The Desal Divide Pt. 1: The Science
By Beatz Alvarado
Highlights:
- Corpus Christi residents challenge the city’s science on desalination.
- City of Corpus Christi evades modeling for Inner Harbor project while Port’s modeling results in the suspension of La Quinta desal project.
- Texas-based scientists weigh in on environmental implications of desal brine dumps into the Inner Harbor and Gulf of Mexico.
It all started with one question for the City of Corpus Christi: How will brine dumps from desalination in the Inner Harbor dilute over time, considering the sluggish nature of Corpus Christi Bay? And what will that mean for sea life, area anglers and commercial fishermen?
“That’s all I’ve been trying to figure out, and I still can’t get a straight answer,” said Corpus Christi resident Jason Hale.
The question has been asked by Hale twice since February during private meetings with the City of Corpus Christi’s Water Department, but to no avail.
The frustrating experience with staffers left Hale with more questions than answers about the scientific proof the City has used to justify building the first large-scale seawater desalination facility in the world in a closed bay system. Unable to cut through the City’s bureaucratic, and potentially misleading, red tape on this issue, Hale is suspicious of the mathematical modeling used to acquire the state permits required to build the Inner Harbor desalination plant in the Hillcrest neighborhood.
“It’s just super fucked up because on their permit, it’s best-case scenario and then some,” Hale said of the conclusions drawn from the analysis conducted by city staff for permit applications submitted to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ).
When the Chisme Collective sent questions to the the City of Corpus Christi in July, officials declined to comment.
Here’s what we asked:
The City of Corpus Christi is one of two entities seeking to build a seawater desalination plant in the Inner Harbor. The second entity is Corpus Christi Polymers, which is trying to build its own desalination plant to operate what could be the largest Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plant in the world. PET is a petrochemical product often used to manufacture single-use plastics.
The Port of Corpus Christi Authority is the third key player behind efforts to bring desalination to the Coastal Bend. Initially, the Port proposed to build two desalination plants: The Harbor Island plant in Port Aransas and the La Quinta plant in Ingleside.
Since the first version of this story was published in August, the Port suspended its permit application for the La Quinta facility, according to reports.
Origins of the Desal Fight
Opposition to the City’s and Corpus Christi Polymers’ projects, as well as the projects proposed by the Port of Corpus Christi, started in 2016 by a local community group called For the Greater Good. Members of For the Greater Good exposed plans to build multiple desalination plants in the Coastal Bend shortly after they began to monitor government meetings related to water.
Founders of For the Greater Good exposed to the public that the need for a new source of potable water stemmed from the City’s obligation to fulfill water contracts with high-volume industrial water users, like ExxonMobil. Community resistance to desalination gained steam when city officials started trying to sell desalination to the public as the only solution to the area’s worsening drought, implying that residents need desalination as much as industry does.
“Those trying to force Corpus Christi to pursue desalination are doing so because they want the public to bear all the risks and burdens associated with such a facility,” said Dr. Isabel Araiza, founding member of For the Greater Good. Araiza was interviewed by the Chisme Collective in early August before she filed to run for mayor of Corpus Christi. “We believe our community and our environment deserve better. We aren’t willing to sacrifice our people, the creatures or the environment for the greed and interests of corporations who have no stake, no loyalty to our community and region.”
Desalination has gone mainstream since it was first brought to light by For the Greater Good. The now-popular anti-desal outcry has attracted others to the fight, including Hale, whose opposition is rooted in the potentially-misleading science being used to predict the environmental consequences of desalination.
Hale earned a bachelor’s degree in chemical engineering from Texas A&M-Kingsville, where he graduated among the top three students in his class. After learning about the potential for “dead zones” due to brine dumps from desalination plants proposed for the Inner Harbor, he decided to put his degree to use to investigate the proposed projects.
The Chisme Collective
The Science
The first time Hale met with city staff in February 2024 he recommended staffers conduct a far-field model to better understand the environmental implications of brine dumps into Inner Harbor waters. This would’ve answered his question about how well the brine can dilute in the bay.
During a second meeting in June with Corpus Christi Water Department staff, Hale cited a white paper on “dead zones” submitted to the TCEQ as part of a Contested Case Hearing Request by the Hillcrest Residents Association. But that went nowhere, he said.
Far-field modeling of brine discharge from the city’s proposed desalination plant in the Inner Harbor was recommended by Dr. Ben Hodges in the white paper. Hodges is an engineering professor at the University of Texas at Austin.
“The lack of an inertial far-field mixing regime at this location (Inner Harbor) renders this location inappropriate for the applicant’s proposal,” Hodges states in the paper.
Running a far-field model could help avoid “dead zones” by stopping the city’s Inner Harbor desal project, as well as the Corpus Christi Polymers project, before they start. Once online, the plants’ brine accumulation could degrade water quality beyond legal limits set by the TCEQ, ultimately breaking state law when the plants are up-and-running in 2030.
Near- vs. Far-field Modeling
Conducting a far-field model would be a step above what the City has conducted, which is near-field modeling.
Near-field modeling simulates brine dilution at the first 400 feet from the desalination plant’s outfall (where the brine is dumped) while far-field modeling looks at everything beyond the first 400 feet. The mixing processes and other assumptions made for these two distances are what differentiate the models. The near-field is a simplified model that simulates a turbulent mixing process and assumes a fixed velocity. Unlike a far-field model, it does not factor in the dynamic changes in water movement that occur throughout a body of water.
Therefore, examining brine dilution via a far-field model (beyond the first 400 feet) makes for a more accurate reading of how well brine will naturally mix with seawater.
Corpus Christi Water Department staff told Hale during a private meeting on June 19 that the City will not consider far-field modeling because they’re confident in the findings of the near-field modeling.
Days later, during the June 25 city council meeting, Assistant City Attorney Janet Whitehead advised councilmembers to not conduct a far-field model of the Inner Harbor for three reasons:
- A far-field model would delay the Inner Harbor project past an upcoming hearing necessary for one of its TCEQ permits.
- A far-field model would cost the City too much money ($50K-$100K).
- A far-field model would actually stop the project in its tracks, which would work against the City’s goal of defending the draft permit already issued by the TCEQ.
“So, we wouldn’t have time to do the far-field modeling for Inner Harbor, and the cost involved is tremendous; we’re talking $50,000 to $100,000 to run modeling that may or may not … uh … I’m sorry, that will not advance our project,” Whitehead said. “It will not. So, (the City’s legal staff) has recommended that we don’t chase that rabbit.”
During the Corpus Christi City Council Meeting on June 25, 2024, Assistant City Attorney Janet Whitehead advised councilmembers to not conduct a far-field model of the Inner Harbor.
The Rabbit
The implications of using a far-field model to forecast the environmental impacts of desal brine dumps into a body of water was put to the test by the Port of Corpus Christi Authority.
Despite it not being a requirement by the TCEQ, the Port conducted a far-field model in 2023 for one of its proposed plants, the La Quinta Desalination Plant in Ingleside. The far-field model simulated the movement of brine across Corpus Christi and Nueces bays, which also showed the impacts of brine dumps into the Inner Harbor.
The Port’s modeling was brought to light during the public comment portion of the Aug. 13 council meeting by Corpus Christi resident John Weber. The emails between the Port and the City were obtained by Weber via a public information request to the city.
In the emails, a former Port-employed attorney wrote that the Port’s far-field model does not look good for the city’s Inner Harbor project. He went as far as calling the results “disparaging” and a “roadblock” to the City’s project.
One of the emails, forwarded to city staff by Corpus Christi Water Chief Operating Officer Drew Molly, stated that the Port’s far-field model concluded that the City’s Inner Harbor desal plant “will not comply with TCEQ standards and thus not be protective of marine life.”
Hodges’ white paper echoes the sentiment expressed by the Port’s former attorney in the set of emails exposed by Weber during the Aug. 13 council meeting.
Hodges states that the City’s permit application and near-field modeling “do not, as a matter of science, provide confidence that the planned installation of the Inner Harbor desalination plant will be protective of water quality and ecosystem health.”
Weber exposed a second email exchange that show the Port tried to share the modeling results with the City in June 2024.
In the email exchange, Molly rejects the Port’s attempt to formally document the sharing of the modeling results with the City. The emails show Port attorneys and Molly negotiating an agreement, drawn up by the Port, that was meant to formally record how the city will use the far-field modeling results.
Molly crosses out large chunks of the agreement to give the impression that he had no first-hand knowledge of the Port’s far field-model, its implications on the City’s project and that he was actually the one who requested the modeling results from the Port.
The emails exposed by John Weber show an email exchange in which the Port tried to share the modeling results with the City in June 2024. Photos provided to Chisme Collective by John Weber
As of September, Weber has yet to receive any response from City Council to his Aug. 13 public comment.
While the implications of the Port’s far-field model on the city’s Inner Harbor project remain unclear, the Port initially credited the modeling for the downscaling and suspension of permits for the desal plant they proposed in Ingleside – the La Quinta Channel Desalination Plant.
It is possible the Port now wants to bury its findings or conceal exactly how the far-field modeling affected the suspension of permits for the La Quinta plant.
Screenshots Are Forever
On Aug. 19, Chisme Collective learned that the Port’s far-field modeling files were available for download on the Port’s website. On the download page, the Port announced the downscaling of the La Quinta project due to the results of the far-field model. In the same sentence, the Port stated that it decided to “voluntarily suspend the application for the discharge (permit) associated with this potential facility.”
Chisme Collective reached out to Port Commissioner Diane Gonzalez on Aug. 19 to seek clarification on whether the voluntary suspension of the permit application could also be attributed to the Port’s 2023 far-field modeling results.
The sentence Chisme Collective inquired about was removed from the far-field model’s download page by the next day, Aug. 20.
On Aug. 22, KRIS 6 News reported that the Port will no longer pursue the La Quinta project in Ingleside, but there’s no mention of the Port’s far-field model.
On Aug. 25, Chisme Collective reached out to the Port again for clarification. This time, we forwarded a screenshot of the modeling download page taken on Aug. 19 to the Port’s communications manager Lisa Hinojosa.
These are the questions we asked Gonzalez and Hinojosa:
- Why did the Port suspend the (La Quinta permit) application?
- Was it due to the (far-field) modeling results?
- Or was it due to the decision to downscale the project?
Hinojosa declined to answer the questions and instead sent a link to a news story published Aug. 23 by KIII-3 News. KIII reported that the Port “has not taken steps to suspend anything with the La Quinta site but rather it is not actively working on it.”
Ultimately, the Port released a statement to the Corpus Christi Caller-Times newspaper for a story published Sept. 9 that said the Port plans to “put a hold” on its proposed La Quinta project.
“The Port has paused any further work on the La Quinta site for now,” said port CEO Kent Britton in a statement to the Caller-Times.
Britton said the project pause was due to limited resources and to avoid a “duplicative effort” to the City’s project. The City of Corpus Christi also proposed building a desalination plant in the La Quinta Channel.
The Port will focus all of its attention on scaling up another one of its proposed desal projects, the Harbor Island Desalination Plant in Port Aransas, according to reports.
In addition to doubling the amount of water produced by the Port’s Harbor Island desal plant – from 50 million gallons per day to 100 million gallons per day – the Port proposed to redirect the plant’s water intake and brine dumps offshore to the Gulf of Mexico, instead of the original location in the ship channel.
Brine Dumps Offshore (Gulf of Mexico)
Redirecting desal brine dumps offshore has been a long standing demand made by anti-desal advocates whose opposition lies in “the science.”
Dr. Hodges, who first contributed his expertise to Coastal Bend desal projects in the early 2000s, echoed this sentiment during an interview with Chisme Collective.
“The best thing to do with desal is to dump it all offshore,” Hodges said.
When asked if there was an ideal location for building a desalination plant, Hodges named the Port’s Harbor Island project proposal, adding that he oversaw brine discharge modeling for the site in 2019.
“That seemed to be an acceptable spot to us,” he said. “It’s simply a very well swept channel by the currents.”
Hodges said unlike the plants proposed for the Inner Harbor, the Port’s Harbor Island project does not impose the same risk of “dead zones.”
“If you go far enough offshore, you have lots of mixing energy and any ‘dead zone’ would be very ephemeral; it wouldn’t last very long,” he said.
The Chisme CollectiveNo “Dead Zones,” But What Else Are We Risking?
Coastal Bend governments have positioned the area to be a guinea pig for desal plants for Texas. The plant that is built first will likely be duplicated to meet the growing demands of water-intensive industrial operations coupled with the already dry conditions worsening in the state because of climate change.
Considering this, we asked Dr. Edward J. Buskey what the “dump it offshore” solution could mean for marine life in the Gulf of Mexico longterm.
Buskey, who is the director of the University of Texas Marine Science Institute, said he’s not aware of studies looking at the longterm impact of the salinity levels that could be imposed on the Gulf of Mexico due to daily brine dumps. Established in 1941, the Marine Science Institute in Port Aransas is the oldest marine research laboratory in Texas.
Buskey said it’s hard to tell how the expensive venture of piping desal brine offshore could affect ecosystems in the Gulf. But the best way to go about it will also come with its own costs, he added.
Back in the late 1970s before oil exploration began along the Texas coast, the Marine Science Institute took a comprehensive study of the coast’s fish and invertebrates, he said.
The study, conducted through the Bureau of Land Management, provides area scientists with great baseline data to monitor the impacts of brine dumps moving forward, he said.
It’s expensive to do that but you have to weigh the costs and benefits, he said.
“If you don’t know what the impact is and you just go ahead and do something, sometimes it’s hard to reverse those effects,” he said. “Being a scientist, I always think that if we know more about the environment, we’ll be better off.”
It’s unclear if the Port is considering funding this precautionary measure as they move forward on new state permits for the Harbor Island site in Port Aransas.
“If we ever got to the point where (seawater desalination) was our main source of water for all sorts of things, that would be a very expensive proposition,” Buskey said.
When Politics Meets Science
It’s been difficult to get someone from the science community to pinpoint – on the record – who should pay for a far-field model of the Inner Harbor and whether it should be factored into a decision on issuing state permits required to dump desal brine into a body of water.
A qualifying far-field model could help avoid “dead zones” by stopping the Inner Harbor desal projects before they start. But it does not appear as though the TCEQ, nor the Texas Water Development Board, are concerned with proposed desal projects degrading water quality beyond legal limits when the plants are online in 2030.
The science is clear on the implications of building the first large-scale seawater desalination plant in the world in a closed bay system; in an estuary of national significance at that.
Whether the science is acceptable or not is a separate ordeal, Hodges told Chisme Collective.
“That’s a political and regulatory decision,” Hodges said. “I couldn’t begin to tell people what’s acceptable and what’s unacceptable.”
Buskey echoed this sentiment. Even though “people want to protect the environment,” the dangers of longterm salinity increases in the Inner Harbor and the Gulf due to desal brine dumps maybe isn’t dramatic enough to sway the public to exert its power to hold politicians and regulatory agencies accountable for the environmental consequences of these decisions.
“Something like adding more salt back (into the sea), it’s not that dramatic; it’s probably going to be a chronic longterm change if there is one,” Buskey said. “So it’s not going to be as immediately apparent, and it’s certainly producing value to certain groups … in other words, more jobs, more industry, more money into the area.”
The City of Corpus Christi is acting on this assumption. City officials plan on ramming the Inner Harbor project through before a new city council is elected in November.
According to a memo to councilmembers shared with Chisme Collective, three industrial firms vying to build the Inner Harbor plant will be interviewed, scored and chosen between Oct. 1 and Oct. 8.
We’ll be back soon with Part 2 of the Desal Divide series in which you’ll hear from anti-desal advocates whose opposition lies in the environmental racism being perpetuated by continuous industrial expansion in the Coastal Bend.