4 ms·

The Muskegon River (the main drainage for the area) has a discharge of 1,450 cubic feet per second at Evart, Michigan (where this facility is located). That is

The Muskegon River (the main drainage for the area) has a discharge of 1,450 cubic feet per second at Evart, Michigan (where this facility is located). That is about 11,000 gallons per second, or about 937 million gallons per day. The facility proposes to pump about half a millon gallons per day. Tempest, meet teapot. https://waterdata.usgs.gov/mi/nwis/current/?type=flow https://waterdata.usgs.gov/mi/nwis/current/?type=flow

sykh 9y ago
I don't know the particulars in this case but is Nestlé going to pay proper amount for this water? If the public doesn't want the plant then shouldn't their desires carry some weight? Especially since it doesn't appear that Nestlé would be providing a service in the interests of society at large. Overall there is a growing sense in the U.S. that public assets are being sold off at below market rates. That corporate interests trump public interests. There's a lack of trust in the system. The overreaction, as you put it, here seems to me to be a symptom of what I think is a growing lack of trust in the system.
- Turing_Machine 9y ago
  > I don't know the particulars in this case but is Nestlé going to pay proper amount for this water? I suspect the value of untreated groundwater in Michigan is very, very small. > there doesn't appear that Nestlé would be providing a service in the interests of society at large. What about jobs? What about the people who want to buy bottled water? Why don't the workers and consumers count as "society at large"? Note: I personally think most people who buy bottled water are foolish (unless the local tap water is unsafe or unpalatable), but then people do a lot of things I think are foolish.
- nrdgrl 9y ago
  > I don't know the particulars in this case but is Nestlé going to pay proper amount for this water? This is just a permit to draw water from a well, not a municipal drinking water supply. I suspect that (other than the permit fee) they aren't paying anything for the water. (I had a look at the permit & didn't see anything there about payments).
- rmason 9y ago
  Nestle is paying $5200 for all the water it is drawing. I'd be willing to wager they're paying 10-20x that on lobbying efforts. https://www.bridgemi.com/guest-commentary/opinion-nestle-water-deal-bad-economics-and-bad-policy-michigan https://www.bridgemi.com/guest-commentary/opinion-nestle-wat... The county they're in has high unemployment and they make the case that it's all about the jobs they're creating.
  - nrdgrl 9y ago
    That is the permit application fee (one time, $5,000) and reporting costs ($200 / year). They aren't paying for the water.
    - Turing_Machine 9y ago
      Detroit is currently selling water for $23/thousand cubic feet, or about .000321/gallon. That's filtered, treated, and distributed to a tap in every home. What do you imagine a fair price would be for untreated, pump-it-yourself groundwater? http://www.detroitmi.gov/Portals/0/docs/DWSD/Water%20Rate%20Card%202017_Detroit_Retail_Rates_COD.%208-1-17_WEBFINAL.pdf?ver=2017-08-04-111558-603 http://www.detroitmi.gov/Portals/0/docs/DWSD/Water%20Rate%20...
    - toomanybeersies 9y ago
      When you pay for residential water, you're not actually paying for the water. You're paying infrastructure costs, the cost of running the pumping station and repairing the pipes to your house.
lima 9y ago
Isn't that apples and oranges, comparing the numbers like that? The river is connected to the water table, sure, but surely the issue is more complicated than that?
- Turing_Machine 9y ago
  I don't see how it could be more complicated. Any groundwater that isn't pumped out and used is going to eventually go down the river, right? Otherwise the area would be underwater. Yeah, there are places where groundwater enters the aquifer from long distances away. Michigan is not one of those places. It gets plenty of precipitation.
  - domevent 9y ago
    “Eventually” is quite the weasel word in this context. Yes, eventually it will, for values of eventually which may exceed the average human lifespan.
    - Turing_Machine 9y ago
      > Yes, eventually it will, for values of eventually which may exceed the average human lifespan. Pure nonsense.
      - dang 9y ago
        Please don't break the site guidelines like this, regardless of how nonsensical some other comment is. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        portofcall 9y ago
        How on Earth is that guy not rate limited?
Pharylon 9y ago
Are they pumping the water from the Muskegon River? No? OK... then... uh... what are you talking about?
- nrdgrl 9y ago
  Nope, they are pumping from the "White Pine Springs well". The aquifer likely refills at a much slower rate than the flow of the Muskegon River
  - Turing_Machine 9y ago
    > The aquifer likely refills at a much slower rate than the flow of the Muskegon River No, most likely it does not. The watershed and the associated aquifer are where the river water comes from. As to "what that assertion is based on", that would be "knowledge of how the hydrologic cycle works".
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - nrdgrl 9y ago
      > The watershed and the associated aquifer are where the river water comes from Yes, that's where it comes from, but it doesn't fill up instantly. Depending on the depth and type of aquifer the well is tapping, it could actually take a very long time for the aquifer to refill (or it could refill very quickly).
      - Turing_Machine 9y ago
        Do such "fossil aquifers" exist? Yes. Are they widely used in places like Michigan, where there is plenty of precipitation? No.
        nrdgrl 9y ago
        Rather than making blanket statements, here is the actual aquifer characteristics. https://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/wrd-nestle-attach-5-aquifer-characteristics_544391_7.pdf https://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/wrd-nestle-attach-5-a... which is of course much more nuanced, and interesting than "it rains a lot".
Retric 9y ago
The facility is only one of many uses for water in the area. Suggesting the rivers flow is 100% free to use is extremely misguided.
- Turing_Machine 9y ago
  We're not talking about "100% of the river's flow". We're talking about 1/2000 of the river's flow.
  - Retric 9y ago
    1/2000 is a meaningless number because you don't know if hypothetically 2000/2000 of the flow is already assigned to other uses then there is zero left over and someone is losing out. Hydro power for example uses 100% of the flow so removing that water directly reduces power output of downstream power plants.
    - maxerickson 9y ago
      Water rights aren't terribly contentious in that part of Michigan. The Muskegon is tiny and the sort of river hydro is being removed from. http://glpf.org/funded-projects/muskegon-river-dam-removal/ http://glpf.org/funded-projects/muskegon-river-dam-removal/
      - Retric 9y ago
        The Muskegon feeds into the Lake Michigan which is thus upstream of Niagara Falls and a lot of hydro power generation. Granted we are not talking about a huge amount of energy, but it is one of many costs that are not being compensated.
        Turing_Machine 9y ago
        Compare the amount of water they're taking out per day (576,000 gallons) to amount of water that goes over Niagara Falls in a day (about 54,345,600,000 gallons). "Not a huge amount of energy", indeed.
abtinf 9y ago
Per the article, they already pump 360,000 gallons per day. So this dispute is about a an increase of just 216,000 gallons per day and it has taken them almost 2 years to go through the permit process. For reference, an olympic sized swimming pool holds 660,000 gallons of water. So even after this increase, they are still drawing less than one pool's worth of water.
cowpig 9y ago
Bernie Madoff's $68.5 billion ponzi scheme was a MERE 0.09% of the world's $78.3 trillion GDP.
larkeith 9y ago
This is a false equivalence - discharge rate of the Muskegon is not the same as refill rate of the aquifer being drained.
- tptacek 9y ago
  The aquifer we're talking about holds about as much water as Lake Michigan. It is huge on a scale that dwarfs human enterprise.

sykh 9y ago

I don't know the particulars in this case but is Nestlé going to pay proper amount for this water? If the public doesn't want the plant then shouldn't their desires carry some weight? Especially since it doesn't appear that Nestlé would be providing a service in the interests of society at large. Overall there is a growing sense in the U.S. that public assets are being sold off at below market rates. That corporate interests trump public interests. There's a lack of trust in the system. The overreaction, as you put it, here seems to me to be a symptom of what I think is a growing lack of trust in the system.

Turing_Machine 9y ago
> I don't know the particulars in this case but is Nestlé going to pay proper amount for this water? I suspect the value of untreated groundwater in Michigan is very, very small. > there doesn't appear that Nestlé would be providing a service in the interests of society at large. What about jobs? What about the people who want to buy bottled water? Why don't the workers and consumers count as "society at large"? Note: I personally think most people who buy bottled water are foolish (unless the local tap water is unsafe or unpalatable), but then people do a lot of things I think are foolish.
nrdgrl 9y ago
> I don't know the particulars in this case but is Nestlé going to pay proper amount for this water? This is just a permit to draw water from a well, not a municipal drinking water supply. I suspect that (other than the permit fee) they aren't paying anything for the water. (I had a look at the permit & didn't see anything there about payments).
rmason 9y ago
Nestle is paying $5200 for all the water it is drawing. I'd be willing to wager they're paying 10-20x that on lobbying efforts. https://www.bridgemi.com/guest-commentary/opinion-nestle-water-deal-bad-economics-and-bad-policy-michigan https://www.bridgemi.com/guest-commentary/opinion-nestle-wat... The county they're in has high unemployment and they make the case that it's all about the jobs they're creating.
- nrdgrl 9y ago
  That is the permit application fee (one time, $5,000) and reporting costs ($200 / year). They aren't paying for the water.
  - Turing_Machine 9y ago
    Detroit is currently selling water for $23/thousand cubic feet, or about .000321/gallon. That's filtered, treated, and distributed to a tap in every home. What do you imagine a fair price would be for untreated, pump-it-yourself groundwater? http://www.detroitmi.gov/Portals/0/docs/DWSD/Water%20Rate%20Card%202017_Detroit_Retail_Rates_COD.%208-1-17_WEBFINAL.pdf?ver=2017-08-04-111558-603 http://www.detroitmi.gov/Portals/0/docs/DWSD/Water%20Rate%20...
  - toomanybeersies 9y ago
    When you pay for residential water, you're not actually paying for the water. You're paying infrastructure costs, the cost of running the pumping station and repairing the pipes to your house.

lima 9y ago

Isn't that apples and oranges, comparing the numbers like that? The river is connected to the water table, sure, but surely the issue is more complicated than that?

Turing_Machine 9y ago
I don't see how it could be more complicated. Any groundwater that isn't pumped out and used is going to eventually go down the river, right? Otherwise the area would be underwater. Yeah, there are places where groundwater enters the aquifer from long distances away. Michigan is not one of those places. It gets plenty of precipitation.
- domevent 9y ago
  “Eventually” is quite the weasel word in this context. Yes, eventually it will, for values of eventually which may exceed the average human lifespan.
  - Turing_Machine 9y ago
    > Yes, eventually it will, for values of eventually which may exceed the average human lifespan. Pure nonsense.
    - dang 9y ago
      Please don't break the site guidelines like this, regardless of how nonsensical some other comment is. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - portofcall 9y ago
        How on Earth is that guy not rate limited?

Pharylon 9y ago

Are they pumping the water from the Muskegon River? No? OK... then... uh... what are you talking about?

nrdgrl 9y ago
Nope, they are pumping from the "White Pine Springs well". The aquifer likely refills at a much slower rate than the flow of the Muskegon River
- Turing_Machine 9y ago
  > The aquifer likely refills at a much slower rate than the flow of the Muskegon River No, most likely it does not. The watershed and the associated aquifer are where the river water comes from. As to "what that assertion is based on", that would be "knowledge of how the hydrologic cycle works".
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - nrdgrl 9y ago
    > The watershed and the associated aquifer are where the river water comes from Yes, that's where it comes from, but it doesn't fill up instantly. Depending on the depth and type of aquifer the well is tapping, it could actually take a very long time for the aquifer to refill (or it could refill very quickly).
    - Turing_Machine 9y ago
      Do such "fossil aquifers" exist? Yes. Are they widely used in places like Michigan, where there is plenty of precipitation? No.
      - nrdgrl 9y ago
        Rather than making blanket statements, here is the actual aquifer characteristics. https://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/wrd-nestle-attach-5-aquifer-characteristics_544391_7.pdf https://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/wrd-nestle-attach-5-a... which is of course much more nuanced, and interesting than "it rains a lot".

Retric 9y ago

The facility is only one of many uses for water in the area. Suggesting the rivers flow is 100% free to use is extremely misguided.

Turing_Machine 9y ago
We're not talking about "100% of the river's flow". We're talking about 1/2000 of the river's flow.
- Retric 9y ago
  1/2000 is a meaningless number because you don't know if hypothetically 2000/2000 of the flow is already assigned to other uses then there is zero left over and someone is losing out. Hydro power for example uses 100% of the flow so removing that water directly reduces power output of downstream power plants.
  - maxerickson 9y ago
    Water rights aren't terribly contentious in that part of Michigan. The Muskegon is tiny and the sort of river hydro is being removed from. http://glpf.org/funded-projects/muskegon-river-dam-removal/ http://glpf.org/funded-projects/muskegon-river-dam-removal/
    - Retric 9y ago
      The Muskegon feeds into the Lake Michigan which is thus upstream of Niagara Falls and a lot of hydro power generation. Granted we are not talking about a huge amount of energy, but it is one of many costs that are not being compensated.
      - Turing_Machine 9y ago
        Compare the amount of water they're taking out per day (576,000 gallons) to amount of water that goes over Niagara Falls in a day (about 54,345,600,000 gallons). "Not a huge amount of energy", indeed.

abtinf 9y ago

Per the article, they already pump 360,000 gallons per day. So this dispute is about a an increase of just 216,000 gallons per day and it has taken them almost 2 years to go through the permit process. For reference, an olympic sized swimming pool holds 660,000 gallons of water. So even after this increase, they are still drawing less than one pool's worth of water.

cowpig 9y ago

Bernie Madoff's $68.5 billion ponzi scheme was a MERE 0.09% of the world's $78.3 trillion GDP.

larkeith 9y ago

This is a false equivalence - discharge rate of the Muskegon is not the same as refill rate of the aquifer being drained.

tptacek 9y ago
The aquifer we're talking about holds about as much water as Lake Michigan. It is huge on a scale that dwarfs human enterprise.