Desalinization....

[Darian]

In all of the discussion about water drawn from the Sacramento River and the Delta, we've barely scratched the surface on proposed desalinization (desal) operations. We've discussed whether we should but not the "nuts & bolts" of implementing these facilities. :cool:

As we should expect, we're behind the times. Desal facilities are already proposed and in the EIR process for the Bay Area. Four public utilities have formed the Bay Area Regional Desalinization Project. This project proposes to build from one to three facilities down there using DWR funding to move the process along. The proposed technology used is to be reverse osmosis, a membrane process. The project is scheduled for completion by the end of 2012. :nod:

These facilities will be powered thru conventional power generation methods and all will be ground based. :|

Check it out at:

www.regionaldesal.com

[Tracy Chimenti]

These things are energy hogs. With an electric vehicular fleet on the horizon in need of a charge, as well as powering the de-sal, where's it gonna come from? Oh yeah. Coal.

[Darian]

Yep!!!! I suppose Nuclear power generation isn't really acceptable to the public, yet.

Seems as tho there's some conflicting agendas doing the rounds in this arena. I read somewhere, that the permits for the public/private (Poseidon) desal project in SoCal were denied. The Poseidon project was near an environmentally sensitive estuary. So, maybe that's the real reason for denial. I can't imagine why it would be denied down there and allowed up here.... :confused: :confused:

Most of the proposals I've read are being shoreline based and require a lot of estuarine/marine life mortality considerations, not to mention what to do with the salts remaining. I've been wondering why we don't take advantage of co-locating with existing oil company platforms, offshore :?: :?: seems like a potential solution for dilution/distribution of remaining salts. Those platforms are approaching the end of there useful lives. A portion of the sea water taken in by the desal facilities could be used by the oil companies to inject into wells extending their useful lives (of course, oil companies may already be doing this). The balance of the freshwater produced could be piped on-shore for use. All of this might take some pressure off demand for freshwater from rivers/streams and the Delta. Oh well, people who're much more qualified than I probably already have this thought out.... :-|

[590Mike]

Darian I have wondered the same thing regarding the offshore desal. I was told the expense to "pump to an elevation to build water pressure for public use is too high. So back to the shore based, I'm still for desal and I say lets go Atomic power its cheaper, clean and cost effective.
I have an fishing friend who works for a drilling company and they are buying carbon emissions from coal plants and high pressure injecting the carbon to extract oil from existing wells. They pipe the carbon over an hundred miles to inject/extract and it has a twofold benefit.

[Darian]

Re-cycling carbon emissions.... :-k :-k That's a great idea. :!: I guess these emissions are in gaseous form or are they :?: :?: Is the carbon sequestered for any length of time or released with the recovered crude :?: :?:

[590Mike]

Darian
The way it was explained, is the carbon is pressure injected into the soil forcing the traces of crude out,leaving the carbon in place. There is a weight/density to flow ratio engineering explanation, but quite frankly there were caddis coming off and I wasn't listening as all that well. In theory after a few hundred thousand years there will be more crude or a heck of a lot of diamonds.

[Darian]

Hey,.... It's a win-win :D :D Mike,.... I'm not sure I would've been able to listen to well if fishing "things" were happening either.... :nod: :lol: :lol: