Dear Editor,
As the retired manager of regional water supply planning for the State of New Jersey, I’ve been reading with interest the debate over the proposed United Water desalination plant in Rockland County.
Based on my 35 years of experience, Rockland County does not have a “water supply” problem; rather, it has a “water irrigation” problem. During hot, dry summers, United Water’s demand nearly doubles. These peaks are primarily due to large homes and businesses that irrigate their lawns.
If Rockland County is anything like suburban New Jersey, less than 10 percent of homes and businesses irrigate and cause these peak demands. Watering a larger home’s one-acre lawn will use 8,000 gallons of water a day. That’s enough water to meet the needs of nearly 30 homes that do not irrigate!
If not for these large demands caused by a small portion of the County’s population, United Water can likely meet the County’s current and projected water supply needs without building the desalination plant. Reducing or even eliminating these peak demands would probably dispose of need for the multi-million dollar plant.
This desalination proposal should not be advanced until all conservation alternatives have been thoroughly and impartially considered. A water audit of these larger users could lead to recommendations that could greatly reduce peak usage. The rest of Rockland County’s residents and businesses should not have to see their water rates double (or more) so that these large users can continue to irrigate without restraint.
Robert Kecskes
Pennington, New Jersey
I fear you are drinking the Kool-aid provided by Suez- I have read that, too, but take a look at some of the other viewpoints. http://www.sustainablerockland.org/wp-content/uploads/TRITIUM-in-OUR-DRINKING-WATER-HOW-MUCH-IS-SAFE....pdf http://www.sustainablerockland.org/wp-content/uploads/DOS-Haverstraw-Bay-2011.pdf Fish population levels in this area are “unusual in the northeastern U.S.“ According to the Department of State Coastal Management Program, “Haverstraw Bay is a critical habitat for most estuarine-dependent fisheries originating from the Hudson River… Consequently, commercial and recreational fisheries throughout the North Atlantic depend on, or benefit from, these biological inputs from the Hudson River estuary.” Before taking risks with such a rich and productive ecosystem, withdrawing freshwater and discharging toxins and brine into this critical area, we should be prioritizing sustainable alternatives. http://www.crocodyl.org/wiki/suez_environnement Eve
In many of the situations described above, the performance problems exhibited by Suez and its affiliates and predecessor companies included damage to the environment from poor handling of sewage. These are not the only such cases. For example, during the ten years that Suez subsidiary United Water operated the water system of Milwaukee, billions of gallons of sewage were improperly released into Lake Michigan and other waterways. When the company’s contract expired in 2008, the city decided to dump United Water and go with another private operator. Anti-competitive and consumer protection: In November 2007 the Italian Competition Authority fined Suez Environnement 3 million euros for engaging in an anti-competitive arrangement relating to the water services industry with the Italian company ACEA." Read it all and weep. You will see that Suez, the parent company of United Water, is also in the media business, so they are true experts in PR, and have succeeded in convincing you that this is the best alternative. Their materials are super-slick, and they have many people working to burnish their image. There are many other combinations of less destructive options than a de-sal plant here. Even in Melbourne, where it was extremely dry, they did not make a success of it. And the consumers are paying the price.
More on the track record of United Water
I have listen to the testimony of four hydrologists, conducted my own research, attended practically all meetings opposed to the plant and addressed my concerns directly to United Water's President Michael Pointing and visited the test plant. So do not fool yourself by dismissing my arguments based on your prejudices, I have endeavored to inform myself (and continue to do so) So no I am not drinking Kool Aid, I do not just blindly believe anything someone tells me just because they drive a boat on the Hudson River and have a political agenda.
Any nonsesne about UW being a bad company are irrelevant to the discussion of whether we need additional water supply or not. The simple fact is, this is about science, does Rockland have enough water supply for the future. The PSC says no and are demanding UW take action. So if you have an objection to the plant I would start with the PSC mandate rather than attacking UW for doing what the State requires them to do.
And I am sure Michael Ponting is pro de-sal, why wouldn't he be? But there are other less invasive options, and the entire subject of how much water we have and lack is also controversial, depending upon which studies and projections you believe. There are different results. And what about all the Lake DeForest reservoir water being sent out of state? Why don't we use that here? I think the evidence leads me to suspect that it is really NJ that needs water, but that the closest non-protected site on the Hudson is Haverstraw, so Rockland will pay the price for NJ. It should be explained in a transparent way. We could cooperate.
I don't know any boaters here.
And yes in light of the PSC mandate, then any past dealings of UW are irrelevant, we have to deal with the problem Rockland faces today, based on the facts not bias or political opinions opinions. I would interesting in seeing these studies that project that Rockland does not have a projected water problem as I am sure the PSC would. The issue is simple does Rockland need additional water supply, that is what we should be discussing, not whether UW is a 'bad' company.
Eve the plant won't and can't damage the fish or any other wildlife when opperating. Water is taken from a dredged area where is seeps through nets, the holes in the nets are smaller than eggs and there is no pull or vortex pulling water in through the nets. Thats how it is at bowline. Only Indian Point needs to draw water so fast that fish die against the nets. When lake deforest was built hundreds of acres were flooded all life in that area was displaced or destroyed, but we needed a water source. Now we need more water to process for drinking again and more processing ability due to our expansion. To flood out another 300 acres of habitat for a res and not use the Hudson is environmentally wrong. Will water rates go up to cover building more capacity? I guess so.Thats what happens when a comunity doubles in size and waits to the last minute to act on the growing need, but there is govt regulation on pricing, just like when O&R asks for more. Im more worried about the govt, like the county use taxes ect. All and any jobs matter. Rockland is great at creating tee shirt sales and resturant jobs. 20 good jobs you can own a home on is much better. When environmentalists continually say to every project it dosen't creat enough jobs to matter, at the end of the day many projects will add up to hundreds of good jobs lost.
When you live on a river you get your water from the river, thats your resource
Please stop with the dangerous impediments which will be either filtered out or are not dangerous. As far as rogue corporations, you need not go to France, GE has a lot more on its plate regarding lawsuits than UW and they paid Zero income taxes last year. Lastly, we have no choice, United Water is our water company and the only water shipped to NJ is the amount mandated.
If any of you can provide me with solid scientific support, from a source NOT connected with UW, and pro de-sal, I will be happy to read it and reply after that. What 4 hydrologists? Who are they? I might be swayed by their reports also. But have none of you looked into Melbourne, or Gary, Indiana? Why do you think that a huge multi-national corporation can be trusted with your interests? Why must the over-development in Rockland continue? And wouldn't you be willing to cut back if there actually were a shortage, or would you just expect to continue over-consuming as always? If there were a way to use the Hudson water without huge cost and consumption of energy, it would make sense. If the storm drains were designed to replenish the ground water it would make sense, too. There are ways to get and conserve water beyond de-sal, which is great for Saudi Arabia. They have solar for the electricity there, too. In a case like that it makes sense.
"why should I have to change my habits for a better future for all? Why should I (ME me me) have to conserve anything? Let's just use more and more, drain, poison and heat the Hudson so I can have a green lawn. (And I will cover it with Nitrogen, too, and pesticides, who cares? Who cares if they drain into the lakes and ponds an rivers and disrupt aquatic life and everything turns to green slime???? Just so long as I can have my nice green grass." UGH- fine, it's your back yard, do just as you please. Then let a corrupt corporation dictate the fix for it, so you can keep over-consuming, and charge us all up the gazoo for it. I understand the jobs argument, jobs are always good, but converting the groundwater conservation system so that more wells would be replenished, and drilling them and so forth and piping them, would not that also create jobs?
I will not conserve anything thats easily obtainable, water and electricity. We can get water and hydro power right here. We just need to blow the hull of the riverkeeper and such.
If we had more swamps, we would have a better aquifer.
Bottom line, fire hydrents go low , we are ENTIRLY DEPENDANT ON RAIN, we eirther have to burn down and evac. 1/3 of the population or get a nwe reliable supply.... or just deny our selves an abundant recource buy not processing and providing it and walk backwards to make control freaks happy, and reduce our greatness.
I don't want to control others, but I want to control myself for the good of all. I like having abundant water, too. I have not conserved it here, (except during the rare dry years) as we have a septic/deep well system, and I know that what I use will recycle. I just feel that there should be a way to do that on a larger scale. It is really true that de-sal uses a HUGE amount of electricity, even here where the water has less salt than in other places. And that electricity comes from India Point. I have lived at times in places where water was very very scarce, and I know that one can do a lot with a little when necessary.
Good night Eve.