New

Report: Water conservation is cheaper than building of reservoir
Region C board given documentation; More good news for opponents of Marvin Nichols

By LYNN MONTGOMERY | East Texas Edition

August 28, 2003 -- Documentation on why the Marvin Nichols Reservoir is not an appropriate choice as a water supply for North Texas was presented to the Region C Water Planning Group (WPG) at their monthly meeting.

Region C has the the proposed Marvin Nichols Reservoir on their plan to help supply the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex with water in the future.

Water 'reuse' spotlighted at Region C, Region D water board meetings

With the water planning groups in Texas having the task of meeting water needs for the next 50 years, one way Region C (Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex) is answering the call is water reuse, which was discussed during their monthly meeting on Aug. 18 in Grand Prairie.

Reuse of water is basically the use of wastewater that has been treated at a facility, then discharged as a usable water supply. Generally this water can be used instead of fresh, drinking water. It can be used for landscaping, irrigation, some industial means, golf courses and nurseries.

Region C board members learned from Bob Gooch, a consultant to the water planning group, that there are 28 reuse projects in the region. The projects are used for water supply augmentation, irrigation, aesthetics/environmental, and dust control, he cited.

"The currently available reuse supply is projected to be greater than 90,000 acre-feet per year," Gooch said.

Likewise, at the neighboring Region D water planning group meeting on Aug. 20, board members heard from Dr. Ernest Rebuck with the Texas Water Development Board concerning reuse in their Northeast Texas region.

To detail the reuse of water, Rebuck began his presentation by noting the "portion of water supplied by reuse will increase from 2 percent in 2000 to 3 percent in 2050," he began. "While reuse comprises 2 percent of current supply, it represents nearly 6 percent of the water supplied by future strategies."

Using examples from San Antonio, El Paso, and Houston, Rebuck explained possible actions concerning water reuse.

"In San Antonio, they approved a water recycling system in 1996. This is a 64-mile pipeline going around the entire city, which will result in 35,000 acre-feet per year," he said. In another example, he cited, "The El Paso Water Utilities reclaims 3.4 billion gallons per year or 9 percent of water production."

One of the reclaimed water projects is the Fred Hervey Project in northeast El Paso. "Every drop of water goes to the aquifer injection, the El Paso Electric Company, (and) Painted Dunes golf course, which is 1,800 million gallons per year," Rebuck stated.

Another project in the lower valley of El Paso is projected to reuse 100 million gallons this year.

Water reuse was adopted as a water management strategy in the 2001 for the Region H Water Plan, which includes the city of Houston.

Rebuck also pointed out to the Region D board members that "there is $1.6 million available of which can be asked for" to study the possibilities.

North East Texas Regional Water Planning Group (Region D) board member Richard Letourneau asked if Region D adopted reuse could it reduce the amount of water needed?

"Reuse is a very reliable source," Rebuck stated. "On this second round of water planning, you must look at water conservation or water reuse."

The Region D board said it will investigate this issue.

The documentation was presented to the WPG at the Aug. 18 meeting in Grand Prairie by Janice Bezanson from the Texas Committee on Natural Resources.

"Conserving water in the DFW area municipalities could supply water needs more cheaply than building the Marvin Nichols dam project and associated infrastructure," Bezanson stated.

In the documentation, the estimated cost for water conservation in Region L, which includes the greater San Antonio area, is $399 per acre-foot of water saved. Costs for water conservation programs in Region N (Corpus Christi) and Region G (Abilene, Waco) were estimated at $449 and $574 per acre-foot saved, respectively. An acre-foot is equivalent to a foot of water standing on a football field.

The report continued by comparing apples-to-apples. The figures for water conservation represent the costs for making water that has been fully treated and is ready to be distributed to municipal customers. Region D (East Texas) estimates the Marvin Nichols project would provide "raw" water for the dam site at a cost of $61 per acre-foot. By the time the water is piped to the DFW metroplex, the per acre-foot cost of untreated water rises to a range of $232-447 per acre-foot, depending on the water utility supplied.

"The cost of water from the Marvin Nichols dam project would be substantially higher than the average of the costs of water supplied through a municipal water conservation program," she added.

The cost of municipal water from the project, after transmission, treatment, and distribution expenses are added, can be conservatively estimated to be in the range of $600 to $850 per acre-foot supplied, according to the report.

In earlier Country World reports, it has been noted that Region C would pay for the building of the Marvin Nichols Reservoir and would receive 80 percent of the available water. The reservoir would entail 62,000 acres with an additional 10,000 for flood stage. In addition, mitigated land (for displaced wildlife, etc.) would have to be acquired.

Opponents of the Marvin Nichols Reservoir have stated repeatedly there are alternate water supply sources for North Texas (the Region C area). One supply, according to the "Texas Water Allocation Assessment Report," could be from the Wright Patman Lake, part of the Sulphur River Basin, in Texarkana. The report for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers listed, in an assessment prepared in January 2003 by Freese and Nichols, the consultants for Region C, various ways for the increasing the amount of water available from the Sulphur River Basin. The study indicated 100,000 to 300,000 acre-feet per year of additional water supply could be made available without the need to build a new reservoir.

The appeal was made again to the Region C WPG to remove the reservoir from their water plan. Region D has amended its plan and removed the recommendation that Marvin Nichols be built. The reservoir remains as a recommended water strategy for Region C.

Another East Texan who spoke at the Aug. 18 meeting, said, "We would like to work with you. Education is going to be the key for conservation. You use our raw products, and we buy the end products."

Conservation was a key topic during the meeting on Aug. 18. Bob Johnson, vice-chairman for Region C, shared information about the Dallas Water Utilities Conservation Program (DWUCP).

"We call it an alternative to curb supply needs," Johnson said.

The DWUCP conservation plan has tiered water rates. Residential customers using more than 15,000 gallons of water a month pay a higher rate for water (74-cents more per every 1,000 gallons). Commercial customers using more than 10,000 gallons and more than 1.4 times their annual monthly average also pay a higher rate for that water.

Restrictions under the conservation plan include such things as not watering with a broken or missing sprinkler head or one that is poorly maintained and leads to water waste; no watering during any form of precipitation; and prohibited hours of watering (between the hours of 10 a.m. and 6 p.m., June 1 - Sept. 30.)

Johnson added if anyone sees water waste, they can use the phone and dial "311" and someone will be sent to investigate.

Fines for violating the restriction are a warning for the first violation. Subsequent violations will result in a fine of not less than $250 or not more than $2,000.

"This is a criminal fine. We have issued 350 warrants and three citations so far," Johnson said.

Search


Advanced