P-RICH WATER for AGRI

The rumination and idea outlined here may be somewhat raw and only semi-baked. But the more we think of it the more we get the drift of it – and it looks quite logical.  It has to do with Central and South Florida watershed schemes and Phosphorus removal.  At this point, nobody doubts that phosphorus contamination is the main culprit in deterioration of what’s left of the Everglades.

 

These huge-scale ecological systems have to be approached like one HUGE scheme, not so much piece-meal.  The northern watersheds dump nutrients into Lake Okeechobee – that, in turn, has to release its waters further downstream.  We cannot expect these waters to be clean because Lake Okeechobee is thoroughly overwhelmed receiving 500-600t of P/y (max. 105 tP/y allowed).

The South of the Lake, Everglades Agricultural Area, with its vast sugar-cane monoculture, makes the nutrient surplus situation even worse.  A series of new STAs are valiantly struggling with the nutrient (mainly phosphorus) overloads that impair their performance in cleaning up water destined to eventually feed the Everglades Protection Area and the ENP itself.  According to the latest calculations, new expanses of land are now required for expansion of STAs and water reservoirs (FEBs). The latter are necessary for water storage and smoothing the seasonal flood and drought situations.

It is necessary to emphasize that these man-made water storage and cleansing structures are built and operated on taxpayers money.  We shall let the stakeholders argue about this concept, keeping the Tallahassee lobbyists busy (and paid).  

In summarizing the situation, it can be said that -

- we have huge quantities of P-contaminated waters representing a problem;
- large quantities of fresh water AND Phosphorus are used for agriculture operations (NOT going to go away any time soon);
- agriculture needs water - and keeps pumping and using perfectly CLEAN water from underground aquifers – only to contaminate it with hard-to-remove phosphorus.
It is clear that the agriculture needs WATER and P. 
Why not give and distribute both to them already in a MIXTURE ! - and -
- save huge costs of removing P from water (to extremely low levels of 10ppb), and
- preserve the precious clean fresh-water aquifers for city use.

In other words - why don't we have agriculture using exclusively P-loaded water instead ?

Of course, that would mean -
- gathering and holding that water;
- pumping that water;
- conveying that water – perhaps using modern higher-tech distribution PIPELINES rather than canals that suffer from seepage and high evapotranspiration losses;
- have somebody (user ?) pay some (?) of the water conveyance costs.

One could go even one step further, realizing that : 

- As surplus P-rich water from Lake Okeechobee (LO) is currently relased ‘to the tide’ (Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie Rivers) it wreaks havoc along these waterways and on the estuaries. 
- The shallow muds in LO contain high amounts of deposited “legacy” Phosphorus accumulation.
- Large land areas in the EAA suffered soil oxidation, depletion and subsidence (5 feet at some locations).
- The key to water quality and quantity problems in Central and South Florida is Lake Okeechobee.

Pumping out P-rich muds of LO

This may perhaps be a longer range challenge –filling in badly subsided and eroded sections of EAA land, enriching and building up the soil. This approach would be helpful in solving numerous existing side-problems. This may be the only way of solving the LO outstanding water quality problem that stands out and has not even been addressed to this day. Too big a chunk to swallow ?

In fresh water we have what is rapidly becoming a diminishing resource. Just like our municipal water distribution structure is rapidly becoming duplicated – for fresh water and for recycled water, we can expect a similar concept used for agricultural irrigation:  use P-loaded water for that purpose.

Now - here is the economics clincher:
This approach may still be CHEAPER than buying out LAND for and operating FEB-STAs combinations. Nedless to say, with Florida dry-wet seasons, water-storing reservoirs will always be needed.

The whole regional water scheme will likely radically change also with the blocking of remaining ocean outfalls - in a not too distant future. A dual water distribution network is quickly becoming commonplace with those purple 'recycle water' pipelines being laid down everywhere.

The water-phosphorus-agri scheme discussed here should become another ELEMENT in the water management puzzle of Central and South Florida - among all those others introduced, like BMPs, RASTAs, LO, dispersed water storage, etc. 
Not one, not two, but ALL of these remedial actions need to be applied in concert since there is no silver bullet of a solution for problems of this magnitude, compounded by a century of wrong and neglect.
Enough -
That's MY five-billion-dollar conceptual suggestion - for consideration and to keep on the drawing board of solutions being suggested, examined, and eventually pursued. 
Examine it. We just have to better look after our water resources.
Naive ? - well, keep it in mind and just see somebody else coming up with it sooner or later.

BMPs and STAs

BMPs - Best Management Practices (mainly for agriculture).

STAs - Stormwater Treatment Areas.
These are two different concepts for keeping the ‘watery’ environment appropriately clean. To minimize AND  to clean up the pollution. Mainly water pollution which is mobile and travels, polluting everything in its way.  However, there is a world of difference between the two clean-water techniques discussed here.
While BMPs are mainly a PREVENTATIVE (upstream) measure.  Building and operating STAs amounts to an attempt to clean-up AFTER the “cat is out of the bag” , so to speak – the pollution is already streaming through the environment. Ideally, a functioning STA system should normally consist of a Flow Equalization Basin (FEB) and a constructed shallow wetland whose growing ecosystem absorbs and helps mineralize (immobilize and deposit) the excess nutrients.  While FEBs accumulate and release water in wet and dry periods, respectively, they address the water flow quantity aspect.  The wetland-based STAs actually improve water quality.

STA wetland removes polluting nutrients (P)

And what pollution are we talking about ?  In case of Florida Everglades it is primarily the excesses of nutrient PHOSPHORUS, because the pristine ecology of watery Everglades has historically been phosphorus limited. Man’s activities (farming and development) dump excessive phosphorus into the environment everywhere.  The general modern consensus is that ‘normal’ everglades water should not contain more than 10 ppb (parts per billion = micrograms/liter) of phosphorus in it – and that’s ‘very low’ !  That’s the way it used to be or should be – and we can have it that way only if we are VERY careful (practicing the BMPs) or if we CLEAN UP effectively (large land areas of STAs).
As usual, the combination of BOTH together is probably the best approach to achieving sustainable human presence in fragile ecosystems.
The good old wise saying tells us that – “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of medicine”.  No doubt that this applies, and particularly so, in the case of Everglades pollution.
We have to keep one additional very important aspect in mind – of course, the COSTS.
The costs of BMPs (limiting the pollution SOURCE) are paid by the ‘pollution originator’, usually the farm operator – depending on the levels of their subsidies from the government.
FEBs and STAs construction and operation are paid for mainly by the government – the taxpayer.


It is still dark in the Florida Capitol ...

The government(s) should not burn taxpayers’ money on clean-up that really needs to be the responsibility of those generating the nuisance. For the Everglades Agricultural Area this is even mandated in the Florida Constitution that stipulates that “polluters pay”. And so they should – and not only in the EAA ! While not “omnipotent”, the (preventative) BMPs and particularly their strict enforcement deserve much more attention. Increased enforcement of these is not so difficult – because currently there is virtually no enforcement. You would laugh at it if you knew the details. Despite the natural and expected farmers’ outcry about costs of BMPs, this needs to be done.
It is the “cost of running business” – just like any other.

 

 

TMDL

What is this acronym – or abbreviation or – nonsense ? 
Ok, here is the story –

This abbreviation appears in practically all the reports addressing the Everglades and Florida waters in general. It stands for  Total Maximum Daily Loading and what it refers to is "a value of the maximum amount of a pollutant that a water body can receive while still meeting water quality standards" (US Clean Water Act). It could be the amount of Phosphorus (or Nitrogen) nutrient dissolved in flowing water which is bringing it (‘loading’ it) into a receiving water body.
And from the sound and sense of it, you would say “per day”, right ?
Wow – gotcha ! Not exactly !
You see, it is really  absolutely routinely expressed as the amount of the named pollutant/nutrient (say in metric tons) – but per YEAR !
It appears in the same sentence whereby, without blinking an eye, even experts (and particularly them), for instance say : 
“Lake Okeechobee TMDL of 105 mt/year …”
There is an obvious discrepancy there –
so, is it supposed to be per DAY or per YEAR ???
 
A conspiracy theory would tell us that this confusion is injected into all the reports and countless presentations and discussions on purpose – for sure to confuse the foreign enemy’s spies !
But actually, it is probably to confuse YOU – the public - and everybody. 
And it keeps being propagated and propagated (and propagated) - -
TMDL in tons per year.
TMDL – and per year -
WHY that ???   It beats me –
How could we possibly have all the “things Everglades” right if we don’t even know what we are talking about ?
Will somebody please stand up and set things straight ?
 
One thing is for sure - the TMDL should NOT be exceeded !
Not like the situation has been for long with Lake Okeechobee where the TMDL is set at 105 mt/y.
And what is flowing into our "liquid heart of Florida" ? 
Routinely now 400-500 mt/year !
And this is how Lake Okeechobee continues to exist as the toilet of Florida -
The RED LINE in the diagram below is the TMDL where we should be - but it has been notoriously and continuously exceeded by far - no hope for Lake Okeechobee :

 
 
 
 
 
 

WHAT POPULATION PROBLEM ?

Look at the rush-hour traffic - those crowds in Bangladesh don't even realize that this is NOT a normal way of life.
This can never happen to us ? That's exactly what they thought.
Just give it some decades - it is creeping slowly - but surely.
What will come first to Florida -
*1) The sea-level rise type of boat travel ? Water, water everywhere -
*2) Or the left-over dry-land mass transit type of travel ?
Just take your pick and look at this short documentary video - CLICK pictures below for it.
Over-population ? Naaaah, just a usual rush-hour traffic:
ALL ABOARD !

*1)  

*2)

SECURE FRESH WATER

Florida fresh-water situation was being addressed in the recent article
"Don’t let drought catch Florida by surprise” by Melissa Meeker, the former Executive Director of the SFWMD. A good constructive rumination. However, there is a shortcoming of it being somewhat narrow-minded in a sense that she is not considering / addressing / mentioning at all:

(1) SUSTAINABILITY – While technological advances are making the RO membrane processes somewhat cheaper, desalination technologies are invariably extremely ENERGY intensive.  Their use makes us MORE DEPENDENT on conventional (oil) and controversial (nuclear ?) energy production.  Reverse osmosis membranes are also hydrocarbon based.  Moreover, the newer technologies (RO desalination, ASR, reuse) are still facing some challenges (brine disposal, arsenic contamination and water recovery, public acceptance, mismatch between supply and demand, etc.) when compared to using groundwater.  Check the costs below.  Like a proponent of seawater desal that she appears to be, Ms Meeker seems to somewhat suppresses the outstanding controversies.
While the word “diversification” is being used, let’s make that “sustainable diversification” !

(2)  THE STATE IS not CONSERVING WATER – while public is exhorted to CONSERVE  (SFWMD, FDEP, EPA campaigns).  Water conservation is an extremely important factor. 

How to explain to the public that during a wet year like 2013, instead of storing every drop of water, billions of gallons of freshwater are not only dumped to the estuaries but also causing immeasurable damages there.
What a double-whammy waste of our precious freshwater resource !

(3) CLIMATE CHANGE and SEA-LEVELRISE – real longer-term danger of inundation does loom on the horizon. While it is not even mentioned, it is already putting an extra pressure on FL fresh water supplies through (underground) penetration of salt water that poisons FL wells supplying the most dense populations of the East and West coasts.

(4) EVERGLADES RESTORATION – results in both natural aquifer recharging and water STORAGE. It is in progress and should be first on the list of remedial alternatives as it will 
a) decrease the need for expensive water desalination, 
b) recharge our aquifers during the wet years, 
c) stop damaging freshwater dumping into the estuaries,
d) Liven up the tourism and economy in general through available clean water and clean oceans (a $4 return on each $1 so invested).

Obviously, this alternative would not provide freshwater for free.  The costs involved are significant – but it has to be done if Florida is to remain habitable for the population that already arrived and settled in that requires fresh water to survive as a civilization.  
The alternative is to evacuate 8.5 million people of South Florida.

JOB LOSSES due to water shortages are mentioned. What needs to be emphasized is the serious damage due to water shortages and pollution which are deadly destructive to the very heart of the Florida main economic engine – tourism.
The key two sectors with the highest use of our freshwater are public and agriculture.  Floridians used an estimated 6.8 billion gallons per day of freshwater in 2005 and the forecast water demand is around 8.7 billion gallons per day in 2025, mainly subdivided between agriculture (around 2.5 BGD) and public water supply (around 3BGD).  As the industrial/commercial sectors are not high water users, water related job losses in that direction would not be as dramatic compared to people leaving the state, or not visiting it, because of drastic water shortages and water/ocean contamination.

 There is no “free fresh-water” – we end up paying for it one way or another. 
As usual, not one, not two - but ALL factors contributing to the security of our fresh-water supply have to be considered, exploited and introduced to remedy the situation:


GW =Ground Water       SW = Surface Water

RW = Reused Water       WW= Waste Water

 These are, water -
CONSERVATION,
STORAGE,
RE-USE, and
SEAWATER DESAL.

While the engineering and design of well chosen options should be bold and forward-looking, the economics of these alternatives has to be seriously worked out to provide for a solid decision making basis.  SUSTAINABILITY in particular and CLIMATE CHANGE factors have to be also considered as part of the multifactorial, multifaceted and balanced action toward the optimal solution that we could afford as we must act. 
There is no life and no economy without fresh water.