Comments for GrokSurf's San Diego

Comment on A tour of Hoover Dam and the Colorado River Aqueduct system by Milton N. Burgess, P.E.

Milton N. Burgess, P.E. — Mon, 20 May 2013 22:05:24 +0000

Great pix. Thanks, George. Like being there.

Comment on A tour of Hoover Dam and the Colorado River Aqueduct system by Carl

Carl — Mon, 20 May 2013 19:38:04 +0000

Nice junket. Amazing that for a tour and the price of a box lunch, those who signed, sealed and delivered the California water crisis can buy s juch support.

Comment on San Diego faces a major decision on wastewater treatment and water recycling by Blog round up: Bloggers on the costs of the BDCP, the fortress Delta option, plus more on infrastructure spending, the Borba email exchange, whitewater rafting and a peripheral playground … ? » MAVEN'S NOTEBOOK | MAVEN'S NOTEBOOK

Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:31:19 +0000

[...] Decision time for San Diego on recycled water, says GrokSurf’s San Diego blog: The one-year demonstration project has completed, a report has been generated: ” … The City Council enthusiastically accepted the report. Now it needs to decide whether to authorize a full-scale IPR program. That decision will have to wait until Public Utilities Department staff report back in 90 days to the Natural Resources & Culture Committee with a recommended preferred plan. The committee would then forward a recommendation to the full City Council. The really big part of this story, though, is that San Diego’s wastewater management policy has been a problem for many years and it’s in that context that the potable reuse program needs to be understood. … “ The GrokSurf’s San Diego blog discusses how the recycled water project and San Diego’s Point Luoma Wastewater Plant are connected in this post: San Diego faces a major decision on wastewater treatment and water recycling [...]

Comment on San Diego faces a major decision on wastewater treatment and water recycling by Milton N. Burgess, P.E.

Milton N. Burgess, P.E. — Sun, 28 Apr 2013 23:33:30 +0000

It appears Mr. Freeman and I are on the same page. Actually instead of sewage or waste-water some communities are using different terms for recyclable water. I think its a little like the automobile people did when they came up with the term pre-owned cars, instead of used cars. it’s really not PC talk, but more definitive to talk about water than can be reused, and not wasted. So perhaps we can get that in the minds of those who have influence in the media.There is nothing greener than to reuse the precious fresh water we have available to us, only 1% of all the water on the Blue Planet, and that is the same 1% that was around when Adam and Eve got in trouble in Garden of Eden, only now there are seven billion cousins trying to use the same amount. Thanks for the discussion. I enjoyed it.

Comment on San Diego faces a major decision on wastewater treatment and water recycling by Burton Freeman

Burton Freeman — Sun, 28 Apr 2013 21:38:00 +0000

Well, I think I’m about commented out! Maybe one more.

George asked for suggestions about his summary report (above); my first comment refers to my analysis of the limnology task and suggests that its conclusions are problematic on technical grounds. Indeed, George and I collaborated on the publication of a GrokSurf paper in September, 2011 (http:groksurf.com/2011/09/27/questions-arise-about-the-san-vicente-reservoir-limnology-study/ . In it I provide chapter and verse regarding criticism of the task findings. George’s question about DPR and summary conclusion (not mentioned in his current report):

“Dr. Freeman’s points are important to be considered for the project as envisioned, but my own question about the project has been on a slightly different track: is there really a need for detention time at all?”

I certainly agree with Mr. Burgess that our imported raw water has experienced a bad history of water quality; diluting imported water (and run-off) with a small amount of advanced water (depending on time of year and weather) should increase is quality; will that affect the treatment stream at a water treatment plant?

Well, the GrokSurf paper certainly didn’t receive peer-review; it stands on its own merits, ready for any criticisms!

Finally, regarding politically correct speech; I have never, never used the phrase that you refer to! Is the word “sewage” ok? Maybe waste-water is more acceptable?

Comment on San Diego faces a major decision on wastewater treatment and water recycling by Milton N. Burgess, P.E.

Milton N. Burgess, P.E. — Sun, 28 Apr 2013 03:55:37 +0000

I certainly respect your expertise in this matter, based on your reply. My background includes building and starting up waste water plants, 5 MGD tertiary to 25 MGD secondary. I think where I have difficulty with your reply is the raw water we get from the Colorado River, and for that matter the State Water Project is the effluent of many, many municipal sewage plants up the line. When we talk of co-mingling the water from coming from an IPR plant, and then treating the combined effluent it seems to me the combined effluent should be of higher quality than the ordinary raw water the water treatment plants, like the Alvarado Plant, usually receive. Am I wrong? And I am not suggesting suppressing any findings that have been peer-reviewed and accepted as good science. Suppressing is your term. When I say tamp down the comments, I am referring generally to the “toilet-to-tap” phrase carelessly injected into the lexicon of the broadcast and print media.

Comment on San Diego faces a major decision on wastewater treatment and water recycling by Burton Freeman

Burton Freeman — Sun, 28 Apr 2013 01:40:31 +0000

My principal concern is over the reservoir augmentation task of the IPR Demonstration investigation. It just so happens that my technical experience over many years has dealt with developing and applying computer dynamic models to transient geophysical flows; the contract in the Demonstration Program for the application of the 3D CWR-ELCOM model to San Vicente reservoir prompted my interest. My extensive study of the scope and execution of this contract and its use of ELCOM suggests that the results are problematic; bad input data yields bad conclusions. So, you suggest that I “tamp down”, i.e. suppress, this finding?

Indeed, water conservation is essential, as well as new local sources of water. Potable reuse of sewage is clearly technically feasible. It is feasible to contaminate pristine advanced water by the uncontrolled mixing it with raw water in a reservoir and subsequently cleaning it to potable standards by processing it through one of our great water treatment plants (such as Alvarado) at an additional cost of several hundred dollars per acre foot. And, as a result, we conserve less than 15 mgd out of a total demand (when the project might come on line) of ~ 300 mgd.

Comment on San Diego faces a major decision on wastewater treatment and water recycling by Milton N. Burgess, P.E.

Milton N. Burgess, P.E. — Sat, 27 Apr 2013 17:02:53 +0000

Your concerns are well articulated, but we can’t get bogged down in all of the “if’s” before we take the first tew steps forward. We must move forward with IPR. Its proven not only here but elsewhere. DPR is a great concept, but won’t have public acceptance as quickly. Getting IPR into the public mainstream is a little like young people getting married. If they knew what they didn’t know, its likely they never would. As the process unfolds for IPR, the concerns you mention will be examined, as they have been in other venues. The old adage, “Whilst we deliberate, it becomes too late” was never truer with regard to safeguarding the socio-economic viability of the San Diego area. We need to tamp down negative comments so that those who are on the fence are not influenced away from water independence through the use of IPR.

Comment on San Diego faces a major decision on wastewater treatment and water recycling by Burton Freeman

Burton Freeman — Sat, 27 Apr 2013 14:59:32 +0000

Indeed, George, an heroic job on the disposal and/or conservation of sewage water!

Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR) through Reservoir Augmentation, as you point out, needs to be viewed as one of several options of 1) ocean discharge with a) enhanced primary or b) secondary treatment, 2) reuse with a) tertiary (purple pipe) or b) advanced potable water treatment. The latter (2b) has several options as well; the “I” in Indirect can be through sequestration in an aquifer or a surface water body. Or the advanced potable water could be consumed directly without sequestration (DPR).

Well, this is a complicated and boring business requiring regulatory, technical, economic, and cost/benefit analysis! Do you think that this has been carried out?

Regarding IPR in San Vicente Reservoir, I’ve challenged the conclusions of the Demonstration Task on 3-D computer modeling on the disposition of water within the reservoir. Unfortunately, it uses meteorological data, essential to accuracy, that are uncertain; this is a topic aired with your help in a Grok Surf article, as well as in extended discussions with Jeffery Pasek of the SD Public Utilities Department. Regarding cost concerns that you mention, I also am uncomfortable with the cost allocation/offsets.

So, this is the short version of my concerns. Potable Reuse is feasible and desirable (and cheaper) without Reservoir Augmentation. Water customers deserve the best solution to the use of sewage.

Comment on San Diego faces a major decision on wastewater treatment and water recycling by miltburgess

miltburgess — Thu, 25 Apr 2013 00:50:04 +0000

Thanks for doing a very thorough effort researching the issue of IPR and the San Diego Water Policy Implementation Report. Now all we have to do is to raise the consciousness level of the average San Diego citizen to understand how important it is we get this underway as soon as we can. Maybe we can talk the Feds into kicking loose that half a billion dollars for water infrastructure the State has ignored (San Diego UT article page 29 of the A section last Sunday). It’s follow the money time. Here we are sucking on a several hundred mile long pipe subject to natural disasters, with the very viability of San Diego’s economic well-being at stake. This is not “the sky is falling’ talk, it is reality and the sooner we get get under way with IPR, the faster we will reduce the risk of an economic disaster. My father was a researcher. I think he originated the saying, “I shall never cease to be amazed at the infinite capacity of the human mind to resist the penetration of useful knowledge.”