WATER NEWS
News You Need to Know - NOW
By Ron Weitzman, President, WaterPlus
Excerpt Highlights:
Why is public ownership of our local water supply better than ownership by Cal Am? Answer: Briefly, cost and control.
Why is a large desalination plant better than a small one?
Answer: Briefly, adequacy and cost of supply.
Why is a water supply obtained by desalination better than one obtained by treating sewer water?
Answer: Briefly, cost and reliability of supply.
Why then do local elected officials prefer the Cal Am project to publicly owned alternatives?
Answer: Briefly, irresponsibility… with the exception of a majority of Pacific Grove City Council members, no publicly elected official wants to take the responsibility of building, owning, and operating a water supply project.
WATER NEWS
News You Need to Know - NOW
By Ron Weitzman, President, WaterPlus
Water Plus strongly supports the following:
Public ownership of our water supply, particularly desalination
A new water supply of 10,000 or more acre-feet per year
Water from sources other than desalination only as a surplus to the amount needed
A desalination plant sited outside the Salinas Valley Groundwater Basin
A desalination plant sited at Moss Landing
Competition among all proposed desalination projects at shareholder or investor risk
WATER NEWS
News You Need to Know - NOW
By Ron Weitzman, President, WaterPlus
The answer, in the simplest of terms, is continuation of the status quo on our limited water supply in order to control growth—regardless of the cost.
...we have chosen to have an unreliable supply of water in our future. The reason: the two non-desalination legs of the three-legged stool depend on moderate or heavy winter rain, and the frequency of dry winters is likely to increase as global warming progresses. And that means that we can expect rationing as a way of life exacerbating the inconvenience that we are currently experiencing.
WATER NEWS
News You Need to Know - NOW
The Difference between OR and AND
The PUC Claims to Preempt the County Ordinance Prohibiting Cal Am from Owning a Desal Plant in the County
By Ron Weitzman, President, WaterPlus
Excerpt Highlights:
Cal Am’s Current Water Proposal Needs a Whole New EIR
- New to
this project is the extensive involvement of the
- Although cost and financing are not topics of direct concern to an EIR, they certainly will be topics of at least indirect concern in the case of the current project.
- For the project to proceed as proposed, the CPUC must make a certification of public convenience and necessity to preempt the Monterey County Ordinance 10.72 prohibiting a private company from owning and operating a desalination plant in the county. That certification depends on the non-existence of any feasible alternative project.
The Difference between OR and AND
Both the mayors and the district agree on the need for a
desalination component of the new project, but while the water management
district considers the second component to be either additional desalinated water OR treated
sewer water (which it prefers), the mayors consider the second component to be
additional desalinated water AND treated sewer water.
The PUC Claims to Preempt the County Ordinance Prohibiting
Cal Am from Owning a Desal Plant in the County
Despite objections from Water Plus and others, the Public
Utilities Commission at the end of October adopted an administrative law judge’s
proposed decision that authorizes the commission to preempt the Monterey County
ordinance that prohibits a private company like Cal from owning and operating a desalination
plant in the county.
No comments:
Post a Comment