Western Water News: #ColoradoRiver shortages drive major advances in recycled sewage water use — Water Education Foundation #COriver #aridification #reuse

Long-term drought and dwindling Colorado River supplies have Phoenix urgently pursuing highly treated sewage as a drinking water supply. Source: Wikimedia Commons

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education Foundation Foundation website (Nick Cahill):

Phoenix, Southern California betting on purified sewage to fill drinking water needs.

After more than two decades of drought, water utilities serving the largest urban regions in the arid Southwest are embracing a drought-proof source of drinking water long considered a supply of last resort: purified sewage.

Water supplies have tightened to the point that Phoenix and the water supplier for 19 million Southern California residents are racing to adopt an expensive technology called “direct potable reuse” or “advanced purification” to reduce their reliance on imported water from the dwindling Colorado River.

“[Utilities] see that the river is overallocated, and they see that the climate is changing,” said Kathryn Sorensen, former director of Phoenix Water Services Department. “They’re looking at this and understanding that the river supply is highly variable and extremely uncertain in the future.”

The Colorado River that sustains nearly 40 million people and more than 4 million acres of cropland across seven states is shrinking because of climate change and overuse. The river’s flows have declined approximately 20 percent over the past century, and a more than two-decade drought that began at the turn of this century has pushed the system to its limits.

With so much at stake, cities dependent on the river are strengthening water conservation measures and pursuing new sources of water with urgency.

Phoenix is quickly advancing plans to purify its wastewater for household use in the expectation of state regulators’ approval.

The city’s water agency is drafting blueprints, securing funding and crafting communication strategies to assure customers that drinking recycled water is safe and necessary in the face of prolonged droughts and climate change.

Communities in California could see major advances in wastewater reuse in the near future. State regulators on Dec. 19 unanimously approved groundbreaking rules that will allow cities for the first time to pipe highly purified sewage water directly into drinking water supplies.

“This will help the state live up to commitments to reduce our dependency on the Colorado River,” the State Water Resources Control Board chair Joaquin Esquivel said before casting his vote of approval. 

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which relies on the Colorado River for about 20 percent of its supply, is hoping to launch one of the state’s first direct potable reuse projects. It has plans well underway to build one of the world’s largest wastewater purification plants and expects to release the project’s environmental review next year.

“We can’t be dependent on hydrology, we have to manage our own fate,” said Adel Hagekhalil, Metropolitan’s general manager. “The future is about recycling and reuse.”

At full scale, Metropolitan’s plant would produce 150 million gallons of purified water each day, enough for roughly 400,000 Southern California households.

On Shaky Ground

Finding a new local, reliable water supply is critical for Arizona as more than a third of its water comes from the over-committed Colorado River. The search has become more pressing in recent years as Arizona has sustained cuts to its river supply.

Adel Hagekhalil

Under a drought deal with other states that rely on the river, Arizona this year took a 21 percent reduction – or about six times the amount of water the city of Tucson uses annually – with another round of cuts looming next year.

The inconsistent river supply is a major concern for Phoenix, the state’s most populous city and its capital. Though Arizona farmers and tribes bore the brunt of the recent Colorado River reductions, there’s a chance future cuts will be spread to cities under the next set of river operating rules that take effect in 2027. The revisions are under negotiation by the federal government, Mexico, tribes and the seven Western states that use the river.

The Phoenix metropolitan area has grown rapidly over the last 23 years despite the drought, augmenting its river supply with groundwater. But the underground stores alone won’t sustain the region. Groundwater is also in great demand. Earlier this year Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs halted new permits for homes planned in areas of the state where groundwater is the only source of potable water.

“I will not bury my head in the sand, cut corners, or put short-term interests over the state’s long-term economic growth,” Hobbs said of her decision last June.

A Drought-Proof Source

Phoenix, the nation’s fifth-largest city, believes it can replace some of what it draws from the Colorado River and pumps from underground by recycling water that’s flushed down sinks, showers, toilets and washing machines.

Starting clockwise from the consumer, the diagrams illustrate the conventional (left) and new (right) methods of treating wastewater to drinking water standards. Source: Wikimedia Commons

The allure of direct potable reuse or “advanced water purification,” is its ability to quickly get highly treated wastewater into the drinking water supply. The method treats wastewater through a three-step purification process involving membrane bioreactors, reverse osmosis and ultraviolet light disinfection and adds it to a drinking water source without going through an environmental buffer.

The method also promises to be energy efficient. A 2021 study found that putting recycled water directly into the water supply requires far less power than long-distance water transfers or seawater desalination.

A more widely used water recycling method known as “indirect potable reuse” requires treated wastewater to first go through an environmental barrier such as an aquifer where it is filtered naturally through layers of sand and gravel. The water is then pumped from the ground and treated again before entering the drinking water supply.

Orange County pioneered the technology in the early 1970s to increase its drinking water supply and replenish aquifers along the Southern California coast as a barrier to seawater intrusion. The county water district operates the world’s largest plant of its kind.

Direct potable reuse has been used sparingly in parts of rural Texas, but Phoenix is looking to do it on a mass scale. And the city is wasting little time: The Phoenix City Council recently committed $30 million toward retrofitting a shuttered water recycling operation for advanced purification, even though Arizona regulators have yet to finalize rules for the technology.

Nazario Prieto, assistant director of Phoenix’s wastewater division, said the closed Cave Creek Reclamation Plant in north Phoenix is a perfect candidate for direct potable reuse as it’s near a facility that treats Colorado River water. A short pipeline could connect the two plants, allowing the recycled product to be blended with the Colorado River supply.

“This is going to play a big role in our water resources portfolio, especially with the uncertainty on the Colorado River,” Prieto said. “Water’s precious here in the desert and this is a sustainable resource that keeps coming to us in the form of wastewater.”

Phoenix is also exploring the construction of a larger, regional wastewater plant to serve Scottsdale, Tempe, Glendale, Mesa and other cities in the metropolitan area. A regional plant would be able to treat up to 80 million gallons of effluent per day and if built to full capacity, the regional and Cave Creek plants combined could supply about 20 percent of Phoenix’s yearly potable water needs.

The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality expects to issue final direct potable reuse rules by the end of 2024 and begin accepting applications for permits in 2025. It estimates recycled water could stream out of taps as soon as 2027.

Rendering of Phoenix’s proposed Cave Creek direct potable reuse project. Source: City of Phoenix

The massive wastewater recycling plant proposed for Southern California cities has also gained momentum in recent years due to dry conditions across its two key water sources, the Sierra Nevada and the Colorado River Basin. And Southern California is getting some funding help from its neighbors.

Water agencies in Arizona and Nevada are helping to pay for Metropolitan’s project in exchange for to-be-determined slices of Metropolitan’s Colorado River supply. The proposed plant would be built in Los Angeles and could produce up to 150 million gallons of potable water a day, enough to serve more than 500,000 households.

California’s newly adopted rules on direct potable reuse are expected to take effect in April, following a review by the state Office of Administrative Law. From there, Metropolitan would be able to present its plans to the state water board for approval.

The Yuck Factor

Water agencies are moving swiftly to bolster their scarce Colorado River supplies with recycled water, but first, they must convince customers and politicians that drinking water originating from sewage is safe and worth the treatment cost.

Overcoming the so-called “yuck factor” could be a challenge for some utilities, though a recent direct potable reuse survey by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality found an appetite for the technology. A strong majority — 70 percent of respondents — said they would be “very likely” or “somewhat likely” to drink recycled wastewater. Some of the more skeptical responses included, “It sounds miraculous, but I would be suspicious,” “How will it taste?,” and “Is it safe for pregnant women?”

Phoenix’s Prieto said the city is crafting a public relations blueprint and giving presentations about the technology to a variety of different business and community groups. He said the initial response has been mostly positive.

“Some people thought we were already doing [direct potable reuse],” he said. “We’re hopeful that we can gain the public’s support and that they will see its safe and the best quality water provided anywhere in the city.”

Beer is another tool being used to overcome the yuck factor.

Lucrative craft beer competitions have been held in Arizona that require participants to use recycled wastewater, while Pima County has created a mobile trailer that treats effluent on site at breweries and provides clean water for brewing. Several Arizona and California breweries are now selling beer made with wastewater.

Kathryn Sorensen

Once Arizona and California approve direct potable reuse regulations, water suppliers will have to figure out how to fund the technology.

Phoenix estimates its Cave Creek project will cost approximately $300 million and that a larger regional plant could cost more than $2 billion.

The final price tag for Metropolitan’s project could top $4 billion by the time it’s finished. Both water suppliers are hoping to tap into state and federal grants to offset some of the cost to their ratepayers.

Major cities are likely to become the first adopters of the technology, but the goal is for rural towns to eventually implement it as well.

Recycled water could be a solution in areas that are burdened by poor groundwater quality or those that don’t have access to surface water. The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality said interest in the technology has broadened to smaller cities.

While adopting the recycling technology isn’t cheap, creating a new water source that alleviates pressure on both the Colorado River and aquifers may be priceless.

“It’s one of the biggest and most important tools,” said Sorensen, who is now director of research at the Kyl Center for Water Policy at Arizona State University. “It is absolutely critical to our water future.”


Reach writer Nick Cahill at ncahill@watereducation.org

Know someone who wants to stay connected to water in the West? Encourage them to sign up for Western Water and follow us on TwitterLinkedInFacebook and Instagram.

2023 #COleg: #Drought task force can’t agree on #conservation program recommendations: Some members said recommendation ‘premature’ — @AspenJournlism #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Elk Creek Marina at Blue Mesa Reservoir on the Gunnison River was temporarily closed so the docks could be moved out into deeper water in 2021 after federal officials made emergency releases from the reservoir to prop up a declining Lake Powell. A state drought task force did not make recommendations regarding an interstate conservation program. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Click the link to read the article on the Aspen Journalism website (Heather Sackett):

Programs that would pay water users to conserve and send that water downstream for the benefit of the Colorado River system remain too controversial for Colorado water managers to agree on.

A statewide task force has failed to make recommendations to lawmakers about the primary issue they were supposed to tackle: how to address drought in the Colorado River basin and respond to a downstream call through water conservation programs.

Senate Bill 295 created the 17-member Colorado River Drought Task Force this year, with representatives from Western Slope water users, Front Range water providers, local governments, the state Department of Natural Resources, environmental groups and tribal leaders. The group met 10 times between July and December at locations across the state and remotely.

According to SB 295, the purpose of the task force was to provide recommendations for state legislation “to develop programs that address drought in the Colorado River basin and interstate commitments related to the Colorado River and its tributaries through the implementation of demand reduction projects and the voluntary and compensated conservation of the waters of the Colorado River and its tributaries.”

But a draft recommendation about what a conservation program should look like lost on a 9-7 vote, meaning task force members did not advance it as a recommendation to legislators. A narrative about the issue was still included in the report.

“I was personally disappointed that some of the larger topics that are out there in the water world or brought up at the task force did not get support from the task force,” said state Sen. Dylan Roberts, a Democrat who represents District 8 and was a sponsor of SB 295. “They either didn’t have time or shied away from those conversations about longer-term solutions.”

The losing recommendation contained many of the state’s same long-discussed themes surrounding demand management: Any potential program should be temporary, voluntary and compensated, should avoid disproportionate impacts to any one region, and must not injure other nonparticipating water rights holders; and Western Slope conservation districts should be involved with projects within their boundaries.

Task force members could not agree on whether the timing was right for such a program, with some saying it’s “premature.” The “no” votes came from those representing Front Range water providers, the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Agriculture, the Southwestern Water Conservation District and Colorado’s two tribes, the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe and Southern Ute Indian Tribe.

“I think there is a lot of institutional pressure that keeps us tethered to the status quo in water policy in Colorado,” said Roberts, who represents Clear Creek, Eagle, Garfield, Gilpin, Grand, Jackson, Moffat, Rio Blanco, Routt and Summit counties. “We owe it to Coloradans and the people in the West to grapple with the reality of what faces us in the decades ahead. … There’s no time like the present to prepare for a bad situation.”

The lack of recommendations about conservation programs highlights the complicated nature of water in Colorado and the difficulty of achieving consensus among competing interests. A 2021 work group that had been created to tackle speculation also failed to make recommendations to lawmakers.

Water managers say any program designed to conserve water to send downstream to help boost the Colorado River system will likely involve mostly Western Slope agriculture. Members of a state drought task force could not agree on whether the timing was right for a conservation program, with some saying such a program is “premature.” CREDIT: BRENT GARDNER-SMITH/ASPEN JOURNALILSM

Conservation controversy continues

Demand management, water banking, system conservation, a strategic water reserve — the names and details are different, but the basic concept is the same: paying water users to use less on a temporary and voluntary basis. They have been controversial in Colorado, with skeptics saying these types of programs could strip rural agricultural communities of their water.

The Colorado Water Conservation Board undertook its own demand management feasibility investigation in 2019 with eight work groups devoted to exploring different aspects of a potential program. The CWCB shelved the investigation last year without implementing a program.

Some have argued that implementing a state conservation program now would weaken or constrain Colorado’s negotiating position among the six other Colorado River basin states as they hammer out new reservoir operating guidelines. The concern is that implementing a program now would remove the focus from where some say it belongs — that the crisis is driven by overuse in the lower basin. Some task force members said they simply didn’t have enough time to thoroughly discuss conserved consumptive use (CCU) programs.

“Unfortunately, the task force spent very little time discussing this recommendation,” Southwestern Water Conservation District General Manager Steve Wolff wrote in the report. “If we had, we may have been able to develop language that we all could have agreed to and moved a recommendation forward. As written, there are aspects that could not be supported by Southwestern.”

Alexandra Davis, Aurora Water’s deputy director of water resources, served on the task force and voted “no” on the recommendation on conservation programs.

“It’s been contentious,” Davis said. “The CWCB has had a difficult time coming to some sort of idea of what kind of program would benefit the state as a whole and to create sideboards for something that we haven’t been able to agree on yet just seemed premature.”

The Glenwood Springs-based Colorado River Water Conservation District, which recognizes that any CCU program is likely to heavily involve water users within its 15-county Western Slope area, has taken the lead on demand management and system conservation discussions and has commissioned its own studies on the topic in recent years. River District General Manager Andy Mueller wrote the minority report on the task force’s failed recommendation.

“Unfortunately, the task force was unable to provide clear guidance to the members of the General Assembly with respect to how our state should be prepared to move forward should the pressure to participate in an interstate conserved consumptive use program increase in the future,” Mueller wrote. “We respectfully disagree that the CCU proposal is premature, and that this conversation should wait until a specific program is implemented.”

Although the River District does not necessarily endorse a CCU program, officials have repeatedly said they should be prepared with guidelines that protect water users if the state decides to go forward with one and that the River District should be involved to ensure a measure of local control.

“If there are programs that are designed incorrectly, …you will destroy the future of our communities,” Mueller said at the Dec. 7 task force meeting in Denver. “We have seen an interstate water conservation program roll out without any approval by our state legislature or our government and we could see another one come out. … The West Slope will be the target of that produced water.”

Mueller was referring to the Upper Colorado River Commission’s System Conservation Program, which pays water users in the upper basin states — Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming, Utah — to conserve. The program was rolled out in 2022 without evaluation or approval by the River District.

The Lake Fork Marina boat ramp at Blue Mesa Reservoir on the Gunnison River closed early for the season in 2021 after U.S. Bureau of Reclamation officials made emergency releases from the reservoir to prop up a declining Powell. Members of a statewide drought task force could not agree to advance a recommendation regarding conservation programs to help aid the Colorado River system. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

12 recommendations

The task force still came up with eight recommendations to legislators, most of which are expansions of or increased funding for existing programs: Continue funding of a technical assistance grant program; increase funding for aging water-related infrastructure; prioritize forest health and wildfire-ready watersheds; expand a temporary loan program to include storage rights; expand agricultural water rights protections beyond divisions 1 and 2 (the South Platte and Arkansas river basins); continue state funding of measurement tools; remove invasive species; and increase funding for municipal turf removal.

A sub-task force on tribal matters made four recommendations: fund a study of a potential pilot program to compensate tribes to not develop their water; have state officials write a letter requesting the U.S. Congress fully fund the Indian Irrigation Fund; waive a requirement for matching funds for state grant programs; and provide cultural protection of instream flows.

Task force Chair Kathy Chandler-Henry — a nonvoting member of the group, the president of the River District board and an Eagle County commissioner — said the time constraints were challenging. Coming up with recommendations in just five months for a field that normally moves at a snail’s pace was hard.

“I think the work that was done in that concentrated period of time is going to bear fruit in ways we don’t know about yet,” she said. “I think that, in itself, is the real value of the task force.”