Florida is not happy about the reduced flow
(via Freshloaf) The director of Florida’s Dept. of Environmental Protection has sent a letter to the Corps in which they complain about the reduced flow out of Lake Lanier. The flow was reduced by 5% last month, but Florida says that the lack of water from the river is increasing the salinity in the bay, which is killing oysters.
The oysters in Apalachicola Bay depend on a rather specific mix of fresh water (from the river) and salt water (from the ocean) to stay alive. In addition, the fresh water helps to stave off predators that require saltier water to survive.
It should be interesting to see where this debate ends up…
December 6th, 2007 at 3:30 pm
one thing is for certain…there are going to be no winners.
December 6th, 2007 at 3:40 pm
All you Atlanta people are oyster murderers. *shakes fist*
More seriously, the issue isn’t oysters, it’s the people whose livlihoods depend on the oysters. RichS and I argued it down to a point in the forums - it’s possible the best solution given the relatively few people in the Bay area whose lives depend on oyster farming (or on oyster farmers) would be to bail them out as part of the Atlanta disaster, and then cut water flows to a level that allows just enough oysters to survive so that they could repopulate when the drought ends.
Not saying anything remotely that intelligent will happen. Just… that’s one rational response.
December 6th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
If all of this results in decreasing Metro Atlanta’s growth, I’ll consider that a win for all of us who are concerned about the diminishing quality of life here in Atlanta. I’ve lived in Atlanta for 16 years and am finding it increasingly unmanageable, to the point of wanting to move away. I’m on the side of Florida and Alabama on this one.
December 6th, 2007 at 3:48 pm
Are you ready for your home to lose half of it’s value in the exodus Carol? If a big chunk of population moves away what happens to all those empty houses? If people just move away and let the banks foreclose, then the banks will re-sell the houses. If it happens in mass - then there will be a glut of cheap houses for sale - Then out of staters see Atlanta houses for sale for $50k and move in to fill the void. Not sure how that will help you. Maybe you see a different scenario? Or maybe you just hadn’t thought it out that far?
December 6th, 2007 at 3:54 pm
Hi Rich, I’ve thought about it alot. Housing values are already going down. In the case of an exodus, the market will correct itself eventually. Atlanta will suffer some economically, then it will likely bounce back when/if the rains come back. If they don’t, housing values will go down anyway and we’ll all be in big trouble.
Bigger is not always better. Certainly not when it comes to Atlanta’s uncontrolled growth.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:42 pm
I tend to wonder how those oysters got by before Lake Lanier was built in Georgia to regulate the water flow. Surely the oysters had a way of dealing with periods of low flow before the dam was built in the 1950’s?
December 6th, 2007 at 6:25 pm
Prootwadl - there is an interesting article that addresses that here -
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/cobb/stories/2007/12/05/myviewnw_1206.html
December 6th, 2007 at 6:59 pm
What a terrible editorial. Basically what she was saying was “Atlanta should be the only one who benefits from the dam, because I don’t find the things they use the water for down steam to be as important as our uses.” Perhaps she would be happier if the dam had not ever been built? Then you would already be out of water.
Obviously what the ACE is trying to do is to make sure that everyone gets “screwed” at the same time. Imagine what would happen if they did what many Atlantans are calling for and cut off the water going downstream now. Imagine then that, say, around February it started raining and the drought ended. No crisis would have materialized, but in the mean time, Florida has had permanent damage to their lands and waters due to salt water intrusion. Georgia and the ACE would be in deep deep trouble for causing Florida to run out of water before it is sure that running out of water is inevitable–by shutting off water that Florida and Alabama have a LEGAL right to (whether or not you think their uses for the water are stupid or not). The way things are being managed now, if it doesn’t rain by summer, both Georgia AND Alabama and Florida will be screwed. But the ACE is right in making sure that this happens at the same time to all parties.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:25 pm
Gov. Crist of Florida first needs to explain if his family has financial ties to Gulf Power company that owns and operates the Scholz Generating Plant located below Woodruff Dam, that just so happens to require 3+ billion gallons of water flow from Lake Seminole daily. As for the oysters: do not eat them because the old coal-fired power plant spews mercury into the river and ends up in the oysters and those endangered mussels too. One of the power plants in Florida panhandle is named Crist and we the people are not supposed to notice that fact.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
The flow reduction of 3.2 billion to 3.1 billion gallons daily from Woodruff Dam is what Florida is screaming about. I wonder what they will do when all the reservoirs are empty and just the watershed water from Georgia mountains flowing down at about 300 million to 1 billion gallons max? Like rkolter said just pay the fishing industry for their losses and be done with it. As for mussels they will die back and then return when the drought is over.
December 6th, 2007 at 10:04 pm
Paul - I think your summary of the article is a little ridiculous so it isn’t even worth refuting. I will hit a couple of points though.
You say - “in the mean time, Florida has had permanent damage to their lands and waters due to salt water intrusion.” If you had read the article you would have seen that Florida has dealt with low water flow often without permanant damage. I have read several articles from the Floridian point of view and have seen nothing about permanant damage.
You also say “Georgia and the ACE would be in deep deep trouble for causing Florida to run out of water “. Nothing Atlanta does will cause Florida to run out of water. Most of the water going into Florida originates from below Atlanta. The reckless release of lake Lanier to keep Florida wet can cause Atlanta to effectively run out of water though.
I could pick apart more in your post, but honestly it’s just too easy.
December 6th, 2007 at 11:09 pm
All the politics involved in this issue reminds me of the jack nicholson movie “chinatown”. Without giving away too much of the movie, it involves some wealthy people and politicians scheming to minipulate the los angeles water supply during a severe drought.
December 7th, 2007 at 12:12 am
Of the 3 states bickering over Lake Lanier’s water, Florida has the least claim to it and is NOT in serious drought like Georgia. Alabama and Georgia share Chattahoochee River as common border, so we must work together on conserving the precious resource water flowing down from the Georgia mountains into Lake Lanier. Gov. Crist of Florida is a trouble-maker and the damn fool is going to ignite a water war. The mussels are NOT important compared to an entire state running out of water. He needs to get his head out of his own ass and get a life!
December 7th, 2007 at 8:32 am
Just read AJC’s new article: “How full is Lake Lanier? The numbers keep changing.” By Stacy Shelton. Published on: 12/7/07 today.
AJC has reset their countdown clock to 258 days, but ACE claims 167 days?
Also a hydraulic engineer claims Lake Lanier has 504 days left before being bone dry, which means one year, four months and 17 days worth? He says “337 day’s worth in the inactive pool at the lake’s bottom.”
But the article goes on to claim that the drought is getting worse daily, and bigger water releases to please Florida will resume soon, thus the lake could still empty out by end of next summer.
Seems AJC newspaper and Georgia government officials would like the water to last at least past next November election, then give us all the bad news. If Gov. Crist has his way on supplying more water for mussels, then the lake might be bone dry before the election. Hence Sen. Chambliss will pay a heavy price for his friendship with Crist and be defeated by angry Georgians.
December 7th, 2007 at 8:35 am
Gov. Crist of Florida > our Gov. Perdue of Georgia is just praying for rain and telling developers to continue the building boom in Atlanta no matter if water runs out or not.
December 7th, 2007 at 9:27 am
The AJC clock is based on the total volume of lake lanier, divided by the average daily loss over the previous two weeks. It’s a rolling average.
Two weeks isn’t imho, a long enough period of time, and leads to big jumps in their clock. My prediction using the average since 10-1 doesn’t change dramatically due to large, but temporary changes in the outflow.
Neither does the Seasonal predictor designed by lj61. Honestly, the countdown clock from the AJC is about the least accurate predictor. It’d be a lot better if they did a rolling 30 days.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:12 am
Carol Says:
I’ve lived in Atlanta for 16 years and am finding it increasingly unmanageable, to the point of wanting to move away.
–
Funny, I’ve lived here 30 years and 16 years ago I suddenly found it increasingly unmanageable to the point of wanting to move away.
Good riddance.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:18 am
Yeah, but you stuck around just so you could hide behind a made up name and make rude comments on a blog.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:19 am
Thanks for sharing, Long time listener. But I really don’t understand your point. Do you have one?
Many find Atlanta increasingly unmanageable. There are too many people and there’s not enough infrastructure to support them. I’m not sure what your problem is with these sentiments.
December 7th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
To Carol,
Perhaps this will seep through. In the context of Atlanta’s 5,000,000 or so
people running out of water and the resulting perhaps unprecedented
catastrophe that this would create, your comment’s about the upside of such a scenario, i.e., slowed growth, indicates a level of insensitivity, and self-absorption of mind boggling proportions. Combine the above with your stated position of siding with Florida and Alabama on this issue, a position that if followed to it’s logical conclusion will almost certainly result in a complete loss of water for Atlanteans and your position reaches sociopathic levels. Perhaps you simply didn’t think before you typed? By the way, I agree that unfettered growth in the region without responsible water management is a problem - but that isn’t exactly going out on a limb.
December 7th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
I read that article and I think it’s way off base as well. Usually when species go extinct due to environmental reasons it is not due to a single factor (although sometimes it is), it is usually a combination of stresses that ultimately overwhelm the organism. Asking the question, “How did the oysters survive without the ACE to regulate flow?” is answered by the fact that the oysters are already dealing with a number of antrohpegenic environmental stresses including pollution, fertilizers, herbicides, habitat loss, overfishing, etc. that weren’t there prior to the dam being built. By removing the flow now, you are exacerbating a number of other problems, the high flow is designed to offset the ill effects of these.The bottom line is that this drought was entirely predictable, the problems with inadequate water supply for Atlanta have been known about since at least the 1980s and that if the environmental quality in Florida goes down and/or people lose their jobs, the state of Georgia/city of Atlanta should be forced to pay reparations.
December 7th, 2007 at 12:43 pm
..and another thing: Look at the aqueduct system for LA. It consists of at least 2 major aqueducts and a channel bringing water from the Columbia river, which drains the water from about five different states. Look at the water supply for the city of NY: It consists of a network of 15 reservoirs (yes, 15) in upstate NY covered by forest and two aqueducts to bring the water to the city. Granted, I know nothing about the relative sizes of Lake Lanier vs. the NY ones, but clearly the amount of infrastructure, time and money put into ensuring an adequate water supply are lacking in GA relative to the size of the city.
December 7th, 2007 at 12:46 pm
er, in my first post I was referring to the editorial that RichS linked to, not the FLA one. The main article kind of looks like that might be FL gearing up for a lawsuit against GA.
December 7th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
..and oops sorry, it’s not the columbia river, it’s the Colorado for LA, I more than a little annoyed when I posted that and didn’t read carefully.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
Andrew is right. Why should the people of Florida suffer the economical and environmental consequences of Atlanta’s profligacy?
As for an “unprecedented catastrophe” scenario, that won’t happen. The water depletion will not happen in one day, as happened with Katrina. There will be no sudden mass exodus of biblical proportions. If it doesn’t rain, people will slowly become aware of the serious water problem in Metro Atlanta. They may start moving away and certainly people and businesses won’t re-locate here. Builders will stop building, restrictions will be tighter, and we will probably not run completely out of water. As long as the poor and institutionalized are taken care of, no one will die of starvation and thirst. Atlanta will suffer some and then re-generate if/when the rains come back. If not, then we would all have to move away anyway. The US is a big country…there are places to go. It’s not like we live on an island with no escape. People will have to suffer some changes in their lives. Life isn’t suppose to be always be easy.
December 7th, 2007 at 7:18 pm
Carol,
I tend to be a plan for the worst hope for the best type, you assume everything will work out - that’s fine, but I wouldn’t bet on this unfolding quite as painlessly as you assume, though if you turn out to be right, great. I see no planning for anything at the moment, nothing. The only useful info on the situation I’ve found is at this site. If not for the asinine handling of Katrina I might be a bit more optimistic. Could this unfold into a biblical calamity? Yes, a few wrong decisions and look out below. You assume once the water really does run out everyone will act rationally and sanely. You assume that basically 5,000,000 people have the were-with-all to simply get up and start anew. Do you understand the logistics involved in moving millions of people in a short period of time - and a short period of time could be days to weeks? Given that there are drought conditions in all our neighboring states, where do you think these people are going to go? Are they going to be shuttled from state to state by authorities concerned about their own resource situation? What percentage of that 5,000,000 are going to end up basically homeless? Is Marshall law going to be rolled out and how are locals going to respond to that? Katrina did not happen overnight, there was warning, there was a mood of impending crisis, millions watched in real time as mistake after mistake was made which resulted in unnecessary hard ship and death. I haven’t seen it dealt with in any depth, but at some point power outages will come into play. I lived in San Francisco after the Earthquake in ‘89 in which we had a couple days without power, and I can tell you from first hand experience that when the lights went out mayhem ensued in a lot of neighborhoods and there was nothing the “authorities” could do about it. Anyway, other people on this site have painted some dismal plausible scenarios of what could happen so I needn’t continue. Suffice to say, as evidenced by many posts here, it’s reasonable to be very worried about how events are unfolding, and it’s also reasonable to be dumfounded by the fact that some mercury laden oysters are being used as an excuse to dance on the edge of catastrophe.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:08 pm
I agree thirsty and will add that Carol is another of many here who seem to think Atlanta is evil because it uses some water. Granted - Florida would get more water on average if there were not a major city upstream. I’m just not sure how this makes Atlanta so hated. Even by some Atlantans !?!
Her premise is that Atlanta is at fault - therefore why should Florida suffer? If we remove the premise that Atlanta is at fault, you can just as reasonably ask why Atlanta should suffer when Florida has much more water than we do and won’t even reduce a pitiful 5%.
December 8th, 2007 at 12:00 am
richs, it is a myth that the downstream states are not experiencing water shortage. Look at the following link:
http://water.sam.usace.army.mil/blstfc.htm
Currently Florida is working with less water than they would like–just like Atlanta.
Currently, they have enough that disaster is not yet happening–same as Atlanta.
If it does not rain in the next six months or so, catastrophe will hit them–just like it will Atlanta.
If catastrophe does end up coming, it needs to come for both states at the same time. As you can see from the above link, they don’t have that much extra water to play with. The only thing you could do would be to cut off their water completely at this time. That would be both illegal and immoral.
December 8th, 2007 at 2:10 am
I’ve recently moved here and what I’m seeing concerning the “Atlantans
deserve it” attitude is bizarre. Atlanta is made up of 5,000,000 individuals with a few apparently incompetent numbskull politicos running things into
the ground. Collective punishment for the incompetence or corruption of a few politicians? Paul your post doesn’t make sense. As I understand it, the water from Lanier which makes it’s way to Florida is cooling one power plant and keeping some oysters alive and that’s it. How would this continued flow which is obviously setting Atlanta up for catastrophe help Floridians beyond what’s mentioned? Also, from what I’ve read here that power plant is the one that is spewing mercury into the water resulting in the contamination of the oysters, which fact, should lead those blaming Atlanta for the potential demise of the oysters to reconsider at least some of their placement of blame. Ironic that the water that is supposedly necessary to keep the oysters alive is feeding the power plant that is slowly destroying their ecosystem with mercury. I haven’t heard that Florida is facing imminent disaster as is Atlanta, in fact South Georgia and Florida are supposedly doing o.k. My guess is the Floridians are as adamant as they are - being willing to throw Atlantians over the rail if necessary - about the continued water flow from Lanier because though it’s now being used primarily for one polluting power plant and some stressed oysters, down the road that flow is going to be mighty valuable. A couple billion gallons a day, three times the amount Atlanta currently uses, yes, that is a mighty valuable asset. Floridians probably figure once they give that flow up that’s it, they’re out of the game - no water no development. I was going to suggest that Atlantans head south and hang out with the oysters since that’s where the water is going, but, when it dries out here the oysters are going to be out of luck too. How’s the water situation in Miami? Could 5,000,000 Georgians fit into Miami?
December 8th, 2007 at 2:19 am
AJC drought countdown clock is now set at 267 days? Only clock I have ever seen go up instead of down. They should just stop doing it, because the paper really has no idea at all how long the Lake Lanier water will last.
December 8th, 2007 at 9:52 am
Atlanta reminds me of the Titanic. Full speed ahead!
This time it’s urban sprawl which is not unique to Atlanta.
No one thinks most people are evil there either, just really stupid.
All of your neighbors also see your unlimited sprawl as a threat to their water supply.
Everyone else has accepted limiting growth and conservation, but not Atlanta.
Time for a little reality check. You all don’t have anyone to blame but yourselves.
December 8th, 2007 at 10:35 am
If you google “atlanta drought” you will come up with articles from all over the state, country and overseas. From the LA Times to the BBC to small towns in Georgia. They all say the same thing. It’s Metro Atlanta’s fault. Seems like the only people who don’t see that are the local leaders and some Atlantans. Let’s see, I was called insensitive, sociopathic and self-absorbed for pointing out the obvious and what everyone outside of Atlanta understands. Since I live right here in Atlanta and stand to lose if the economy collapses, it’s hard for me to understand how I am the one being self-absorbed and insensitive. I think most of us would recognize that it’s the Atlantans who are whining and moaning and blaming that are being self-absorbed and insensitive (I wouldn’t dare call anyone I don’t know sociopathic).
I’ll say it again: Atlanta is the fat lady at the buffet table taking all the food and leaving none for the responsible, disciplined, thin people who really need it.
December 8th, 2007 at 11:13 am
Currently, they have enough that disaster is not yet happening–same as Atlanta.
December 8th, 2007 at 12:51 pm
Let’s see, a community of oysters and one mercury polluting power plant in Florida are using three times the amount of water that Atlanta is using daily and Atlanta is the “fat lady at the buffet table”? Can we distinguish between the leadership, both business and civil of Atlanta and Georgia from the normal everyday Atlantans please? Yes, the LEADERSHIP of the Atlanta region has been woefully incompetent and or corrupt, no doubt. Yes, urban sprawl and uncontrolled development run amok are creating all kinds of problems and are contributing factors to Atlanta’s current dilemma. However, your average Atlantan in not responsible and really has no meaningful say in the situation. If your hot to assign guilt than at least be a bit more specific rather than using inflammatory rhetoric aimed right at millions of innocent individuals. How about Coca Cola? I seem to remember having read that Coke’s bottling plant uses about the same amount of water daily as the rest of Atlanta. Whichever brain-dead politico allowed half of Atlanta’s potable water to be handed over to Coco Cola is indeed worthy of blame. Who are the individuals pushing for unlimited development here? Yes, they are worthy of blame. Those Atlantans who are screaming that Atlantans are at fault and implying that Atlantans collectively deserve whatever is coming down the pike, how does this apply to you? Are you at fault, and if so, how? It’s hard to make any rational sense out of this collective demonization of the people of Atlanta, it’s as if some people have gone into a kind of primitive attack mode and are irrationally lashing out - the absolute worse attitude to have in a crisis.
December 9th, 2007 at 6:41 am
Carol Says:
I’ve lived in Atlanta for 16 years and am finding it increasingly unmanageable, to the point of wanting to move away.
–
ahh yes I long for the days before Carol moved to Atlanta….when water flowed freely from the tap………when I could jump in my car and drive from Buckhead to Little Five Points without encountering the slightest annonyance from traffic……when the air was clean and the Braves were all the rage
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, “GOOD RIDDANCE”.
December 9th, 2007 at 7:56 am
Re Thirsty:
Dude! please break up your thoughts into paragraphs.
December 9th, 2007 at 8:22 am
I live north of Atlanta in Maryland…but my family comes from Atlanta..
It seems to me that the leaders of Atlanta could have seen this problem coming for many years. There are too many people in Atlanta for the amount of water that flows into Lake Lanier. I don’t know how the City can control the size of the City’s population, but there isn’t enough water to wet everyone’s thirst as the situation stands, and increasing the amount of water without stabilizing the number of people, or even reducing the number of people, seems non-sensical. The issue of controlling/reducing the number of citizens has to be part of the equation. Depending on more and more water coming from somewhere else that belongs to someone else, or depending on rain based on prayer power, seems ridiculous to me…I would be circulating a recall petition to remove the dumb people that let it go this far…
The fact is that Atlanta is going to run out of water.
Let me make a possible suggestion…there should be a crash program to run a pipeline from the Georgia Sea Coast to Atlanta, sea water should be pumped into the water system in Atlanta…that water would be used to maintain the sewer systems and toilets in Atlanta, and fresh water in bottles should be delivered like the old milk deliveries used to do. The sea water in plumbing would have negative impacts…it would put salt into the plumbing. It would maintain the sewers and a home delivery service to deliver water by private companies would keep fresh water flowing into places where people congregate….water could be trucked from places where it is available…
What is amazing is that nothing seems to be going on to run a pipeline as I suggest, and no other specific actions have been announced. By now there should be a plan in place and action taking place.
December 9th, 2007 at 9:43 am
The real problem at present is that Peter (Lake Lanier and other reservoirs below it) is being robbed to pay Paul (Lake Seminole that flows out 3 billion gallons of water daily from Woodruff Dam for power plant needs & mussels.)
The extreme artificial flow being released from Woodruff Dam daily is draining out Lake Lanier that is forced by old binding water agreements to keep Lake Seminole’s level high. Eventually if the drought remains for another year, then all the reservoirs on Chattahoochee River could be emptied out and NO water left for power plants nor mussels. Gov. Charlie Crist of Florida can demand more water till his damn head explodes, but it’s not sustainable with drought.
December 9th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
Jerry –
As far as controlling the size of the city, remember we are talking about a whole metro area - many cities and several counties - no unified authority short of the state of GA.
The problem is the main reservoir (lake Lanier) is dropping fast. Only a small portion of this drop is because of the thirst of Atlanta. The vast majority of the water coming out of the lake is being sent downstream to support users south of the Atlanta area. This is the point that most casual observers tend to miss. It is much easier to look at Atlanta’s popluation and the fact that Atlanta is running out of water - and look no deeper.
Your pipeline scenario would be a lot more problem than you think. First, have you looked at the elevation of Atlanta? For instance lake Lanier full pool is 1071 feet above sea level. So to pump water to the full pool area of lake lanier means aside from a couple of hundred miles of pipeline, the water will have to go uphill 1000 ft. It is possible but you are talking about a massive undertaking and huge amounts of power to lift that much water. Maybe Rkolter or some other numbers guru would like to do some calculations on how many horsepower total it would take to lift a continuous stream of water of the volume Atlanta would need 1000 ft uphill.
I’m not saying it is impossible - just that if we undertake that massive of a project, a desalinization plant would certainly make more sense as part of the project than trying to truck in drinking water (another huge undertaking).
December 9th, 2007 at 1:25 pm
JohnC - I thought you had decided not to post your drivel here anymore because I was being too mean to you.
December 9th, 2007 at 1:29 pm
Reassuring to see some good suggestions and solid reasoning - i.e. Jay Randal and Jerry Wing. Regarding Coca Cola’s presence in Atlanta, which I think could and should play a central role in handling the current water crisis in Georgia, I tried to find the percentage of Atlanta’s water that Coke uses but couldn’t, though I remember reading somewhere that it’s about half - whatever it is, it’s significant.
Here’s a suggestion. How about if Coca Cola is approached by some of Georgia’s stellar leadership - or maybe just a group of concerned citizens - and the following proposal is made. Given the current water situation in Atlanta, it makes no sense for Coca Cola to be tapping into Atlanta’s water system. Right now Coke is facing major problems with local municipalities in India because Coke is draining local water resources for their production. Do a google search on Coke and what comes up are many links documenting this situation. Coke is doing major damage to it’s image both in the massive Indian market as well as internationally , does Coke want to face a similar situation in Atlanta, adding to it’s already suffering public image?
Eventually Coke’s role in the current
drought crises will come into focus for the public. Here is a chance for Coke to step up to the plate and insure that when that focus happens Coke will gain public good will, not lose it. How about instead of tapping into Atlanta’s municipal water system, Coke takes the $150,000,000 or so million it would take to develop a desalinization plant, yielding about 25,000,000 gallons of water per day, and do it on the Georgia coast. Florida is currently bringing on-line the countries largest capacity de-salinization plant, which is where I got the above figures. $150,000,000 is peanuts to Coke - of course Coke would need more than one plant, but at the above cost, Coke can surely afford it.
What does Coke gain? A huge public relations coup, an assured endless source of water, a potential premium charge for at least some of their products, because now they are arguably “green.” Coke would be able to put their competitors to shame with the legitimate claim (not necessarily conveyed by Coke) that Coca Cola is a responsible civic member concerned for the welfare of the general public — their customers, unlike it’s competitors who are contributing to the what is now a national water shortage crisis - given that taping into municipal water supplies is the norm for soft-drink, bottled water companies.
With Coke setting the pace - as thus far there has been no push for desalinization plants in Georgia - hopefully Georgia’s leadership will see
that building desalinization plants is a feasible long-term solution for coping with at least some of Georgia’s water needs.
For those who will claim that desalinization plants are too expensive, in the grand scheme of public finance, $150,000,000 in peanuts, and even adding in the cost of piping the water from the coast it’s still eminently doable.
Also adding to other’s suggestions, an immediate moratorium on development in the region is without a doubt necessary. Given the current inventory of properties this may have at least some short-medium term economic benefit.
One can look at California coastal
communities - including San Francisco bay area metro, a little larger than Atlanta metro - to get an idea of what happens when development is severely limited in an otherwise desirable place to live. Combine limited development with property tax reform as suggested by Richardson - California passed similar property tax reform in the 70’s, prop 13 - and tens years from now that $100,000.00 ranch in an Atlanta suburb may be worth five to ten times that amount. The real-estate industry will thrive because they’ll be making far more per transaction, as will some developers as they shift efforts from new-housing to reclaiming old housing, or gentrifying lower income areas. There’s a big downside concerning affordability for lower income and even middle income people who don’t own property, but that’s pretty much how such a scenario could play out.
December 9th, 2007 at 1:43 pm
Paul -
You say - “If it does not rain in the next six months or so, catastrophe will hit them–just like it will Atlanta.”
Can you please define that disaster? How many people effected in what way? I think it has been well documented on this forum how many people in Atlanta might be effected in what way. Mostly downstream I hear about oyster fishermen. Not to say that an oyster fisherman doesn’t deserve to make a living but you can’t compare that with the catastrophe that could hit Atlanta.
You also say - “The only thing you could do would be to cut off their water completely at this time.” Please do a little research on the watershed area in question. You will see there is no way the Atlanta area could “cut off their water completely”. Most of the water flowing into Florida comes from streams and tributaries which flow into the river system BELOW Atlanta. Even if Atlanta sent zero water downstream (impossible), we would not “cut off their water completely”.
Just for arguement sake - I think we can all agree that north Georgia (Atlanta) has a right to some of the ACF basin which is shared between Georgia, Alabama and Florida. What percent of the basin do you think that should be? 5% maybe??
If you think 5% is reasonable - Great. 5% of the watershed area of the ACF basin flows into lake Lanier. That is the 5% that we are arguing about. North Georgia is using a portion of that 5%. So how much does everyone really think Atlanta should reasonably use? None?
December 9th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
Thirsty - you make good points, but if Coke moves out of Atlanta how many jobs are lost? Is that really the best place to cut back? And if they relocate, it would be much more likely to relocate some place that they don’t have to build a desalinization plant. I’m sure Chatanooga would love to have them. Not to say that we can support a Coke plant here forever -but maybe farm irrigation goes before Coke. Way less jobs lost to get more benefit.
December 9th, 2007 at 2:28 pm
RichS,
The goal would not be to get Coke to leave. If the question is one of which
is more vital in the region, agriculture or Coke, off hand i’d go with agriculture, though I don’t have enough info to make a trully informed opinion. I want Coke to stay, but the current terms are not supportable, or sane. Given the stakes here, both in terms of setting the tone for a sane sustainable water policy, as well as short term water useage issues, trading the Jobs Coke provides
for setting the right trend would be something I personally wouldn’t have a problem with - not that what I prefer is worth 10 cents.
I think however, given the P.R. implications of Coke simply getting up and moving, it’s a fair bet that they wouldn’t do that. What I outlined above is feasable and to Cokes benefit - and further to the point, it’s the right, sane, moral thing for Coke to do. P.R. is very important to Coke, go to their website and check out the amount of space devoted to Cokes promotion of their benevolent civic presence here in Atlanta. Does Coke want to appear as a rat leaving a sinking ship or a knight in shining armour?
December 9th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
Regarding my post above. I can see that Coke would have to move
their bottling plant to the coast, and presumably keep their headquarters in Atlanta. Georgia as a whole still benefits and we have some sane
policy in Atlanta. In my opionion, benefits far outweigh Atlanta job losses - presumably present workers could relocate.
December 9th, 2007 at 3:02 pm
Thirsty - I agree if you are talking agriculture vs coke. I think for comparison between a similar amount of water used you would have to compare a handful of nice sized farms vs the coke bottling plant. To compare all of agriculture you would have to compare against all of industrial use (other than power plants which are way in a category by themselves).
December 9th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
RichS,
If the water runs out Coke is going to have to leave anyway, hell, they
may be negotiating with Chattanooga right now. What I’m proposing is
simply another option. I’m sure Atlanta and Coke are bound by all kinds of contractual constraints - most likely highly favorable to Coke, so the notion that Atlanta could make any enforceable ultimatums to Coke is not likely. If the water runs out I’m sure Coke would be free to do as they please.
Given that the idea has been floated that Atlanta may be able to receive
water diverted from Tennesee via some leverage from Chattanooga - involving high speed trains and expansion of Chattanooga’s Airport - and Coke’s need for a reliable water source, the politcal landscape becomes much more tangled. Which is worth more to Chattanooga, Coke relocateing there, or high-speed trains, or can they get both?
December 9th, 2007 at 5:10 pm
Uh, you guys do realize that Coke has many other bottling plants nation wide besides Atlanta ans it really would not be that much of a problem to shift operations to a different area and ship product back into this area.
December 9th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
It would be a problem if you were an employee of Coke in Atlanta.
December 9th, 2007 at 9:33 pm
Since water levels and salinity are so important to Florida’s oysters and mussels, why didn’t Florida have the foresight to build reservoirs and aqueducts to protect them?
I’m not an expert on Coca Cola, but my understanding is that the Coca Cola Co. only makes the syrup. Bottling companies buy the syrup and add carbonated water to make the final product.
December 9th, 2007 at 11:14 pm
Nice point GT. Why does that question only get posed regarding Atlanta and never regarding Florida’s wildlife which is apparently equal in importance (by some twisted logic)?
December 10th, 2007 at 11:29 am
Question: If Atlanta only uses a small fraction of the water released from Lake Lanier, as seems to be the case, then how can anyone see the current issue as being Atlanta’s fault? If Atlanta did not exist, the water shortage would still be pending. Rain comes from the skies, not the Atlanta metro, and Atlanta is not the reason that the resevoirs are being drained.
2nd question: Florida says it is dependent on the water from Georgia, and so does Alabama. The reserviors appear to be deferal structures, not state structures. If Florida and Alabama are so dependent on these things, why haven’t they been more proactive in building more infrastructure to ensure that the flow of water continues? Surely it’s in their best interest to see that more reservoirs are constructed? And yet I’m under the impression that instead of encouraging such development, those two states have been (and are still currently) *fighting* such development. Can someone explain?
It sounds to be like there is plenty of blame to go around, but it also sounds like some of the folks in Florida and Alabam expect to have a lot of work and economic stability created FOR them by upstream states like Georgia without having to life a finger. Maybe some serious funding from those two states is in order?
December 10th, 2007 at 11:35 am
GThierry and richs: Water laws in the east coast follow a riparian water law which means everyone shares the water proportionally. In this case, most of the water is legally bound to go to downstream users. Sorry, but them’s the laws and the city of Atlanta was quite happy with them, but now all of a sudden they feel that they should get more than their share? Good luck — they’ll get sued into oblivion by FL, AL, and the Feds if they try to use more than their share and rightfully so.
December 10th, 2007 at 11:40 am
Also, IMHO the state of Georgia would get more sympathy from the rest of the country if people (especially those in power and at the AJC) would stop trying to play politics by using conservative hate-speech to rile up the populace and admit they have a big problem and try to come up with the best solution for everyone involved.
December 10th, 2007 at 11:47 am
Andrew - If what you are saying is true - “everyone shares the water proportionally”, how is North Georgia’s proportion calculated?
And I understand that on the west half of the country upstream users have the right to use as much water as they want as within limits. When we are talking about a matter of law I don’t see how there is different law in different halves of the country. There is state law and federal law. I think what you are referring to is more a matter of tradition / compacts. I’m not sure to what extent Florida and Alabama will win on that basis particularly when the judge that ruled in their favor would be giving a death sentence to Atlanta.
Nevertheless, I’m not a lawyer and not qualified to debate the fine points of law. I can debate right and wrong though - and what the law should be.
And I will tell you it’s wrong to starve a city of water just because you can - even if the law is on your side.
December 10th, 2007 at 11:50 am
“conservative hate-speech”
How about some examples. All the hate speech I see is from the left on this forum.
December 10th, 2007 at 12:43 pm
Alright, hate speech was language that was a little strong. But Governor Perdue and the AJC has been very successful in framing the debate as “man vs. mussels”. There was a quote on here from a user just a few weeks ago, “They’re putting animals ahead of people!” Which of course is not true, it’s the PEOPLE in florida fighting for their water rights for their multi-million dollar oyster and fish industries and electrical power against the PEOPLE of georgia fighting for their rights so they can sell coca cola and wash their cars. I remind you that the governor ousted in 2002 had plans to build three more resevoirs, but Perdue decided to cancel the projects. Now why isn’t the Governor getting on the radio and letting people know that? That’s obvious to answer, but why isn’t the AJC? It’s because they’re playing politics and it’s easier to blame the mussels than the true people at fault, themselves. You say it’s a crime to allow a city to starve a city for water and you are right, but it’s also wrong to allow a city to grow beyond it’s means — which is what Atlanta has done.
Water rights are different in different parts of the country, owing to the differing climates. Western water rights are what’s known as prior appropriation, where rights to water are bought and sold similar to land or mineral rights. Eastern states historically have had more water so haven’t had to worry about having such a tight set of laws. Nowadays they fight just like everyone else out here.
Let’s hope that the La Nina ends sooner rather than later and we get a big fat hurricane right at the beginning of hurricane season next year. Maybe we’ll get lucky and the state of Georgia government will have been scared badly enough to build more reservoirs.
December 10th, 2007 at 3:23 pm
Agreed and hopefully Florida and Alabama will stop blocking us from building those reservoirs.
December 12th, 2007 at 11:19 am
This is the part I don’t get.
(1) Atlanta apparently removes less than 150 million gallons per day (net) from a flow which is many many times that. As such, it has very little impact on the flow of the river … or on the level of Lake Lanier … when compared to the total requirements downstream.
(2) Atlanta and its surrounding communities have attempted for years to have additional reservoirs built, but most of those were apparently shot down by downstream interests, and the one new reservoir which is almost completed (the Hickory Log Creek Reservoir) is being sued by Alabama again in order to stop it.
(3) The entire Atlanta metro is currently under some fairly strict water use restrictions (no outdoor water use at all except for a few special exceptions in the entire metro).
…and yet Atlanta is being painted as the Bad Guy.
What else should folks in Atlanta do?
December 12th, 2007 at 5:18 pm
Amen Brotha.
December 13th, 2007 at 1:03 pm
Doesn’t anyone from Florida or Alabama have the courage to address my questions?
Or am I so close to being correct that you’re ashamed to address the actual issues here?
Come on, folks. This isn’t just a stimulating intellectual exercise for some of us — our main water supply has the potential to be impacted by this, unlike the supply for most of the residents of those other two states.
December 13th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
I’m not from either location but I can respond fairly logically I think. Here is what I am guessing from their point of view. Don’t shoot the messenger:
(1) Atlanta and it’s impact - You’re correct; metro Atlanta actually consumes around 200 million gallons (the previous thread has a link broken apart by locality). That is 18-20% of the average 1 billion - 1.2 billion gallon release. It’s actually 25% of the recent 800 million gallon releases. Regardless, Atlanta is NOT the main consumer of water from Lanier - the main consumer from Lanier is maintenence of the water supply downstream.
But because Georgia is saying the water needs to be kept in Lanier for metro Atlanta’s needs, Alabama and Florida are not wrong in casting Atlanta as the villain.
(2) Alabama and Florida will try to shoot down new reseveroir construction in Georgia because they have a legal right to the water that Georgia is reserving in those reseveroirs. Taking less water from the Chattahoochie and more water from another river that feeds Alabama or Florida, is just robbing Peter to pay Paul. They wouldn’t complain about a desalination plant. Or three. Or five. Or at least, they wouldn’t have a leg to stand on if they did.
(3) The strictness is relative. And it’s human nature to want to see the other guy suffer as much or more, before you have to suffer. That’s what the whole water war is about.
So, Atlanta is the “bad guy” because Georgia is saying “We have to hold onto this water in Lanier for the people in metro Atlanta!” The only logical response is, “Metro Atlanta is responsible for Georgia’s position.” Therefore, you’re the bad guys.
What else should folks in Atlanta do?
The media show one town in Georgia turning their park fountains back on after digging a well, and a family in Florida that has lost their home because Appalacian Bay is not getting enough fresh water and they couldn’t make ends meet with the oysters and fish dying off. The sound bite for “It’s humans vs. mussels” plays regularly. There’s a real “understanding” that Atlanta people couldn’t give a rat’s ass about anyone but themselves.
It’s not true (and I know that so don’t go yelling at me). But to answer your question about what folks in Atlanta can do, it would be to write your media and get them to run special interest stories.
December 13th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
I just want to address a couple of points above -
“Georgia because they have a legal right to the water that Georgia is reserving in those reseveroirs”
It seems when all the logical arguments are gone as to why downstream interests should get so much water, it always degenerates into their claim that they have a legal right to it.
I would just like to point out that who has a legal right to how much of the water has yet to be decided by the courts. Yes, they have a legal right to some - so does Atlanta have a legal right to some. Who has a legal right to how much? That’s a lot less clear and will probably be decided by the courts - and probably appealed to the supreme court.
Also - Your math of up to 25% of water released being consumed by Atlanta depends on the 800 MGD figure. When the releases were 2.5-3 Billion gallons per day as referenced on other parts of this forum the math would come out quite a bit different. I think you are using numbers toward the high end for Atlanta consumption and toward the low end for Buford Dam releases. I think 10% is more realistic.
In fact, I have a reference here that puts Atlanta metro consumption at 100 - 120 MGD (they didn’t source their figures). I honestly think 150 is more likely but we are coming up with numbers from 100 MGD - 200 MGD.
http://www.11alive.com/news/article_news.aspx?storyid=104561
December 14th, 2007 at 8:24 am
I don’t disagree with most of your post RichS, but would like to point out that these weren’t necessarily my arguements, but instead what I imagined people might argue.
Sure Atlanta has rights to some of that water. Or at least, Georgia does.
I will say that my math is generally accurate. The 2.5 billion gallon releases were not the norm, and the ACE specifically said it was releasing that much only so that it could populate the downstream reseveroirs, and with an eye on increasing the average flow for October/November to 1.7 billion gallons.
Ditto my consumption numbers - while yours doesn’t source the figures, the wiki entry does. Remember as we’d already discussed, many of the conservation methods are not assisting consumption in that they reduce both inflow and return in nearly equal ways.
I really don’t think 50 million gallons is entirely worth argueing about; I am more concerned with people batting around an old number and then getting caught up in semantics when someone argues against them. 500 million / 350 million is referenced as far back as 2003.
December 14th, 2007 at 9:37 am
rk - I don’t think we have a lot of disagreement. I think we are discussing finer points or degrees. And I agree that you don’t seem to have a dog in this fight (as we southerners say). So an unbiased input is appreciated.
I attempt to be unbiased in my facts that I lay out, but it’s hard not to be an advocate when you look out your back window every day and see dirt instead of lake.