Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

onehandle

(51,122 posts)
Sun Apr 12, 2015, 09:02 AM Apr 2015

For Drinking Water in Drought, California Looks Warily to Sea

CARLSBAD, Calif. — Every time drought strikes California, the people of this state cannot help noticing the substantial reservoir of untapped water lapping at their shores — 187 quintillion gallons of it, more or less, shimmering so invitingly in the sun.

Now, for the first time, a major California metropolis is on the verge of turning the Pacific Ocean into an everyday source of drinking water. A $1 billion desalination plant to supply booming San Diego County is under construction here and due to open as early as November, providing a major test of whether California cities will be able to resort to the ocean to solve their water woes.

Across the Sun Belt, a technology once dismissed as too expensive and harmful to the environment is getting a second look. Texas, facing persistent dry conditions and a population influx, may build several ocean desalination plants. Florida has one operating already and may be forced to build others as a rising sea invades the state’s freshwater supplies.

In California, small ocean desalination plants are up and running in a handful of towns. Plans are far along for a large plant in Huntington Beach that would supply water to populous Orange County. A mothballed plant in Santa Barbara may soon be reactivated. And more than a dozen communities along the California coast are studying the issue.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/12/science/drinking-seawater-looks-ever-more-palatable-to-californians.html

That's nice, but we are doomed.

The Earth has lost a quarter of its water

Although water covers 70 percent of the Earth's surface, water is actually a rare substance that represents just 0.05 percent of the Earth's total mass.

Water has nevertheless played a crucial role in the emergence of life on Earth. Without water, the Earth would in all likelihood be a dead planet.

The amount of water on the planet has not always been the same, however. A research group at the Natural History Museum of Denmark has discovered this by measuring how hydrogen isotope ratios in the oceans have changed over time.

"The water that covered the Earth at the dawn of time contained more of the lighter hydrogen isotope than the heavier hydrogen isotope, known as deuterium, than it does today,” says Emily Pope, a post doc, who has played a central role in the study.

http://sciencenordic.com/earth-has-lost-quarter-its-water

11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
For Drinking Water in Drought, California Looks Warily to Sea (Original Post) onehandle Apr 2015 OP
CA Looks Warily to the sea fredamae Apr 2015 #1
Do you know if anyone has compared water used in beer and soda production HereSince1628 Apr 2015 #2
Not to say the info fredamae Apr 2015 #3
No doubt food processing use much water HereSince1628 Apr 2015 #4
Exactly fredamae Apr 2015 #5
There's more to this story sckopicki Apr 2015 #6
Good articles, definitely worth reading, but first link needs fixing. bananas Apr 2015 #7
"a technology once dismissed as too expensive and harmful to the environment" FLPanhandle Apr 2015 #8
Three issues, one of which can be mitigated jmowreader Apr 2015 #9
Thanks, I did not know that FLPanhandle Apr 2015 #10
Mmmm...Now With Even MORE Fukushima! WinkyDink Apr 2015 #11

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
2. Do you know if anyone has compared water used in beer and soda production
Sun Apr 12, 2015, 10:23 AM
Apr 2015

in Oregon or California with bottled water. Or for that matter, anywhere?

I think it might be interesting.

I did a back of the envelope calculation about milk production in California to use reported in a story about Nestles bottled water in California and it was clear that California milk production involved more water. None of the articles I've read have treated milk production as something that should be associated with water rationing...which isn't to say such articles don't exist.

I'm not at all suggesting that corporations buying aquifers, or proportions of stream flow is a right is a good thing or that such uses be free from rationing.

But I think the argument about production of bottled drinks is bigger than just bottled water. It would be interesting to see a much more systemic comparison with measurements/estimates of water use.

fredamae

(4,458 posts)
3. Not to say the info
Sun Apr 12, 2015, 10:30 AM
Apr 2015

isn't out there...I don't know and I didn't think to look.
I Do know that Seafood Processing uses Millions upon Millions of gallons of water, everyday.

Having grown up here....water for livestock was never an issue because everywhere you looked back then..there was Water available pretty much everywhere without pumping. Water was Always readily available for Wheat, Rye, Hops, various Grasses, in the valley etc because there was Plenty of snowpack and our reservoirs were always full etc
That said...the climate has changed here too and if the PAB's haven't reevaluated all this..they need to.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
4. No doubt food processing use much water
Sun Apr 12, 2015, 10:43 AM
Apr 2015

People clearly need jobs during the drought as much as they need water. Finding a balance that serves the population is going to involve thinking of the big-picture.

fredamae

(4,458 posts)
5. Exactly
Sun Apr 12, 2015, 10:47 AM
Apr 2015

And here, for many in the PNW...this is unimaginable new territory.

I do believe, regardless of the credible issues you bring up...that Expanding water use is not wise at this juncture.
We have to review our current production priorities as it is.
So, NO to Nestle.

sckopicki

(2 posts)
6. There's more to this story
Sun Apr 12, 2015, 10:52 AM
Apr 2015

The New York Times article doesn't begin to tell the story of Poseidon in Orange County. It glosses over the negative impacts, especially in Huntington Beach, and leaves out details that lead to a different conclusion altogether. Orange County and San Diego are entirely different in terms of water and OC can solve its problems without resorting to desal. For just a starting look at the situation here http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/2015/03/poseidon_water_desalination_huntington_beach.php. There's lots more, including comments from world leader Irvine Ranch Water District's engineer Peter Swan http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2015/03/swan-song-for-poseidon-irvines-peer-swan-unleashes-a-blast-of-truth-at-the-connecticut-hedge-fund-pirates/

bananas

(27,509 posts)
7. Good articles, definitely worth reading, but first link needs fixing.
Sun Apr 12, 2015, 12:05 PM
Apr 2015

The period at the end of the sentence became part of the url, it shoud be:
http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/2015/03/poseidon_water_desalination_huntington_beach.php

Thanks for those articles.

FLPanhandle

(7,107 posts)
8. "a technology once dismissed as too expensive and harmful to the environment"
Sun Apr 12, 2015, 12:13 PM
Apr 2015

Curious, what's harmful to the environment about desalination?

The sun evaporates water off the ocean daily, we use salt...where is the environmental damage?

jmowreader

(50,569 posts)
9. Three issues, one of which can be mitigated
Sun Apr 12, 2015, 12:45 PM
Apr 2015

1) IF fossil fuel is used to generate the electricity that runs the plant, the CO2 levels in the atmosphere rise
2) Plankton and other small marine life whose main function is to feed fish, whales etc., are sucked into the inlet and killed
3) The concentrated brine dumped back in the ocean upsets the local area salinity level around the plant

When they desalinate they don't remove all the water from a gallon of source water and leave solid salt - that would take way too much time to accomplish. They get most of the water, and dump the sludge back in the ocean.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»For Drinking Water in Dro...