Looks like the Cadiz plot is thickening.
Emily Green, whose post I repeated yesterday, sent me some more information about the Cadiz project. She tracked down a copy of the EIR/EIS and received a 30-pound document from the BLM. I don't have that but she did send me two documents that I am posting here.
First is a National Park Service response to the Draft EIS it received in 1999.
Second is a report prepared for the protestants by Dr. John D. Bredehoeft.
John (retired USGS Regional Hydrologist) is a friend of mine, but more importantly, he is arguably the greatest living hydrogeologist, a member of the National Academy of Engineering. If he says something, I am inclined to believe it.
John makes a number of points; three are given below:
1) the annual recharge is more like 5,000 AF, not 50,000 AF the Draft EIR/EIS claims;
2) the annual pumping of native groundwater should be capped at 5,000 AF to make the project sustainable; and
3) the proposed early warning system will likely be undermined by the nature of the aquifer system response.
A word to the wise is sufficient.
I am sure there will be more to follow.
"Nothing is less productive than to make more efficient what should not be done at all." -- Peter Drucker