thelog.com
Sailfish cruises onto Intrepid
fishrap.com By Parimal M. Rohit
HUNTINGTON BEACH — California borders the world’s largest ocean yet is in the midst of a record-setting drought. The close proximity to the Pacific Ocean, combined with a need to find an immediate solution to California’s water shortage, has sparked a debate of whether local cities should build desalination plants. While the idea of converting ample amounts of saltwater to consumable freshwater might seem like a plausible solution to California’s current drought, environmentalists warn desalination plants could be harmful to the marine life and recreational anglers. Poseidon is aiming to build a desali- nation plant in Huntington Beach by 2018. If built, the 50-million-gallon per day plant would be located near the corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Newland Street and next to the AES Huntington Beach Power Station. The proposed desalination plant could have an impact on recreational fishing once it is operational, accord- ing to Orange County Coastkeeper Associate Director Ray Hiemstra. “The project will create a brine plume that will stretch from the outfall pipe near Newland Street all the way to the Santa Ana River outlet. While this plume will not kill fish outright it will create an area that they will avoid (due to high salinity) and impact shore fish- ing in the state park,” Hiemstra said. How the desalination plant would impact marine life once it is up and running has not yet been fleshed out by the Orange County Water District’s (OCWD) board, even though the agency approved a term sheet May 14 to allow civic leaders and Poseidon to enter final negotiations for the pro- posed desalination plant. “OCWD has not discussed or gotten involved with this aspect of the proj- ect,” Harry Sidhu, one of the water board’s board members, said in
response to a question of whether the desalination plant would impact recre- ational fishing. “The district is relying upon the California Coastal Commission and the State Water Resources Control Board to impose the necessary conditions and restrictions in the permits they both issue to pro- tect the marine environment. Both of these agencies routinely deal with coastal issues and have the necessary technical experience and staff as well as the regulatory power.” Sidhu added the Coastal
Commission is reviewing alternative intake systems and will determine whether to require Poseidon to con- struct a new system or modify an exist- ing one already in place. “If Poseidon is ultimately allowed to modify the existing AES intake system, they will have to reconstruct the intake and install very small (wedge wire) screens to minimize the impact to the environment,” Sidhu said. “Addition- ally Poseidon will have to provide addi- tional mitigation such as funding new wetlands for the small amounts of ocean life they do kill.” Indeed, Poseidon still has a few hoops to jump through as the plant developer attempts to complete the permitting process. The project will not move forward until the Coastal Commission gives Poseidon its bless- ings to build the plant on the Huntington Beach coastline. Still, Poseidon boasts its desalina- tion plant on Orange County’s north central coast will benefit its surround- ing community, such as infusing hun- dreds of millions of dollars into the local economy during the life of the plant and creating more than 2,000 jobs during construction. Once opera- tional, the plant itself would require 18 fulltime jobs and 322 indirect jobs, according to Poseidon. An advocacy group, Food and Water
Watch, hosts a webpage opposing Poseidon’s proposed desalination plant and claims the developer “relies on
Steve Abel reeled in a sail- fish aboard Intrepid during a fishing expedition in mid-May. The angler reeled in the large catch May 16 with a dine and a circle hook. Abel and a few others aboard Intrepid posed for a few photos with the sailfish before it was released into the water. On Intrepid’s Facebook page, the crew reported the catch was “released swimming away strong.”
Desalination Plant
Poseidon desalination plant could negatively impact local fishing
The Log • June 5 - 18, 2015 • 27
Poseidon seeks to build a desalination plant in Huntington Beach (near the bottom of the photo). Environmental groups say the proposed plant would, once operational, negatively impact marine life and recre- ational fishing. Orange County officials, however, said the plant’s intake systems are still being reviewed and the every attempt will be made to preserve marine life.
outdated technology that kills marine life.” Food and Water Watch, in a report published in 2009, said fish and marine life would be drawn into the desalination plant with the ocean water and not survive once inside. “On its way into a plant, the ocean
water brings with it billions of fish and other organisms that die in the machinery,” the 2009 report stated. “According to EPA, these intake struc- tures kill at least 3.4 billion fish and other organisms annually. Larger organisms are trapped against the intake screens, and smaller ones, such as fish eggs and larvae, are drawn through the intake screens and destroyed in the cooling system. As a result, fishermen lose at least 165 mil- lion pounds of fish today and 717.1 million pounds of potential future catch. This is equivalent to a $212.5
million economic loss to anglers and commercial fishermen.”
A similar desalination plant is being
built by Poseidon in Carlsbad, about 60 miles south of Huntington Beach. Civic leaders in nearby Oceanside are also looking to develop a desalination plant near the city’s harbor. According to news reports, the desalination plant in Carlsbad is expected to be completed before the end of this year and could produce 50 million gallons of drinking water per day, good enough to hydrate almost 10 percent of San Diego County’s 3.2 mil- lion residents. Once operational, Carlsbad’s desalination plant — which reportedly cost more than $1 billion to build — will be the largest such plant in the Western Hemisphere. Desalination plant developers such
as Poseidon hope to convert saltwater into freshwater via reverse osmosis.
Photo courtesy Poseidon Water
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52