10/23/2012

1

October 18, 2012

OverviewOur local water resources (Vai)

Water conservation (Ron)

Integrated water plan and Desalination (Melanie)

Santa Cruz County Water 

• Source:

• 80% groundwater 

• 20% surface water

• Total: about 86,000 acre‐feet per year

• Mostly agricultural (about 60%)

• Residential use accounts for ~ 25%

86,000

Santa Cruz County Watersheds

10/23/2012

2

Santa Cruz County31 inches of rain per year25‐45” for Soquel‐Aptos

16.5” is runoff

11.5” evaporates

2.5” into groundwater 15%.5” surface water to be used

10/23/2012

3

Monterey Area

Western Purisima : Fall 2011

10/23/2012

4

Water Shortages

Goal ‐ How to Conserve 35% for 20 Years

– Show methods and estimated costs

– Convey customer & District impacts

– Estimate reliability

What did we come up with?

• Two conceptual mandatory water restriction     scenarios:

– Scenario A: The Enforcement Approach

– Scenario B: The Full Tool‐Box Approach

10/23/2012

5

Key Components of Both Scenarios

Moratorium

Monthly

Billing

Enforcement

Water 

Budgets

Pricing

Behavior

Modification

Education

Enhanced

Rebates

Direct Install

Other

* Blue circles are unique to Scenario B

Comparison of Water Restriction Scenarios

•Customer‐driven

•Low chance of success

•District‐driven

•Moderate chance of success

Scenario A:Enforcement Approach

Scenario B:Full Toolbox Approach

District Cost:  $117 Million (M)Customer Cost: $0 MTotal Cost: $117 M#

#The District purchases and installs water conserving measures, customers pay over time via rates for $117M.

District Cost:  $40 Million (M)Customer Cost: ~$77 MTotal Cost: $117 M*

*Customers directly purchase and  install water conserving measures for ~$77M. District provides $40M, customers pay over time via rates.

*Both scenarios are conceptual and unproven and carry risk that seawater intrusion may occur even if attempted

Water restrictions alone carry a huge risk

Uncharted territory

Potential failure and consequence of seawater intrusion

Other factors to consider: Climate change – 30% less recharge Water‐quality regulations

ConclusionsAverage Cost per AF of Water 

(Total Annual Expenses / AF of Water Sales)

Note:  Desal assumes substantially higher water sales. Bills would vary based on water use and rate structure.

10/23/2012

6

Water Industry ‐ Help Wanted Aging Workforce – next 10 years 50% retire

Less available people – the rising Generation X (30 – 50 yrs) is 25% smaller than 

current workforce

Growing industry – growing and changing as technology advances, new water 

sources are developed, wastewater treatment technologies evolve, and regulations increase 

Water Footprint Sister to Carbon Footprint

654,000 gals avg. US citizen Footprint

Only 5% (37,000 gals) from direct use

1 hamburger = 600 gallons

1 cotton T‐shirt = 500 gallons

1 slice of bread = 10 gallons

1 beer = 20 gallons (can’t use that as excuse anymore to save water)

Toilets – Technology Evolution Pre 1983 – 5 gallons per flush

1983 – 1992 – 3.5 gallons per flush

1992 – 2012ish – 1.6 gpf

2014 – 1.2 gpf

(2010 – invent 0.8 gpf, future no water?)

10/23/2012

7

Hot‐water Recirculation Systems

Who likes to waste water?

Who steps into a cold shower?

Nifty device – saves water (best type is the self activate type systems –save energy too)

Peanut Butter & Jelly Energy produces water, water makes “E”

In CA 20% of energy use related to water

100 watt light blub for 10 hrs takes 25 gals

3 Rounds – Who wins? Safety – a draw (EPA vs. FDA)

Environmental – tap takes it  (bottle 1/4 oil)

Co$t – bottle 1000 times more costly 

KNOCKOUT – tap wins

Best Life/Work Lesson

“It’s not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.”  Charles Darwin

10/23/2012

8

Melanie Mow Schumacher

Education Bachelor of Science, Civil Engineering

Licensed, California Professional Engineer (P.E.)

Jobs Construction Management‐Military Base Conversions

Geotechnical Engineering‐ Soil Samples and Testing

Water Resources – Soquel Creek Water District

scwd2 is a collaboration betweenthe Santa Cruz Water Dept. & Soquel Creek Water Dist.

Together we serve over 135,000 people 

Similar values and objectives

Our different needs led us to a collaborative approach for sustainable water resources

Santa Cruz Soquel

Safe   Adequate   Reliable

Our Primary Goals Regarding Water Supply:

Water Supply Issues

1. Drought

2. More Water for Fish

3. Water Quality

4. Climate Change

1. Groundwater Basin not sustainable

2. Seawater Intrusion

3. Water Quality

4. Climate Change

Our Water Plan: A multi‐faceted approach

This Water Plan is a culmination of over 30 years of evaluation and looking at

numerous supply alternatives.

10/23/2012

9

Soquel Creek Water District Residents use about 40% less(residential, gallons per person per day)

Water Use Comparison

California (Average, 2005)

Santa Cruz (2010)

~70

111

Conceptual 2.5 MGD Desalination Facility

* Shared Use *Shared Costs

Potential Facility: Located within the Industrial Area of SC 

Intake example

Cost Estimate and Timeline

2005 - 2010 Pilot Plant Testing

Additional Studies

EIR and Project Approval

Design, Permitting, Construction

2008 - 2012

2012 - 2014

2015 - 2018

(Schedule subject to change)

~ $115 million• $65M for City• $50 M for District

*Desalination would increase water bill by ~$5/month

Frequently Asked Questions

What about the environmental issues with the intake and the brine?

Does desalination use a lot of energy and how are greenhouse gases being addressed?

What about Measure P in the City?

What about alternatives?

Are there successful desalination plants currently in operation?

10/23/2012

10

How to stay informed about the project Handouts are available at back table

E‐mail Updates – sign up to receive monthly email notices and project updates

For more info contact: Desalination Program Coordinator at (831) 420‐5214

Visit our website:www.scwd2desal.org

Questions?

p gsubstantiates that desalination is plausible

Concern Study

Water Quality Pilot Plant Testing

Marine Impacts with Intake

Open Ocean Effects (Entrainment and screen effectiveness)

Energy and GHGs

Energy Minimization & GHG Reduction Plan

Marine Impacts with Brine Discharge

Brine Dilution Study

Technical studies will be used to fully inform the environmental impact report (EIR).

What studies have been conducted? What are the preliminary results?

Study Findings

Desal water is safe

Currently underway

Can effectively blendtreated wastewater and brine.

No endangered or threatened species found, entrainment impacts considered de minimus

Energy to operate desal plant is less than 20% of energy used for TVs in our service areas

Will the proposed desalination project use a lot of energy?

On a household basis, the additional energy for desal is equivalent to leaving a computer on for 1-3 hours a day.

Household Energy Equivalents for Desalination

8 to 24 hours per day

1 to 3 hours per day

1 to 3 loads per week

A white paper on Energy Use related to Desalination is now available.

10/23/2012

11

How are the agencies addressing greenhouse gas emissions?

Desalination uses electricity so it indirectly causes GHG emissions in the same manner as homes and businesses

The addtional indirect GHGs to operate the desal plant is equivalent to approx. 400-700 typical automobiles.An Energy Minimization and GHG Reduction

Plan is underway with a Technical Working Group to evaluate ways to reduce the carbon footprint, including net-carbon neutral.

but project does not meet either agency’s near‐term needs.

Estimated ~340 afy available to SqCWD.  This is less than 25% of the supplemental supply needed.

SCWD is not guaranteed any water back from SqCWD or SV because both groundwater basins are overdrafted.

“….. not considered an alternative to developing a new reliable and flexible supplemental supply.”

‐ John Ricker, Water Resource Division Director

Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Services

What about the surface water transfer project?

designed to protect marine organisms

Slot size of 2 mm

Intake velocity < 0.33 fps

Courtesy of: Alden Research

Potential intake system under evaluation:

the potential open‐ocean intake system

Screened open‐ocean intake:

equivalent of  ~ 50 white croaker per year

Pacific Fisheries Information Network and Tenera

Monterey County commercial and recreational fishing:

~ 160,000 white

croaker per year

Heidi1

Slide 44

Heidi1 I would like to delete this slide. I've heard from several that it looks like we are comparing to commercial fisheries (peoples livelihood) and saying see, we're not as bad as that and also that 50 is still large. Can we delete it? And maybe conclude the intake study with some bullets about what its doing: assessing habitat including special status species. evaluating ways to eliminate impingement and reduce entrainment. Assess impacts and mitigate them.hluckenbach, 5/5/2011

10/23/2012

12

Conceptual Project Costs  Several components continue to be evaluated 

Costs will be shared equitably between the City and District

Conceptual cost estimated at ~$115 million (includes 30% contingency)

IntakeStructure

IntakeStructure

LandAcquisition

LandAcquisition

TreatmentPlant

TreatmentPlant

AlternativeEnergy

AlternativeEnergy

ConcentrateDisposal

ConcentrateDisposal

Storage& Delivery

Storage& Delivery

How much will the proposed project cost?Desalination is a proven and successful technology

1950s ‐ First major desalination plants built in the Middle East 

1961 ‐ First U.S. seawater desalination plant built in Freeport, Texas

Sand City’s RO units

• Currently – over 15,000 desalination plants in operation worldwide

• 70% of U.S. desalination capacity uses reverse osmosis technology

Evaluating ways to bring ocean water to facility and limit impacts

scwd2 is evaluating two intake approaches in terms of engineering feasibility, cost, and affects to marine life/ocean floor

Working with regulatory agencies and scientific community through Technical Working Groups

Intake impacts will be evaluated in the EIR Process

Open ocean intake Subsurface intake

would cover a surface area on the ocean floor equivalent to 4.5 football fields.

10/23/2012

13

Brine discharge can be safely handled:Mix brine with existing wastewater effluent

Conceptual design will mix brine from proposed project with the existing wastewater effluent 

Brine Dilution Study ensures that brine can be effectively mixed with effluent so as to have no altering effect on the Bay.

Utilize existing infrastructure