tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6621691715090523319.post310955115780814512..comments2023-10-08T04:12:46.273-05:00Comments on The Political Environment: Waukesha Has Lake Michigan Application On A Fast TrackJames Rowenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10203270946492159686noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6621691715090523319.post-28386183411212402262009-10-13T18:46:54.291-05:002009-10-13T18:46:54.291-05:00Perhaps the sewage infiltration problems should be...Perhaps the sewage infiltration problems should be taken care of first. Usualy the sign of an old system. Un-less the entire system needs replacing, Infiltration areas need to be identified. No sense sending good water into a system that can't handle it.Brutushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11596780839348930312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6621691715090523319.post-24531157559506971702009-10-13T12:51:22.495-05:002009-10-13T12:51:22.495-05:00Does "co-mingled out of basin" return wa...Does "co-mingled out of basin" return water contain radium? Also, once the GL water is pumped out of the basin too Waukesha, what would prevent the water exporters from taking all they want.Brutushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11596780839348930312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6621691715090523319.post-69728963915450018812009-10-13T12:04:40.408-05:002009-10-13T12:04:40.408-05:00here's the question I don't see being aske...here's the question I don't see being asked in the press:<br /><br />Why should Milwaukee want to sell water to Waukesha? how could it possibly help Milwaukee?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6621691715090523319.post-45429339194467059542009-10-13T10:34:39.371-05:002009-10-13T10:34:39.371-05:00We will see if the shallow well alternative, thoug...We will see if the shallow well alternative, though more costly, is considered by one or more state regulators here or elsewhere as reasonable.<br /><br />Not merely preferable by you, but reasonable.<br /><br />And I am sure the cost figures will be vetted by independent analyses - - inevitably.<br /><br />Eight states can interpret the Compact and use their enabling statutes, and read and critique your application in eight different ways, because it's a political process.<br /><br />What Waukesha thinks is reasonable might not be what Michigan or Ohio or Minnesota thinks is reasonable, or the DNR, for that matter.<br /><br />The Compact is less a document to enable rare diversions as it is a document that calls for water management and conservation.<br /><br />Waukesha has a good conservation program, but that may not be enough to convince seven other states that it is already time for a precedent-setting diversion to an out-of-basin community that is very close to shallow aquifer sources and thus wells to its west and south.<br /><br />And to an out-of-basin comunity with a history of annexation that has a plan to expand its service territory eventually to a total of more than 97,000 residents.James Rowenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10203270946492159686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6621691715090523319.post-1331688859118948742009-10-13T10:09:37.745-05:002009-10-13T10:09:37.745-05:00A partial list of corrections would include the fo...A partial list of corrections would include the following.<br /><br />You say, “Waukesha's intent [is] to send some diverted water under some conditions - - either heavy rains or drought - - down the Fox River, and away from the Great Lakes Basin - - something the Compact does not allow.” In fact, the Compact does allow it. <br /><br />Waukesha treats more water at its waste water plant that it withdraws because, as with all water utilities in the region, there is infiltration of groundwater into pipes. If it sent all the water it treats back to Lake Michigan, it would be sending more than 100% back, because it would be sending water from the Mississippi Basin to Lake Michigan, in addition to the Lake Michigan water. This is contrary to the Compact, which says, “The proposal . . . minimizes the amount of water from outside the Great Lakes basin that will be returned to” Lake Michigan. S. 281.346(4)(e)c, Wis. Stats. Is your position that water should be diverted from the Mississippi Basin to Lake Michigan? No environmental organization that we have spoken to has taken that position. <br /><br />You also say, “Waukesha says it will be returning water everyday to Lake Michigan. The questions could be: is the return flow enough, and to get to a required amount, can it include diverted water that is co-mingled, as Waukesha says it could, with some out-of-basin water that infiltrates through its water system pipes and towards its treatment plant?” <br /><br />The amount required to be returned to Lake Michigan is the amount withdrawn “less an allowance for consumptive use.” S. 281.346(4)(f)3, Wis. Stats. The fact that Waukesha will meet this requirement is not in doubt. As to whether return flow can include some out-of-basin water, the Compact specifically recognizes the fact that infiltration is inevitable, saying water from outside the basin can be combined with water from the Great Lakes if the water is treated. S. 281.346(4)(f)4.b, Wis. Stats. <br /><br />As to alternatives, the law is also clear on what it means to be a “reasonable water supply alternative” to a Great Lakes water supply: “a water supply alternative that is similar in cost to, and as environmentally sustainable and protective of public health as, the proposed new or increased diversion and that does not have greater adverse environmental impacts than the proposed new or increased diversion.” S. 281.346(1)(ps), Wis. Stats. Can you point to a feasible alternative for the city that is as affordable, as sustainable and with no greater environmental impacts than recycling water back to Lake Michigan? Use of the deep aquifer is already having significant negative impacts on regional surface waters. In fact, any use of groundwater, which cannot be recycled back to the source, will have greater environmental impacts than the use and recycling of Lake Michigan water – as well as be more expensive.Bill McClenahannoreply@blogger.com