Sunday, February 12, 2012
My thoughts are that there is a limit that will ultimately be reached for the resource. To destroy the reserve for the rural communities that generally are supply side communities, just to preserve for a short interval, communities that have suddenly been created, obviously in conflict with the available resource, is short sighted to say the least. When the underground resource is exhausted, the large communities will just up and leave, as many are doing now anyway. Destroy the resource and your destroy any viability of any communities to survive. This is all assuming that these droughts are going to continue. Who knows, but if they do, Katy bar the door.
Larry Stephens, P.E.
Friday, February 10, 2012
It's time to give serious consideration to point-of-use treatment and reuse. And by reuse, I mean direct reuse for non-potable purposes --- like toilet flushing, laundry, etc. In some settings, this means we can use the water 3 to 5 times before it is discharged to surface or groundwaters; in addition to saving on energy costs to move that water great distances.
Wednesday, February 08, 2012
The actual amount requested is 105 THOUSAND acre-feet, not 105 AF as noted in your article above. That makes a big difference!
Note from the Editor: The content that appears in our "Comments" section is supplied to us by outside, third-party readers, and organizations and does not necessarily reflect the view of our staff or Forester Media—in fact, we may not agree with it—and we do not endorse, warrant, or otherwise take responsibility for any content supplied by third parties that appear on our website. All comments are subject to approval.
Subscribe to Water Efficiency Magazine for Free!
Get weekly news and updates through our email newsletter!