(GP/GT) for Additional Water Supply in the Lower Rio Grande

More documents

Recommendations

Info

afforded by low electridty rates allows for profitable operation of the H.LD. lighting. However, slight increases in electricity rates, on the order of only SO.002-0.005/kWh, dramatically shift profitability to a negative position. Prospective growers will want to carefully evaluate the stability of the local utility and its rate policies before committing to H.l.D. lighting. Some of the points brought out in this analysis may be considered as elements necessary fer a successful venture. A primary consideration is that high levels of quality bloom production are absolutely required. The high annual solar radiation in the Southwest, particularly in the winter time when the crop is growing for holiday sales, is a natural resource benefit that has considerable financial rewards. By not having to invest in and operate H.LD. lighting, the Southwest grower saves on financing and annual operating costs to an enormous degree relative to the other regions. A second necessary element is a skilled labor force that is both willing and able to work for competitive wage rates. Annual costs for labor, expressed as a percentage of the total operating budget, range between 40 to 50%. Labor costs represent the single largest expenditure for a grower. Opportunities for enhanced automation, the substitution of capital for labor, appear to be limited. Therefore the grower will have to attract labor at rates that are both sufficient for the worker and competitive for a profitable enterprise. Because the overall cost of living tends to be considerably lower in the Southwest, labor rates also tend to be lower, particularly for agriculture-based labor. It is likely that the relative cost-of-living indices will continue to be lower in the Southwest, therefore contributing to a long-term economic advantage for the grower. In summary, it is esp,matedin this report that a cut-flower rose operation may be established and operated in a Southwest location at a profitable level. Because of the lower real estate prices in the Southwest, less capital is required to start a new greenhouse business. In addition, no special incentives are necessary for the operation. Rather, the Southwest offers natural resource and cost of living advantages that make the region an economically-preferred location. U.S. growers, seeking expansion or relocation sites, should consider the opportunities afforded by a Southwest location. New growers to the industry should consider the Southwest as th,: primary location for their business planning. F-8
Appendix Financial \lodel Description SECTION 1. ASSUMPTIONS FOR OPERATING ANALYSIS Greenhouse Assumptions LAND COST: Land cost estimations are based on known prices of existing and likely possible locations. Commercial real estate brokers were contacted in the selected locations. given a brief explanation of the study. and asked to estimate a price for a ten-acre plot of land suitable for commercial greenhouse operations. ROSE PL4u"lTS PER ACRE: The figure given for the number of rose plants per acre is based upon averages cited by various experienced growers. TOTAL 1'
Page 1 and 2:
KLEBER J. DENNY, INC. 312 Grandview
Page 3 and 4:
KLEBER J. DENNY, INC. 312 Grandview
Page 5 and 6:
FINAL REPORT ON TEXAS WATER DEVELOP
Page 7 and 8:
REPORT ON TASK NO. I: CO-LOCATION S
Page 9 and 10:
1-2 1. GP/GT Fairways Information p
Page 12 and 13:
o s:: 011= m ,; .. f ; iI '& ri i'
Page 14 and 15:
Table S Selected Formation Water An
Page 16 and 17:
average depth of 10,033 feet, avera
Page 18 and 19:
high, the sands are not thick enoug
Page 20 and 21:
included distributary channel or de
Page 22 and 23:
the eastern part of the study area,
Page 24 and 25:
to coastal barrier sandstone on the
Page 26 and 27:
within Reservoir Area B, the sand a
Page 28 and 29:
Papadopulos, S. S., 1975, The Energ
Page 30 and 31:
FLUID PROPERTIES Gas Gas Water Sol'
Page 32 and 33:
only reason for selecting that limi
Page 34 and 35:
Hidalgo Co. , , , ,, , ,, , ,,, , ,
Page 36 and 37:
§ 8 10,116' ;;;- - ... : 10,695' F
Page 38 and 39:
-r- ~~ '1- • r- ~~ .... . ~ 0 0 0
Page 40 and 41:
MARK SAND (MINIMUM) Geo2 Fluid Prod
Page 42 and 43:
BOND SAND (MINIMUM) Geo2 Fluid Prod
Page 44 and 45:
EAST SAND (MINIMUM) Geo2 Fluid Prod
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
EAST SAND (MAXIMUM) Geo2 Fluid Prod
Page 52 and 53:
MARK SAND (MINIMUM) 1 5 Year Cumula
Page 54 and 55:
BOND SAND (MINIMUM) 1 5 Year Cumula
Page 56 and 57:
EAST SAND (MINIMUM) 1 5 Year Cumula
Page 58 and 59:
jpH~j·:/·3,000 mgi1 TOS Sli,;,lly
Page 60 and 61:
average depth of 10,033 feet, avera
Page 62 and 63:
high, the sands are not thick enoug
Page 64 and 65:
included distributary channel or de
Page 66 and 67:
the eastern part of the study area,
Page 68 and 69:
to coastal barrier sandstone on the
Page 70 and 71:
Within Reservoir Area B, the sand a
Page 72 and 73:
Papadopulos, S. S., 1975, The Energ
Page 74 and 75:
FLUID PROPERTIES Gas Gas Water Sol'
Page 76 and 77:
only reason for selecting that limi
Page 78 and 79:
Matrix of Locations!') and Descript
Page 80 and 81:
• , l L , ,, , ,, , , ,, ,, , ,,
Page 82 and 83:
"i 8 10,116' II =1 -- ~ ~ -- iii: 1
Page 84 and 85:
-I- 0; 0 0 .f: 0 -. - . '-I- - . r-
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
EAST SAND (MINIMUM) Geo2 Fluid Prod
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
EAST SAND (MAXIMUM) Geo2 Fluid Prod
Page 98 and 99:
MARK SAND (MINIMUM) 1 5 Year Cumula
Page 100 and 101:
BOND SAND (MINIMUM) 1 5 Year Cumula
Page 102 and 103:
.,,'" - •• 0. _. ___ _ EAST SAN
Page 104 and 105:
STARR COUNTY I -i'J- ~ 10 b .......
Page 106 and 107:
Net Sand Depth Thickness Sand Sand
Page 108 and 109:
TABLE 5 TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOA
Page 110 and 111:
ill-2 This process review is especi
Page 112 and 113:
m-4 There are some built-in limitat
Page 114 and 115:
ill-7 It is not surprising, therefo
Page 116 and 117:
,,,,-,';8 .. - .. ~ Pretreatment Pr
Page 118 and 119:
lli-9 Comparative Assumed Input Inr
Page 120 and 121:
PRO-FORMA CALCULATIONS FOR REVERSE
Page 122 and 123:
STEAM VENT EJECTOR • PRESSURE RED
Page 124 and 125:
STEAM VENT EJECTOR I :> :>:> LfTl:>
Page 126 and 127:
ID-16 a) The separate seawater inta
Page 128 and 129:
1lI-18 Data for the injection flow
Page 130 and 131:
lli-20 (8) Thermal content of fluid
Page 132 and 133:
ill-22 The primary environmental co
Page 134 and 135:
ill-24 III. B-2 BRINE DISPOSAL VIA
Page 136 and 137:
1lI-26 to 10 centipoise if it is he
Page 138 and 139:
1II-28 1lI.B-S&6 BYPRODUCT SALTS RE
Page 140 and 141:
II I-3~ BRINES mOlAl( DlCAtlYDlAI!
Page 142 and 143:
1II-32 2. Generally speaking, the s
Page 144 and 145:
III-34 1. Group 1 through Group 4 w
Page 146 and 147:
1II-36 Based on this comparative da
Page 148 and 149:
In-38 Section UlD - Pro-Forma Econo
Page 150 and 151:
II I -40 Exhibit InD-2 Assumed Inpu
Page 152 and 153:
111-42 EXHIBIT llID-4 PRO-FORMA CAL
Page 154 and 155:
Appendices
Page 156 and 157:
Appendix A Preliminary Estimates of
Page 158 and 159:
APPENDIX B
Page 160 and 161:
-------- ThIs Underground Injection
Page 162 and 163:
Federal Requirements - -"-J;' ... -
Page 164 and 165:
Chapter II Summary of Injection Con
Page 166 and 167:
.. ' a surface owner b. offset oper
Page 168 and 169:
I. Special "Down Hole" Swvcys speci
Page 170 and 171:
FLOWCHART: INJECTION/DISPOSAL WELL
Page 172 and 173:
the applicant can show. by computat
Page 174 and 175:
Criteria lor Determining the Adequa
Page 176 and 177:
.I MODULAR POWER PLANTS FOR GEOPRES
Page 178 and 179:
FIGURE 2 BINARY POWER MODULE··: .
Page 180 and 181:
TABLE 1 GEOPRESSURED PLANT APPROXIM
Page 182 and 183:
EGG-EP-8839 September 1991 Idaho Na
Page 184 and 185:
EGG-EP-9839 Distribution Category:
Page 186 and 187:
ACKNOWLEDGMENT Work supported by th
Page 188 and 189:
APPENDIX A--SEATTLE TIMES EDITORIAL
Page 190 and 191:
THE FEASIBILITY OF APPLYING GEOPRES
Page 192 and 193:
University, January 10, 1990 with 6
Page 194 and 195:
OF 35 50 100 150 200 250 300 I I I
Page 196 and 197:
Desalination Plant Supply Well \ er
Page 198 and 199:
for an extensive chicken hatching/r
Page 200 and 201:
THE GEOPRESSURED RESOURCE Geopressu
Page 202 and 203:
Production Co. has leased 4000 acre
Page 204 and 205:
p' , ~"\ ,0 .~~ ~~ 'i ~ __ =:-~ 'l.
Page 206 and 207:
Desalination Desalination is a prov
Page 208 and 209:
--- r/< N N EIII ... IK:ltI' 011 ,,
Page 210 and 211:
Sacramento Valley and San Joaquin V
Page 212 and 213:
Gas Use and Sales Gas contained in
Page 214 and 215:
Sulfur Fraschtng Sulfur can be reco
Page 216 and 217:
Coal Desulfurization and Preparatio
Page 218 and 219:
films. Today, nearly half of the br
Page 220 and 221:
Waste gases Chlorinator Chlorine Di
Page 222 and 223:
POTENTIAL AGRICULTURE/AQUACULTURE A
Page 224 and 225:
The University of Southwestern loui
Page 226 and 227:
Snapping turtles are important comp
Page 228 and 229:
ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS This sectio
Page 230 and 231:
economic techniques because cash fl
Page 232 and 233:
Assuming a geopressured well can pr
Page 234 and 235:
Table 3. Agriculture/aquaculture fi
Page 236 and 237:
Circular Tank 90' Diam. 80'F Bypass
Page 238 and 239:
Potable water for agriculture and a
Page 240 and 241: DESALINATION/AGRICULTURE/AQUACULTUR
Page 242 and 243: REFERENCES Carlson, R. A., P. H. Po
Page 244 and 245: APPENDIX A SEATTLE TIMES EDITORIAL
Page 246 and 247: APPENDIX B HEATING REQUIREMENTS FOR
Page 248 and 249: temperature and the heat gain curve
Page 250 and 251: Thermal Refuge Heating Requirements
Page 252 and 253: APPENDIX C INTEGRATED APPLICATIONS
Page 254 and 255: ANALYSIS OF WELL: Large Volume. Mod
Page 256 and 257: ANALYSIS OF WELL: large Volume, Mod
Page 258 and 259: ANALYSIS OF ~ELL: Large Volume. MOd
Page 260 and 261: APPENDIX D PRELIMINARY FEASIBILITY
Page 262 and 263: DES/ON • CONS(JI..TlNO • F',..,
Page 264 and 265: Des/oN • CONS
Page 266 and 267: Des/ON • CONS(.Jl..rINQ • F,A.S
Page 268 and 269: RED EWALD,lnc. 10,000 GALLON RACEWA
Page 270 and 271: ",CUND F:;:SH C;LTURE TANKS ~.:::~
Page 272 and 273: ~c:!~ ?:~:~.~ ?.I'n~ -: 1'DS-; mS-!
Page 274 and 275: * Texas A uaculture Association * A
Page 276 and 277: -----------------------------------
Page 278 and 279: RED EWALD. Ute. -- Round Fish Cultu
Page 280 and 281: PORTABLE MODULAR FISH HATCHERY SYST
Page 282 and 283: B & J Water- Well Ser-vice 419 East
Page 284 and 285: APPENDIX F COMPARATIVE PERFORMANCE
Page 286 and 287: BffiLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET for repor
Page 288 and 289: factors, utility costs, cash flow,
Page 292 and 293: PRODUCTION LOSSES: With any type of
Page 294 and 295: deposits. minimum monthly customer
Page 296 and 297: conservative figure. This rate is u
Page 298 and 299: Other Capital Equipment YlETAL BUIL
Page 300: SECTION 3a. ~OTE 1 :-"-:ET CASH l1'
Page 303 and 304: TABLE 8·25. ASSl.;;-'1PT!O:\'S FOR
Page 305 and 306: TABLE B·26. GRED;HOUSE C.u>IT AL C
Page 307 and 308: .1 ~I ~ · ~ · ~ .. · · ~ ~ " -
Page 309 and 310: APPENDIX E
Page 311 and 312: Assumed Efficiency = 0.90 Constant
Page 313 and 314: EVALUATION OF AUTO DESALINATION As
Page 315 and 316: A review of the data for the wellhe
Page 317 and 318: J. McNutt & Associates, Inc. McAlle
Page 319 and 320: DownHole SAT(tm) SURFACE WATER DEPO
Page 321 and 322: DownHole SAT(tm) SURFACE WATER CHEM
Page 323 and 324: DownHole SAT(tm) SURFACE WATER MOME
Page 325 and 326: en C 0 09'8 -- += "0 c 0 U "0 X (])
Page 327 and 328: (/) c o += x -- (]) D -c 5 c u - D
Page 329 and 330: Degree of Supersaturation (E-01 ) 0
Page 331 and 332: (/) c - 0 (]) -- += > D (]) c -.J 0
Page 333 and 334: (/) c - 0 (]) 09'8 += -- > '"0 (])
Page 335 and 336: (/) c 0 - 09'8 -- :f= (]) -0 c > (]
Page 337 and 338: (/) c 0 09'8 -- =t= - C > 0 (]) U -
Page 339 and 340: C/) c 0 - 09'8 += (]) .- D c (]) >
Page 341 and 342:
en - Cl) > Cl) C ..J o += C "'0 --
Page 343 and 344:
APPENDIX G
Page 345 and 346:
McPJlen Ranch, 7 t :> W:lter Recove
Page 347 and 348:
c ~ (J) 09'8 0 (J) (]J 0 (1) U C2::
Page 349 and 350:
McAJlen Ranch, 75'10 WJter Recovery
Page 351 and 352:
IVlcPJlen I-
Page 353 and 354:
c CJ) CJ) (]) ~ 0 U 0 X w & ~ ~ -m
Page 355 and 356:
J) rJ) (1) u x W 09'8 ~o .. ..c. o
Page 357 and 358:
c ~ 0 09'8 U) 0 U) (]) CJ.) ~ U ~ X
Page 359 and 360:
McAJlen Ranch, 7510 W:1ter Recovery
Page 361 and 362:
c ~ - 09'8 0 (]) 0 > Q) (]) -V ..J
Page 363 and 364:
c ~ o
Page 365 and 366:
c ~ 09"8 0 - (]) 0 > (]) (]) 0::: .
Page 367 and 368:
c ~ 09'8 0 - 0 Cl) (1) > ~ Cl) ~ ..
Page 369 and 370:
c ~ - 09'8 0 C]) 0 > (]) C]) v --1
Page 371 and 372:
c ~ o (]) y - (l.) > (l.) ..J C o .
Page 373 and 374:
00'8 ... .c U c -8 c (l) - ~ 5 - x
Page 375 and 376:
c ~ X 0 Q.) u (}) -0 ""V - C ~ ~ c
Page 377 and 378:
APPENDIX G 4 DEC 1993 TO: MR. KLEBE
Page 379 and 380:
PRELIMINARY EDR/RO COSTS & PERFORMA
Page 381 and 382:
GROUP 1 CONDITIONS 195,000 gpd bypa
Page 383 and 384:
CASE 3 CONDITIONS 214,000 gpd bypas
Page 385 and 386:
BUDGET CAPITAL COST REVIEW ---costs
Page 387 and 388:
0H16D REVIEW OP O~11 COSTS .'.(1) -
Page 389 and 390:
From: CANYON n,DUSTRIES, INC. 206 5
show all

(GP/GT) for Additional Water Supply in the Lower Rio Grande

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?