Pixel Tracker

Tuesday, December 11 , 2018, 1:14 pm | Fair 67º

 
 
 
 

Santa Barbara Rejects Subsurface Water Intake For Desalination Plant

The city of Santa Barbara won’t pursue a subsurface ocean intake for its desalination plant after a study revealed that the process would either be infeasible or fail to meet the city’s needs.

Like most desalination plants, the city’s plant has an open water intake pipe in the ocean, but environmentalists say that process kills microorganisms and other sea life.

In response to the concerns, the city commissioned a study to evaluate six different ways to extract water through a subsurface — from the seabed — process.

According to the study, all of them came up short in some way, determined to be unable to produce the planned amount of water or had major design and construction challenges.

The study was a mandatory condition of the city’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit, which was issued by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board.

The California Coastal Commission also had concerns about the current intake system, but had no opportunity to require a change since Santa Barbara’s 1996 coastal development permit for the Charles E. Meyer Desalination Plant is still valid, so the city did not go through another coastal development permit review for the current reactivation. 

Kira Redmond, executive director of the Santa Barbara Channelkeeper, blasted the study’s findings, blatantly stating that the city only took part in the study to appease environmental groups.

She said she is extremely disappointed and that the open-intake process would kill “trillions of organisms.”

The city should study a lesser, more realistic amount of water that could be pulled from the subsurface intake, she told the City Council at Tuesday’s meeting. 

The city based its study on a feasibility baseline of 10,000 acre-feet of water and the current plant is designed to produce 3,125 acre-feet of potable water each year. 

“This study is disingenuous and it is flawed,” Redmond said.

While cities often use open-intake systems because they are typically less expensive and can be installed in most locations with few construction complications, open intake also has a 100-percent kill rate for microorganisms and small fish trapped in the system. 

Several members of the City Council took offense to Redmond’s attacks.

“I don’t appreciate the innuendo about how this is being disingenuous,” Councilman Harwood “​Bendy” White said.  

“This is not disingenuous. This is hard work, difficult work being done in the midst of the crisis.”

White praised Water Resources Manager Joshua Haggmark for his commitment to studying the alternatives. 

“Not much is going right and you are in the hot seat,” White said. “And I appreciate your work and your tenacity to pull this all together.”

Councilman Frank Hotchkiss was also put off by Redmond’s comments.

“It is unfair to try to cast a negative light on this,” Hotchkiss said. “Keep going, we’re behind you,” he told Haggmark. 

Councilwoman Cathy Murillo seemed to defend Redmond’s position. 

“Unless we do something different we will be destroying marine life,” Murillo said. 

She agreed that the city should look at an amount of water less than 10,000 acre-feet. She also said she felt rushed by the Mayor Helene Schneider during the meeting. 

“I don’t appreciate that we are rushing through this because it is such a big topic,” Murillo said. “I am uncomfortable with this.”

Schneider said that the study revealed important information. When the drought is over, Schneider said, the city will need to have the conversation about the role of the desalination plant and the alternative source study will be helpful at that time. 

“I don’t see this as the end of the process,” Schneider said.  

Councilman Gregg Hart put the matter in a broader perspective, saying the city needs to activate the desalination plant as soon as possible. 

“There’s a real difficult reality check of what is feasible versus what is theoretically possible,” Hart said. “We’re doing the best we can and moving forward the fastest we can.”

Noozhawk staff writer Joshua Molina can be reached at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). Follow Noozhawk on Twitter: @noozhawk, @NoozhawkNews and @NoozhawkBiz. Connect with Noozhawk on Facebook.

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made using a credit card, Apple Pay or Google Pay, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments and a mailing address for checks.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Noozhawk Supporter

First name
Last name
Email
Select your monthly membership
Or choose an annual membership
×

Payment Information

Membership Subscription

You are enrolling in . Thank you for joining the Hawks Club.

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover
One click only, please!

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.
You may cancel your membership at any time by sending an email to .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.