Water, Water Everywhere Nor Any Drop to Drink


previous item | next item

Citation
Water, Water Everywhere Nor Any Drop to Drink

Material Information

Title:
Water, Water Everywhere Nor Any Drop to Drink
Creator:
Garald G. Parker
Language:
English
Physical Description:
1 online resource (1 paper)

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Floridan Aquifer ( lcsh )
Green Swamp (Fla.) ( lcsh )
Flood control ( lcsh )
Water supply ( lcsh )
Land tenure ( lcsh )
Genre:
Text ( sobekcm )
Time Period:
1974 - 1974
Location:
North and Central America -- United States -- Florida -- Green Swamp

Notes

Abstract:
A paper discussing the finite nature of peninsular Florida's water supply and the limitations of renewable water resources.
Original Location:
Box 3 Folder 25
General Note:
September 1974

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
This object is protected by copyright, and is made available here for research and educational purposes. Permission to reuse, publish, or reproduce the object beyond the bounds of Fair Use or other exemptions to copyright law must be obtained from the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
G16-00004 ( USFLDC DOI )
g16.4 ( USFLDC Handle )

Postcard Information

Format:
Text

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

l. '."!,,.,' . . . a.. •• . f : : .. .. ,, .. . . " • . . . WATER, WATER EVERYwHE:iE NOR ANY DROP TO DRINK. BY GARALD G : PARKER !:./ September 26 ,.. . 1974-ABSTRACT The title, from Coleridge ' s . of the Ancient Mari:ner" is an over-dramatization of a direful situation that we cannot allow to befall the citizens of Florida. Statewide we are not yet in the sad situation of the Ancient Mariner and his companions, nor we need ever to be if we but use our resources wisely and well, nonethe-less, there are areas, such as Pinellas County, whic h has outgrown its peninsular supply and. therefore, to avoid dr.inking salty water, has developed inadequate supplies inland. However, our water resources, which seem limitless to most laymen, definitely finite and cannot continue to be developed haphazardly as has been the practice in the past. Even though they are renewable, they are renewable only within limits. Our problem is in determining what these limits are, how they vary from place to place and from time to time and how to manage the. resources so as to prevent depletion, pollution, or salt-water encroachment. Carefully developed water budgets for our larger stream. basins and ground-water basins will define the water crop that we develop from any or all the basins, and thus determine the people-carrying capacity of such areas. If we consumptively used the water crop we either must reduce wastes, .and import, manufacture (desalinate}, or re-use water again and again and thus augment and extend the natural water crop. But this will oe acffieved only at-great expense,-: something the American people are not. used to nor yet ready to pay. It would behoove us to learn well the magnitude of our natural water crop and the costs of its development, then manage our uses so as to live within its limitations • . In any case, the cheap water in Florida is almost all developed already. Creating large additional supplies will drive costs of water and sewerage treatment up beyond belief and may in the long run, act as a brake on the population explosion we are now experiencing. Y Certified Professional Geologist. Chief Hydrologist and Senior Scientist, Southwest Florida Water Management District. .. --.u, . . ,.. .. ' .• ... . . -.... . .. -. . .;. .. . , ....... . --_......:. • . ,., ... -.. .:: . .

PAGE 2

. , . . ,, " t ....... , .. . i .. . . . . i .. , _. .:. . !. ' ' GREEN SWAMP CALCULATIONS (1) . . . -t'cJMMAteY -G.G.P., os-17.:.74 . ' . 1 1. DiVi,de G .. S. area r i " nto 5 . USGS' pot map of5/73 • . . . . .... z . . Pick gradients orr pot._ segments as : follows: . . _ .. Line -A-A' Line B-B' Line C-C' Line D-D' Line E-E' . (SW, toward P o 5 . District) 30' in 8 mi. toward crjsta 1 Sp9 • . ) . 25' in 5 mi. (NW, toward Ci. ty) 25' in 6.5 mi. ; 1 : . (Northeast, toward Orlando)30' in 10 mi. (East toward Davenport) 30' in 10 mi. 3 ... L (length of'fiow area in segments) on following pot .. contours:. Line A-A', 100' contour Line B-B', 90' contour Line C-C', 90' contour Line D-D', 90' contour-Line E-E', 90' contour , 4. Use T values for these 5 areas taken from Pride, Myersand Cherry (FSG . RI42, p.85, T.11) as follows: Line A-A' (SW) 600,000 gpd/ft. Line B-B' (W} 200,000 gpd/ft. Line C-C' (NW) 1,200,000 gpd/ft • . line D-0' (NE} 300,000 gpd/ft • . Line E-E (E} 200,000.gpd/ft. 5... Then: A-A' Q = 600,000 x 30/8 x 30 = 67.50 mgd .. B-B' Q = 500,000 x 25/6 x 24.5 = 51.04 mgd . . C-C' Q 1,200,000 x 25/7;5 x 19 76.00 mgd. D-0' Q 300,000 x 30/10 x 22.5 20.25 mgd. E-E' Q = 200,000 x 30/10 x _ 22.5 = 26.77 mgd. 6. And, total flow froin all 5 segments is 24i.36 == BB .1 • Calculations of yield per units area: a. 870 mi2 in Green Swamp b. Total est. = 241.4 mgd. . 2-c. 241.4 mgd = 277,470 qpd/mi (yield) d. 111 outflow/yr. = 17.4 mgy. 2 e. 17.4 mgd 365 days = 47,671 gpd/mi (yield) f. 277,470 47,671 = 5.8 in/yr. outflow 8. Est. total outflow from FloridanAquifer is 5.8 inches 6 inches 9. Average P '::::! 53 in. 10. 53" -6 11 = 47" Et+ SW0 (7") 11. .•• GW 0 611 + SW??= 13" total out fl ow 12. 53" -13" = 40" Et ; 40/53 : .75 or Et = 75 % Df "P. A. . . .

PAGE 3

I . . . ,. ' , . f • • • • ( . . . ESTIMATES OF GREEN SWAMP WATER PRODUCTION POTENTIAL '. CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATION OF AQUIFER OUTFLOW FROM GREEN SWAMP . . . . Use pot. map showing g • . -w. (05-73) and ari average-(very conservatfvet:_ _ _ .,," .. -T value = 200 ,000 gpd/ft;;. (U:S.G.S. letter-to. C. of , . . , -. :!:.:.:. :,,' -. 1. Line A-A' (segrrent flowfng into P205: District from N): : T =-200,000; : . ;._; ' I=, 30'/8. mi; L = 30 mi. along . 100' pot. contour. Q 200,000 x-30/8 . x 30 = 22.50 mgd. . , .. 2. Line B-B' (segrrent flowing into Hills. R . -sasin. N. Crystal Spring).,.. T= 200,000; I -25'/6 L = 24.5 mi. along 90' pot. contour. Q = 200,000 x 25/6 x 24.5 = 20.42 3. .Line C-C' (segment fl owing into Wi thl acoochee R • . near Dade City) T = 200,000; I= 25'/7.5 mi; L = 19 mi. along 90' contour. Q • 200,000 x 25/7.5 x 14 = 12.67 mgd .. -"'\... . . Line D-D' (segrrent flowing toward Orlando) T = 200,000: I = 30'/10 mi-.; -L• 22.5 along 90' contour. Q = 200,000 x 30/10 x 22.5 = 13.50 mgd. 5. Line E-E' (segment flowing toward Lake Tohopel i ga) T = -200 ,000, 30'/6.S mi.; L = 29 mi. along 90' contour Q = 200,000 x 30/10 x 22.5 = mgd • . Sum of outflow, 5 segrrent.s above, equals 95 • . 86 ('4 . . '\'tJ_;-B. REALISTIC ESTIMATE OF AQlHFER OUTFLOW FROM GREEN SWAMP According to Stewart (FGS Info. Circ. No. 23, p. 40, 1959) T = 1 ,000,000 in a Green Swamp Fla. Aq. well l,200' deep, 26" . diam .. pumping 6,500 gpm for 8 hrs. Pride, Myersand Cherry (FGS. Inv. No. 42, p. 8,5, Table II. ) give estimates of T from 5 Green Swamp area sites as follows: .-:. : . ; -1. Davenport Horse Creek Area 2. Eastern Area 3. Northeastern Area 4. Southwestern Area 5. Dade City Area T = 2.00 ,000 t = 300,000 T = 500 ,000 T = 600 ,000 T = 1,200,000 Using that values of T for the 5 sites indicated in Section A, we get the following values: 1. Line A -A' (Southwestern, toward P 2o5 District) T = 600,000 Q = 600,000 x 30/8 x 30 = 67.5 mgd. 2. Line B -81 (West, toward Crystal Springs) T = 1,200,000 Q = 500,000 x 25/6 x 24.5 = 51.04 mgd. 3. Line C -C' (Northwestern toward Dade City) T = 500,000 Q = 1,200,000 x 25/7.5 x 19 = 76 mgd. 4. Line D -D' (Northeastern toward Orlan do) T = 300 ,000 Q = 300,000 x 30/10 x 22.5 = 20.25 mgd . . -1-.

PAGE 4

. . ., • Ill ' ' ' . ("': I . . 5 • . Line E.... -E' (East, toward Davenport-Horse Creek) 200 ,000 . . -. i. . . : Q = 200,000 x 30/10 x 22.5 = 26.77' mgd. .. } . Sum of outflow, 5 segments above, equals 2.41.36 mgd. This estimate ... . . . :. of total ground-water outflow seems far more reas onab thei ver 2 .. f , : btl'i conservative estimate in A; whi dr was 95.86 mgd. •For example, f ow from ---: ' --l ; Crystal Springs (in se gment B -B') averages 42 mgd alone, which fs more . than. twice : the entire estimatecrflow for the entire segment. Obviously, a T of 200,000 for this segment is about 3 x too low. Likewise, the. segrren t AA' which flows into. "The Great: Red Hole" and probably furnishes about half the. pumpage. from that area, about500 mgd; is much too .. low. Estimates in A gives. a -value of about 22.5 mgd; and estimate in B is 67.5 mgd. It may well be that T .=-2 mgd. is much.more likely to be a truer value. (Wilson finds such values in the De Soto Co. area of Tropical River, Groves). If this value.. _ were substituted for r = 600 ,000 in. B.1 (above) the Q would then be Q = 2,000 x 30/8x30 = 225 mgd or about half of total pumpage from the. area of "The Great Red Hole". C.. VALIDITY OF EXISTING DATA: NEED FOR BETTER INFORMATION : " I • The foregoing points up the great need for detailed exploration of the ground-water systems of the Green Swamp Area and supports the decision by both the SWFWMD and the USGS to engage in a definitive 3-year study of . the hydrology and geology of the area. The of this study will not only tell us where and how much recharge takes place but will enable us to neasure ground-water recharge with reasonable accuracy and the outflow in detail sufficient for aquifer management purposes . Lacking this detail, the Survey in Clyde Conover's letter to Garland, dated 09-20-72 estimated a value of T= 200,000 because tests of Floridan Aquifer wells tapping the upper 250 feet of the 2 ,000 feet of the aquifer, indicated values ranging from 150,000 to 293,000 in the area of SWFWMD's FDA's. Likewise the Survey found it necessary to estimate values of leakance and on the basis of past experience elsewhere decreased indicated values in the range of 0.022 to 0.036 gpd/ft2 to 0.001 gpd/ftZ. is pretty skimpy estimating,, but-na, adverse criticism of the Survey is intended. in inaking this observation. It only points up another aspect of our great. lack of adequate hydrologic data upon which to base management decisions. I've checked the survey mathematics in this letter and find no errors., The--mathematics are OK, but the data they used . inay be . several hundred percent in error. D. ESTIMATES OF WELLFIELD YIELD & DRAWDOWN EFFECT IN GREEN SWAMP With little more to go on than the Survey did in making their conservative estimates, I suspect that a wellfield in the FDA's would yield 80 to 100 mgd with drawdowns of the same order of magnitude, i.e., lower the potentiometric surface 20-30 feet over about 15 mi2 and 10 to 20 feet over about 25 mi2. However, these values are only estimates and final values can only be determined by the aquifer evaluations to be made from the cooperative survey ---District investigations earlier mentioned. 241 .3bm•'J'I = E. MONET ARY VALUE 0 F GREEN SWAMP WELL FI ELD PUMP AGES ff': 09'1, . .J,,_ Value of such water, at 36 cents per thousand gallons produced at a tf'f:I rate of 80 mgd, would be $28,800 per day or $10,512,000 per year. Or, if produced at a rate of 100 mgd would bring in a return of $13,140,000 per year. -2-

PAGE 5

' ; . . . t .'.'.' • • I i j . l . I I I • ' t F. POPULATION GREEN SWAMP WELL FIELD PUMPAGE WOULD SUPPORT Sale, of such water would -be-. to an-. urbanizing society of chiefly homes, '-' small . {no heavy ;.. 1 ight commercial .t.Jses and _ _ ; "'' .. agricultural needs • . A per capita: . use of 200 gallons per person would . expected to satisfy the. reEJUirements . of such a population developingch;:ef.ry:: ; .. 2-f _ :'"!... around the southern and eastern peripheries of theGreen -Swamp . At -so mgd wou.ld provi "de-water supp.1 ies for 400,000 persons and 100 mgd would.:-;,.,, .... suffice for-500 000. . .. .,.-.. ..... , -G. PROJECTED POPULATION. ANO REGIONAL USE OF GREEN. SWAMP WELLFIELD WATER SUPPLY ttis my judgement that all thfs water--and. perhaps more--will be. : . needed for population growth chiefly in Polk, Osceola, Orange and Lake .:.....-: Counties. Population projections for these four counties, given in FlorJda, : .. - • Statistieal Abstracts (1973), are as follows: .: .. County 1972 1975 1980 1985 _____ ------Polk 249,000 274,600 319,300 . 355 ,900 Osceola 31,400 38,700 50,100 65 " ,200 Orange 385,000 Lake 732460 78,500 872500 100,400 Tota1 738,860 831,200 982,600 1,123,600 When these values are plotted _on graph paper it is readily seen that they<-: ' .. form straightl ine curves and may well be about 20 per cent in error (too fow). Correcting for this, excepting 1972 which is a measured and not projected value, the forecast would be as follows: Totals 1972 738,860 1975• 997,440 1980 1985 1,179,120 1,348,320 H. WATER-USE REQUIREMENTS OF REGIONAL USE AREA Allowing a water use of 200 gpcd, water requirements for the four counties would be: 1972 1975 Totals 147.7 mgd. 199.5 mgd. I. COMPARISON OF WATER SUPPLY VS. DEMAND 1980 235.8 mgd. 1985 269.6 mgd. It was estimated (8) that the total ground-water outflow is in the order of 241 mgd., or a yield of about 277,500 gpd/mi 2 for the 870 sq. mi. area of the Green Swamp. This equals 5.8" or approximately 6 inches of groundwater outflow. Putting this into the familiar water-budget equation of P R =-Et we get: P(53")-R(13")=Et(40"). 1311 = 6u GW0 + 711 SW0 • These values compare favorably with values obtained from other methods . J • • of estimating Rand Et for the Green Swamp area in which Et has been established -3-

PAGE 6

< . ' . . . . ... . ( as being in the range of. 70 -75" per year, and . give derived herein. • : .4 ...... credence the values I -. . 1 . . ,.. . . . . . . . . . ' .-'-. . This 1311 of outflow repres. enti:.. 611 of'"wate r that: has lieen recharged falling .on the: Green seep.ing downward into the Floridan-::.:: ':::'.0,,. and fl owing outwardly in all directions from a. central high near Polk City, plus 7" of streamflow. ,.:: :--.: :.:-:::. If one neglected the surface-water outflowand depended solely upon i .r " .-::..-::: capturing ground-water flow, the. potential water crop would be about 241 .mgd. . _ .. . But common sense tells us that wecannot withdraw all this water and use-it . . . consumptively. . Were we to.do so the s _1:reams would dry up, the swamp and .:. vegetation die and be. replaced with desert-type-plants such as turkey and blackjack oaks, long-leaf pines, saw palmetto, gall.berry and = ... . --.. certain bunch grasses. Perhaps it would be safe to use consumptively ab-ciut one-third of this total outflow, or about 80 mgd. This provide, at ; -:_" 200 . gpcci. water for a hew population of 400,000 people. If this much (80 mgd) were withdrawn but by careful usage only 25 per cent were lost to consumptive use and the rest, 60 mgd. returned to the aquifer by recharge practices, the usable water supply would be raised to 140 mgd, or enough water for 700,000 people. This is quite possible to accomplish and inasmuch as the waste .water must be cleaned up. to very high standards (almost to drinking water quality before being discharged to the environment) the cost of .further refining it for human uses would not be excessive; and for agricultural and many commercial uses it could be. re-used again and again with only secondary treatment. The nutrients .fi. • in the secondary-treated water, nitrates and . phosphates particularly, make: :. :.::-::. , such treated e ffluents highly valuable for plant watering. This may, in-.,.,-:-fact, be the only way to go to avoid importation of water from distant such as the Apa l ach i col a or Suwannee Rive rs. -4-


printinsert_linkshareget_appmore_horiz

Download Options [CUSTOM IMAGE]

close
Choose Size
Choose file type

Cite this item close

APA

Cras ut cursus ante, a fringilla nunc. Mauris lorem nunc, cursus sit amet enim ac, vehicula vestibulum mi. Mauris viverra nisl vel enim faucibus porta. Praesent sit amet ornare diam, non finibus nulla.

MLA

Cras efficitur magna et sapien varius, luctus ullamcorper dolor convallis. Orci varius natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Fusce sit amet justo ut erat laoreet congue sed a ante.

CHICAGO

Phasellus ornare in augue eu imperdiet. Donec malesuada sapien ante, at vehicula orci tempor molestie. Proin vitae urna elit. Pellentesque vitae nisi et diam euismod malesuada aliquet non erat.

WIKIPEDIA

Nunc fringilla dolor ut dictum placerat. Proin ac neque rutrum, consectetur ligula id, laoreet ligula. Nulla lorem massa, consectetur vitae consequat in, lobortis at dolor. Nunc sed leo odio.