OCR Text |
Show PROBLEMS OF IMPERIAL, VALLEY AND VICINITY. 179 For this report, therefore, an estimate is necessary of the potential power not only on the Colorado River but also below the large reservoir sites on the tributaries, which latter are also below most irrigation possibilities on the respective tributaries. Power possibilities above may be neglected. In the following an estimate is made of the potential power assuming that the total fall can be utilized. However, it is known that the total fall of the stream can not be utilized although conditions are favorable on the Colorado and its tributaries. Some head will be lost in creating storage to equate the stream; it will always be necessary to lose a small amount at the tailrace of power plants; dam sites may not exist at the proper places or it may not be possible to build as high dams as necessary at the sites which can be used. Railroads may be located at such points as to prohibit raising the water surface behind good dam sites. A multitude of circumstances may interfere, but in the present state of knowledge no other basis for comparable estimates appears. The proper height of dam at any of the known locations has not received study from this standpoint, and it may be found that, for the purpose of creating head alone, higher dams than at present proposed are economically feasible. As to stream discharge no account is taken of loss by evaporation from reservoir surface, the total of which would be large if all sites are built. GREEN RIVER. The major upper site on the Green River is the flaming Gorge of 4,000,000 acre-feet capacity. Below this the main tributaries are the Tampa and White from the east and the Duchesne from the west. Below the Duchesne, the Price and San Rafael also enter from the west but are of no importance to power because of small discharge. For convenience the basin is taken up by sections, and tributaries are discussed first. Calculated power is horsepower at turbines based on 88 per cent efficiency. ¦¦ TAMPA RIVER. Jumper reservoir site to mouik of Little Snake. ' (Jmriper reserrcir site (13) is the controlling reservoir.] Juniper nsmtvoir site, capacity................;____. ..v.......acre-feet,. 1,800, 000 Present average annual discharge..............................___do..,. 1,300,000 Estimated ultimate after irrigation develops above.................do.... 1,140,000 Storage capacity to equate stream------...........................do.. ?. 1,560,000 Raise in water surface for 1.800,000 acre-foot capacity................feet.. 240 Head below 1,550,000 acre-foot storage.....................«.,.... do.... 150 Equated discbarge: * - Present.................„....................___'.___second-feet.. 1,800 Ultimate........................................____1___..do.,.. 1,600 Elevation of outlets......................\.........................feet.. 6,090 Elevation at mouth of Little Snake, about........................do___ 5,850 Total fall.....................................,............do.,... 240 Distance..................................,.......-...1__........miles.. 25 Potential horsepower at dam site: Present....................-----..........___....................... 27,000 Ultimate.............................--........................... 24,000 Potential horsepower in section: Present-........................................................... 43,200 Ultimate.......................................................... 38,400 |
Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : |