While desalination seems like one of the only options for
increasing our freshwater resources, in addition to the environmental
degradation, it is currently not economical. A proposed plant in Carlsbad is
estimated to cost $700 million dollars and will satisfy only 8% of San Diego’s
water needs. For this 8% of the water supply it will use as much electricity as
45,000 homes, which is an additional recurrent operating cost on top of the
$700 million. The amount of energy required for desalination is extremely high
and will be very costly.
The cost of water from the desalination plant will be tied
to the cost of energy and as the price of energy rises, so will the price of
water. “The Public Utilities Commission has approved a plan to allow publicly
traded California American Water to potentially quadruple water bills on 40,000
ratepayers in order to pay for the proposed plant”. Consumers are unaware that
the cost of desalination plants will be passed on to them, which is why they
are cost-effective for the owners of the plant.
In terms of the allocation of state money, while our
education system struggles on budget cuts, Proposition 50 (passed in 2002)
provide $50 million to support desalination projects. Last year, the
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California reduced its conservation to
$10 million while allocating $350 million for the Carlsbad desalination plant
and promising $250 per acre-foot of fresh water produced to future desalination
plants.
Rather than spending tons of money on desalination plants
that are harmful to the environment, we should first focus on maximizing
conservation. While at some point, desalination might be necessary for human
survival, we should increase our conservation first. “In parts of Southern California, up to 70 percent of all
household water is used outdoors, mostly to water lawns, and an estimated 1.3
billion gallons of wastewater drains into the ocean each year.”
Southern
California is a desert and people living here need to accept that they cannot
have a green lawn. If you want a green lawn, move to Northern California or
Oregon. Otherwise plant some native plants that don’t need as much water and
stop exploiting our water resources just to have a pretty front yard. In terms
of in house conservation, low-flow toilets and showerheads, efficient washing
machines and dishwashers could all be made extremely affordable if state
subsidies were reallocated from desalination plants to conservation
technologies.
It is
my opinion that desalination plants cause too much environmental degradation
and are too expensive to be implanted when so much more can be done as far as
conservation. We should reevaluate the need for desalination plants when
excessive water use has been reduced significantly.
SOURCES:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124708765072714061.html
Perhaps you should expand upon why desalination plants are harmful to the environment. It's not very apparent what the harmful effects are, at least to me, and I see desalination as possibly the only option for the future. Yes there's going to be some bad side effects, but by implementing the technology the public will become fully aware of them. There will be a huge push to advance the technology and minimize side effects with the benefit that we now have access to the oceans as a water source. This would also allow Africa to start becoming more developed, with access to ocean water facilitating water's ease of access for even the lowest income countries.
ReplyDeletePairing desalination with another renewable source is the kind of collaboration that will make it possible. Desalination plants run on solar panels for example. That's what we need, because there is no doubt water shortage will be a much larger issue than education in the future. I think investing in better technology to solve desalination is particularly important, something that requires government funding, since private enterprise will see little return for many years. It's the type of progressive technological investment we need and we need it fast. At this point the amount of conservation we would need is unreasonable. Especially with so many new people born every day. Our fight against future climate and resource refugees is going to have to be based on technology. I am confident we can do it. I mean we've sent people to the moon, desalination shouldn't be an issue.
ReplyDeleteI remember studying about desalination a few years ago, but cannot really remember how they are harmful to the environment. I do remember that they are expense to operate, as you have pointed out, even when alternatives exist. I would gladly take a subsidy and turn my landscaping into a beautiful desert scene instead. The only reason why a desert landscaping is not appealing is because so few people have it and Southern California specifically was founded with the idea of creating a Mediterranean oasis to the point where palm trees had to be imported. Maybe its just a matter of time for people to catch on with the desert look, but I would also hope that future home developments seriously start to consider desert landscaping rather then the typical green we are used to seeing around Southern California.
ReplyDelete