Blog

DesalData Weekly - December 13th, 2016

Posted 13 December, 2016 by Mandy

Dec 13_1.png

Credit: Amy Taxin/ AP

The fate of Poseidon’s desalination plant in Huntington Beach, California has yet to be determined.[1]  New legislation ratified by the Environmental Protection Agency in April 2016 requires desalination plants in California to use subsurface intake pipes to collect seawater from coastal aquifers and/or off-shore aquifers beneath the ocean floor.[2]  However, if economic or technical issues make the use of subsurface intakes unfeasible, desalination plants may use open intakes instead.  These structures collect water directly from the ocean through the use of on-shore or off-shore pipelines.

 

The environmental community favors subsurface intakes because of their potential to reduce the entrainment and impingement of aquatic life (algae, plankton, fish, crabs, bacteria, etc.).[3] Impingement “occurs when organisms sufficiently large to avoid going through the screens are trapped against them by the force of the flowing source water” (this typically includes adult aquatic organisms such as fish and crabs). Entrainment takes place when marine organisms enter the desalination plant intake and pass into the desalination facilities (i.e. algae, plankton, bacteria).[4]  In a report issued by the regional water-quality control board, between 2000 and 2005, roughly 19.4 billion fish larvae were entrained into California coastal power plants; and each year, 2.7 million fish weighing 84,000 pounds (34,000 kg) were impinged alongside marine mammals and sea turtles.[5]

 

Poseidon has said that subsurface intakes are not feasible for the Huntington Beach facility. The intakes add a projected $1-1.5 billion fee to the construction cost of $2 billion. Scott Maloni, Poseidon’s General Manager, stated that the company will not follow through with construction if the state requires it to follow through with the subsurface intakes. The company has also issued a report that suggests there is insufficient data to suggest that subsurface intakes protect marine life.[6]

 

Dec 13_2.png

 

Meanwhile, an environmental group known as the California Coastkeeper Alliance is contesting Poseidon’s argument for the economic infeasibility of subsurface intakes.  According to the group, California’s 2015 desalination regulations state that “‘subsurface intakes shall not be determined to be economically infeasible solely because subsurface intakes may be more expensive than surface intakes.’”[7]

 

California state officials have yet to determine whether or not the intakes are feasible at the Huntington Beach location.  Three agencies have yet to issue permits for the project.  And one of these agencies, the region’s water-quality control board, has requested 76 pages of additional information from Poseidon.  The board’s executive officier, Kurt Berchtold, has said that Poseidon has yet to prove that the intakes are not feasible for the project.[8]

 

 

[1] Tony Davis, “Why One Decision Could Decide the Future of Desalination in California,” Water Deeply, December 7, 2016, <https://www.newsdeeply.com/water/articles/2016/12/07/why-one-decision-could-decide-the-future-of-desalination-in-california> accessed December 8, 2016.

[2] “Overview of Desalination Plant Intake Alternatives: White Paper,” Waterreuse Association Desalination Committee, October 2015, <https://watereuse.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Intake_White_Paper.pdf> accessed December 8, 2016.

[3] Ibid.

[4] “Desalination Plant Intakes: Impingement and Entrainment Impacts and Solutions: White Paper,” Watereuse Association, June 2011, <https://www3.epa.gov/region1/npdes/schillerstation/pdfs/AR-026.pdf> accessed December 8, 2016.

[5] Tony Davis, “Why One Decision Could Decide the Future of Desalination in California,” Water Deeply.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid.

Continue reading