Desalination and the Sanctuary

Central coast residents are likely to have heard a lot about desalination lately; it has received increasing attention over the past several years. Much of this is due to many more desalination plants being proposed in California, including a number along the shoreline of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.

Perhaps the most contentious environmental issue surrounding desalination is the potential for it to induce additional coastal development. photo NOAA/MBNMS

Desalination refers to the process by which salts and other chemicals are removed from salt or brackish water and other impaired water resources. It is also referred to as desalinization, desalting, or simply "desal."

The topic is clearly of increasing interest and concern -- in addition to a diverse range of viewpoints -- in the community. Some view desalination as an unlimited and drought-free source of water and a solution to California’s long-standing water shortages, while others perceive it as an infeasible and unproven technology incapable of providing an economically viable source of drinking water for California’s population. Moreover, a growing number of people are concerned that an increase in the use of seawater represents a threat to our fragile environment and has the potential to fuel the growth of coastal communities where develop-ment has been traditionally restricted by limited water resources. Regardless of one’s outlook, one thing is certain: we are seeing a growing trend in local jurisdictions considering these facilities.

In some cases desalination facilities can provide ecological benefits -- by decreasing overdraft of groundwater or offsetting water that can be used to restore streams and rivers. photo NOAA/MBNMS

Historically, desalination has not been used extensively in California because the cost has always been significantly higher than traditional sources, making it prohibitively expensive. However, recently several factors have led decision makers to turn their attention to desalination as a new source of freshwater. The central California coast is faced with recurring droughts and an existing shortage of water that will become more severe as populations continue to expand in the region. Current water sources are being overdrafted, causing significant environmental impacts, such as saltwater intrusion and damage to plant and animal habitat. As traditional sources of fresh water continue to be depleted and degraded, water agencies and local jurisdictions are clearly looking more toward desalination as a drought-resistant water supply that can augment existing sources. This increased interest in desalination can also be traced in part to significant advances in desalination technology over the past decade, which have increased the efficiency and decreased the costs of desalinating seawater. With more efficient desalting technologies capable of producing water at cheaper prices, in conjunction with the escalating costs of obtaining fresh water from traditional sources and declining freshwater sources, desalination has become an attractive option to many water purveyors.

This trend is clear along the shoreline of the sanctuary, where there are around ten proposed or potential desalination facilities in some stage of planning, including several proposals that are an order of magnitude larger than any existing facilities currently operating within the state. Most of these facilities are proposed to be located in Monterey Bay. In most cases these proposals have been developed independently of one another. The sanctuary is concerned that a proliferation of desalination plants, without consideration for regional planning, proper siting, or cumulative impacts, could lead to significant environmental impacts.

New pipeline construction associated with desalination plants can disturb the seafloor, surf zone, and dunes. photo NOAA/MBNMS

Without careful planning and mitigation measures, desalination plants have the potential to harm the marine environment. One of the major concerns surrounding these facilities is the impacts that result from the introduction to the ocean of con-centrated saline brine that may kill or harm sensitive marine organisms. In addition, the intake of ocean water directly through plant pipelines can result in the death of marine life through impingement (where marine organisms collide with screens at the intake pipe) or entrainment (where animals and plants are taken into the facility through the pipe and are killed during plant processes). Perhaps the most contentious environmental issue surrounding desalination is the potential for it to induce additional coastal development, which could lead to significant indirect impacts, such as degradation of water quality from increased urban runoff and other pressures to the sensitive coastal environment resulting from increased population. Finally, new pipeline construction associated with desalination plants can disturb the seafloor, surf zone, and dunes. Permits for desalination related to discharges into the sanctuary and certain construction activities must be authorized by the sanctuary.

The good news is that, through proper design and siting, desalination plants can significantly reduce impacts to the marine environment. In some cases these facilities can provide ecological benefits -- by decreasing overdraft of groundwater or offsetting water that can be used to restore streams and rivers. As part of the Joint Management Plan Review process, the sanctuary convened a multi-stakeholder working group that collaboratively developed an action plan to address the issue in a comprehensive and coordinated fashion. This plan lays out a framework for a regional approach to address desalination, aimed at reducing impacts to marine resources in the sanctuary through consideration of regional planning, facility siting, on-site mitigation measures, modeling and monitoring, and outreach and information exchange. The sanctuary will continue to promote a collaborative and precautionary approach to desalination, in order to protect the phenomenal resources of the central California coast.

Brad Damitz
Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

Human Interactions
Visitors to State Parks and Beaches Contiguous to the Sanctuary (1)	San Mateo County coast -- 2,293,154 visitors Fitzgerald Marine Reserve -- 110,000 visitors Santa Cruz County coast -- 11,890,018 visitors Monterey County coast -- Not available San Luis Obispo County coast, north of the sanctuary boundary -- 470,000 visitors
2004 Coastal Cleanup (2)
Volunteers Trash (lbs) Recyclables (lbs.) Marin 1,026 10,579 1,644 San Mateo 1,190 27,265 3,159 Santa Clara 1,246 33,171 6,586 Santa Cruz 3,196 8,736 3,142 Monterey 1,610 18,619 2,180 San Luis Obispo 1,290 14,857 2,784
Volunteers (3)
Año Nuevo State Reserve: 208 volunteers; 15,762 hours BAY NET Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Volunteer Network: 32 volunteers; 1,650 hours California State Parks, Monterey District: 431 volunteers; 44,413 hours California State Parks, San Mateo Coast Sector: 2,665 volunteers; 15,682 hours California State Parks, Santa Cruz District: Not available Coastal Watershed Council: 122 volunteers; 3,200 hours Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve: 112 volunteers; 8,200 hours Fitzgerald Marine Reserve: 65 volunteers; 6,041 hours Friends of the Elephant Seal: 80 volunteers; 11,300 hours Friends of the Sea Otter: 14 volunteers; 1,700 hours Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Beach Watch (south of Golden Gate only): 47 volunteers; 3,900 hours Maritime Museum of Monterey: 57 volunteers; 4,150 hours Monterey Bay Aquarium; 1,132 volunteers; 137,450 hours Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Beach COMBERS: 72 volunteers; 1,752 hours Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary TeamOCEAN: 35 volunteers; 519 hours Monterey Bay Sanctuary Citizen Watershed Monitoring Network: 288 volunteers; 4,140 hours Pigeon Point Lighthouse: 20 volunteers; 2,160 hours Return of the Natives Restoration Education Project of the Watershed Institute, CSUMB: 4,631 volunteers; 5,018 hours San Gregorio Environmental Resource Center: 17 volunteers; 650 hours Save Our Shores: 1,600 volunteers; 14,200 hours Seymour Center at Long Marine Lab, UCSC: 215 volunteers; 18,331 hours Surfrider, San Mateo County Chapter: 226 volunteers; 1,620 hours The Marine Mammal Center: 202 volunteers; 22,263 hours (excluding San Mateo volunteer hours, which are not available) Total number of volunteers: 12,159 Total hours donated: 324,101 Total value of volunteer services (calculated at $15.00/hour): $4,861,515
Annual Beach Warnings and Closures by County 2000-2004 (4)
Data obtained from State Water Resources Control http://water24.waterboards.ca.gov/BeachWatch/ Note: San Mateo County issues beach warnings stringent 30-day geometric mean standards.
Vessel Incidents with Sanctuary Response (5)
Incident Type Date Reported Location Cost to NOAA Grounding (R/V) 4/10/2004 Within .5 mile of Moss Landing Harbor entrance $450.00 Sinking (C/V) 5/6/2004 Approx. 16 nm WNW of Pescadero Point, San Mateo County $1,200.00 Sinking (R/V) 6/5/2004 50 yards SE of Wharf II , Monterey, approx. 200 yards from the shoreline $750.00 Grounding (C/V) 6/8/2004 Naval Postgraduate School Beach, Monterey $725.00 Grounding (C/V) 6/10/2004 Bradley Beach, San Mateo County, just south of Año Nuevo State Reserve $4,000.00 Sinking (R/V) 6/12/2004 12.5 nm NW of Cape San Martin, Monterey County $550.00 Grounding (R/V) 6/20/2004 50 yards offshore from mouth of the Pajaro River $300.00 Sinking (R/V) 6/26/2004 Approximately 2 miles SE of the Santa Cruz Pier $300.00 Sinking (R/V) 6/26/2004 Approximately 2 miles SE of the Santa Cruz Pier $300.00 Sinking (R/V) 11/23/2004 4 miles off Martin’s Beach, Half Moon Bay $225.00 Grounding (R/V) 11/30/2004 Shallows between Point Año Nuevo and Año Nuevo Island $8,000.00           Total $16,800.00 R/V-Recreational vessel C/V-Commercial vessel
Profile of Documented Enforcement Cases, January - December 2004 (6)
These data represent only sixty-four formally documented cases by the NOAA Office for Law Enforcement and do not reflect all investigative actions or patrol contacts by NOAA enforcement personnel or enforcement actions by partner agencies. The data do not reflect total reported incidents or number of convictions within the sanctuary. They simply provide a relative comparison of the types of violations occurring within the sanctuary. Marine mammal take cases were processed as actions under the Marine Mammal Protection Act instead of the National Marine Sanctuaries Act. Vessel groundings and sinkings are counted as seabed alteration cases, though most also involved discharges.
Volunteers everywhere play a critical role in protecting -- and cleaning up -- the marine environment. photo NOAA/MBNMS

Sources:
1 -- California State Parks, San Mateo Coast Sector; Pigeon Point Lighthouse; Año Nuevo State Reserve; Fitzgerald Marine Reserve; California State Parks-Santa Cruz, Monterey, and San Luis Obispo Coast Districts
2 -- California Coastal Commission
3 -- Organizations listed
4 -- State Water Resources Control Board
5 -- Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary
6 -- NOAA Office for Law Enforcement