Go behind the analysis.
See the audit trail.

3.0 million acre-feet per year (about 2.7 billion gallons per day).

Sets the scale used to test whether new supply could materially reduce pressure on the Colorado River system.

Strategic relief target for scenario testing — not a claim that the basin is exactly 3 MAF short.

Water portfolio, desalination scale, energy demand, infrastructure sizing and economics.

3.0–4.5 kWh per cubic meter for seawater reverse osmosis, before conveyance and pumping.

Strongly affects annual energy use, operating cost and required generation capacity.

Technical literature and operating experience; project-specific design could move the value within or beyond this range.

Power model and project economics.

To be determined.

Determines how much new coastal water could replace Colorado River demand through a binational arrangement.

Binational desalination studies and existing treaty mechanisms establish areas for analysis, but do not establish the proposed project volume.

Water portfolio, exchange accounting and conveyance planning.

To be determined.

Could allow coastal or other new supply to replace some Colorado River demand without moving every new gallon inland.

Requires detailed legal, operational and agency-specific analysis.

Water portfolio and Colorado River demand-reduction scenarios.

Scenario input: 0, 4, 6 or 8 hours of peak electrical load shifted by producing and storing freshwater earlier.

Tests whether storing finished water can reduce peak electrical demand and some battery or firm-capacity requirements.

Operational concept to be validated against storage cost, plant flexibility and grid pricing.

Power sizing and operating-cost scenarios.

To be optimized across firm generation, solar, storage and flexible water-system loads.

The mix affects reliability, capital cost, operating cost and emissions.

No specific new-reactor, solar or storage configuration is treated as a committed project.

Power capacity and economics.

To be determined by corridor engineering.

Elevation gain and route length can materially change energy use, pipe sizing, construction cost and environmental impact.

Candidate corridors require engineering-grade route and hydraulic analysis.

Conveyance energy, infrastructure cost and environmental review.

Low / base / high ranges to be developed by asset class rather than one project-wide rough number.

Allows sensitivity testing and prevents false precision before project-level engineering exists.

Will combine comparable projects, current industry data and engineering estimates as they become available.

Cost per acre-foot, annual operating cost and financing scenarios.

To be determined.

Interest rate, asset life, public/private participation and revenue allocation can materially change delivered-water economics.

No financing structure has been selected.

Annualized capital cost and cost-per-acre-foot calculations.

To be determined.

Intake, brine management, habitat, rights-of-way and other mitigation measures are real project requirements and costs.

Depends on siting, technology, permitting and environmental review.

Project economics and feasibility conclusions.