Friday, February 05, 2010

Anon Desal Comment

Posted comment, off topic

Sorry to switch topics but someone needs to talk about the hearing next week on the desal plant in Carlsbad. We are on the 99 yard line to getting a reliable water source that can provide about 9% of the water needs of San Diego County (water will not be available outside North Couny but the math still works).

Surfrider Foundation will be there to make their last ditch effort to stop the progress. They say a few fish might get sucked into the intake every year. I guess they dont fish or eat fish because I know that I suck A few fish into my intake each year (I'll bet they do too but dont like that analogy).

If you care about a dependable source of water to our area and you belong to the Surfrider Foundation like I did. Call them and let them know how you feel.

11 comments:

  1. Think hard before you support the desalination plant:

    1) The company, Poseidon, has gotten a lot of negative feedback for a plant it built in Tampa Bay, FL.

    2) The costs of this plant, over $500 million, will be subsidized by the public all for the benefit of a private company.

    3) Desalination requires a lot of energy. Not great for the planet or your energy bill.

    Look to alternatives before subsidizing this operation. One such alternative is a water conservation approach that replaces all urinals with water-less urinals. It costs less ($187 million) and saves an equal amount of water as the Poseidon plant claims it will produce. The conservation approach also requires less energy for years ahead.

    References:
    Waterless Urinal Project
    Doing desalination wrong: Poseidon on the public dole

    ReplyDelete
  2. That argument was debunked at the last Coastal Commission hearing. Were you there?

    The no growth argument that less water availability will limit growth is honorable but not practical.

    70% of the population growth in the county is from cute little babies like J.P.'s being born everyday (not that he fathers one on a daily basis). A good portion of the rest of the growth comes by land and sea (in pangas).

    Protect your Delta Smelt and the few fishies that sacrifice their lifes each year at your own peril.

    The second website that you reference is an editorial... Dime a dozen.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Travis:

    It is a good thing when the private sector makes money by providing service - that is why they do it. What is the alternative?

    We need the water (even though it is raining).

    Conservation is good, but independance from Northern California and the Colorado river is also good.

    Good for JP for supporting this.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Travis- Producing water and conserving water are two DIFFERENT things. Go back to Jr. high and learn the difference.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm all for the waterless urinal idea. I love to pee in the shower, my wetsuit,the bushes. Very Bohemian.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think the desal plant is a white elephant boondoggle.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Water is a precious resource. We've let it slip through our fingers since day one. One Leucadian had it right. Save rainwater in cisterns to use later for our medians, golf course, and and parks. (There are plenty of ways to filter runoff for plants - and ways to purify it for personal use in an emergency.) Just in Encinitas, 500 million gallons are lost in each storm running back into the ocean. With no ceiling on development in our desert county, we could be courting disaster not conserving what falls to us naturally.

    ReplyDelete
  8. JP

    Disneyland was considered a boondogle, the moonwalk was thought to be a boondogle, shortboards were said to be a "white elephant" as was the Toyota Prius.

    Try to live without water for a few days. Not easy.

    ReplyDelete
  9. So, the Tampa Bay desal is not a boondoggie?

    Any stupid hair brain costly project that produces a gallon of water is worthy? Doesn't matter how much that gallon of water costs or how much of that cost goes to a government guaranteed monopoly, funded with government backed loans? This is not democracy and this is not a free market.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Privatization of a water supply source is not a good thing. Furthermore, the production of water through reverse osmosis is very energy intensive, and I believe the added energy costs to pump water up to the distribution system from sea level has been overlooked. Increased conservation, increasing the use of recycled water, less restrictions on grey water use in landscaping, and limitations on water use for new development will be much more beneficial in the long term.

    ReplyDelete
  11. It won't suck a few fish into it's intake, it'll suck BILLIONS of larva into its intake.

    Some of those larva grow up to be valuable commercial and recreational species, some grow up to be trash fish and most feed all the other fish in the area.

    Or they would, but instead they'll be wasted and the entire coastline and our population will be poorer for it.

    Go with the urinal option. Costs less and supports MANY local businesses.

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for posting on the Leucadia Blog.
Anonymous comments are allowed, after moderator review.
The moderator works at his leisure.