As an engineer, here's how I look at the idea of pumping water from Mississippi to the West

Status
Not open for further replies.
Meatwagon said:
Well I grew up on banks of the Mississippi, as did my father and his father before him and they both lived long healthy lives.
Our Well was a Sandpoint drawing water right out of the river basin. I'm healthy, no cancer, don't glow green or anything like that.
As for contamination it's probably very similar to the fertilizers and chemicals that also flow down the Colorado into Powell already.
As for invasive species most of fish in the Mississippi are already in the Colorado River system, although they're are some turtles and frogs that may not currently exist.
I don't see it happening, but the Mississippi isn't a sewer by any means.
Click to expand...
The measurable concentrations of nutrients entering Lake Powell are virtually non-existent. The Colorado only exhibits issues with solids and there is a minor dissolved solids issue entering Lake Powell, resulting in attention from the Colorado River Salinity Forum. It is the easiest body of water in the State of Utah to get discharge permits for since the dilution is so high and the impairment is so minimal. In contrast, the Mississippi is loaded with high nitrate and phosphorus concentrations, leading to severe limitations way up the river system on discharges and massive algae populations in the river and in the gulf due to the high nutrient loading.
 
That's treated water. I'm from Wisconsin. The Mississippi along that border is nasty. It's a mud river. Good for catfish and waterfowl. I'd never swim in it. I'm also a Kevin btw. 60 yrs ago it was quite a popular name

graphics.wsj.com

The World’s Appetite Is Threatening the Mississippi River

Pollutants from booming farms combined with record wet weather are contaminating the nation's mightiest waterway.
graphics.wsj.com graphics.wsj.com
 
Last edited:
Gunny said:
That's treated water. I'm from Wisconsin. The Mississippi along that border is nasty. It's a mud river. Good for catfish and waterfowl. I'd never swim in it. I'm also a Kevin btw. 60 yrs ago it was quite a popular name

graphics.wsj.com

The World’s Appetite Is Threatening the Mississippi River

Pollutants from booming farms combined with record wet weather are contaminating the nation's mightiest waterway.
graphics.wsj.com graphics.wsj.com
Click to expand...
Hi Kevin
I know its treated, but they can treat the Mississippi river water as well, and its surely not as bad as sewer. Hopefully it snows A hole deep to a 40 ft Big foot next three years, and they can keep it, but it floods enough in that country back there that they could take water on the flood years only, and probably fill Powell and Mead. Probably not going to happen any way, guess these other states better look into the sewer treatment allso 😩
 
KYKevin said:
Hi Kevin
I know its treated, but they can treat the Mississippi river water as well, and its surely not as bad as sewer. Hopefully it snows A hole deep to a 40 ft Big foot next three years, and they can keep it, but it floods enough in that country back there that they could take water on the flood years only, and probably fill Powell and Mead. Probably not going to happen any way, guess these other states better look into the sewer treatment allso 😩
Click to expand...
As unappetizing as it may sound, it is generally much easier to treat wastewater to a drinkable standard than treat a low quality surface water or ground water source. Wastewater is mostly water anyway, generally with lower solids than a muddy river source, which is what costs real money to get rid of. Wastewater also has good energy sources for bacteria to eat up and remove the complicated things to get rid of, like nitrogen and phosphorus. The only thing you can't get rid of well in wastewater is salts. Run the wastewater through membrane filters capable of removing all viruses and you generally have something that is drinkable, though there is typically an advanced oxidation step as well to get rid of any lingering organic substances. In Singapore, they are running their domestic supply on 15% reclaimed wastewater, as it was far cheaper than desalination to meet their needs.
 
Richp47 said:
Past opposition might begin to look different when the Central and Imperial Valley areas face extreme cutbacks from the Colorado.
Click to expand...
Certainly true about the Imperial Valley, but the Central Valley doesn’t tap into the Colorado. It gets its supply mostly from either groundwater or the Central Valley Project, which includes a whole series of dams holding water mostly from the Sierra Nevada.
 
It’s been said here before but I think the idea of the upper states paying for desalinization plants on the coast so we can use their water has real merit.

And back to the Snake River use…is it really ALL used? Isn’t there excess in the winter? Or is that stored in reservoirs for summer use? A “short” tunnel/pipeline (<50 miles?) could transfer water from the snake River basin into the upper green river basin (Fontanelle Reservoir)
 
Last edited:
As a layman, I don't think you have to pump water from the Mississippi to Lake Powell. You have to pump water to the areas that draw large amounts of water from the Colorado River - Colorado Front Range trans-mountain diversions, California agricultural users, Arizona/Phoenix. If you can bring water from the east or north parts of the country to these regions, more water will flow into Lake Powell. The solution to this issue is not just from the supply side, it's also from the demand side. What if the calculations for the project were made moving water from the Mississippi to Colorado's front range?
 
Kevin G said:
As a layman, I don't think you have to pump water from the Mississippi to Lake Powell. You have to pump water to the areas that draw large amounts of water from the Colorado River - Colorado Front Range trans-mountain diversions, California agricultural users, Arizona/Phoenix. If you can bring water from the east or north parts of the country to these regions, more water will flow into Lake Powell. The solution to this issue is not just from the supply side, it's also from the demand side. What if the calculations for the project were made moving water from the Mississippi to Colorado's front range?
Click to expand...
Like the idea - except the front range is "limited" to 500K acre feet per year - that would be a small amount in the big picture. More beneficial use and conservation would be better. Even IF they gave up those rights for other imported water - it would accelerate the growth - they would grow based on Miss volumes - and we DO NOT need faster growth of liberals on the front range!!
 
nzaugg said:
As unappetizing as it may sound, it is generally much easier to treat wastewater to a drinkable standard than treat a low quality surface water or ground water source. Wastewater is mostly water anyway, generally with lower solids than a muddy river source, which is what costs real money to get rid of. Wastewater also has good energy sources for bacteria to eat up and remove the complicated things to get rid of, like nitrogen and phosphorus. The only thing you can't get rid of well in wastewater is salts. Run the wastewater through membrane filters capable of removing all viruses and you generally have something that is drinkable, though there is typically an advanced oxidation step as well to get rid of any lingering organic substances. In Singapore, they are running their domestic supply on 15% reclaimed wastewater, as it was far cheaper than desalination to meet their needs.
Click to expand...

there is often a UV stage too in the end along with any oxidation if they are going for drinking water - purple pipe (aka recycled) water isn't normally treated as heavily.
 
Gem Morris said:
It’s been said here before but I think the idea of the upper states paying for desalinization plants on the coast so we can use their water has real merit.

And back to the Snake River use…is it really ALL used? Isn’t there excess in the winter? Or is that stored in reservoirs for summer use? A “short” tunnel/pipeline (<50 miles?) could transfer water from the snake River basin into the upper green river basin (Fontanelle Reservoir)
Click to expand...

parts of the Snake River watershed upstream do go dry in the summer during irrigation season.
 
Gem Morris said:
It’s been said here before but I think the idea of the upper states paying for desalinization plants on the coast so we can use their water has real merit.

And back to the Snake River use…is it really ALL used? Isn’t there excess in the winter? Or is that stored in reservoirs for summer use? A “short” tunnel/pipeline (<50 miles?) could transfer water from the snake River basin into the upper green river basin (Fontanelle Reservoir)
Click to expand...
The Snake is struggling with the same issues as the Colorado, that is a drying climate and over allocation. The upstream reservoirs in Wyoming and eastern idaho did not fill this year, and the whole system is stretched beyond the capacity of the river. Plus…the Snake is about 1500’ lower than the upper Green and separated by rugged wild country…
 
flowerbug said:
there is often a UV stage too in the end along with any oxidation if they are going for drinking water - purple pipe (aka recycled) water isn't normally treated as heavily.
Click to expand...
Of course. That is part of the advanced oxidation. I am a water/wastewater treatment engineer.

The standards for reuse vary depending on where it is going. Purple pipe water is nice because you can take what has typically been a pristine water and offset it with reclaimed wastewater. Singapore has that too, running all over the island and is typically about 5x cheaper than the potable water due to the treatment differences and to encourage businesses to identify ways they can use reclaimed water instead. Here (Wasatch Front), we put in purple pipe and it is simply untreated irrigation water, with the eventual possibility of reclaimed water. I would rather have reclaimed water since it doesn't have the weed seeds in it.
 
airford1 said:
Question, How much of the California and Arizona/Phoenix agricultural is being exported to other countries?
Click to expand...
A quick Google search comes up with somewhere between 25 and 45 % of California's $40 billion agricultural products are exported with the most likely amount around 40%. Water gulping almonds to Asian countries account for about $5 billion.
 
Here is an example that highlights how much it would cost to move water that far. Douglas County in Colorado is proposing a project to move 20,000 acre feet 125 miles from the South Platte near Sterling, CO to Castle Rock, CO. The pipeline would gain around 2,000 feet in elevation. Total estimated cost is $827 million. Interesting notes: 125 miles of 36 inch pipeline that moves only 18cfs cost $245 million, Four pump stations with 250cfs capacity run $87 million. Just 12.5 miles of a larger 66 inch pipeline runs $72 million.

 
ndscott50 said:
Here is an example that highlights how much it would cost to move water that far. Douglas County in Colorado is proposing a project to move 20,000 acre feet 125 miles from the South Platte near Sterling, CO to Castle Rock, CO. The pipeline would gain around 2,000 feet in elevation. Total estimated cost is $827 million. Interesting notes: 125 miles of 36 inch pipeline that moves only 18cfs cost $245 million, Four pump stations with 250cfs capacity run $87 million. Just 12.5 miles of a larger 66 inch pipeline runs $72 million.

Click to expand...
Mmmmmmm. Can you smell the profit?
 
It is 555 miles from Omaha (Missouri River) to Boulder (near Lake Granby). Those 555 miles along I-80 are flat as a board. The only issue is getting the water up to Lake Granby, the head of the Colorado River, at over 8200 feet. After that it's all downhill!
 
Jan Hertzen said:
It is 555 miles from Omaha (Missouri River) to Boulder (near Lake Granby). Those 555 miles along I-80 are flat as a board. The only issue is getting the water up to Lake Granby, the head of the Colorado River, at over 8200 feet. After that it's all downhill!
Click to expand...
Of course, it looks flat as a board, but it's really a steady slow rise. Omaha is at 1,100 feet. Boulder is at 5,300. And of course, Lake Granby as you say is at 8,200.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top