Great Recycling and Northern Development (GRAND) Canal
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article or section needs to be wikified to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please help improve this article with relevant internal links. (June 2008) |
The Great Recycling and Northern Development (GRAND) Canal of North America (or GCNA) is a water management proposal designed by Newfoundland engineer Thomas Kierans to solve increasingly serious North American water shortage problems (Water politics).The GCNA, which relies upon proven water management technologies (see Zuider Zee and California Aqueduct below) has been promoted by Kierans since the early 1960’s.
Worsening freshwater deficits threaten the shared Great Lakes and other vital areas in Canada and the United States. Kierans proposes that to avoid forecasted severe impacts from future droughts in Canada and the United States (in addition to water conservation) acceptable new freshwater sources must be found.
The premise of the GCNA is that one potentially acceptable new source of fresh water is run-off from natural precipitation after its collection in an outflow-only, sea level dyke-enclosure. In this way the fresh water is collected just before it is normally lost in the world’s oceans and is not diverted from any existing uses. All run-offs from the U. S. and Canada averages about 160,000 m3 per second, or the flow of 28 Niagara Rivers. Sixty percent occurs in Canada, which has only 10% of both nations’ total population.
Similar projects have been implemented around the world. The Netherlands has recycled run-off since 1928 from a sea level, outflow-only, multi-use, freshwater dyke-enclosure in the former Zuider Zee. For 50 years an expanding California Aqueduct with a 1200m pump-lift recycles up to 115 m3/sec of northern river run-off from upstream of the sea in San Francisco Bay over 700km southward in the San Joaquin River valley to create productive new farm and urban areas in former arid land. New recycled run-off proposals are now being considered throughout the world.
Contents |
[edit] Proposal
In his GCNA proposal, Kierans asserts that experience in the Netherlands demonstrates that a large new freshwater source can be created in Canada’s James Bay by collecting run-off from many adjacent river basins in a sea level, outflow-only dyke-enclosure. Moreover, he claims that California’s Aqueduct proves that run-off to James Bay can be beneficially recycled long distances and over high elevations via the GRAND Canal. The purpose of the GCNA would be to stabilize Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River levels, flows and water quality. It would also deliver, via the Great Lakes, new fresh water from the James Bay dyke-enclosure to many other deficit areas in Canada and the United States.
[edit] Controversy
In 1959, Canada officially claimed that U.S. expansion of a Chicago diversion from Lake Michigan would harm downstream Canadian areas in the Great Lakes Basin. In contrast, Kierans argues, it can now be shown that recycling run-off from a dyke-enclosure in Canada’s James Bay is not harmful and can bring both nations many useful benefits including: a) more fresh water in Canada than now exists despite exports to the U.S.; b) improved fisheries and shipping in Hudson Bay due to recycled run-off’s increase in the Bay’s now harmful low salinity; c) substantially improved Great Lakes water quality due to the increased flows; d) lower electricity-user cost by integrating water transfer energy needs with peak power demand; and e) enhanced flood controls and forest fire protection in both nations. [1]
According to Kierans, project organization to recycle run-off from James Bay Basin could be like that for the St. Lawrence Seaway. Capital costs for about 160 million users will exceed $100 billion. But, he claims, “before construction is completed, the total value of social, ecologic and economic benefits in Canada and the U.S. will surpass the project’s costs.” [2]
By 1985, former Quebec Premier Robert Bourassa and several major engineering companies endorsed detailed GRAND Canal concept studies. (Power From the North, Robert Bourassa, Prentice Hall of Canada Ltd,May 1985.)
Kierans on left Bourassa on Right
Inscription: To Mr. Kierans, a Canadian with an extraordinary vision for the good of his country, With all my gratitude, Robert Bourassa, April 16,1985.
But, complains Kierans, “…some misinformed environmentalists and news media refuse to accept the proven Netherlands and California recycled run-off projects.[3] Further, they refuse to acknowledge the fundamental differences between NAWAPA’s (see Cadillac Desert) harmful “headwater diversion” and the environmentally friendly “recycled run-off” of the GRAND Canal.(see maps below).Unfortunately, their political influence continues to block Canadian government support for the urgently needed detailed studies of recycled run-off from James Bay. Until the Canadian Government supports such studies, drought and freshwater quality in Canada and the U.S. will continue to worsen”
The above contrasting North American drought relief proposals show, at right, a conventional diversion concept known as the NAWAPA Plan. It involves halting the flow of Canada’s major west coast rivers and diverting their flow to the southwestern U.S., Canadian Prairies and Great Lakes. Flooding in mountain valleys and downstream flow disruption in existing rivers are apparent. At left and in sharp contrast,according to Kierans,it is shown that recycling of fresh water run-off from James Bay does not involve such major flooding or flow reduction. Canada’s fresh water will be substantially increased.
