We’ve been on the current path toward desalination, carpooling with Bill D. Moratorium for nearly 10 years. Many studies have been commissioned and reviewed before the CCSD Directors back then decided how much water we need, at what level of reliability and at what cost to the community. How they interpreted the information and answered those questions continue to have a less than ideal affect on our lovely town.
I believe Cambria is full of intelligent, educated and thoughtful people (including the CCSD Board and Staff, no matter what they think). There are many of us here that missed the fun of the 1996 change of leaders and cancellation of a desal project that was ready to go. I think it’s critical to have information to make good decisions. In that light, then, here is an excerpt from Chapter 8 of Task 4 of the Water Master Plan. (The entire document is available for download on the CCSD website.
8.10 Comparison of Water Supply Alternatives
The potential long-term water supply alternatives were evaluated according to the following criteria:
- Water Supply Capabilities: ranked from < 600 AFY to 1,000 AFY
- Water Quality: ranked from Very poor to Excellent
- Reliability: ranked from None to More than Sufficient
- Required Agreements/Institutional Issues: ranked from Very Difficult to None Required
- Environmental Issues: ranked from Significant to None
- Permitting/CEQA: ranked from Very Difficult to None Required
- Cost: ranked as a combination of annual and variable costs from above average to below average
- Funding: ranked from None to Fully funded
Table 8-37 compares the evaluation for each of the alternatives discussed in this section and is based on the assumption that each criterion has equal weight. Alternatives with a score of 2.9 or higher were considered viable options for CCSD. Accordingly, CCSD should consider continuing
Demand Management and incorporating Recycled Water to reduce potable water demand in addition to implementing Seawater Desalination as a supplemental source during critically dry years. Because changes to the criterion weight may alter the final scores, alternatives with a
score between 2.5 and 2.9 may also be considered.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_c.png?x-id=014f44d4-254b-4ed7-82cf-b91c18c428d4)
Last 5 posts by Amanda Rice
- Gail Robinette Chosen to Complete DeMicco's Term as CCSD Director on Unanimous Vote
- California Coastal Commission Unanimously Denied Army Corps Desal Tests
- Cambria CSD Agenda for November 27, 2011 Meeting Includes Water Conservation & New Tank Project
- Sunken Oil Tanker Off Cambria's Coastline Will Be Checked Again Soon
Thank you Amanda for all the essential information. You are providing a valuable service to the community.
Interesting that water demand management received the highest score on the alternatives matrix but not surprising since we have our very own conservation retrofit ordinance that makes it a legal mandate to offset any intensified water use from new building or remodels over a certain size. We have plenty of money to fund this program from remodel water impact fees. I’m sure everyone has noticed all the huge remodels and guest houses being built. Four new guest houses in my neighborhood alone.
LA City and Las Vegas each give rebates to retire grass lawns. Las Vegas will give you $1.50 per sq ft and LA will give $1 up to 2000 sq ft. I recall in a brochure the CCSD sent out that we use 70 % of our creek potable water on outdoor use.
The below excerpt is from the Cambria Water Master Plan definition of Water Demand Management.
Program Environmental Impact Report
Cambria Community Services District Water Master Plan
Final • July 2008 2-5 Executive Summary
WATER DEMAND MANAGEMENT
Demand management would consist of improvements to the current conservation program and regulations to reduce potable water use for landscaping. Although CCSD’s current conservation practices have already reduced the average per capita potable water consumption below the state average, more efficient water demand management practices are proposed for further reduction in water consumption.
Future demand management measures may include greater emphasis on landscape irrigation. Such measures may include the addition of rain sensors to ensure irrigation systems shut-off during periods of rain. The installation of evapotranspiration (ET) controllers may also become part of future landscape irrigation efficiency improvement measures.
Water demand management would not have any water quality implications. It would simply allow available water to be used more efficiently. No significant additional infrastructure would be required for this alternative.