Desalination is the process of removing the salt and other minerals from sea or brackish water, making it suitable for irrigation and human consumption. Tampa Bay's desalination plant, like most others, will share an intake with the power plant, and use reverse osmosis filters for the salt removal process. The finished product is then merged into the local water supply. The brine byproduct, which contains all the removed salt and minerals, is dumped into a discharge canal (also labeled the "protected manatee area" in the diagram below). This canal, and the manatees in it, rely on the bay's natural flushing cycle to dispense the process waste in an environmentally friendly manor.

      Water shortage has been a controversial topic for decades, and really hits home here in the Tampa Bay area. The booming population in the 70s led to the over pumping of local aquifers. This in turn lead to salt-water intrusion destroying our local water sources, forcing our water needs to be filled from outside sources. Deciding ownership, who gets what water, and how that water gets to where it's needed all fueled the "water wars" that were fought between Pinellas and its neighboring counties. The feud was never a matter of who owned what water, but a matter of who has to gather, treat, and transport it, as this resource becomes more precious.

      The problem is amplifying as aquifers further inland are nearing a similar fate as the local ones and Florida wet-lands are drying up. To lower our reliance on groundwater, Tampa Bay Water, partnered with Southwest Florida Water Management District, has built the largest desalination plant in the United States here at Apollo Beach, next to the TECO Big Bend Power Plant. This 157 million dollar, multi-year project has been a virtual roller coaster ride. Its journey has taken it from one private contractor to the next while facing numerous technical difficulties in hopes to finally be completed by January 2008.

      The Tampa plant is capable of supplying 25 million gallons a day (mgd) at maximum capacity. This is equivalent to 1/10 of the total water demand. This amount seems mighty trivial for the hefty price tag, and leaves one wondering: why take this route? To make matters worse, the plant's administrators have been wishy-washy in its planned running capacity. Since this water is so expensive, a new plan emerged: let's run at less than full capacity, say 50%, and then cut our water with the cheaper stuff we can get elsewhere. Local authorities, frustrated with this declaration offered a compromise: whoa! slow your roll, if you only operate at half-capacity you will get half-funding. So where does that leave Tampa Bay area residents? We now have a 157 million dollar Desalination plant that plans to supply 5% of our water needs, and still requires us to pump groundwater. Don't fret, we can sleep easy, because that's 5% we won't have to worry about during times of drought.

      One reason they turned to desalination is to improve the habitat of freshwater fish through the decreased use of streams, lakes and other groundwater sources. However nothing is mentioned about the effect on the saltwater habitation. Not only should the ecological effect of the brine byproduct be considered but the effect of the intake pumps should be examined as well. The Tampa plant has already faced problems with the intake pumps. During operational testing thousands of mussels were pulled into the intake and clogged up the filters. That makes me wonder; what else is being sucked up in the process? Could less forceful pumps allow fish to escape the intake flow? Or is it feasible to implement a fish return system, delivering any sea creatures caught in the pumps to be returned to the source?

      So what will the alternatives for this alternative be? Conservation is probably the most conceivable solution. Improving conservation techniques and practices would be taking a giant leap closer to our ultimate goal: sustainability. Drought resistant landscaping, also known as xeriscaping could minimize agricultural and household consumption. Also, higher efficiency fixtures could save thousands of gallons a year. The great thing about conservation is that it is cheap! It costs nearly 4 times less than desalination. It's also very easy, as easy as turning off the faucet. Unfortunately conservation's greatest attribute is also its downfall. There's no money in it, so it doesn't get the political backing big projects like the desalination plant get.

      I have to agree with McAteer that desalination, at least the path it's taking here in Tampa, will not solve all the water shortage problems. Let us just hope this cash cow doesn't create any new ones.

links/sources:

This site actually lists energy savings as a pro of desalination, and not energy efficient as a con, what gives.

http://www.sptimes.com/2003/09/24/Tampabay/Tiny_mussels_hobble_d.shtml

http://www.usgbc-la.org/newsletters/feb06/feb06.html

http://www.hillsboroughwaterworks.com/0103.html

Yes, John, keep going. Next, weave these counterarguments together. Give us a snippet, then another...what's the story that includes both perspectives?

- ShareRiff

John: I threw a couple of sets of brackets around terms I wasn't familiar with but seemed intriguing. You're definitely on the right track. When the time is right, take a close look at your grammar and structure, but don't get caught up on it now. That is, after all, what remixing is for. -- EmerySkolfield

Emery: Thanks for the gutters, those are going to make some good links. I am aware of the grammar, instead of writing the whole thing in word and posting a polished product, I'm start to finish on the wiki. I'm just not at the revision stage yet.

John: Word up. Carry on and keep rockin' and jammin'. -- EmerySkolfield

Recall today, when we realized that bolting down desal (your X term, which can after all just be a gambit for doing any sort of definitional work, as Scott and John M. pointed out) once and for all was not really what was at stake, after all. Meanwhile, in your epigraph (nice re-arrangement), we can read closely and see how "sustainability" has become a powerful metaphor, and as such, can be "troped" into diverse arrangements for diverse arguments. If you comment even briefly on the rhetorical function of sustainability, that also counts as definitional work.-ShareRiff