I thought I would start off the conversation with a hot button issue here in the state.

Poseidon is a company that has been trying to create solutions for California's water crisis since the 80's. Their main project was water desalination of ocean water to make it useable and drinkable.

They were stopped by an environmental group in the late 80's because the group said, among other things, that it didn't make sense that Poseidon was trying to capitalize a resource that belongs to everyone (ocean water). As time went on, our need for a new source of water became more and more obvious. Environmental reports claimed that the Colorado river (one of our main sources of water) was at an all time low thanks to Southern California. It has gotten so bad a few years ago that we decided that we had to reconsider Poseidon. Poseidon is now back on track but some people are still don't think its right.

Here's what I think:
When it comes right down to it, I would rather pay for salt free ocean water then pay for recycled water, or damage the environment that has come to rely on the Colorado river.

First off, I encourage anyone who has time and $8 to visit the Museum of Natural History's Water Exhibit (free every other Tuesday IIRC).

Fresh water is a scarce resource; globally humans have access to only 1% of the fresh water on the planet.The Imperial Valley is the only district in in CA that receives water from the Colorado River, while the rest of the Metropolitan Water Authority imports 90% of the water in San Diego County. Recycling water from sewage plants is a necessary part of water management, as is desalination. Both can and are being be done responsibly. Unfortunately it is not cheap or as efficient as importing water.

Recycling treated waste water used for irrigation for farmland and landscapes is smart because it is nutrient rich, and properly managed, watersheds around farms can keep the run-off from going into lakes, streams and the ocean where it can kill the marine life. Aquatic plants like it, however the algae resulting algae growth would asphyxiate any fish that were there. Furthermore this provides an opportunity for college students who can examine what is going into the water, as well as the food by sampling these watersheds for their experiments.

Desalination is easier on most people's sensibilities. However, if you live next to a desalination plant, there tends to be a decline in property value as the resulting brine doesn't smell very nice, so most communities will likely prevent development, and there are also environmental standards which must be met by those companies. If the brine is simply discharged it will more than likely kill neighboring aquatic life as species are adapted to only a narrow salinity range. If it's done near industrial or commercial centers water quality, including impacts of blending with power plant, sewage or other discharges would have a tremendous ecological consequence. We don't need to revisit the Hudson River I think.

Doing a cost benefit analysis, we have to consider the social benefits and costs and remember that, these are not always strictly quantitative: e.g. simply paying more on your monthly water bill. Negative impact: loss in property value, pollution, environmental damage... where is it going to be built? Will the company internalize those costs or would a
If we just do a strict MC>MB analysis, it's cheaper to simply keep importing water. What other consequences might there be though? If we have more water to use, which leads to urban sprawl which requires even greater water usage will there be a domino effect? There comes a point where the costs are greater than the benefits, and we're not just talking about dollars.