Letter To Editor: Desal Plant Too Expensive SCWD Candidate Says

DANA POINT, CA — In a letter to the editor, Markus Lenger of Capistrano Beach described why he feels the Desal Plant is "too expensive for our wallets and the environment."

Growing up in Switzerland where mountain water was abundant and now a ten-year resident of Dana Point, I understand firsthand the importance of water security. In fact, ever since 1989 when I assisted in the clean up of the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska, I have devoted my life to water. Now recognized as an expert in the water industry, I volunteer my time on many water efficiency and technical committees to help effect positive change in the way we secure our nation’s water.

I am truly concerned about SCWD’s plan to build an expensive, complex, power hungry and unsustainable slant-well desalination plant right outside our harbor!

SCWD says its mission is to be “entrusted by our community to provide water resources essential for sustaining life.” So far, we have trusted them to spend upwards of $10 million on consultants alone
without a single permit secured and without earning the support of any other water district partners. We have also trusted them to report the facts, some of which have not been made clear.

For example, did you know that the proposed desalination plant will require close to 40% of the City of Dana Point’s entire energy usage at full capacity? Did you know that once the State revolving fund becomes due to pay for the completed $100 million sewer tunnel next
year, even at preferential interest rates, your bill will increase by over $30? The debt service on the proposed desalination plant, (now estimated at $120 million and growing) which will produce water that is more expensive than purchased water, will cause yet another significant increase.

Desalination has been named by MIT and United Nations as bad for the environment because it creates more waste (for our delicate ocean eco-system) than useable product.

Other proposed desal projects in California have recently been either delayed or axed, mainly due to prohibitive energy usage and excessively high cost when compared to other sustainable options.

Oceanside’s desal plant has constant challenges and can’t meet the required water quality and cost targets. It was proposed to cost $320 million but the final price tag was over $900 million.

Is this what we want for our tiny water district? If you think, as I do, that the proposed desal project is too risky, too expensive, too power hungry and therefore the most unsustainable option SCWD could have chosen, then I ask you to put your trust in me by giving me your vote and allowing me the chance to make positive change.

What are your thoughts on the Desalination Plant?

Do you have any additional questions for Lenger? Please share in comments or by emailing your Patch editor.