GrokSurf's San Diego

Local observations on water, environment, technology, law & politics

  •  

     

     

  •  

  • Enter your email address below to receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 44 other followers

  •  

  • Browse previous posts

  •  

  • Subscribe

  •  

     

     

     

     

     

    GrokSurf's San Diego by George J. Janczyn is produced under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 License. Anything on this blog copied and used elsewhere online must include attribution and a link to the original on this blog, or a citation with the URL if reprinted on hard copy.

     

     

Archive for the ‘Environment’ Category

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »

Committee on Natural Resources and Culture stalls over action plan

Posted by George J. Janczyn on February 3, 2011

The first meeting of the reconstituted San Diego City Council Committee on Natural Resources and Culture (NR&C) was held Wednesday February 2. The committee reorganized after last November’s election that brought in two new members to replace outgoing councilmembers.

David Alvarez, Chair, is taking the place of Donna Frye who termed out of her council position. Lorie Zapf is getting Marti Emerald’s seat (Emerald is still a Councilmember but received different committee assignments for this year). Carl DeMaio remains the Vice Chair and Sherri Lightner continues with her membership.

The NR&C Committee’s area of responsibility includes Clean Water Program, Energy, Water, State and Federal Endangered Species Acts, Arts and Culture, TOT, Solid Waste Disposal, Recycling, APCD/Air Quality, Hazardous Waste, MSCP, and Regional Parks and Open Space. I follow the Committee’s doings because it is deeply involved in operations of the Public Utilities Department and especially with water.

Last December, Council President Anthony Young sent out a memo asking committee chairs to submit a 90-day action plan for their respective committees.

David Alvarez responded for NR&C on December 30, indicating that he was soliciting input from colleagues on the Council, the Mayor’s Office, City staff, and other stakeholders and hoped to have it ready by the end of January. He also stated that his own initial three priorities were: 1) Promoting water conservation; 2) Flood protection and environmental preservation; 3) Promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy.

Wednesday’s agenda included the 90-day action plan as a discussion item.

For this meeting I thought the committee members would talk about feedback Alvarez had gotten from the various stakeholders mentioned in his memo, then discuss their own priorities and negotiate a final 90-day action plan for the committee. That’s not what happened, though.

While they were working on the last agenda item before the action plan, Carl DeMaio slipped out of his chair, exited the room, and never returned.

I don’t know if Alvarez had other plans and changed because of DeMaio’s absence, but he asked Lightner and Zapf only to mention highlights from their memorandums, and then he had a few comments about his items. That was it. No discussion. No debate. No action plan. In effect, that made everything a priority.

There are plenty of water-related issues in those memorandums. If you examine them, you’ll find there’s a great deal there, perhaps even too much for a 90-day plan.

Lightner wants to completely overhaul obsolete and conflicting water policies and to develop a comprehensive policy for a sustainable water supply in San Diego. Her ideas alone could take six months to plan and prioritize. Carl DeMaio is crusading to reform financial management of the Public Utilities Department and for lower water rates (it will be interesting to see how he balances Council work against his 2012 mayoral campaign). Alvarez has water conservation and flood control concerns along with Zapf.

Nobody mentioned planning a future for indirect potable reuse after completion of the Water Purification Demonstration Project, although Lightner mentions IPR in a generic sense. It’s only a one-year project and I hope more advance planning is done not only for the subsequent production phase but for possibly wider application of IPR beyond that.

An action plan should be fairly specific about things to do. A priority such as “Promoting Water Conservation” needs to be translated into concrete steps. As things now stand, the committee has a collection of memorandums with numerous ideas all competing for attention. It will be difficult for the committee to focus on a selection of them, especially with complex and sometimes mundane demands from a never-ending workflow of projects and requests from the Public Utilities Department.

Aside from the planning deficit and despite the loss of knowledge and experience that Donna Frye and Marti Emerald contributed, I think the committee shows promise.

In his role as Chair, Alvarez performed competently and cordially, the committee members were otherwise well-prepared for some difficult and complex agenda items, and they seem to get along with each other. So despite the committee lagging on a coordinated action plan for important water issues, I’m hopeful that in the coming weeks and months they’ll be able to regroup, organize their ideas, and implement their plans successfully.

 

Posted in Environment, Water | Tagged: , , , , , | 1 Comment »

San Diego files second lawsuit in groundwater dispute with Sweetwater Authority

Posted by George J. Janczyn on December 21, 2010

The City of San Diego’s ongoing legal dispute over Sweetwater Authority’s project to expand groundwater pumping from the San Diego Formation aquifer has escalated with the filing of a second lawsuit.

The City’s first lawsuit, filed March 26, 2010, challenged Sweetwater’s certification of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and project approval (for background and a copy of that lawsuit see my October 28 report as updated December 8). The City alleged that its formally stated concerns about groundwater depletion/overdraft in the San Diego Formation, saltwater intrusion, land subsidence, brine discharge, and other issues were rejected or ignored by Sweetwater.

Subsequently, after some procedural errors in the approval process were discovered, Sweetwater Authority revisited its decision and again approved the project on November 10 (the U-T reported on that in this report).

San Diego’s newest lawsuit filed December 9 again challenges Sweetwater’s EIR certification and seeks to set aside Sweetwater’s November 10 action reaffirming project approval.

Significantly, going further, the new lawsuit also seeks the court’s declaration of San Diego’s Pueblo water rights in the San Diego Formation. Specifically, it asks:

For a declaration that the City was at the commencement of this action and now is the owner in fee simple of the prior and paramount right to the use of all the water of the San Diego Formation underlying the former Pueblo of San Diego, including all waters tributary thereto whether beneath the Pueblo or not, for the use of the City and of its inhabitants for all purposes and that Respondent Sweetwater and all other respondents have not and no one or more of them have any estate, right, title or interest in or to said waters, or any part thereof, or in the use of the same, or any right to take or use said waters, or any part thereof, save in subordination and subject to said prior and paramount right of the City.

Here is a copy of the new lawsuit:

 

Posted in Environment, Water | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Panel: Signs of the tide — San Diego’s water supply

Posted by George J. Janczyn on December 9, 2010

“Signs of the tide — San Diego’s water supply” was the title of an interactive panel discussion hosted by San Diego Coastkeeper yesterday evening at the Urban Corps of San Diego County facility in the Midway area.

Panelists were David Pierce, Analyst, Scripps Institution of Oceanography; Jared Criscuolo, Co-founder, Below the Surface; Bruce Reznik, Advocate, San Diego Coastkeeper; and Brook Sarson, Owner, H2Ome, and the moderator was Rob Davis, Senior Writer, Voice of San Diego.

The first speaker, David Pearce, delivered an overview of San Diego’s water supply situation. Using slides with maps and charts, he set up the dynamic of our need to import 80% of our water and a growing population against how expected water shortages, climate change, economics, issues with the California Delta, and decreasing Colorado River Basin runoff present difficult challenges to plan and make adjustments for. He illustrated how the price of water rises at each stage of the delivery process and commented about the low price for farming use vs. high prices for urban use being a factor in water use and conservation, saying “people make different decisions when water is cheap.”

From left: Rob Davis, Brook Sarson, David Pierce, Jared Criscuolo, Bruce Reznik.

Next, Jared Criscuolo showed slides from his group’s “Spring to Sandtrap” canoe expedition to explore the headwaters of the Sacramento River through the State Water Project to the sprinklers at a Southern California golf course (the shot of that looked like it might be Palm Springs). He said that they had intended to but didn’t actually canoe through the SWP aqueduct because it was dangerous and also prohibited (someone behind me whispered “they better not have…that’s drinking water!”). The expedition documented how relatively pristine water conditions near the headwaters rapidly deteriorated as they went downstream where they encountered numerous facilities drawing water on the one hand and expelling wastewater on the other, with water becoming murkier and algae growth more prominent as they continued their journey.

Bruce Reznik spoke on organizing and planning issues for San Diego’s water future. He criticized the San Diego County Water Authority for lacking vision in their planning and observed that they seem to just gather information on projects and needs from member water agencies and then plug that into a master plan. He also complained about their charts illustrating increased diversification in water sources, saying they’re misleading because they count canal lining and the IID water transfer as representing a reduction in the imported water category where in fact that’s just a financial arrangement for getting more of the same imported water. After comparing various water supply options using data from Equinox Center reports, highlighting desal as an extreme that should be considered last resort, he concluded saying “solutions are easy, the problem is political will.”

Finally, Brook Sarson covered rainwater harvest, stormwater redirection, and greywater reuse design and cost issues. She talked about the mindset people have about getting water away from the house and property and the desirability of finding ways to redirect it into the local soil. She also covered practical issues with greywater use, noting that it’s a bit more involved because it often requires a permit, can’t be stored for longer than 24 hours, and can only be used on certain types of plants. She displayed slides from some the rainwater harvest projects she has installed locally through her H2Ome business.

Overall impression: a worthwhile informative gathering, but while turnout was probably around 100, most appeared to be people already well-schooled in water issues. I think the hope was to address more newbies who would be learning something new but I’m sure the organizers were gratified to see so many well-informed people coming together for this event.

Logistics -

Prior to starting we were treated to a light dinner of pizza and ice tea.

Dylan Edwards from Coastkeeper did the welcome and closing remarks.

The moderator Rob Davis gave a brief introduction to each panelist and fielded questions turned in from the audience on paper slips during the discussion.

One of the sponsors, San Diego Gas & Electric, had a small booth with pamphlets and information about the Smart Meter program.

I was told slides from the PowerPoint presentations will be made available by Coastkeeper, and I’ll add a link to them here when they’re available.

The North County Times filed this report on the meeting. San Diego Coastkeeper also did some live tweeting from the event.

 

Posted in Environment, Water | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Groundwater dispute between San Diego and Sweetwater Authority

Posted by George J. Janczyn on December 8, 2010

Is the City of San Diego’s environmental lawsuit against Sweetwater Authority actually more about asserting water rights in the San Diego Formation aquifer? The lawsuit alleges defects and procedural errors with the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), but a Sweetwater Authority representative told me San Diego is positioning itself to assert its pueblo water rights over the aquifer and perhaps lay claim to work already done by Sweetwater. The staffer made the remark in response to a question I asked during a recent open house at the Reynolds Groundwater Desalination Facility.

If you look at the City’s lawsuit, it does focus attention on the EIR and procedural issues — there’s no mention of pueblo water rights. However, there are definite allusions to claims on the water such as: “The City of San Diego is committed to managing its water rights and the groundwater resources within its jurisdiction…” and “…as an entity with water rights in the Formation, the City has a special interest in managing this important resource…” (page 2 of the lawsuit).

It’s true that San Diego has a “paramount right” to all water within the San Diego River watershed, including the groundwater, based on the City’s pueblo past (the Journal of San Diego History has this background on that business). The question, though, is what about the groundwater in the San Diego Formation aquifer? The issue is much murkier there.

The Sweetwater Authority has been drawing an average of 2,727 af/yr from six existing wells in the Formation since 1999, and now plans to install five additional wells to roughly double the take.

The San Diego Formation aquifer is bisected by four different drainage basins, so rights to its groundwater are hardly clear, and there’s relatively little that is known about how it behaves and is recharged. True, it has been the object of widespread study (see the USGS San Diego Hydrogeology web page and the County Water Authority’s San Diego Formation Aquifer Storage and Recovery studies). Legal claims and project ideas have been made, but the bottom line on the whole situation, as observed by Wes Danskin, Project Chief for the USGS San Diego Hydrogeology Project, is: “What I know is that the science is not well founded yet.”

Certainly any large-scale groundwater withdrawals should be based on thorough scientific understanding of the aquifer and San Diego’s lawsuit credibly addresses potential problems with increased pumping, including overdraft of the aquifer, land subsidence, seawater instrusion, and increased waste brine discharge from the desal plant going into storm drains and ultimately into San Diego Bay.

No doubt San Diego wants some of that Formation water for itself and increased withdrawal by Sweetwater threatens the remaining supply. The lawsuit states “Also, the City informed Sweetwater of a project it intends to construct within 4 to 5 years. Sweetwater chose to ignore this project as well.” For some reason the City seems reluctant to say what that is. When I sent email to PUD’s Arian Collins asking for the name of the specific project, he referred me to Eric Symons. Symons didn’t reply until a week later and then vaguely only to “confirm that it is the San Diego Formation Basin.” I’ve gotten no reply to my followup request to name the specific project.

One can try to guess which project, I suppose: here’s a general San Diego Formation Fact Sheet and a Mission Valley Basin Fact Sheet. The City also has an interest in drawing from groundwater below Balboa Park. However, the Mission Valley site is complicated by the groundwater contamination from the fuel tank farm near Qualcomm Stadium. As for beneath Balboa Park, it appears to be somewhat isolated from Formation groundwater flow so recharge would be a concern, according to Danskin.

Little is known about how the entire San Diego Formation aquifer recharges itself, but it should be safe to say the recharge capability is limited and large-scale withdrawals raise questions about sustainability.

Dec 8, 2010: A copy of San Diego’s complaint is reproduced below. Today I spoke with a clerk at Superior Court who said that Sweetwater has not yet filed a reply brief (the U-T article said today was the deadline for that), but that settlement negotiations are ongoing. A Status Conference has been scheduled for Dec 17. Meanwhile, the clerk also informed me that a NEW lawsuit will be filed on Dec 10, but it is not yet known what party will file that suit.

 

There’s another area I’ve been looking at that’s potentially linked to the San Diego Formation (it’s certainly in the San Diego River watershed), but it’s playing out a bit differently. The City has a pilot well located near the foot of the dam at El Capitan Reservoir to determine if seepage from the reservoir can be captured. Presumably that groundwater travels through El Monte Valley and is ultimately linked in some way with the San Diego Formation.

Presently many property owners in the El Monte Valley have their own wells drawing groundwater. Theoretically San Diego could exert its pueblo water rights against those wells but probably does not consider their use to be a problem.

As for the consequences of Helix Water District’s plan to develop a 5 mgd groundwater operation with its El Monte Valley IPR Project, I got this statement from Kate Breece, Public Affairs Manager at Helix Water District: The El Monte Valley Project would be a “put and take” project. We would have the right to any water we put into the basin, and we would take out no more than we put in. So, the City would not claim any of that water as belonging to the “watershed.” Our staff works with the City’s staff to make sure we keep them informed of our project.”

 

Posted in Environment, Water | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

City of San Diego files opening briefs in appeal of SDSU’s plan to develop Adobe Falls

Posted by George J. Janczyn on December 3, 2010

Overlooking the Adobe Falls area. Freeway I-8 is on the left, Mission Valley in the distance

Adobe Falls is a parcel of undeveloped land and open space adjacent to Alvarado Creek across the I-8 freeway from San Diego State University just west of College Avenue.

Since before 2005, SDSU has been pressing to implement its Master Plan project to use that land for up to 348 residential housing units for faculty and staff. Numerous lawsuits by the City of San Diego, Del Cerro Action Council, and other entities challenged the California State University’s (CSU trustees) certification of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The cases were eventually consolidated into one and last February the court entered a judgment in favor of SDSU (for details about the project and those legal actions click here).

On May 25, 2010 the City submitted notice of intent to file an appeal (Del Cerro Action Council had earlier filed an objection to the proposed statement of decision, but lack of financial resources prevented it from filing an appeal).

Just a few days ago, on Nov. 24, 2010 an appellant’s opening brief was filed by the City of San Diego and the Redevelopment Agency. On Dec. 1, 2010 the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) and the San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) filed their opening brief.

Adobe Falls is considered to be the only year-round waterfall within City limits

Judges have not been determined yet. According to Gina Coburn, Communications Director for the City Attorney’s office, “The appellate court assigns a 3 panel judge but we don’t know who until they send out the notice of hearing which will be after the briefing is complete, sometime in February 2011.”

The City of San Diego [et al.] opening brief argues that the EIR was improperly certified because the approval is based on an erroneous interpretation of a different case that was cited as precedent. It also charges that CSU was “disingenuous” and abused its discretion under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by claiming it has no obligation to ensure mitigation for traffic and other issues beyond asking the State Legislature for funding (i.e., if funds were not forthcoming, CSU’s position is that it has no further obligation).

The SANDAG and MTS opening brief states that “the most fundamental violation of CEQA at issue concerns CSU’s complete failure to address the impacts that will result from SDSU’s massive increased use of public transit systems to transport additional students, faculty, staff and visitors to and from the SDSU campus.” It goes on to say that CSU “deliberately” understated automobile traffic impacts.

A response brief from CSU is due in January or February of next year.

 

Posted in Environment, Government, Land use | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Aquafornia’s wellspring: Chris Austin

Posted by George J. Janczyn on December 2, 2010

Anyone who seriously follows California water issues knows that the Water Education Foundation’s Aquafornia blog is a leading source for “all water news pertaining to California, including climate change, Colorado River basin issues, some Nevada water news, desalination, stormwater issues, press releases, commentaries, information from elected officials and some publicity on events.”

Chris Austin, Aqua Blog Maven, is the tireless heart and soul of the blog.
She diligently finds, compiles, and presents a comprehensive view of California water news stories on a daily basis, writes virtually all the articles for the blog’s Information Desk, produces photo essays (one of her favorite activities), and more.

Chris also has a personal website, Maven’s Manor, where she is accumulating her work on water and other topics (like electricity), and sharing articles & slideshows from her travels up and down the state.

So far there’s a section of articles and slideshows on California’s Water, a “visual primer” on electricity, slideshows from Eastern California including Death Valley and the Los Angeles Aqueduct, and a link to her Maven’s Photoblog. A new project she’s working on is to tell the history of the Imperial Valley and the formation of the Salton Sea in pictures. There’s just a placeholder for that project for now, but Chris intends to cover the water & restoration issues, history, geothermal power, agriculture, and more. She’s been collecting historical photos and facts for several months now and is planning another visit to the area in January for more pictures, tours, and research.

If you aren’t already a Maven’s Manor visitor, I think you’ll enjoy having it on your list of stops.

 

Posted in Environment, Water | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Keeping SIO sea-watered

Posted by George J. Janczyn on November 30, 2010

You might imagine that UCSD’s Scripps Institution of Oceanography (SIO) in La Jolla is a major water user — seawater, that is — but did you know the pier is the conduit for that water?

(click pics for enlargements..they’re sharper that way. For best results use desktop browser opened wide; mobile devices will need to horizontally scroll to see pics)

The SIO pier

Facilities at end of pier

Securing the hoist after pulling a boat out of the water

Surfers' view from the pier

The nearly 1100-foot-long pier at Scripps was built in 1987-88 to replace an older pier that dated back to 1915. It not only provides for the launching for ocean-bound research boats and collection of data on ocean and weather conditions, but also is the drinking straw in the ocean for the seawater filtration, distribution, and discharge system that provides the various labs and aquariums (should I write ‘aquaria’?) with the seawater they need.

A housing at the end of the pier holds three vacuum-assisted pumps, along with a backup pump available on standby. The system can produce a flow of about 1200 gallons per minute, and generally produces about 800,000 gallons per day (although it is permitted for up to 1.25 million gpd).

Inside the pump house

Inside the pump house

A long ladder down to the pumps

Pump closeup

The fiberglass flume runs along the south side of the pier

Three pumps, three pipes

Water from flume goes through the sand filters

Sand filters, settling tanks, and backwash discharge pipe

A flume runs from the end of the pier to the shore conveying the water through a screen to trap large kelp and other debris. The water then goes into settling tanks and then through four high-speed sand filters. From there it is pumped up to several 15,000 gallon storage tanks and a 60,000 gallon tank on the hillside which provide a steady gravity-feed of water to the aquariums and lab facilities below. After the water flows through the various systems, it is returned to the ocean via several outfalls near the pier. Because the waters offshore are designated as the San Diego Marine Life Refuge, the discharges are regulated and monitored under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Program (NPDES) permit.

Inside the experimental aquarium facility

Specimen tank

More specimens

More spaces in the experimental aquarium facility

The Ring Tank next to the Kaplan Lab is no longer used

Pool adjacent to ring tank is also no longer used

The high quality filtered seawater is a critical resource in numerous marine biology and oceanographic research and teaching activities at SIO. The Birch Aquarium, the Hubbs Hall Experimental Aquarium, Ritter Hall Experimental Aquarium, Hydraulics Laboratory, and even the nearby NOAA Southwest Fisheries Science Center all receive a constant flow of fresh seawater through the delivery system.

Behind the scenes is a variety of life support chillers, heat exchangers, piping, pumps, filtration systems, electrical equipment, and backup power systems. A crew of 8 provides 24/7 support for the seawater delivery facilities.

Birch Aquarium

Water tank above Birch Aquarium

Thanks to Mario Aguilera, Assistant Director of Scripps Communications, and Jose Moret, Superintendent of Zone Maintenance Operations for giving me a tour of the facilities.

Posted in Environment, Water | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Helix Water District holds stakeholders meeting for El Monte Valley Project

Posted by George J. Janczyn on October 13, 2010

Yesterday, the Helix Water District held the second in its series of stakeholder meetings for the El Monte Valley Project at 6:30pm at the Lakeside Christian Church on El Monte Road. The project seeks to recharge the District’s aquifer beneath the valley using treated wastewater purified with the Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR) process–the same process that will be used in San Diego’s Water Purification Demonstration Project. The project will produce enough water to serve approximately 15% of the District’s total water demand.

The District introduced the project plan to valley residents and stakeholders last July 21 and promised to consult with them regularly. In addition, presentations have been made to a variety of groups throughout the county.

In addition to groundwater recharge with IPR water, the Helix plan envisions extensive riverbed restoration with native plants, public recreational space for hiking and equestrian use, and wildlife habitat. A portion of the valley previously zoned for mining will be tapped for sand and gravel which will be sold to help defray project expenses and to help re-contour the riverbed for the restoration.

Yesterday’s stakeholders meeting was to get feedback on the recreational space envisioned for the valley, in particular on design parameters for multi-use trails.

Principal Engineer Tim Smith discussing trail design

Attendees were seated at round tables with 3-7 persons per table. A large map of of the valley showing project components was provided for each table. Everybody was given a copy of initial trail design parameters based on the San Diego County Community Trails Master Plan specifications for rural trails, and they were asked to spend about 25 minutes discussing them and listing issues and concerns. Afterwards, a “captain” selected at each table gave a report on the table’s discussions.

The trail design handout called for multi-use trails on the north and south side of the valley, 6-10 ft. wide, with 2-5 river channel crossings. Trail material would be native soil. The trail would be fenced on the river side, with a slope less than 15%, and would be kept well away from project facilities.

Residents study map with District General Manager Mark Weston (second from the right).

Some issues came up repeatedly: potential conflict between equestrian and biking was a concern; many felt the trail should be wider so that two horses could pass in opposite directions comfortably; restroom facilities, staging areas, and security patrols were other common themes.

One person noted that many equestrian users come to the valley from other locations and they should be considered stakeholders as well. Another worried that planting near the river with riparian vegetation would create spots that could attract transients. Several people wondered who will maintain the trails?

A number of people began raising issues related to the project as a whole. A few people wanted the project to just go away and leave the valley alone. Concern about dust, noise, and traffic during construction was expressed. Someone worried that their property value would decrease because of the project. Many are unhappy that they will no longer be able to use their existing wells for drinking water (due to state regulations) and feel that it’s unfair they will have to purchase water from the District.

The valley is under attack from two sides and we can’t do anything about it, another person complained, saying that the Helix water project reconfigures the valley and riverbed on one hand, and on the other hand the Sunrise Powerlink electrical transmission lines planned for the valley will bring fire danger and visual blight.

In closing remarks, General Manager Mark Weston encouraged people to visit the District website for more details. He also announced that a November field trip is being planned to visit the Orange County advanced water treatment facility that will be the model for the plant to be used for this project. The trip may need to be deferred until early next year, though, unless enough people sign up for the tour.

For more information about the project, here’s the El Monte Valley Project website.

Also here’s my report describing the project and stakeholders meeting in July.

 

Posted in Environment, Water | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Should San Diego ozonate its wastewater for IPR?

Posted by George J. Janczyn on October 5, 2010

San Vicente Reservoir, August 2010. Water level has been lowered to allow dam raise construction.

As San Diego prepares to embark on its one-year Water Purification Demonstration Project with the eventual goal of augmenting San Vicente Reservoir with purified wastewater (planned indirect potable reuse, or IPR), the biggest public concern about actually implementing that process — besides the considerable expense — will probably be water quality. The sheer persistence of the terms ‘recycled sewage’ and ‘toilet-to-tap’ in the news media is an indicator of that lingering concern.

To be sure, there’s reasonable certainty that the advanced treatment process is very reliable. Scientific studies have shown that the advanced steps of micro/ultra filtration, reverse osmosis, and UV/peroxide are effective for removal of pharmaceuticals and endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs) from wastewater. Indeed, the City of San Diego previously completed a small-scale 18-month pilot testing program to determine the effectiveness of the advanced water treatment process being used in the new demonstration program, with the conclusion that the product water met all federal and state drinking water standards. However, the test is being repeated in this one-year project because the California Department of Public Health wants a test that would use the same size equipment and monitoring devices that we would use for a full scale project, according to Alma Rife, Public Information Officer for the San Diego Public Utilities Department.

Still, although pharmaceuticals and EDCs are held below state and federal threshholds (and are sometimes undetectable) after treatment, it is known that trace amounts can remain and there’s no consensus about their cumulative effect on humans. Further, the effect of EDCs on aquatic ecosystems (e.g., feminized male fish) has certainly been documented.

There’s growing awareness in many communities, being downstream from other communities, that treated wastewater already exists in their source water supply. That’s called unplanned indirect potable reuse and it’s certainly happening in San Diego via its imported water from the Colorado River and Northern California. Consider the following:

“…pharmaceuticals and EDCs have been detected in many water bodies around the world [...] and are now considered ubiquitous wastewater contaminants. Undoubtedly, the major contributor of such widespread contamination is municipal wastewater discharge. Indirect potable water reuse, either planned or unplanned, occurs when wastewater treatment plant discharge comprises a portion of the receiving stream’s total flow. In many cases, surface water with some degree of wastewater influence is used as source waters for drinking water treatment facilities leading to the presence of these compounds in source and finished drinking water. Thus, the propensity for surface water or drinking water contamination will grow with human population growth and generation of additional wastewater.”

[S.A. Snyder and M.J. Benotti. Endocrine disruptors and pharmaceuticals: implications for water sustainability. Water Sci Technol. 2010;61(1):145-54]

The bottom line is that regardless of the source of our drinking water, whether Northern California or the Colorado River, we’re presently doing unplanned IPR. So now that we’re now looking at doing planned IPR through reservoir augmentation, is enough being done to address the trace contaminants that have been quietly tolerated in the past?

The treatment regime now contemplated for San Diego’s IPR project is: activated sludge, secondary clarification, tertiary precipitation, micro filtration, reverse osmosis, and UV/peroxide. The treatment plan is modeled on Orange County’s program because that program has already been permitted by the California Department of Public Health, according to Ms. Rife.

What about ozonation?

Ozonation is more effective than chlorine as a disinfectant and it can eliminate contaminants that even UV treatment can’t remove.

One doesn’t hear much about ozonation being used to treat wastewater. It’s more commonly used for drinking water treatment plants. In fact, a new ozonation facility near completion at San Diego’s Alvarado Water Treatment Plant is expected to go online by December (that plant treats water from San Vicente).

But when I visited the Southern Nevada Water Authority and Las Vegas Valley Water District water facilities to get a closer look at their operations, I learned that they just completed a pilot ozonation project at the Clark County Water Reclamation District, where much of their wastewater is treated (you may be aware that Lake Mead is their drinking water source as well as the destination for their treated wastewater).

Since Las Vegas already uses ozonation for their drinking water treatment plants, why also for wastewater?

Doug Drury, Asst General Manager for Water Quality, Research & Technical Services at Clark County Water Reclamation Plant (CCWRP), told me that some of the thinking that went into the decision to add ozonation to the other advanced treatment procedures included:

  • Substantial scientific documentation confirms the effectiveness of ozonation towards elimination of EDCs and PPCPs (pharmaceuticals and personal care products)
  • In testing, 60 samples for enteric virus were negative after ozonation, but not after UV treatment alone
  • Cryptosporidium was found in the Las Vegas Valley in recent summers
  • Lake Mead is less than half-full now but treated wastewater inflows remain the same, so there is less dilution and an apparent increase in concentration of contaminants in the reservoir
  • Potential environmental impact on aquatic ecosystems
  • Downstream water user concerns

HPLC unit at the Southern Nevada Water Authority Water Quality Laboratory

Not only did CCWRP perform that pilot study, but they approved $50 million for a permanent ozonation system. That’s a good sum of money; obviously they’re convinced that ozonation is doing something good. Interestingly, it appears they will also phase out reverse osmosis because of the 10-15% water loss involved in disposing of the resulting brine.

Ozonation is cited in another study as being the “most responsible for the removal of pharmaceuticals and EDCs” and “though many ozone plants also utilize chlorine, ozone is a stronger oxidant.”

In San Diego we’re looking to augment a reservoir that’s a lot smaller than Lake Mead. The San Vicente Reservoir will eventually have a capacity of around 250,000 acre-feet after the dam raise is complete. There’s only so much dilution that can occur when you add 16 million gallons per day of treated wastewater to a reservoir that size. So while public perception may find it acceptable to dilute wastewater in a large body of water such as Mead within the flow of the Colorado River, it could well be that the public will balk at the same thing being done at San Vicente Reservoir — and remember, public perception killed San Diego’s IPR project last time it was attempted.

Adding ozone to the IPR treatment regime could ease the public mind, but it’s probably a far-fetched idea for us. Ozonation on the wastewater side might convince some people who are still undecided about indirect potable reuse but it would be an extreme expense for what would really be a marginal benefit — and we’re already being squeezed with rising prices for water. Besides, we haven’t even managed to treat the bulk of our wastewater stream to secondary standards yet.

Ultimately, education will be key to a successful IPR project. The city’s public outreach and education program for the Demonstration Project has gotten underway with meetings with neighborhood planning groups, but those are just introductory project overviews. The challenge will be to go beyond the generalities (such as provided in the monthly IPR updates to the NR&C city council committee) and share complete, up-to-date, highly detailed water quality and cost information about IPR regularly and persistently. Tours of the new advanced treatment facility have been promised; the same should be done with the water quality lab. A blog-like news section on the city’s project website could help to stream out the details.

Many San Diegans have been squeamish about IPR despite it being a proven and safe technology. Providing access to plenty of information will be vital for overcoming that problem. On that note, this report from the independent Equinox Center is deserving of wide circulation (reprinted with permission).

 

Posted in Environment, Water | Tagged: , | 5 Comments »

San Diego Lake Murray’s ebbs and flows

Posted by George J. Janczyn on September 30, 2010

Regular visitors to San Diego’s Lake Murray Reservoir are probably accustomed to seeing the water level rise and fall somewhat. Indeed, the city changes the elevations on all its reservoirs frequently depending on the demands on the system or other circumstances.

One of those “other circumstances” made itself visible recently when the water level dropped much lower than usual, but warm weather and high demand were not the reason, nor was it because of the trunk sewer project underway nearby. This drawdown was actually related to the big rainstorm we had last January.

During those rains, the old corroded 48″ storm drain pipes beneath the lake’s service road at the northern end of San Carlos Bay clogged up and heavy runoff washed over the outlet, damaging the road (click photos for enlargements).

When the pipes clogged up, the road became a dam that quickly overflowed

Overflow washed out part of the road

Roadcut on opposite side revealed corroded pipes

At that time, a water department construction foreman told me the city might replace the old 48″ pipes with larger 60″ pipes but later the decision was made to install a concrete box culvert under the road.

The project needed to be done in two phases. The first phase was to install the box culvert and repair the road. That part is now done.

The new culvert measures 5' x 8'

The second phase involves work on the concrete-lined drainage channel toward the lake. That stage was put on hold, however, because it takes place in an area that is part of the Multiple Species Conservation Program. The program did not allow construction to take place until after Sept. 15, which is considered the end of bird nesting season.

With the deadline passed, work resumed and the reservoir water level was lowered to an elevation of about 83 feet to allow compaction of the soil that will be under the new concrete. Normally the lake elevation is around 93 feet with a reservoir capacity of 4,684.2 acre feet. The boat launch is affected as well since it can’t be used when the level is below 85 feet (boat rentals are no longer offered anyway but small private craft may be launched when levels are normal).

The view from Lake Shore Drive

Looking toward San Carlos Bay. At the usual lake level, I would be standing in water to take this picture.

Before concrete could be poured for the new channel, however, another delay became necessary. This time it’s because the San Diego County Water Authority has scheduled a shutdown of the untreated water supply in order to work on a valve at its Rancho Peñasquitos Hydro Facility. As a result, the city had to postpone the repair project and refill the reservoir in order to have water on hand during the shutdown. They’re refilling the reservoir now.

Water is added via the fill chute near Alvarado Water Treatment Plant (looks like a stream near center of photo)

The plan now is to resume construction near the end of October, so as the month progresses we’ll see the water level drop significantly again. The project which is fully funded by the Public Utilities Department budget (no tax dollars) is expected to be completed by mid- to late- November.

Rising lake bringing water back into the unfinished channel

[Update Oct 1, 2010]: The day after I took the above picture the supervisor in charge decided the water level was still low enough to finish the concrete work on the drainage channel, here it is. They’re now digging footings for a chain-link fence that will line the side of the road near the channel.

[Thanks to: Arian Collins (Supervising Public Information Officer, City of San Diego Public Utilities Department, Water Operations Branch) and John Liarakos (Media Relations Representative, San Diego County Water Authority) for their assistance with my questions]

 

Posted in Environment, Water | Tagged: | 1 Comment »

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »
 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 44 other followers