outlines the success the plant has had.  It seems to be a viable solution for California's water problems, at least for Southern California if more of them can be built. 

https://timesofsandiego.com/opinion/2021/01/29/a-desalination-skeptic-now-sees-carlsbad-plants-undeniable-value/

Noel

[dmwalker 605]

1 hour ago, birdguy said:

It seems to be a viable solution for California's water problems, at least for Southern California if more of them can be built. 

It's an impressive start. There is a problem of the brine which is returned to the ocean, not dispersing as quickly as hoped and resulting in excessive concentrations in the coastal waters, but that sounds like a technical problem which could be solved. The only other problem is the periodic occurrences of "red tide", which can shut the plant down.

[dave2013 1,130]

Bottom line: too many people living in the wrong place.

I've read the articles as well about the dangerously low levels of Lake Mead and the Colorado River.  The fact is that if there weren't tens of millions of people living in the Southwest, those water levels, albeit very low, wouldn't be as much of a concern.

If the drought doesn't go away and those water levels don't start increasing, then there are two choices:

1. People start migrating away from the *desert* Southwest, so as the population diminishes the need for resources diminishes to the point where it becomes sustainable.

2. We find other water sources and begin aggressive conservation.

I don't think option 1 is all that viable, so option 2 is the way to go.  No more lawn watering, no more golf courses, and water consumption restrictions.  Then, where practical drill more wells to access water deep underground, and build some desalinization plants on the coast.

Desalinization works on naval vessels so it can be done.  But it will cost.  Fund it all with increases in residential and commercial water bills.  You want to live in a desert, you pay a lot for water.

Dave

[Fielder 3,676]

Nuclear power is the answer in my opinion. Just ask Bill Gates. (Please, nobody tell Gretta I posted this).

I admire Bill Gates. The beautiful people with hip slogans and popular cliche speach, not so much. He wears glasses, looks and talks like a nerd, and made billions. I'll listen to anything that guy has to say. 🙂