This is a site mirroring the emails of California Water News emailed by the California Department of Water Resources

[Water_news] 2. DWR'S CALIFORNIA WATER NEWS: SUPPLY - 3/26/07

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment 

 

March 26, 2007

 

2. Supply

 

DESALINATION PLANT:

Desalination test a model of cooperation; Conservationists work with water managers - San Diego Union Tribune

 

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WATER SUPPLY PLANNING:

Inland agencies get money to boost water supply - Riverside Press Enterprise

 

DEVELOPMENT ISSUES:

 

Whose water is it? - Napa Valley Register

 

CONSERVATION EXPO:

WATER AWARENESS; Second annual expo explores products, ideas to conserve the wet stuff - Monterey Herald

 

LOCAL CONSERVATION MEASURES:

Drought tapping water reserves - Pasadena Star-News

 

CENTRAL COAST DESALINATION:

Editorial: Stalling best water strategy - Monterey Herald

 

CLIMATE CHANGE ISSUES:

Guest Column: Global Warming Response — Markets or Taxes?; California's water future - 21st century solutions - San Francisco Chronicle

 

 

DESALINATION PLANT:

Desalination test a model of cooperation; Conservationists work with water managers

San Diego Union Tribune – 3/26/07

By Sandra Dibble, staff writer

 

YUMA, Ariz. – It is one of the world's largest desalination plants, big enough to provide water to 500,000 people. But since 1993, the Yuma Desalting Plant has stood idle at the edge of this quiet agricultural community.

 

Now, for the first time in 14 years, the $250 million reverse-osmosis facility is back in operation for a three-month test run. And that is prompting a key question: How would this affect the Cienega de Santa Clara, a wetland 30 miles south in Mexico? What could have flared into a bitter dispute between environmentalists intent on saving the cienega and water managers searching for a new supply has turned into an cooperative venture. Both sides hope to set an example for avoiding conflict and learning to share an increasingly scarce supply of Colorado River water.

 

“In this little region of California, Arizona, Mexico, we're all confronted with the same issues,” said Sid Wilson, general manager of the Central Arizona Project, a water district that serves 1.5 million users. “How do you deal with growing demands for water by people, declining natural supply and trying to sustain environmental values?”

 

The Yuma Desalting Plant, he said, “provides the key as to how we might better manage resources at the end of the system.”

 

The Cienega de Santa Clara is a 15,000-acre cattail marsh that is a prime habitat for endangered species and waterfowl, the largest such place in the Sonoran Desert. It was created inadvertently three decades ago by runoff from southern Arizona farms that was sent to Mexico, and has survived largely because until now, no one has decided to run the desalination plant.

 

Today, “it's a superimportant stop on the Pacific Flyway,” a major route for migratory birds, said Osvel Hinojosa, a wildlife ecologist with Mexico's largest environmental group, Pronatura. For Hinojosa and other conservationists intent on preserving the cienega, its existence offers proof of nature's resilience and hope that other parts of the Colorado River Delta can be brought back to life.

 

The flow to the cienega began in the mid-1970s with the construction of a drainage canal to divert the agricultural runoff before it got into the Colorado River. During the 1960s, Mexican farmers had complained that when the untreated runoff made its way into the Colorado, it raised the salinity level of their river water and harmed their crops.

 

But the canal was only meant to be a temporary measure until a desalination facility could be built to treat the water in the United States. The Yuma Desalting Plant was completed in 1992, but for years, high water levels on the Colorado River made the plant's operation – which costs about $30 million a year – unnecessary. With drought and growing populations, Arizona water districts began pressing to start the plant up again.

 

Conservationists feared operating the desalting plant would cut off the cienega's main lifeline and braced for a battle to keep the water flowing.

 

“You mentioned the Yuma Desalting Plant and the environmental community saw the imminent doom for the Cienega de Santa Clara,” said Jennifer Pitt, a research analyst with Environmental Defense. “There was no dialogue happening; it was just a push-button issue.”

 

Until a few years ago, Wilson of the Central Arizona Project cared little about the wetland. “My view was the cienega isn't natural,” he said. “But when you go down there, you recognize that artificial or not, it has some real environmental value.”

 

Wilson also saw some practical reasons for engaging with conservationists: avoiding a fight over the water.

 

Seeing the potential for conflict, Wilson formed a group to discuss the options for the cienega and the desalting plant.

 

Participants included the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which owns and operates the facility, the Arizona Department of Water Resources and the city of Yuma, as well as U.S. environmental groups that have studied the delta, including Environmental Defense, the Tucson-based Sonoran Institute and the Oakland-based Pacific Institute.

 

In April 2005, they came up possible alternatives that included treating poor-quality Yuma groundwater at the plant and allowing the agricultural runoff to continue flowing to the cienega. The report also included a proposal for a voluntary program in which farmers are paid not to grow crops.

 

The group “is a model for how we should resolve border environmental and water disputes,” said participant Peter Culp, an attorney for the Sonoran Institute.

 

As the Bureau of Reclamation's area manager, Jim Cherry oversees the desalination plant and also participated in discussions.

“This is something we've found common ground on,” Cherry said. “It's good to be working cooperatively with these groups, because historically, we've sat down at the table and argued.”

 

The potential for conflict can be seen just west of Yuma on the California border, where a plan to stop cross-border seepage by lining a portion of the All-American Canal has led to litigation and a standoff between the U.S. and Mexican governments.

 

In Arizona, the Bureau of Reclamation has made no final decisions on the plant's operation. Staff members are studying options and are hoping to gather information by operating the plant at 10 percent capacity for a three-month period that ends in June.

 

“We're concerned about the environmental impacts associated with operating the plant,” Robert Johnson, the bureau's commissioner, said during a visit to the plant Tuesday. “We don't have an obligation to do this, but if we can avoid the impact on that environmental resource, no matter where it is, we want to take that into consideration.”

 

The bureau is also following the results of a separate scientific study of how the plant's partial operation will affect the cienega, hoping to understand how sensitive it is to a reduction in the flow of the Arizona agricultural water. The Central Arizona Project is funding the $80,000 study, conducted by the University of Arizona and two Mexican groups, Pronatura and the Center for Investigation in Nutrition and Development.

 

Karl Flessa, a conservation biologist at the University of Arizona, is encouraged by the interest in the study's outcome. “It's an acknowledgment that how we manage water on this side affects environmental quality on the other side of the border. It's a recognition that it's all one river.”  #

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20070326-9999-1n26desalt.html

 

 

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WATER SUPPLY PLANNING:

Inland agencies get money to boost water supply

Riverside Press Enterprise – 3/25/07

By Jennifer Bowles, staff writer

 

The State Water Resources Control Board issued $25 million in grants to agencies in the Inland region and Orange County to stretch the local supply of the life-sustaining resource.

 

Regional water officials said Friday the grants will go to agencies that serve residents in San Bernardino Valley, western Riverside County, the Yucaipa Valley and northern Orange County.

 

They are all part of the same watershed that drains into the Santa Ana River, which flows from the San Bernardino Mountains to the Pacific Ocean.

 

The competitive grants from the voter-approved Prop. 50 in 2002 went to just that -- projects that aim to solve regional problems such as the removal of high salts that will increase the supply of usable water, said Celeste Cantú, general manager of the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority.

 

The authority, which represents the region's largest water agencies, coordinated the package of proposals to the state and was awarded the funding to distribute.

 

Salt in the region generally soaks into the groundwater from cow manure, agricultural practices or the Colorado River, Cantú said.

 

"Chemically, you can't change salt," she said. "And it doesn't evaporate and it doesn't change. It's there. You have to concentrate it and shovel it out."

 

Other funded projects will remove an invasive bamboo-like cane called arundo donax that guzzles water and has infested stands of native willows and cottonwoods along the river. Some projects will recycle more wastewater so it can be used for irrigation, saving better-quality groundwater and imported water for taps.

 

For instance, about $4.5 million will help expand a wastewater treatment plant in San Jacinto so the water can be used to irrigate school grounds, parks, crops, roadway medians and golf courses, said Peter Odencrans, a spokesman for Perris-based Eastern Municipal Water District.

 

Western Municipal Water District will use its roughly $4.5 million share to help build a segment of the Riverside-Corona Feeder, a 28-mile pipeline that will bring water from the San Bernardino area to Corona and other nearby areas, said Tedi Jackson, a district spokeswoman. #

http://www.pe.com/localnews/rivcounty/stories/PE_News_Local_B_water26.3c06ad9.html

 

 

DEVELOPMENT ISSUES:

 

Whose water is it?

Napa Valley Register – 3/24/07

By Kerana Todorov, staff writer

 

Last year, Jim Barbour thought the purchase of a lot off Jamieson Canyon Road was a sound investment for his wine management consulting business.

Barbour figured he would build a large enough building on the 1.5-acre parcel off of Jamieson Canyon to have his offices and his machinery in one central location. That would allow him to give up his $5,500-a-month office in St. Helena.

The 7,000-square-foot, one-story stucco building in the industrial zone off North Kelly Road would house the tractors he drives to the vineyards he manages in the Napa, Sonoma and Lake counties.

Barbour's plans were on track until last fall, when he and other property owners near Napa County Airport received a notice from the city of American Canyon saying the city would not provide a hookup to its municipal water system unless Barbour's property became part of the city. Instead of a water hookup, he was advised, one option was to drill a well.

 

"When I bought the property, nobody told me there was going to be a problem hooking up to water," said Barbour, adding the land is too far from American Canyon to be annexed into the city.

He paid a company $10,000 to put in a well, but found no water after drilling down 400 feet. He said he now hopes that the county will allow him to install a 10,500-gallon tank and truck water to the site. "Otherwise, I'm stuck."

Barbour is among several property owners in unincorporated Napa County since last fall who have been denied "will-serve" letters, agreements to provide water service, from the city of American Canyon.

Napa County Planning Director Hillary Gitelman recently said a half-dozen property owners in unincorporated Napa County have been denied water service letters unless they agreed to annex into the city.

Growing too fast?

According to city records, however, American Canyon has not rejected that many claims.

The city has not acted on two water service requests for properties in unincorporated Napa County, city Public Works Director Robert Weil said this week.

Three other water service requests in the Napa Valley Gateway subdivision are being written. "We are drafting the conditions at this time," he said. At least one property owner in the Napa Valley Gateway, developer Zapolski and Rudd LLC, still has not received a service letter for its' site, a representative said this week.

"We are still waiting on it," said Jon Bowman, whose company plans to construct a 34,510 square-foot building.

In the meantime, in letters and at public meetings, county representatives have said American Canyon is obligated to provide water to properties in unincorporated Napa County south of the Soscol Ridge. That's because the city assumed the responsibilities of the former American Canyon Water District when it incorporated in 1992. The district's boundaries extended to the Soscol Ridge, near the Napa County Airport.

American Canyon officials dispute that assertion, saying they need to protect American Canyon's water resources for its residents and businesses within the city limits.

American Canyon City Attorney Bill Ross, in a March 5 letter to the Napa County Local Agency Formation Commission -- the agency that approves jurisdictional boundaries and updates water, sewer and fire service areas -- reiterated the city's position that its primary obligation is to provide water and sewer service to properties within its boundaries or to those slated to be annexed into the city.

City Manager Rich Ramirez said "hundreds of thousands" of square feet of building is planned north of American Canyon. The city has to make sure water resources are not being depleted, he said.

The properties outside city limits use about 16 percent of the city's water supply annually, Weil said. That demand is estimated to increase to 20 percent by 2025, he said.

All told, the city is entitled to 4,700 acre-feet of water annually under a 1967 contract between the former water district and the Napa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. American Canyon's water allocation will increase to 5,200 acre-feet of water in 2015, Weil said.

The city and the county each say the other is growing too fast and using too much water.

American Canyon added more than 4,800 residents and 1,600 homes between 2000 and 2005, according to the Association of Bay Area Governments, a regional planning agency. Between 1995 and 2005, an estimated 2.4 million square feet of industrial buildings were constructed in American Canyon, according to the county.

In the same period, construction within industrially zoned areas in unincorporated Napa County totaled 2.9 million square feet.

Citing an American Canyon study, Gitelman also noted that the city's water demand increased from 917 acre-feet per year to 1,979 acre-feet per year between 2000 and 2005.

Napa County supervisors Bill Dodd and Mark Luce recently said that land-use control -- not water availability -- is the reason the city has refused water service to properties near the airport.

"We don't believe water is the issue," Luce said. "We just believe it's a tactic to expand their boundary."

Ramirez said the city wants to "control" water mitigation measures. For instance, the city could require that properties use recycled water or low-flow toilets, he said.

"We're just trying to be good stewards of the limited amount of water we have left," Ramirez said.

Bring in the lawyers

The debate over "will-serve" letters comes as American Canyon and Napa County officials joust over the location of the city's boundary line.

At stake, among other properties, are about 350 acres of industrial land north of the city.

The county's proposed general plan update -- the document guiding future growth of the Napa Valley -- shows American Canyon's ultimate boundary line a short drive south of Fagan Creek, which crosses Highway 29 near La Strada restaurant.

City officials, including Ramirez and Mayor Leon Garcia, have repeatedly said that the city's northern boundary line should be Fagan Creek, as it is under the city's 1994 general plan. City officials said they plan to ask LAFCO to amend the city's sphere of influence -- the ultimate urban boundary line -- to match the one in the 1994 general plan.

"We can't figure out how to plan for the area if we cannot control the land uses that are going on in that area," Ramirez said.

Board of Supervisors Chairman Harold Moskowite, who represents the south Napa County, including American Canyon, expressed hope that the disagreements between the Napa County and American Canyon will be resolved.

"I think we'll work it out," he said. "It's very important for American Canyon and Napa County to work together."

Yet, Dodd, who finds the city's refusal to provide water service to Barbour "distasteful," said he is annoyed that American Canyon has failed to recognize previous agreements signed with the county.

In the meantime, both sides are preparing in case the dispute should end up in court.

Napa County has retained an attorney, Alan Lilly of Sacramento, to study the issue. Another Sacramento attorney, Iris Yang, will consult for American Canyon on the water issue, Ross said.

"We're close to going to court, without a doubt" Luce said. #

http://www.napavalleyregister.com/articles/2007/03/24/news/local/iq_3872309.txt

 

 

CONSERVATION EXPO:

WATER AWARENESS; Second annual expo explores products, ideas to conserve the wet stuff

Monterey Herald – 3/24/07

By Kevin Howe, staff writer

 

It feels like grass. When you poke the soil, it gives.

 

But it's not living sod, said Steve Taylor of Heavenly Greens, makers of Fieldturf, the so-called "turf of choice" for child-care centers.

 

Fieldturf -- artificial grass with a soft pad beneath and soft, grasslike monofilament fibers -- was one of a number of exhibits on display Friday at Rancho Cañada Golf Club in Carmel Valley during the second annual Water-Wise Landscape Symposium and Vendor Expo.

 

Sponsored by the Water Awareness Committee of Monterey Inc., the expo gave people in the irrigation and landscaping business a chance to advertise their wares and brainstorm how to grow gardens and save water.

 

Several companies exhibited artificial turf -- the conventional lawn is considered the No. 1 water-waster by the Water Awareness Committee -- along with water-saving plumbing devices ranging from plastic pipe inserts to low-flow toilets. The expo offered seminars on drip irrigation, rain "harvesting" and storage, sprinkler systems and garden design, all aimed at saving water.

 

Water is going to remain a scarce resource on the Central Coast in the foreseeable future, said water officials.

 

The general managers of two major water agencies, Curtis Weeks of the Monterey County Water Resources Agency and David Berger of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, noted that their agencies, along with private and public entities on the Central Coast, have been meeting in sessions organized by the state Public Utility Commission's Division of Ratepayer Advocates to form a regional water collaborative.

 

"We're going to have to work together," Weeks said.

 

He cited the recent availability of $50 million in funding for Monterey and Santa Cruz counties and $25 million for the Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency from Proposition 50. Passed in 2002, funding is finally coming through after five years.

 

Monterey County, Weeks said, is bogged down by its general plan update, the Natividad Medical Center crisis and a series of lawsuits.

 

The state Department of Water Resources "used to be about developing water and projects," he said, but its biggest projects have long since been built and the state doesn't have the money it once did. Now, he said, the department's focus is on conservation and local water supply solutions.

 

The regional water collaboration task force, Berger said, "could send a message that the Monterey Peninsula and North County have their act together," which would bring the area closer to getting the state funding it needs for solving its water shortage.

That problem hasn't been solved, he said, and it has been 12 years since the Department of Water Resources ordered California American Water to cease overpumping from the Carmel River aquifer.

 

"The state," Berger said, "will run out of patience."

 

Cal Am and neighboring Pajaro/Sunny Mesa Community Services District are moving ahead with plans for a regional water desalination plant on Monterey Bay.

 

But the solution may not be a single big project, Weeks said. A dependable and adequate water supply might be achieved through a package of smaller projects that would be easier on the ratepayers' pocketbooks.

 

Berger said the Monterey Peninsula is tied with San Francisco and Eureka for the least per-capita water use, and may be the suburban area with the lowest water use in the state.

 

County agriculture "could do better," Weeks said, "but people come from all over the world to see how we do it." As a group, Monterey County growers are "four to five times better" in water-use efficiency than in other agricultural counties around the state, he said. #

http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/16966354.htm

 

 

LOCAL CONSERVATION MEASURES:

Drought tapping water reserves

Pasadena Star-News – 3/25/07

By Mike Sprague, staff writer

 

It's only three months into 2007, but Suburban Water System customers are turning the tap on a lot more than usual.

 

Consumption is up by 25 percent in March and a little less so far during the first three months, said Garry Hofer, spokesman for Suburban, which serves some of Whittier, La Mirada and several cities in the San Gabriel Valley.

 

"March has gone crazy," Hofer said. "Already we've pumped about 3,000 acre-feet, and that was the entire amount" pumped for all of March last year, he added.

 

It's all because one of the driest winters in history in Southern California has people relying less on rain and more on tap water to keep their gardens and lawns green.

 

The area has received 2.5 inches of rain since July 2006. In a normal year 13.2 inches would have fallen during that period.

 

Free storm water that replenishes the local underground basin also is down by about 75percent.

 

But there is some good news, regional water officials say.

 

"We are prepared to meet any additional demands that may be placed on us because of the weather," said Bob Muir, spokesman for the Metropolitan Water District. "We have more than 2.5 million acre-feet of groundwater and surface water stored. We're more than prepared to meet demands."

 

An acre-foot, 326,000 gallons, can be visualized as a football field one foot deep in water. It also is the amount of water used in a year by an average family of five.

 

MWD most likely will have to dip into its storage to meet demand, Muir said.

 

The district expects to receive about 2.2 million acre-feet of water from the state water project and the Colorado River, while needing to sell about 2.4million acre-feet of water.

 

MWD is better able to meet these demands because of $250million it has spent in the last 17 years on conservation and storage, Muir said.

 

Some of the agencies that purchase water from MWD, such as Pasadena, and Central Basin and the Upper San Gabriel Valley municipal water districts, also have spent money on increasing conservation.

 

"We've learned from the past," said Art Aguilar, general manager of the Central Basin District, which serves the southeast area of Los Angeles County.

 

"There's been a lot of work done in the last few years to make sure there's a lot more reliable supply."

 

Central Basin also has its own reclaimed waste-water system that provides as much as 10,000 acre-feet of non-drinking water for irrigation and other uses.

 

"Our eventual goal is to have around 25,000 acre-feet," Aguilar said.

 

Timothy Jochem, general manager for the Upper Basin district that serves much of the San Gabriel Valley, said his district too is trying to encourage conservation.

 

"The program is going at 100percent now," Jochem said. "We're continuing to do a toilet program and provide rebates for high-efficiency washing mach- ines. This weekend, we're starting a new program for weather- based irrigation controllers."

 

Pasadena also promotes drought-tolerant plants as well as the same irrigation controllers.

 

But even with this new conservation, water utilities in much of the San Gabriel Valley and Whittier, which rely on the underground water supply, probably will have to pay more.

 

Carol Williams, executive officer for the Main San Gabriel Basin Water Master, said it expects to lower the level of water that agencies can pump at no additional cost.

 

"Years ago we had near- record rain and got a terrific water supply that put lots and lots of storm runoff into the basin," Williams said.

 

"That's changed now," she said. "We're seeing a very low- flow of water in the river. We'll be relying on more imported water."

 

Still for Whittier, which has saved up its water rights, this won't be a problem, said Dave Mochizuki, its public works director.

 

It has banked so much that it's going to lease out the rights to 3,000 acre-feet of water, Mochizuki said.

 

The lack of rain also is hurting the Water Replenishment District of Southern California, which replenishes water in a large basin in the south Los Angeles area.

 

Normally, it gets about 50,000 acre-feet of water from storm water, but this year, only about 20 percent of that is expected, said Robb Whittaker, the replenishment district general manager. #

http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/search/ci_5521130

 

 

CENTRAL COAST DESALINATION:

Editorial: Stalling best water strategy

Monterey Herald – 3/24/07

 

Among the many upcoming fights in the arena of Monterey County politics is the contest over who should operate a desalination plant. It is not a battle of heavyweights.

 

In one corner is California American Water, which wants to build and operate the plant, but has been unable to develop much of a fan base. The company for many years took a ham-fisted approach to public relations. It has, finally, generated support from those hoping a desalination plant would take some of the pressure off the declining Carmel River. But, overall, its public image is on par with cable TV operators. Cal Am may be part of a huge international conglomerate, but for this event, it checks in as a bantamweight.

 

In the other corner stands government, bruised and battered well before this fight. Still, all things considered, it's on about the same footing as Cal Am.

 

We hear so often that private enterprise can beat public agencies at just about any game that many consider it fact -- despite a fair amount of evidence to the contrary. In many ways, the conventional wisdom reflects general discontent with much of what government does, but it fails to consider the actual performance of private enterprise. For proof that government has no monopoly on nonfeasance, look no further than the chain of Central Coast water companies once operated as Alisal Water Co., also known as Alco. Officials of that very private company ignored water-testing rules so blatantly that they were forced to sell most of their holdings. The stripped-down company is now trying to expand its service area, despite a record that makes its remaining customers fear the water in their taps.

 

The notion that private equals quality simply doesn't hold up.

 

Making the coming Cal Am-government bout more interesting is the potential spoiler, the public-private hybrid know as the Pajaro-Sunny Mesa Community Services District. It is an obscure, but public, water agency that teamed with developer Nader Agha to pursue a desal plant of its own. As Monterey County's regulations now stand, Pajaro-Sunny Mesa would qualify to operate a plant while Cal Am would not.

 

What, then, should the Monterey County Board of Supervisors do as it considers Cal Am's request to kill the ordinance that says desal plants in unincorporated Monterey County must be owned and operated by a public entity?

 

In a word, stall.

 

Cal Am is pushing to eliminate the rule to help it navigate a maze of bureaucracies with a role in building a desalination plant.

 

The company may be right that taking time to create a government partnership could seriously delay the already-plodding process. But the county would be wise to hang onto the public-ownership requirement as long as possible so it can maintain some local control over a process that ultimately will be shaped primarily by state and federal agencies.

 

The county could reconsider and drop the clause later -- if and when Cal Am demonstrates that it has learned from its mistakes and is capable of acting in the public interest as well as its own. #

http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/editorial/16966346.htm

 

 

CLIMATE CHANGE ISSUES:

Guest Column: Global Warming Response — Markets or Taxes?; California's water future - 21st century solutions

San Francisco Chronicle – 3/23/07

By Lois Wolk, represents Yolo and Solano counties in the state Assembly; Jared Huffman, represents Marin and Sonoma counties in the state Assembly

 

With a growing population, strained ecosystems and global warming shrinking the Sierra snowpack, California faces serious water challenges. We must plan far ahead while also taking immediate actions to ensure a reliable supply of clean water for our people, farms and ecosystems.

 

A hundred years ago, California relied on dams, reservoirs, pumps and canals to meet the state's water needs. We built the world's most elaborate water system, with more than 1,000 dams, but in the process, we also created major water quality and environmental problems.

 

Meeting today's water challenges requires modern, realistic, cost-effective solutions that incorporate lessons from the last century. The most obvious of these is to better use existing water supplies. Thanks to investments in conservation and recycling, California's water demand has been relatively flat despite the tremendous population increase over the past few decades. For example, in the past 30 years, the population of Los Angeles grew by 33 percent, yet its total water use did not increase. With ever-improving plumbing fixtures, appliances, irrigation techniques and recycled water technologies, this trend can continue.

 

Similarly, we can clean up and better protect water supplies that have been placed in jeopardy by contamination. Many California groundwater basins and rivers are impaired by pesticides, industrial effluent and other pollutants. Cleaning up contaminated water supplies is a proven, cost-effective strategy.

 

Another obvious solution is better use of groundwater storage. In the 20th century, we mismanaged our groundwater aquifers, depleting them faster than rain and snowmelt could recharge them. The good news is that these depleted aquifers provide ready-made water storage facilities capable of significantly increasing our water-storage capacity at a much lower cost than building new dams. This cost-effective and environmentally friendly strategy is already working. Since 1990, 1 million acre-feet of groundwater storage has been developed and there is tremendous additional potential.

 

While these promising strategies are playing an increasingly vital role in meeting our water needs, some argue that building one or two new dams should be California's top priority. Whether you believe dams are good or bad, one thing is certain: new dams are expensive.

 

With limited resources, the state of California must be smart and practical in evaluating these proposals. We need increased water storage, and global climate change adds to that need. But unlike 100 years ago, we have choices. That's why policymakers should require answers to the following questions before approving billions of dollars in state funding for new dams.

 

First, how will the proposed dam benefit us? If the answer is water supply, what is the amount, cost and reliability of that water, and are there cheaper, more reliable alternative supplies? If it's flood protection, what level of protection and can other strategies achieve that protection more cost-effectively?

 

Second, how quickly can a dam provide these benefits? In the past, large dams have taken many years, sometimes decades to plan, design and construct. We face urgent water challenges that can't wait decades for solutions.

 

Third, who are the primary beneficiaries and how much will they pay? Three major California surface storage projects have been built in recent years, including the Los Vaqueros Reservoir in Contra Costa County. In each case, most of the funding came from water users who benefit from the project, not massive state subsidies.

 

Finally, what are the environmental impacts, and would alternative strategies be better for the environment? The negative consequences of most major dams -- from loss of habitat, to adverse effects on fisheries and water quality -- are well known.

 

Let's finish the studies California water officials are conducting to answer these questions.

 

In the meantime, however, let's not wait to move forward on proven, cost-effective solutions that can produce significant supplies of clean, reliable and affordable water for decades to come. We may not have all the water we would like. We certainly don't have all the money. Let's be smart and make the best use of both. #

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/03/23/EDGT0OQ1FJ1.DTL&hw=global+warming+response&sn=005&sc=532

####

 

 

No comments:

Blog Archive