A 24-acre fake lagoon constructed in the middle of the California desert will be at the heart of a new Disney-branded planned community, the company announced this week.
Rancho Mirage, California, a city in the Coachella Valley not far from Palm Springs, will be the site of Disney’s first “Storyliving” community, the company said in a press release.
A “fake lagoon” doesn’t sound necessarily all that different from a reservoir, and California could probably use more reservoirs, to get filled up when we finally get more rain. But maybe...
A “fake lagoon” doesn’t sound necessarily all that different from a reservoir, and California could probably use more reservoirs, to get filled up when we finally get more rain. But maybe evaporation is worse? I wonder what their plans are regarding water usage?
I was wondering about that, but apparently they are going to use Crystal Lagoons Technology, whatever that is. Apparently this company has done projects with Disney before.
I was wondering about that, but apparently they are going to use Crystal Lagoons Technology, whatever that is. Apparently this company has done projects with Disney before.
It doesn't to me either, but I get very tired of responses that are dismissive of things that I'm at least mildly curious about. I would like to read an article or two about how this really works...
It doesn't to me either, but I get very tired of responses that are dismissive of things that I'm at least mildly curious about. I would like to read an article or two about how this really works before passing judgement.
(Though corporate PR is often anti-curious too.)
Edit: I see that this company claims "low water use" as a benefit, though maybe these aren't good comparisons?
The construction costs for a lagoon with Crystal Lagoons technology are very low, even lower than those of a park of the same size. In addition, operating costs are very low, due to the efficient use of safe additives and energy. This revolutionary technology also stands out for its low water consumption, as it operates in a closed circuit, needing only to replace the water that is lost through evaporation. In comparison, a 1 hectare lagoon consumes only 50% of the water required for the maintenance of a park of the same size, and a lagoon of average size consumes around 30 times less than a golf course.
That's fair, I'm sorry for being dismissive. It was a shitty comment. I work within the climate space and claims like this from groups like Disney always make me bristle. They are so effective at...
That's fair, I'm sorry for being dismissive. It was a shitty comment. I work within the climate space and claims like this from groups like Disney always make me bristle. They are so effective at their marketing that they get to drive the narrative on what constitutes responsible or sustainable corporate behavior.
In comparison, a 1 hectare lagoon consumes only 50% of the water required for the maintenance of a park of the same size, and a lagoon of average size consumes around 30 times less than a golf course
Like you say, they feel like odd comparisons and like they have cleverly moved the goal posts. Sure Disney, next to some of the most water intense environments this is a savings. It allows them to re-label non-conservation behavior as sustainable. How interesting would it have been if they actually leaned into the fact that they are in a desert and themed it around the world of Aladdin? They could plant natives. They could build very cool looking, desert friendly structures (like stylized adobe that is heat/cooling efficient). I'd be so excited if they worked with the landscape rather than against it. But they chose the lazy route, looking for clean tech to reduce their water waste and emissions away and claim a victory for the planet. I'm not against clean tech, but it's often used to justify or even celebrate what are otherwise ecologically damaging and emissions heavy projects.
Also, if you're interested in the water issues within California there is a great book out called "The Dreamt Land" that dives into how we got where we are today (it's a great listen on audio book too, be it a little depressing). There is a much shorter, but interesting episode on the origins of LA's water (and by extension this region) in The Californian Century podcast.
Okay, thanks! I think in the end, water use needs to be understood by getting a feel for the numbers. I don’t have a good idea about what’s typical or how this project compares with other...
Okay, thanks!
I think in the end, water use needs to be understood by getting a feel for the numbers. I don’t have a good idea about what’s typical or how this project compares with other residential developments.
I found some additional information on these Crystal Lagoons. I thought it was just "vaporware," but several of these have already been built, even in the US. Got me curious. This is from a...
I found some additional information on these Crystal Lagoons. I thought it was just "vaporware," but several of these have already been built, even in the US. Got me curious.
The secret to Fischmann's filtration system—and what makes such large pools possible—is that Crystal Lagoons isn't constantly treating the entire volume with chemicals, such as chlorine. Instead, the company uses sensors to monitor quality in real time. The water is treated only when needed, and after it's done, ultrasound is fired through the water. That makes the dirt and pollutants clump together and fall to the bottom of the pool, where they're easy to collect.
Here's a link to a patent the company holds regarding the filtration and cleaning. Way too technical for me.
And another article from Popular Mechanics about using these lagoons in concert with power plants' water cooling systems. I think the Crystal Lagoons website had some sketches of having a data center nearby that uses water cooling.
All very interesting. Enough for me to be up at 4:30am trying to find info.
Still, I'm with the other commenter; where's the water coming from? It's one thing to build these in Florida or literally next to an ocean in Chile. But in the desert? In California? Doesn't seem like the best idea.
Here's an opinion piece saying it will come from the aquifer. And there is also a water park planned. That doesn't sound good at all. I'm wondering if the Disney project really needs to use...
Here's an opinion piece saying it will come from the aquifer. And there is also a water park planned. That doesn't sound good at all.
I'm wondering if the Disney project really needs to use potable water like this article claims, though?
I didn't mean to sound dismissive (if that's me you're referring to), it's just the Salton Sea is an interest of mine, and being as it's a large artificial body of water in the California desert,...
I didn't mean to sound dismissive (if that's me you're referring to), it's just the Salton Sea is an interest of mine, and being as it's a large artificial body of water in the California desert, the comparison seemed natural. Even the article makes it.
Well, the Salton Sea seems like just about the worst thing ever, but it started as an accident and was entirely unmanaged. It doesn't seem like quite the same thing? It's a good question though,...
Well, the Salton Sea seems like just about the worst thing ever, but it started as an accident and was entirely unmanaged. It doesn't seem like quite the same thing? It's a good question though, what the long term result would look like.
This is also somewhat different, but in the SF Bay Area we have lots of reservoirs, mostly managed by the local water district. They are beautiful places to go hiking. Drought affects us too. Nobody wants to drain Chabot Lake, although it is technically still a backup reservoir I think. There is a water tunnel built in the late 1800's by Chinese labor.
From the article:
A “fake lagoon” doesn’t sound necessarily all that different from a reservoir, and California could probably use more reservoirs, to get filled up when we finally get more rain. But maybe evaporation is worse? I wonder what their plans are regarding water usage?
Worse, it sounds like the Salton Sea.
I was wondering about that, but apparently they are going to use Crystal Lagoons Technology, whatever that is. Apparently this company has done projects with Disney before.
It's a 24 acre pool in the middle of a desert. Nothing about that sounds water conservation friendly to me.
It doesn't to me either, but I get very tired of responses that are dismissive of things that I'm at least mildly curious about. I would like to read an article or two about how this really works before passing judgement.
(Though corporate PR is often anti-curious too.)
Edit: I see that this company claims "low water use" as a benefit, though maybe these aren't good comparisons?
I'm wondering what kind of park they mean.
That's fair, I'm sorry for being dismissive. It was a shitty comment. I work within the climate space and claims like this from groups like Disney always make me bristle. They are so effective at their marketing that they get to drive the narrative on what constitutes responsible or sustainable corporate behavior.
Like you say, they feel like odd comparisons and like they have cleverly moved the goal posts. Sure Disney, next to some of the most water intense environments this is a savings. It allows them to re-label non-conservation behavior as sustainable. How interesting would it have been if they actually leaned into the fact that they are in a desert and themed it around the world of Aladdin? They could plant natives. They could build very cool looking, desert friendly structures (like stylized adobe that is heat/cooling efficient). I'd be so excited if they worked with the landscape rather than against it. But they chose the lazy route, looking for clean tech to reduce their water waste and emissions away and claim a victory for the planet. I'm not against clean tech, but it's often used to justify or even celebrate what are otherwise ecologically damaging and emissions heavy projects.
Also, if you're interested in the water issues within California there is a great book out called "The Dreamt Land" that dives into how we got where we are today (it's a great listen on audio book too, be it a little depressing). There is a much shorter, but interesting episode on the origins of LA's water (and by extension this region) in The Californian Century podcast.
I'm sorry again for the flippant comment.
Okay, thanks!
I think in the end, water use needs to be understood by getting a feel for the numbers. I don’t have a good idea about what’s typical or how this project compares with other residential developments.
I found some additional information on these Crystal Lagoons. I thought it was just "vaporware," but several of these have already been built, even in the US. Got me curious.
This is from a Popular Mechanics article:
Here's a link to a patent the company holds regarding the filtration and cleaning. Way too technical for me.
And another article from Popular Mechanics about using these lagoons in concert with power plants' water cooling systems. I think the Crystal Lagoons website had some sketches of having a data center nearby that uses water cooling.
All very interesting. Enough for me to be up at 4:30am trying to find info.
Still, I'm with the other commenter; where's the water coming from? It's one thing to build these in Florida or literally next to an ocean in Chile. But in the desert? In California? Doesn't seem like the best idea.
Here's an opinion piece saying it will come from the aquifer. And there is also a water park planned. That doesn't sound good at all.
I'm wondering if the Disney project really needs to use potable water like this article claims, though?
I didn't mean to sound dismissive (if that's me you're referring to), it's just the Salton Sea is an interest of mine, and being as it's a large artificial body of water in the California desert, the comparison seemed natural. Even the article makes it.
Well, the Salton Sea seems like just about the worst thing ever, but it started as an accident and was entirely unmanaged. It doesn't seem like quite the same thing? It's a good question though, what the long term result would look like.
This is also somewhat different, but in the SF Bay Area we have lots of reservoirs, mostly managed by the local water district. They are beautiful places to go hiking. Drought affects us too. Nobody wants to drain Chabot Lake, although it is technically still a backup reservoir I think. There is a water tunnel built in the late 1800's by Chinese labor.