Welcome! Please Login or Register.  

Using water for energy makes sense

  • Time Posted 1 year, 0 months ago in General.
  • 1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
    Loading ... Loading ...
  • Comments Comments
Tags:   Share:  
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Sphinn
  • Spurl
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • YahooMyWeb
  • BlinkList

Regarding the article, “Study: Oil Shale could require lots of water”: The article’s point is that oil shale requires lots of electricity which requires lots of water and, therefore, we shouldn’t develop oil shale.

To start, the study referenced assumes that coal power would be used instead of natural gas power. According to a recent Rocky Mountain News article, use of natural gas would reduce the water requirement from 400,000 acre feet to 264,000 acre feet. In addition, power plants in Utah and Wyoming could utilize water in those states to power oil shale in Colorado, further reducing the in-state water requirement.

A more important question is whether oil shale should be curtailed so additional water can be diverted to the Front Range. The Front Range Water Users Association is opposed to oil shale because water not used for oil shale can be diverted to supply another 528,000 households there. Thus, as an alternative to oil shale we could allow Front Range cities to divert an additional 264,000 acre feet of water per year to fuel their growth.

The problem with that alternative is that additional transmountain diversions will permanently remove water from rivers on the Western Slope, further reducing in-stream flows. On the other hand, oil shale development in northwestern Colorado uses and returns water within the same river basin to help maintain in-stream flows and provide return flows for downstream users while providing a water allocation for the Western Slope that can be accessed in the future, when oil shale has been exhausted.

So, when we consider water for oil shale versus other uses, we need to ask ourselves if those other uses will keep the water in the basin. When I compare water-demand growth on the Front Range to demand growth here, I would argue that water use for energy is our best bet for keeping water in our rivers, where it can be accessed when the oil shale is gone.

MIKE FOSTER
Grand Junction

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.