Anyone who has read my posts on Texas groundwater law knows that I am NOT a fan of the Rule of Capture (ROC). I think the doctrine is foolish and ruinous for a state with a population that is expected to grow as rapidly as the population of Texas is expected to increase over the next 50 years. The following website on water rights in Texas offers papers both pro and con. I wrote/presented one of the papers arguing against the doctrine. I know some of the authors who think there is nothing wrong with the ROC, or who think that the doctrine requires only minor modification. I disagree, and I am willing to argue the matter with them, on this forum or any other forum.
Back to the previous post later today. I have been attending to a family matter in Louisiana.
aquadoc
Friday, May 20, 2011
Monday, May 9, 2011
Top-Down or Bottom-Up Approach to Water Management? Part 1
This post is under development! What follows is the introduction, as this will take at least two days to complete. I am a James Joyce/Ernest Hemmingway-type writer. That means that I write in spurts! (I do not claim to be a Joyce or a Hemmingway!) The first spurt follows:
A reader (Christopher) wrote the following in response to my "Cadillac Desert" post:
Christopher asks a penetrating question with regard to the management of water resources: "A top down, or bottom up approach?"
Having been involved in water-planning and management programs for many years, I can say, unequivocally, that the answer depends on (at least) four factors: 1) the nature and scale of the planning/management matters to be resolved; 2) access to information needed to make reasonable assessments of (and proposals to resolve) problems, 3) available financial resources required to address the design and implementation of planning/management problems, and 4) legal and institutional barriers/restrictions.
Years ago, I favored a top-down approach to water planning and management, but that was before my involvement in water-planning programs in Texas and Louisiana gave me a different perspective on planning and management. I have learned a lot since then. The company I worked with at the time ((Leggette, Brashears & Graham) was a prime consultant to two of Texas's 16 water-planning regions and a significant subcontractor for at least one other region. We were the prime contractors for Regions E and J, and a subcontractor for work in Region F. We worked on planning documents for three years (1998 - 2000) and submitted final reports to the Texas Water Development Board in December 2000.
In 2001, LBG worked with C.H. Fensertmaker (Lafayette, LA) to develop a guide for groundwater management in Louisiana. The program was administered by the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Office of Conservation. I was the technical director of the statewide water-management plan. Over a period of 13 months, we produced, by December 2002, a three-volume report (Vol 1 - Identification and Use Assessment of Louisiana Waters, Vol. 2, Water Management Issues, and Vol. 3, Appendices).
TO FOLLOW OVER THE NEXT DAY OR SO:
COMPLETION OF PART 1, DIFFERENCES/SIMILARITIES BETWEEN WATER PLANNING IN TEXAS AND LOUISIANA
PART 2: STATUS OF WATER PLANNING IN EACH STATE
TOP-DOWN/BOTTOM-UP/OR SOMEWHERE IN-BETWEEN?
A reader (Christopher) wrote the following in response to my "Cadillac Desert" post:
After years of working seasonally as a raft guide and ski bum, I felt it was time to get a "real job." This proved to be difficult when I had to answer the question, "what have you been doing in the last five years?" Charged with an interest in natural resources, water in particular, I decided to go back to school. I read Cadillac Desert on a suggestion from a professor at a prospective grad school, and after finishing the book I knew that more schooling in the field of water resource management was a good idea.
As I break from working on my thesis proposal, I realize that the number of water related issues that need to be addressed is both great and daunting. My question for you is, “what approach should be taken? A top down, or bottom up approach?”
One of my projects addresses the value of water-based ecosystem services in a large National Forest. I hope to gain public input about the services supplied, and how certain stakeholders value those services. My hope is this information can be used to inform water-based management decisions.
Christopher asks a penetrating question with regard to the management of water resources: "A top down, or bottom up approach?"
Having been involved in water-planning and management programs for many years, I can say, unequivocally, that the answer depends on (at least) four factors: 1) the nature and scale of the planning/management matters to be resolved; 2) access to information needed to make reasonable assessments of (and proposals to resolve) problems, 3) available financial resources required to address the design and implementation of planning/management problems, and 4) legal and institutional barriers/restrictions.
Years ago, I favored a top-down approach to water planning and management, but that was before my involvement in water-planning programs in Texas and Louisiana gave me a different perspective on planning and management. I have learned a lot since then. The company I worked with at the time ((Leggette, Brashears & Graham) was a prime consultant to two of Texas's 16 water-planning regions and a significant subcontractor for at least one other region. We were the prime contractors for Regions E and J, and a subcontractor for work in Region F. We worked on planning documents for three years (1998 - 2000) and submitted final reports to the Texas Water Development Board in December 2000.
In 2001, LBG worked with C.H. Fensertmaker (Lafayette, LA) to develop a guide for groundwater management in Louisiana. The program was administered by the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Office of Conservation. I was the technical director of the statewide water-management plan. Over a period of 13 months, we produced, by December 2002, a three-volume report (Vol 1 - Identification and Use Assessment of Louisiana Waters, Vol. 2, Water Management Issues, and Vol. 3, Appendices).
TO FOLLOW OVER THE NEXT DAY OR SO:
COMPLETION OF PART 1, DIFFERENCES/SIMILARITIES BETWEEN WATER PLANNING IN TEXAS AND LOUISIANA
PART 2: STATUS OF WATER PLANNING IN EACH STATE
TOP-DOWN/BOTTOM-UP/OR SOMEWHERE IN-BETWEEN?
Friday, May 6, 2011
Cadillac Desert
More than 20 years ago, I read Marc Reisner's book Cadillac Desert: The American West and Its Disappearing Water. I had no idea when I read Reisner's account of the mismanagement of the groundwater and surface water resources of the states west of the Mississippi River, especially in the high desert regions of the North American continent, that my perspective on how Americans (especially agencies of the U.S. Government) use/abuse of water would evolve to something that is now diametrically opposed to the views I held when I was a much younger geologist.
In the years since I read Cadillac Desert, I have worked extensively on water resource problems in all regions of Texas and in other states of the west/southwest, and in many southeastern States (especially, Louisiana, Mississippi, Florida, Georgia, and North Carolina). What I have seen has convinced me that the average American has no clue where the water originates that pours from his faucets, fills his bath tub, irrigates his lawn, flushes the toilets in his house, fills his swimming pool, or spouts from mega-fountains in gaudy desert resorts such as Las Vegas, Nevada. More disturbing has been the realization that many State governments and especially the National (Federal) Government deal myopically with important intrastate, interstate, regional, interregional, and international matters regarding the access to and use of water resources.
As long as water flows when Americans want/need it, then all is well. Most people, however, are not prepared to live in a world that cannot deliver water (especially potable water) on demand. If something were to disrupt the ability to produce, treat and deliver water at any scale, then life for Americans affected by the disruption would change remarkably ... that is, much for the worse. It is my objective to use this blog as a forum to address the broad range of issues related to the management and use of water in the United States ... and in many other Nations around the world. I hope not to provoke arguments, but thoughtful discussion of matters that ought to be of great concern to people everywhere.
Much more to come. I look forward to your comments.
Best Regards,
In the years since I read Cadillac Desert, I have worked extensively on water resource problems in all regions of Texas and in other states of the west/southwest, and in many southeastern States (especially, Louisiana, Mississippi, Florida, Georgia, and North Carolina). What I have seen has convinced me that the average American has no clue where the water originates that pours from his faucets, fills his bath tub, irrigates his lawn, flushes the toilets in his house, fills his swimming pool, or spouts from mega-fountains in gaudy desert resorts such as Las Vegas, Nevada. More disturbing has been the realization that many State governments and especially the National (Federal) Government deal myopically with important intrastate, interstate, regional, interregional, and international matters regarding the access to and use of water resources.
As long as water flows when Americans want/need it, then all is well. Most people, however, are not prepared to live in a world that cannot deliver water (especially potable water) on demand. If something were to disrupt the ability to produce, treat and deliver water at any scale, then life for Americans affected by the disruption would change remarkably ... that is, much for the worse. It is my objective to use this blog as a forum to address the broad range of issues related to the management and use of water in the United States ... and in many other Nations around the world. I hope not to provoke arguments, but thoughtful discussion of matters that ought to be of great concern to people everywhere.
Much more to come. I look forward to your comments.
Best Regards,
Virtual Water
One of the most worthwhile books I've read in the last few years is When The Rivers Run Dry: Water - The Defining Crisis of the Twenty-First Century (Fred Pearce, author). This is a book which challenges your understanding of water-resource issues through 311 pages of text. The book is very well written and is a primary source of information to which I refer my students in GEOL 1403 (Physical Geology), a Freshman-level course I teach at Austin Community College, Austin Texas.
From the book jacket, the author is described as follows: "Fred Pearce has been writing about water issues for over twenty years. A former news editor at New Scientist and currently its environment and development consultant, he has also written for Audubon, Popular Science, Time, the Boston Globe, and Natural History. His books include Keepers of the Spring, Turning up the Heat, and Deep Jungle.
Pearce is a journalist, not a scientist; but he writes cogently about matters of great importance to those of us who work with water resources. More importantly, he distills complicated information about groundwater and surface water into language that is easily understood by most readers, their academic backgrounds notwithstanding. He is, without question, an exceptional writer.
In Chapter 1 of When the Rivers Run Dry, Pearce introduces the concept of virtual water. In the simplest of terms, virtual water is all of the unaccounted-for water that is used to produce the goods and services that people everywhere demand. I'll let Pearce describe the concept:
Manufacturing the goods that we fill our homes with consumes a certain amount [of water], but that's not the real story either. It is only when we add in the water needed to grow what we eat and drink that the numbers really begin to soar.
Get your head around a few of these numbers, if you can. They are mind-boggling. It takes between 250 and 650 gallons of water to grow a pound of rice. This is more water than many households use in a week. For just a bag of rice. Keep going. It takes 130 gallons to grow a pound of wheat and 65 gallons for a pound of potatoes. And when you start feeding grain to livestock for animal products such as meat and milk, the number becomes yet more startling. It takes 3000 gallons to grow the feed for enough cow to make a quarter-pound hamburger, and between 500 and 1000 gallons for that cow to fill its udders with a quart of milk. Cheese? That takes about 650 gallons for a pound of cheddar or brie or camembert.
We enjoy the products, but we don't see all of the resources that factor into the manufacture of those products. Pearce's point is that western societies use a great deal of water to support their lifestyles, and the sum total of this amounts to what he calls our water "footprint." In Pearce's opinion (I don't disagree):
The water "footprint" of western countries on the rest of the world deserves to become a serious issue. Whenever you buy a T-shirt made of Pakistani cotton, eat Thai rice, or drink coffee from Central America, you are influencing the hydrology of those regions - taking a share of the Indus River, the Mekong River, or the Costa Rican rains. You may be helping rivers run dry.
Further on, he continues:
While many nations relieve their water shortages by importing virtual water, some exacerbate their problems by exporting it. Israel and arid southern Spain both export water in tomatoes. Ethopia in coffee. Mexico's virtual-water exports are emptying its largest water body, Lake Chapala, which is the main source of water for the second city, Guadalajara.
His point is that there is an imbalance in the accounting of the relative values of water and the goods that the water is used to manufacture. Think about it: 250 to 650 gallons of water to grow one pound of rice, and 3,000 gallons of water to grow the feed to produce the meat to make one quarter-pound artery clogger!
Because most consumers are far removed from the production of goods and services that require the use of water, they tend not to factor in the hidden cost of a resource such as water. Water, as such, is a free resource ... until it becomes scarce.
Best Regards,
aquadoc
From the book jacket, the author is described as follows: "Fred Pearce has been writing about water issues for over twenty years. A former news editor at New Scientist and currently its environment and development consultant, he has also written for Audubon, Popular Science, Time, the Boston Globe, and Natural History. His books include Keepers of the Spring, Turning up the Heat, and Deep Jungle.
Pearce is a journalist, not a scientist; but he writes cogently about matters of great importance to those of us who work with water resources. More importantly, he distills complicated information about groundwater and surface water into language that is easily understood by most readers, their academic backgrounds notwithstanding. He is, without question, an exceptional writer.
In Chapter 1 of When the Rivers Run Dry, Pearce introduces the concept of virtual water. In the simplest of terms, virtual water is all of the unaccounted-for water that is used to produce the goods and services that people everywhere demand. I'll let Pearce describe the concept:
Manufacturing the goods that we fill our homes with consumes a certain amount [of water], but that's not the real story either. It is only when we add in the water needed to grow what we eat and drink that the numbers really begin to soar.
Get your head around a few of these numbers, if you can. They are mind-boggling. It takes between 250 and 650 gallons of water to grow a pound of rice. This is more water than many households use in a week. For just a bag of rice. Keep going. It takes 130 gallons to grow a pound of wheat and 65 gallons for a pound of potatoes. And when you start feeding grain to livestock for animal products such as meat and milk, the number becomes yet more startling. It takes 3000 gallons to grow the feed for enough cow to make a quarter-pound hamburger, and between 500 and 1000 gallons for that cow to fill its udders with a quart of milk. Cheese? That takes about 650 gallons for a pound of cheddar or brie or camembert.
We enjoy the products, but we don't see all of the resources that factor into the manufacture of those products. Pearce's point is that western societies use a great deal of water to support their lifestyles, and the sum total of this amounts to what he calls our water "footprint." In Pearce's opinion (I don't disagree):
The water "footprint" of western countries on the rest of the world deserves to become a serious issue. Whenever you buy a T-shirt made of Pakistani cotton, eat Thai rice, or drink coffee from Central America, you are influencing the hydrology of those regions - taking a share of the Indus River, the Mekong River, or the Costa Rican rains. You may be helping rivers run dry.
Further on, he continues:
While many nations relieve their water shortages by importing virtual water, some exacerbate their problems by exporting it. Israel and arid southern Spain both export water in tomatoes. Ethopia in coffee. Mexico's virtual-water exports are emptying its largest water body, Lake Chapala, which is the main source of water for the second city, Guadalajara.
His point is that there is an imbalance in the accounting of the relative values of water and the goods that the water is used to manufacture. Think about it: 250 to 650 gallons of water to grow one pound of rice, and 3,000 gallons of water to grow the feed to produce the meat to make one quarter-pound artery clogger!
Because most consumers are far removed from the production of goods and services that require the use of water, they tend not to factor in the hidden cost of a resource such as water. Water, as such, is a free resource ... until it becomes scarce.
Best Regards,
aquadoc
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Back for real this time!
After my accident nearly two years ago, I thought that I would rebound quickly. Truth is, the injuries forced me to rethink much of what I was trying to do at the time. Although I posted a notice that I would resume posting in Sept. 2009, I decided to take time off to pursue other interests.
In addition to my work as a consultant, I have been teaching Physical Geology (lecture and lab) at Austin Community College, and I have been working on an outline for a combination text/lab manual for Physical Geology. I am not satisfied with the way the most texts and manuals approach key topics - such as mineral and rock identification, stratigraphy, structural geology, and groundwater. Much of what is out there is woefully inadequate, outdated, and - frankly - poorly presented. I still have a way to go with that project, but I am making progress.
I have been working on what I call "A Manual of Applied Geochemistry for Hydrogeologists and Environmental Engineers." It is more of a "how-to" document than a textbook on the principles of geochemistry. I will post an outline of topics in that manual by the end of May. I will appreciate any comments that readers of this blog might have about organization and subject matter. As I do a lot of geochemical modeling (especially arsenic, naturally occurring radionuclides, and groundwater age-dating), I am developing chapters illustrating the use of public domain modeling programs (PHREEQCI, CHEAQS Pro, and Visual MINTEQ and inexpensive commercial geochemical graphing programs such as AqQA to model and illustrate a wide range of problems encountered in hydrology. I considered adding examples using Geochemist's Workbench, Standard v. 8.0, but that program sells for $3,499. I typically default to GWB, for my modeling work, but I decided to focus on the use of public-domain programs for this effort.
I also joined Hydrogeologists Without Borders. In January of this year, Laurra Olmsted (Executive Director of HWB) and I traveled to Kenya to conduct a preliminary survey of water resources in the Marakwet District. Our objective is to develop spring water resources along the western escarpment of the Great Rift Valley. This will be a long-term project - one that will involve many trips to Kenya. I expect to return to Kenya at least two times this year, and no telling how many times over the next few years. HWB is also working with the University of Nairobi Geology Department to expand and update the department's course offerings in hydrogeology.
The focus of this blog will change somewhat, as I plan to cover a much broader range of water-resource topics than intended when I set up the blog. I look forward to posting again.
Best Regards,
aquadoc
In addition to my work as a consultant, I have been teaching Physical Geology (lecture and lab) at Austin Community College, and I have been working on an outline for a combination text/lab manual for Physical Geology. I am not satisfied with the way the most texts and manuals approach key topics - such as mineral and rock identification, stratigraphy, structural geology, and groundwater. Much of what is out there is woefully inadequate, outdated, and - frankly - poorly presented. I still have a way to go with that project, but I am making progress.
I have been working on what I call "A Manual of Applied Geochemistry for Hydrogeologists and Environmental Engineers." It is more of a "how-to" document than a textbook on the principles of geochemistry. I will post an outline of topics in that manual by the end of May. I will appreciate any comments that readers of this blog might have about organization and subject matter. As I do a lot of geochemical modeling (especially arsenic, naturally occurring radionuclides, and groundwater age-dating), I am developing chapters illustrating the use of public domain modeling programs (PHREEQCI, CHEAQS Pro, and Visual MINTEQ and inexpensive commercial geochemical graphing programs such as AqQA to model and illustrate a wide range of problems encountered in hydrology. I considered adding examples using Geochemist's Workbench, Standard v. 8.0, but that program sells for $3,499. I typically default to GWB, for my modeling work, but I decided to focus on the use of public-domain programs for this effort.
I also joined Hydrogeologists Without Borders. In January of this year, Laurra Olmsted (Executive Director of HWB) and I traveled to Kenya to conduct a preliminary survey of water resources in the Marakwet District. Our objective is to develop spring water resources along the western escarpment of the Great Rift Valley. This will be a long-term project - one that will involve many trips to Kenya. I expect to return to Kenya at least two times this year, and no telling how many times over the next few years. HWB is also working with the University of Nairobi Geology Department to expand and update the department's course offerings in hydrogeology.
The focus of this blog will change somewhat, as I plan to cover a much broader range of water-resource topics than intended when I set up the blog. I look forward to posting again.
Best Regards,
aquadoc
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Coming back soon
I have been on hiatus, thanks to a drunk driver. She was charged with DWI and Possession of a Controlled Substance. What happened to me? Upper back, neck, and right shoulder injuries. I will get back to this blog next week.
aquadoc
aquadoc
Monday, March 30, 2009
Relaxed Groundwater Restoration Standards at In-Situ Uranium Leach Mines in South Texas
The above is a diagram of an in-situ uranium leach mine.
Before you read any further, I recommend that you download THIS report.
In 2008, I was retained by the law firm of Blackburn & Carter to conduct an evaluation of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's record of granting relaxed standards for the restoration of groundwater at in-situ uranium mines in South Texas. Many people are not aware that Texas is a major producer of uranium. The uranium ore is not characteristically considered "high grade," but in-situ mining technology (which owes much of its development to work in Texas) has proved to be efficient enough to make medium-to-low-grade deposits profitable to exploit.
Texas' prominence as a producer of uranium is traceable to the widespread prevalence of uranium roll-front deposits in the formations of the Gulf Coastal Plain. All are exploited by in-situ mining technology. For an explanation of in-situ leach mining, read Chapter 2 of THIS report by Gavin Mudd. For a somewhat more positive description, read THIS web page by the World Nuclear Association.
Rather than describe the geology and geochemistry of roll-front deposits and the methods of in-situ leach mining, I will assume that the reader is sufficiently interested in the matter to peruse the above references carefully before proceeding with this blog post.
What did my client want to know?
My client commissioned the report to find out whether one of the principal environmental regulatory agencies of Texas was fair-minded in its consideration of requests by uranium mining companies with respect to petitions for relaxed (that is, less stringent) restoration standards of groundwater at in-situ mined sites in the uranium ore trend of South Texas.
The basis for the requested study was the client's concern that the Office of Underground Injection Control of TCEQ might be overly generous in its granting of requests for lower restoration standards.
What did I find? Try THIS web page for a reasonable summary of my report. I will let the reader make up his/her own mind, based on the report.
Allow me to point out here that I am not opposed to mining or to nuclear energy. Look around and then ask yourselves how much of what you see cannot be traced to mining? Not much, I assure you. That, however, does not give mining companies Carte Blanche to pollute groundwater, surface water, soil, air. And in this so-called " anthropogenic greenhouse world" (I have my doubts), nuclear energy can play a major role in reducing the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.
I know the geochemistry of uranium very well, thank you; and I am convinced that we can extract uranium from roll-front and other sandstone-hosted deposits without leaving a mess for others to clean up ... but you can't do it "on the cheap."
Best Regards,
aquadoc
Southwest Groundwater Consulting, LLC
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
