How costly is Great Salt Lake's dust? A working paper says it could be in the billions

Editor's note: This article is published through the Great Salt Lake Collaborative with funding from Love the Lake, an initiative of the nonprofit Great Salt Lake Alliance. Editorial decisions are made independently by the Collaborative and partner newsrooms.

SALT LAKE CITY — Utah leaders and researchers agree that it might take billions of dollars to solve the Great Salt Lake's challenges, as the lake has fallen to its second-lowest level on record this summer.

The state even asked the federal government for $1 billion earlier this year to fund lake solutions, which has President Donald Trump's support, although it's still a work in progress in Congress.

Not addressing the lake's challenges, specifically its dust issues, might also cost billions of dollars in annual health effects, a group of U.S. researchers says. They argue that it might even be costlier than solutions to get water to the lake.

"No matter how we slice it, we find that there is a non-negligible effect of dust coming off the lake, and it's having pretty meaningful health impacts," said Lena Harris, assistant professor of public service and administration at Texas A&M University, in a statement. "We view this as the first step in helping policymakers know the health costs of Great Salt Lake dust."

Harris is one of three researchers who authored a working paper on the topic, which the National Bureau of Economic Research published earlier this year.

The paper is still going through the peer review process, circulating for discussion and comment from the scientific community. Many local researchers learned about it last week, when one of its authors attended a Great Salt Lake solutions brainstorming roundtable with other national experts.

The researchers, from Texas, Arizona and California, found that particulate matter 2.5 pollution near the lake increases by approximately 0.8 to 0.9 micrograms per cubic meter for every 100 square kilometers (39 square miles) of exposed lakebed. Some areas directly downwind of the exposed lakebed could have higher amounts, but effects were also detected as far as 62 miles from the lake.

The group plugged that data into Census block-level exposure predictions of mortality risk, life-years lost and emergency room utilization associated with particulate matter, which found that $81 million to $175 million in emergency room visits and lost years of life might be spent per 39 square miles of exposed lakebed, per the report.

That translates to approximately $1.1 billion to $2.3 billion annually, based on existing exposed lakebed. Conversely, researchers estimate that it could cost $432 to $975 per acre-foot to acquire water from agricultural users.

Utah researchers, who didn't author the paper, estimated last year that it would take 800,000 to 1 million acre-feet of additional water every year for about 10 years to get the lake to its minimum healthy level by 2034. Using the paper's estimates, that translates to $345.6 million to $975 million annually, based on transaction costs and the amount acquired.

"The purchase cost (of water) will probably be less than the value it's providing to Utahns," said Eric Edwards, associate professor of agricultural and resource economics at the University of California, Davis, and one of the report's authors.

Although improvements to air quality monitoring may affect some of the numbers presented in the paper, the working paper offers one of the first quantitative health impact estimates of the lake's decline, said Ben Abbott, a professor of ecology at BYU and executive director of the conservation group Grow the Flow.

"I view these numbers as rough, but a really important first step, because if you don't have an estimate like this, a lot of people just assume the cost is $0. And we know that couldn't be further from the truth," he told KSL, pointing to the health, ecological and economic impacts of other saline lakes that have dried up across the world.

Meanwhile, the lake's estimated water needs and the working paper were both released well before the lake sank to its current elevation of 4189.7 feet to 4,190 feet, following an abysmal snowpack and this year's summer evaporation. That's at least 8 feet below the minimum healthy level.

Approximately 1,216.3 square miles of lakebed were exposed at the start of September, per Grow the Flow data. Several noticeable dust storm events have been reported this year.

Utah's $1 billion federal request, if approved, could fund efforts to acquire or lease water for the lake, but it would also improve water infrastructure and flow to the lake to use water more efficiently, state officials said in April. It would also fund efforts to remove invasive species.

It's unclear whether the working paper will change policy decisions or their pace, and Abbott said he doesn't believe one study or research paper will completely change opinions. However, he hopes that it helps people understand the true value of the ecosystem and makes it clear that inaction might be the costlier option.

"I think that when you see the actual numbers, it's very impactful," he said. "It's going to cost billions of dollars to restore Great Salt Lake. That looks like a deal when you realize we're already suffering consequences that are in the billions of dollars a year."

Related topics