Department of Water Resources
A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment
February 26, 2009
5. Agencies, Programs, People –
Bottled water consumes a lot of energy
Energy secretary throws himself into climate debate, guns blazing
New York Times
Senators delay confirmation of California
Army Corps cracks down on flunking levees
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bottled water consumes a lot of energy
By Dan Walters
Bottled water, increasingly popular because of its convenience and presumed purity, also consumes a lot of energy to produce and transport, according to an exhaustive new study by Oakland-based Pacific Institute.
Bottled water is up to 2,000 times more energy-intensive than tap water, the study found, and consumes the equivalent of 32 million to 54 million barrels of oil annually in the
"As bottled water use continues to expand around the world, there is growing interest in the environmental, economic, and social implications of that use, including concerns about waste generation, proper use of groundwater, hydrologic effects on local surface and groundwater, economic costs, and more. But a key concern is how much energy is required to produce and use bottled water," said article co-author Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute. "It turns out the answer is, a lot."
Bottled water consumption in the nation has been estimated at 33 billion liters a year, roughly half that of carbonated beverages.
Four billion liters are roughly 3,000 acre-feet of water, which is scarcely a trickle in hydrological terms. About 200 million acre-feet of water flow through California's rivers and streams in an average year (an acre-foot is the equivalent of one acre of water one foot deep or 325,851 gallons) so the bottled water that flows through Californians' gullets each year works out to be nothing more than a figurative drop in the bucket. By way of comparison,
For those interested in exploring the energy consumption of bottled water, the full report is available here.
http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/capitolalertlatest/020031.html?mi_rss=Capitol%20Alert
Energy secretary throws himself into climate debate, guns blazing
New York Times – 2/26/09
By Colin Sullivan
Enter Steven Chu, the new Energy secretary, who won the Nobel Prize as a physicist before getting into national politics. In his first interview as a Cabinet secretary earlier this month, Chu warned of a pending climate catastrophe that could see
In jeopardy, he seemed to say, is not only a massive economic engine but a way of life. "We're looking at a scenario where there's no more agriculture in
His intent in making the dire projections was clear: "I'm hoping that the American people will wake up,"
But how true are these predictions? As with most things related to climate science, that depends on whom you ask.
An uncertain model?
Chu's assertion that 90 percent of the snowpack in the Sierra, which acts as a natural water storage system for
A report by scientists at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and the
In contrast, the same study said the Sierra snowpack would lose 30 to 60 percent of its historic capacity under a "lower emissions scenario" in which heat-trapping emissions peak by midcentury and then decline. This point was not lost on John Andrew, a spokesman at
"That 90 percent number gets people's attention," he said. "But we specifically did not go out to the end of the century, because we thought things were just a little too uncertain."
The department, which oversees much of
"He's obviously a Nobel laureate and knows a lot about energy, but I don't know how much he's up to date on water management," Andrew said. "People that know water in
'Shock and awe'
Matthew Kahn, an environmental economist at the
"There might be an element of shock and awe here," he said. "But I don't think he's engaging in science fiction. It's his job to give everyone a heads-up."
In agreement with this point was Peter Gleick, a leading water resources expert and president of the Pacific Institute. Gleick said climate models have to take into account hundreds, if not thousands, of factors, and the 90 percent loss is "at the high end of those scenarios."
"He wasn't necessarily inaccurate," Gleick said. "It's a warning. What he's really saying is, if we don't do anything, this is the future we could face."
But given the vagaries of such estimates, some have questioned whether
I'm afraid Secretary Chu has been misled by highly dubious scientific speculation," said Myron Ebell, director of global warming policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. "A little more experience of weather and common sense would be of use to him. Snowfall rises and falls cyclically in the West."
Frank Maisano, a senior principal at Bracewell & Giuliani, a
"It's not helpful to focus on what's going to happen in 2100 when we have to figure out what we're going to do in the next two years related to really tough policy provisions," Maisano said. "It's much different in the policy world than when you're a scientist."
Defending
But Jay Gulledge, a senior scientist at the
Scientists may have the luxury of debating statistical details, but policymakers and government officials have been tasked with "avoiding the world possible outcomes," he said.
"It is hard to see how focusing on the upper end is either irresponsible or extreme," Gulledge wrote in an e-mail. "Wouldn't it be more extreme to focus on avoiding the lower end of the projected range?"
Others said the projections mean little because any major loss -- whether it's 50 percent or 90 percent -- means trouble in
"Even a 50 percent reduction would, in my view, require a complete restructuring of many aspects of
No more agriculture?
Experts interviewed for this article were less accommodating about Chu's reference to "no more agriculture in
Kahn, the
For one thing, Kahn believes water technology development would likely move forward rapidly by the end of the century. Technologies like desalination and recycling efforts could be far more accessible, and affordable, by 2100, he said.
Moreover, water-intensive crops like strawberries and alfalfa would more likely suffer in the short term, but much of that harm could be offset by a reorganization of
"I understood what he was trying to say, but I don't think he was saying it well," Gleick said. "I don't think
Another possibility is new dams and reservoirs in
"It is possible that a large increase in reservoir capacity could offset much of the loss in snowpack, but it would be expensive and not guaranteed to replace 100 percent of the capacity of the snowpack," he said.
Other possible causalities are the relatively low-elevation ski industry around Lake Tahoe in the Sierra and
"The skiing industry is really screwed in the long run," he said. "Anywhere they depend on snow at 6,000 or 7,000 feet is in trouble."
The Energy Department refused to answer several attempts to clarify
Senators delay confirmation of California
By Matt Weiser
State senators Wednesday postponed the confirmation of Fish and Game Director Donald Koch, saying a hearing on the matter raised bigger issues about the department itself – and how regulators are managing
The Senate Rules Committee instead wants to question Koch's boss, Natural Resources Secretary Mike Chrisman, about whether the Schwarzenegger administration is truly committed to protecting the state's waterways and fish species.
"People respect you, and rightfully so," committee Chairman Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, told Koch. "But it's not just about you. It's about the direction of the department."
Koch was appointed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in April 2008. A 30-year veteran of the department, Koch is former director of the Fish and Game's
"Senator Steinberg and Secretary Chrisman have a great relationship, and we look forward to talking in the next few weeks," said
The decision to put off Koch's confirmation came after a three-hour hearing in which little direct opposition emerged to Koch's appointment. In fact, more than a dozen witnesses spoke in his favor.
"The association believes that with Mr. Koch, the department will be in very good hands," said Anthony Thomas, vice president of government affairs for the California Forestry Association.
But many also raised concerns about whether Koch, even with the best intentions, would be able to do right by the state's environment.
Koch steps into the Fish and Game spotlight amid great turmoil in the department and throughout the state.
Several witnesses complained the department has failed to fulfill its law-enforcement responsibilities, whether by not hiring enough game wardens or by not asserting its permit authority over matters such as timber harvesting and stream alterations.
Of particular concern to some was the department's recent refusal to halt recreational suction-dredge mining, which the department's own scientists assert damages fish habitat. Another raised by several witnesses is inadequate protection of endangered salmon populations.
Few speakers blamed Koch for these problems. But they said the department has been starved of the money and authority it needs to carry out its responsibilities.
"It's tragic our state professes to be a leader in the 'green' movement, but will not hire or maintain enough staffing to protect our natural resources," said Jerry Karnow, a game warden and legislative liaison to the California Fish and Game Wardens Association. "At this time, the wardens association will not offer an endorsement of any director appointed by this governor."
Karnow noted the department employs only about 220 field-level game wardens to police wildlife crimes statewide. And last week, more than 90 of them got layoff notices as part of the administration's effort to balance the state budget.
Whether those layoffs go forward remains unclear.
“You may have a good man in a bad department,” said Zeke Grader, executive director of Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations. #
http://www.sacbee.com/capitolandcalifornia/story/1653966.html?mi_rss=Capitol%20and%20California
Army Corps cracks down on flunking levees
By Peter Eisler
WASHINGTON — More than 100 levees in 16 states flunked maintenance inspections in the last two years and are so neglected that they could fail to stem a major flood, records from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers show.
The 114 levees received "unacceptable" maintenance ratings in corps inspections, meaning their deficiencies are so severe that it can be "reasonably foreseen" that they will not perform properly in a major flood, according to the records, which were requested by USA TODAY. As a result, the corps is advising state and local levee authorities that the levees no longer qualify for federal rehabilitation aid if damaged by floodwaters.
People who rely on the levees should "be aware that there is reason for concern," says Tammy Conforti, head of the corps' levee safety program.
The corps built most of the levees and turned them over to state and local governments, which were supposed to maintain them. Some of the neglected levees protect urban, residential areas, such as the Arcade Creek levee in
The corps' levee inspections were revamped under a public safety initiative started after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. A round of 63 levees with unacceptable maintenance lost eligibility for federal rehabilitation aid last year after they were not fixed within a one-time, one-year grace period.
Now, the addition of 114 levees to that list leaves a total of 177 nationwide that are so poorly maintained that they don't qualify for federal rehabilitation. That's 9% of the nearly 2,000 levees the corps inspects.
There are thousands of levees nationwide — the government has no precise number — that aren't subject to federal oversight, often because they were built by local or private sponsors. And many big levees, including some on the Mississippi River and around
The corps will alert the Federal Emergency Management Agency to poorly maintained levees. If states and communities cannot certify to FEMA that those levees will handle a 100-year flood — one that has a 1% chance of hitting each year — owners of property behind them may have to buy flood insurance.
"Many of the levee boards don't have the funds to maintain them and really haven't … for years," says Michael Borengasser, National Flood Insurance Program coordinator for the state of
Federal taxpayers already have paid to rebuild many levees that failed in floods because of poor maintenance, says Larry Larson, director of the Association of State Floodplain Managers. "For years, the corps has been threatening to kick them out of the (rehabilitation) program, but never really did," he adds. "Now, the corps is doing the right thing."#
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-02-23-levees_N.htm
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DWR’s California Water News is distributed to California Department of Water Resources management and staff, for information purposes, by the DWR Public Affairs Office. For reader’s services, including new subscriptions, temporary cancellations and address changes, please use the online page: http://listhost2.water.ca.gov/mailman/listinfo/water_news . DWR operates and maintains the State Water Project, provides dam safety and flood control and inspection services, assists local water districts in water management and water conservation planning, and plans for future statewide water needs. Inclusion of materials is not to be construed as an endorsement of any programs, projects, or viewpoints by the Department or the State of
No comments:
Post a Comment