Santa Cruz Good Times

Thursday
Apr 24th
Text size
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

Desal: It Deserves an Informed Evaluation

desalinationOur community has a complex water supply problem. It includes the overdraft of freshwater aquifers. It includes the likelihood of severe droughts brought about by global climate change. It includes the likelihood that regulators will reduce our water supply from surface streams to protect endangered fish species. We must continue to evaluate the threats and risks to our environment, our households and our local economy—and evaluate potential remedies to our water supply problems.

Critics question whether or not our community should build a desalination plant to meet our water needs. These critics typically identify a number of important issues we need to examine as desalination is considered … and then jump to the conclusion that desalination should be rejected. Yet by arguing for rejection of desal they are essentially saying that we should “shelve” or cancel the project before allowing the community to learn and consider the latest information on desalination.

The scwd2 Task Force, formed by the Santa Cruz City Council and the board of the Soquel Creek Water District, is working diligently to examine a variety of issues related to the proposed desalination plant, including energy usage; the cost to ratepayers; the impacts to the marine environment; the quality of desalinated water; and the overall question of whether or not desalination is the best approach. A full Environmental Impact Report is currently evaluating many of these issues, and this report, along with public comments, will assist the entire community in understanding them.

Many suggested alternatives to the desal plant have been studied extensively and found inadequate to meet our needs—or found to be infeasible. (For example, while there is real value in implementing rainwater catchment in our yards, it will not meet our needs during an extended drought.) We could go through the entire list of ideas and alternatives that the City of Santa Cruz and the Soquel Creek Water District have seriously considered and decided were inadequate but limited newspaper space does not allow us to go through each one here.

Opponents find it politically useful to claim that specific alternatives should be looked at before desal—ignoring the fact that elected representatives and citizens that volunteer on local commissions thoroughly examined and considered many alternatives. Those citizens sat through dozens of public meetings with countless hours of public testimony to decide that desalination was a reasonable and necessary approach to pursue— coupled with a robust package of conservation measures and the likelihood of curtailment during droughts

An important concern in this community debate is that the desalination process is energy intensive and will be more expensive than our current water. It is important to note that any new water supply source will be more expensive than our existing supplies. It is useful to put the additional energy needs of a desalination plant into perspective. The annual energy consumed by the proposed desalination facility in a normal year would be very modest considering that we are talking about maintaining a healthy and viable water system for more than 100,000 people. The issues of energy use in desal are important but should not be viewed in isolation from the environmental and social impacts of a severe water shortage in a drought period—in terms of maintaining wildlife habitat, protecting our ground water supply from saltwater intrusion, protecting the health and hygiene of the community, and sustaining the economy and local jobs.

Claims that desalination could possibly allow dangerous toxins to enter our drinking water are simply a smokescreen since the reverse osmosis technology has been proven to be effective. This possibility, however unlikely, also exists with our current treatment processes, as it does with any water treatment facility. We do not hear desal opponents suggesting we stop using our current water treatment facilities and shut down our current water system. This is an intentionally alarmist claim.

No one we know believes desalination alone is a panacea for our water supply problems. Our Integrated Water Plans identified desalination as part of a careful process of exploring new water sources while moving ahead with vigorous conservation measures and preparations for significant restrictions during drought periods.

Our community may decide that a desalination plant is not the way to go. But that decision should be based on an open-minded assessment of our needs and possible solutions—not based on the presumption that desalination is bad. It’s easy to claim that there are problems with desalination and to repeat a few questionable “facts” about desalination that appeal to our deep concerns about the natural environment. It’s another to demonstrate the truth of those claims and to present a demonstrably viable alternative plan that would actually meet our community water needs.

A recent written statement from the leaders of the local opposition to desal specifically said “it is critically important to consider both the advantages and disadvantages of a desalination plant in order to make well-informed sound choices.” We wish they would follow their own suggestion and allow the well-informed consideration to continue.

Rather than terminate our community’s desalination planning process, we believe the community is better served if we stick with a thorough examination of all the facts and issues and then make an informed decision.


Don Lane is the vice mayor of Santa Cruz. Dan Kriege is a board member of the Soquel Creek Water District. They both serve as members of the scwd2 Task Force. For more information, visit scwd2desal.org.

Comments (1)Add Comment
...
written by Keven, February 25, 2011
I notice that the only number in your whole typically rambling op-ed is "100,000 people". Show me the real water numbers and facts, and then let me decide by putting the desal plant on the ballot. As Gov. Jerry Brown, from your own party, said just the other day, "Putting it on the ballot doesn't mean that you are for or against it. It means that you trust the citizens to decide." Don't you trust the citizens Mr. Lane?

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

Share this on your social networks

Bookmark and Share

Share this

Bookmark and Share

 

Best of Santa Cruz County 2014

The 2014 Santa Cruz County Readers' Poll Come on in, and have a look around. There’s a lot to see—hundreds of winners selected by thousands of GT readers across Santa Cruz County. So if some of this looks familiar, it’s probably because you helped make it happen. But there are always new things to discover, too—you could go to a different winner or runner-up every day in the Food and Drink category alone, and you’d be booked just about until next year’s Best of Santa Cruz County issue comes out.

 

Something Essential Disappears

Lunar and solar eclipses follow one another. Lunar eclipses occur at full moons, and solar eclipses at new moons. Two weeks ago at the full moon we had the blood red moon—a total lunar eclipse (the next one is Oct. 8). On Monday night, April 28 (new moon), as the Sun, Moon and Earth align, a solar eclipse (Sun obscured) occurs. Eclipses signify something irrevocably is changed in our world. The Sun is our essential life force. Monday’s new moon, 9 degrees Taurus, is also an annular solar eclipse when the Moon moves centrally in front of the Sun, yet does not cover the Sun completely. The Sun's outer edges, still visible, form a “ring of fire” around the Moon.

 

Sugar: The New Tobacco?

Proposed bill would require warning labels on sugary drinks Will soda and other saccharine libations soon come with a health warning? They will if it’s up to our state senator, Bill Monning (D-Carmel). On Feb. 27, Monning proposed first-of-its-kind legislation that would require a consumer warning label be placed on sugar-sweetened beverages sold in California. SB 1000, also known as the Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Safety Warning Act, was proposed to provide vital information to consumers about the harmful effects of consuming sugary drinks, such as sodas, sports drinks, energy drinks, and sweetened teas.

 

Film, Times & Events: Week of April 24

Santa Cruz area movie theaters >
Sign up for Tomorrow's Good Times Today
Upcoming arts & events

RSS Feed Burner

 Subscribe in a reader

Latest Comments

 

Palate-Stretching 101

A wine education with Soif’s experts As a veteran of many weekend wine “seminars” at Soif, I have to confess that I’ve never known less (going in) and learned more (coming out) than I did last week at the Spanish Wine Tasting with ace rep Brian Greenwood. These are classy, casual events and it’s hard to imagine having this much flavor fun anywhere for $20.

 

Martin Ranch Winery

Sauvignon Blanc 2011 One of my favorite wines is Sauvignon Blanc, and this one made by Martin Ranch is particularly lovely. Bright, crisp and refreshing, it’s perfect to pair with fish and shellfish—and good for picnics as it has an easy screw-cap bottle. There’s nothing worse than setting down your blanket, pulling out your sandwiches—and then realizing you don’t have a corkscrew.

 

Foodie File: Red Apple Cafe

Breakfast takes center stage at Gracia Krakauer's Red Apple Cafe Before they moved to Aptos, Gracia and her husband Dan Krakauer would visit friends in Santa Cruz County and eat at the Red Apple Café all the time. Then they moved up here from Santa Monica five years ago, and bought the Aptos location (there’s a separate one in Watsonville) from the family who owned it for two decades.

 

How would you feel about a tech industry boom in Santa Cruz?

I feel like it would ruin the small old-town feeling of Santa Cruz. It wouldn’t be the same Surf City kind of vacation town that it is. Antoinette BennettSanta Cruz | Construction Management