I thought the thrust of the article was:

a) coal is non-competitive with cheap NG for electrical generation at a large scale, and


b) shutting down a big plant and its associated big mine have big consequences for local economies.

Crossfire's link was to a very good article,

http://www.circleofblue.org/2017/water-energy/utilities-move-break-arizonas-coal-water-link/

I recommend anyone with the least interest in the subject take a look.

with an even better picture of the plant. (looking SE, rather than N)

[Linked Image]

Crossfires closing comment was laughable:

Quote

...I'm thinking we'd better have a damn well squared away approach as to how this all gets "decided', and by whom. We just SAW what "Native American Environmental Interest Groups" do to water, and water rights. I wouldn't get to warm a feeling knowing that this particular group/tribe of NAs are going to handle it any better...


You need to do a bit more research on the Colorado River Compact of 1922, the Winters doctrine of 1906, Arizona v. California (1931, 1934, 1936, 1963, 1964, 1966, 1979, 1983, 1984, and 2000)and in general "The Law of the River" as it is known.

My best guess is that following lengthy and expensive adjudication, that Upper Basin AZ water is going to be allocated to The Navajo Tribe of Indians (formal name) and they are going to "lease" it to the highest bidder downstream, probably MWD, but maybe IID.

Or maybe DOI will keep that plant going,through subsidies, in the name of MAGA. And you and I will pay for that, just like the wall.

Savvy?


Sycamore

Originally Posted by jorgeI
...Actually Sycamore, you are sort of right....