Unused Columbia wells tapped to store water from river bottoms

Monday, February 13, 2012 | 6:00 a.m. CST; updated 10:41 p.m. CST, Monday, February 13, 2012

COLUMBIA —Water fills cracks, crevasses and caves in a limestone formation just beneath Columbia. Ten city wells designed to pump drinking water dot the land above this subterranean water supply, but the city only uses two of them.

Until the 1970s, this was the source of Columbia's water. As the city grew, the demand for water became so great the aquifer couldn't keep pace. The city shifted its water needs to a different groundwater source in the McBaine bottoms near the Missouri River.


Related Media

More than 30 years after the wells in the city were abandoned, plans are afoot to return two more of them to service by siphoning water from existing supply lines from McBaine to Columbia and pumping it into the wells.

The water would be on reserve in case something like a power outage disabled the treatment plant at McBaine or if water usage in Columbia spiked for a few days in the hot summer months. The plan would further strengthen the city’s backup supply by providing enough water to accommodate the city’s needs for about a day.

The city already stores water in two wells this way. By adding two more, the city could draw between 8 million gallons a day from the four storage wells combined until it used up the 30 million gallons stored in each well, John Betz of the city's Source Water Protection Plan Task Force said.

In the winter, Columbia uses about 12 million gallons of water a day. That number edges closer to 20 million gallons in the summer, Floyd Turner, manager of water operations for the city, said.

The task force is the group recommending the new use for the old wells. When the group first started meeting, most members expected to recommend pouring concrete down the pipes of the old wells and formally abandoning them, member Tom O'Connor said.

This had been the conventional wisdom from the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Natural Resources after a wave of abandoned rural wells that were seen as potential pathways for surface spills and contaminants to reach drinking water.

"These aren’t little abandoned farm wells," O'Connor said. "These are municipal wells that we invested a lot of money putting into the ground."

O'Connor said the water in the limestone underneath Columbia is a little higher in quality than the water at McBaine.

"The likelihood is it's a notch better, not a world better, but a notch," he said.

But since the water from McBaine will be treated before it's put into the wells, it won't have to go through as extensive of a treatment process as water drawn straight up from the wells, Turner said.

MU gets its water from the limestone aquifer underneath Columbia, but doesn't use the city wells to get it. Todd Houts, MU's representative on the task force, said MU's water supply probably would not be affected by the changes to the city’s old wells because the systems have separate piping.

The storage wells will function similarly to water towers, but they can be used to store water for longer periods of time and store significantly more water. 

"The water tower we have on Walnut (Street) has 1 million gallons," Betz said. "Now picture a 30 million gallon water tower."

Like what you see here? Become a member.

Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Harold Sutton February 13, 2012 | 9:11 a.m.

20 million gallons a day!! Now that is a lot of water! At a rounded off number of 100,000 population, thats 200 gallon each per day. And many do not bath daily.

We are a wasteful people!!!

(Report Comment)
Mark Foecking February 13, 2012 | 9:48 a.m.

Water towers aren't so much for storage as for maintaining a fairly constant pressure in the distribution system they serve. They damp out minute to minute variations from high use flows that might otherwise make the water flow uneven.

We'll need to do more things like this to deal with our increasingly uncertain climate. Storing water from the spring rains for irrigation might make the difference between a good harvest nd a bad one.


(Report Comment)
Michael Williams February 13, 2012 | 10:34 a.m.

MarkF: "...Storing water from the spring rains..."

Columbia needs a lake, but we'll not get one.

A lake 2 miles long, 30 feet deep, and 75 yards wide contains 74.3 million cubic feet of water, or 533 million gallons. It's a nice buffer (26 days at peak load) with lots of community fringe benefits. Hope my calcs are correct.

Dam (or damn) the Hinkson! Cedar or Perche creeks would be even better since the lakes would be substantially larger.

(Report Comment)
Michael Williams February 13, 2012 | 10:53 a.m.

HaroldS and 20 million gallons:

To put this into perspective, 20 million gallons is represented by a cube only 138 feet on a side:

20,000,000 divided by 7.48 gallons/cu foot, cubed root.

Further, a 2 inch rain over a 2 mile x 2 mile area in Columbia represents 18.6 million cubic feet of water, or 139 million gallons.

0.16667 ft X 10560 ft X 10560 ft X 7.48 gallons/cu ft = 139 million gallons.

From only one measly spring rain!!!!!!!!!

PS: This is why the notion of "rain barrels/gardens" providing a significant reduction of water runoff is absolute nonsense.

(Report Comment)
Mark Foecking February 14, 2012 | 2:30 p.m.

Michael Williams wrote:

"A lake 2 miles long, 30 feet deep, and 75 yards wide"

That probably compares to the approximate volume of a mile or so of the Missouri near Rocheport.

I got 71.3 million cubic feet (5280 x 2 x 30 x 75 x 3), but whatever - close enough. The idea would be to build smaller lakes and distribute them around the city or county for both water storage and to keep the water table higher, rather than allowing much of that water to run off to the river.

I agree that rain gardens don't do much to mitigate runoff. I capture runoff from my roofs (at both properties) to water the gardens during dry spells, but that's only a few inches of rain, and only a tiny fraction of the area of my property. All the rest winds up in Flat Branch creek.


(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.