OC Weekly has a great article about Poseidon and sea level rise. Find out more here.
Poseidon is unwilling to consider the responsible way to intake water for desalinization. Instead they are focused on using outdated technology that will impact local fishing.
More information can found in this LA Times Story.
Stefanie Sekich, writing for the Huffington Post, has an article about why the HB site is not a good site for desalination.
Poseidon Resources, a private, for-profit water supplier backed by East Coast private equity investors, wants to take seawater that the public owns, desalt it, and sell it back to the public at a much higher cost than we currently pay for water. Poseidon’s recent press release about a study of its proposed Huntington Beach facility shows how much Poseidon is willing to bend the truth to secure its profits at public expense.
Read more here.
The lead poisoning Flint’s residence are suffering is a result of corrosive water eating away at the water transportation system. What does this have to do with Poseidon’s desalinated water? Actually a lot. Desalinated water is significantly more corrosive than the river water Flint is using. It is so corrosive that the regional water agency will not allow it into its pipes. To help mitigate people drinking the metal from the pipes, hazardous chemicals are used. How to keep our water safe? Say NO to Poseidon.
Morgon Cook from San Diego Union Tribune writes:
“The $1 billion desalination plant coming online next month in Carlsbad will fit right in with years of careful planning and investment in water supply in San Diego County.
It will also worsen a peculiar San Diego problem amid a multi-year drought — oversupply of water.
Unlike other parts of California, San Diego has 99 percent of the water needed for normal usage. But statewide conservation mandates have applied equally to areas that have plenty of water and those that don’t, so the result here has been water piling up unused while local water agencies raise rates to make up for lost sales.”
Here’s a couple of “big picture” thoughts from Joe Geever;
– water supply managers often plan around an “average” rainfall. But our rainfall pattern is such that, if you take almost any 10 year period, eight of the ten years will be below average (hence the lyrics, “it never rains in California, but man it pours”). Predicting supply and demand on an “average rainfall” is a total misunderstanding of what “averages” represent — it’s a mathematical error.
– wet and dry periods in the West are as predictable as the sun coming up. If we don’t properly plan for dry periods, then a drought is a “man-made disaster.” We should have learned that during the “Dust Bowl” — arguably this country’s worst “natural disaster.” (And not the same circumstance as we have now). But we didn’t. We learned to pump groundwater — and we’ve nearly destroyed the Ogalalla Aquifer by continuing to irrigate “farmland” in what is really a dry “grassland” — a place once known as “No Man’s Land.”
– this weather pattern will get more dramatic as the climate changes.
– natural watersheds once evened out the wet and dry periods. Watersheds capture rain and let it percolate into the ground. This natural process recharges groundwater basins, mitigates floods, and maintains in-stream flows even when it gets dry. But natural watersheds in this region have been dramatically altered by impervious surfaces.
So, given these pretty indisputable facts, is OCWD engaged in proper planning for the long-term?
1. conservation (demand reduction) should be the number one priority.
OCWD grade: C-