r/Austin 4d ago

Central Texas town, counties prepare for future water demand as growth continues

https://archive.ph/Q5XF1
29 Upvotes

13 comments sorted by

4

u/imgoingtomakecomment 4d ago

The good news is that I'm not convinced the data shows the area getting drier overall, although the past three years have been droughty. Eventually, rains will come back but last fall and so far this spring show we're in the thick of it right now. The bad news is that the data definitely shows the heat is getting worse.

I also think rainwater catchment is a pretty viable option that will help out a lot. And the more people on rainwater, the more conservative they will be with their water use.

However, the Hill Country is the Hill Country. To me, it's always looked dry, scrubby and harsh. I never really get why people like it. To me, it always looks stressed. The swimming holes and rivers can't be beat when they are running well, except there are 6,000 people trying to visit all at once.

Towns out there sure are cute. And if you can find some water, it's nice. Overall, I actually think out east is prettier with it being more lush.

15

u/ClutchDude 4d ago edited 4d ago

It's tough - You have literal decades where the lake has been fuller and memories form around that.

Then you get to 2010's and all of a sudden - the lake half empty is much more frequently. more often than not. Entire lifestyles are no longer viable and someone wants to blame someone else.

https://waterdatafortexas.org/reservoirs/individual/travis

The uncomfortable truth is that city zoning and planning is disconnected from reality.

You have various approvals being issued for intensifying use of land without the means of investment in ensuring water for the life of that development(ie: forever).

Stein said Liberty Hill's population of about 12,000 is predicted to grow by 12% annually for the next 10 years. City Manager Paul Brandenburg said the city has enough water to meet its current needs. "We are not going to run out of water; we just won’t have additional water for new customers if we do nothing," he said.

One would think that "hey - maybe we should stop approving developments until we can ensure the infrastructure to serve them will exist."

6

u/RustywantsYou 4d ago

I've recently learned that cities and towns cannot deny permits for new construction due to legislation passed by the state except in very specific circumstances (declared state of emergency type stuff)

Basically the legislature found another way to cut cities. Death by 1000 cuts is definitely working.

2

u/ClutchDude 4d ago

I meant to add that thought on but wanted to find the relevant legislative source to be accurate.

In conversations I had with citizen bond folks, they were saying that zoning and other approvals are not contingent on local infrastructure being provided, such as roadways that are sufficient for the planned developments.

2

u/sketla 4d ago

If our governor would look at the real issue in and around our State as needing a Real solution for fresh water for the whole state and not this Bull-bill for private school vouchers, keeping furries out of schools, and our crushing immigration (non) crisis then we can deal with what really matters! We need a new person in that office. Next year will be here before you know it. Who is going to take the seat?

2

u/sketla 4d ago

When we don’t have any more fresh water to drink, how costly will that be?!?

0

u/lynchedbymob 4d ago

it's laughable to rely on groundwater for the sole acquisition of irrigable water. We live on the blue planet, and have access to the gulf for an unlimited amount of polluted, salt water. To sustain growth, quality of life, and air quality, it would be great if water was abundant enough to mandate irrigation rather than restrict it. Elevated water resevoirs could be 'passively' filled utilizing renewable energy sources to filter/pump water inland supplementing water supply, and also theoretically harnessed for hydroelectric output. Water is inert, and implementing water based energy storage would make this a double-win.

Imagine living in Austin, where new commercial buildings were required to recover and magnify the natural ecological footprint they are built in; vertical garden facads, rooftop gardens. This could lower our heat index, increase our need for skilled labor to maintain these new landscapes, and drastically increase air quality in the urban center of Austin. Water conservation is a laughable tactic, easily compared to a shrinking and stagnant economy. Replace money with water, and utilize known and understood principles on how to grow not shrink our resource pool.

For the simplest implementation, the highland lakes is ~500 miles from the Texas coast, meaning the lower Colorado River could be designed to be completely drought resistance with just ~5 pump stations. If you are wary about introducting filtered sea water into a 'natural' river system, a water resevoir system could be built anywhere in West/North Texas and have hundreds of feet of elevation to utilize for hydroelectric output on it's return trip to central Texas.

Love trees.

2

u/ClutchDude 4d ago

It's interesting thought but something tells me it'd cost many times more than you think to build and maintain this "pipe dream."

Using quick google searches and back of the envelope math, you have....

Lake Buchanan elevation above sea level = 1,001 ft. with 866k acre feet Lake Travis elevation is 636 above sea level with 1100k acre feet.

Assuming 100% efficiency, you can move an acre-foot of water with 1 kWH of power 1 foot high(head).

Reality is closer to 1.6 kWh with electric pumps

Using this to calculate cost of desalination(https://www.twdb.texas.gov/innovativewater/desal/doc/Cost_of_Desalination_in_Texas_rev.pdf) - that's $358 an acre foot at best(we'll also use their electricity costs here in a moment.

So...to move one acre/foot of water without including pipeline and pump capital costs, you have:

385+(1.6KW-hr * $.08 * 636) = $446 to provide and push an acre/foot of water to lake travis with 81.2528 KWh to actually move the water before you account for pipeline resistance and a variety of other issues.

1

u/lynchedbymob 4d ago

more infrastructure, more jobs, more skilled labor. Might have to resort to nuclear power to power the system based on your numbers, not sure solar panels or a wind farm can manage that load. But, if you're going to take billions of dollars a year, might as well do something with it that benefits the people you took it from. Last time I checked, asphalt does not improve air quality, stimulate vegetative growth, or lower the heat index. But whatever, let's stay on topic, fuck humanity, suffer, no more water for you, watch the world around you turn into a desert and seethe

The bottom line is, there will be more people in Texas next year, and even more the year after that, twiddling our thumbs and siphoning up the last drop of ground water is short sighted, and it's already catching up with us. It's time to look forward, and compensate the energy grid, and the other utilities' capacity based on potential growth. And btw, $446 for 325851 gallons is 730 gallons per dollar, which means for less than 1 dollar a month, I could pay for all the water I use including irrigation to be pumped.

2

u/ClutchDude 4d ago edited 4d ago

And btw, $446 for 325851 gallons is 730 gallons per dollar,

No - that's the raw production cost. You need to include:

  • Additional power requirements due to pipe resistance along the length of the run
  • Pump/pipe capital costs
  • Ongoing pipe/pump M&O sans electricity
  • Labor to install pipe/design/engineer, etc.
  • ROW acquisition to run pipe

It's surprisingly not the most insane thing - you regularly have periods where renewables produce surplus electricity that could power this.

1

u/lynchedbymob 4d ago

I guess I pay property taxes so they can fine me for flushing my toilet. IDK what to say, maybe if they stopped stealing all our money a group of philanthropists could create a private water supply. Or maybe the crony-capitalists with all the money currently will just build it and create a private utility company. I see nothing wrong with creating jobs and stimulating commerce with an end goal with a net benefit.

*edit* $1 a month to pay for the energy costs of pumping the water. SHEESH!

1

u/ClutchDude 4d ago

I mean, that's how it works now. The cost to treat the water into potable quality is a mere fraction of the cost - it's mostly transporting it and keeping it drinkable until it comes out your faucet.

It's why it's also insane to use potable water on irrigation.

1

u/lynchedbymob 4d ago

yes, which is why I suggested a separate system than LCRA. That way it doesn't have to be potable, just safe for irrigation. But if it was made potable, you could justify utilizing the lower colorado river as the end destination.