(Originally posted on waterefficiency.net)
By Elizabeth Cutright
Editor
Water Efficiency
A few weeks back, I asked, “What’s your standard?”. In exploring the vagaries of water use, water needs, and water waste, I discussed the challenges inherent in any attempt to standardize efficiency measurements. In particular, any attempt to create a cohesive measurement system (and we all know, “you can’t manage what you don’t measure”), must depend on verifiable data, clear benchmarks, and a set of agreed upon metrics. Additionally, if the point of measuring is to encourage conservation, then any system must also include incentives to encourage water efficiency.
One of the greatest challenges when it comes to measuring and monitoring water use involves accounting for regional differences. What might be effective in one community could be counterproductive in another. In fact, it could be that standards and measurements will ultimately have to be tailored to deal with the unique properties of each watershed.
An example of the looming showdown between national protocols and local controls is already taking shape in California. Last month, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals decided that the state of California is well within its rights to create its own set of water conservation standards for clothes washing machines. In its decision, the Court overturned a US DOE decision to bar California from establishing its own water efficiency. In Judge William Canby’s decision, the judge indicated that improving efficiency was essential given the state’s current water crisis.
So what do you think? Is the DOE fighting the wrong fight here? Are states better able to handle their own resources? And if so, how do we account for resources that cross state lines?
Click here for more on the 9th District’s decision.
Showing posts with label water efficiency resource management delta california farmers sacramento. Show all posts
Showing posts with label water efficiency resource management delta california farmers sacramento. Show all posts
Monday, November 23, 2009
Friday, October 2, 2009
Delta Update
(Originally posted on waterefficiency.net)
By Elizabeth Cutright
Editor
Water Efficiency
There’s been another twist and turn in the saga surrounding water allocations in California’s Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta. In case you are unfamiliar with the situation in California’s central valley, last year the state courts delivered the infamous “Delta-smelt decision” that restricted pumping in the Delta and resulted in a drastic reduction in the amount of water delivered from the delta to the rest of California—including the every-thirsty urban enclaves in the south and agricultural interests in the heart of the state. At the beginning of this year, the California Department of Water Resources attempted to readdress the issue by proposing the construction of a 35-mile tunnel, designed to route water under the Bay Delta and deliver it to customers in the south at a cost that some some estimate could be as high as $15 billion.
In response to concerns over costs and the environmental impact of such a large infrastructure project, and vociferous complaints from farmers who seen their water supplies disappear, the Obama administration stepped into the fray this week in an attempt to rectify the situation. According to the Los Angeles Times, the administration plans to dispatch experts from the National Academy of Sciences to the California to review the pumping restrictions. Additionally, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced that six federal agencies had signed a memorandum of understanding to work together on delta issues.
The situation in California may seem unique, but the complex connection between drought, unchecked urban development, inefficient conveyance systems, and water-intensive agricultural interests can be found in areas throughout the US. When you add the difficulties inherent to the transfer of water over long distances (and often across city, county, or state borders), it’s clear that whether it’s California, Georgia, or the Mississippi Delta, the problem is the same: how to get water where its needed and while protecting the source.
So what do you think? Can water rights be designated and enforced? If so, should those rights be based on need or prior claim? And where do conservation and efficiency efforts fit in? Finally, is this a problem that can be solved locally or do we need to bring in the big (federal) guns?
By Elizabeth Cutright
Editor
Water Efficiency
There’s been another twist and turn in the saga surrounding water allocations in California’s Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta. In case you are unfamiliar with the situation in California’s central valley, last year the state courts delivered the infamous “Delta-smelt decision” that restricted pumping in the Delta and resulted in a drastic reduction in the amount of water delivered from the delta to the rest of California—including the every-thirsty urban enclaves in the south and agricultural interests in the heart of the state. At the beginning of this year, the California Department of Water Resources attempted to readdress the issue by proposing the construction of a 35-mile tunnel, designed to route water under the Bay Delta and deliver it to customers in the south at a cost that some some estimate could be as high as $15 billion.
In response to concerns over costs and the environmental impact of such a large infrastructure project, and vociferous complaints from farmers who seen their water supplies disappear, the Obama administration stepped into the fray this week in an attempt to rectify the situation. According to the Los Angeles Times, the administration plans to dispatch experts from the National Academy of Sciences to the California to review the pumping restrictions. Additionally, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced that six federal agencies had signed a memorandum of understanding to work together on delta issues.
The situation in California may seem unique, but the complex connection between drought, unchecked urban development, inefficient conveyance systems, and water-intensive agricultural interests can be found in areas throughout the US. When you add the difficulties inherent to the transfer of water over long distances (and often across city, county, or state borders), it’s clear that whether it’s California, Georgia, or the Mississippi Delta, the problem is the same: how to get water where its needed and while protecting the source.
So what do you think? Can water rights be designated and enforced? If so, should those rights be based on need or prior claim? And where do conservation and efficiency efforts fit in? Finally, is this a problem that can be solved locally or do we need to bring in the big (federal) guns?
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Water Buffaloes in the Delta
(Originally posted on waterefficiency.net)
By Elizabeth Cutright
Editor
Water Efficiency
It’s a dilemma that faces many water purveyors: how to balance urban and agricultural water needs, while protecting and maintaining environmentally delicate water sources. One need only look to northern California’s Sacramento Delta for a real-world example of just how difficult it is to manage competing demands while protecting a finite resource.
In California, there has long been tension between the relatively water-rich north and the arid south. Surrounded by desert and charged with supplying water to dense urban areas, southern California depends on remote water sources to meet demand. In fact, almost 20 million state residents get at least some of their water from the Sacramento Delta—a small patch of land in the north where the ocean and rivers meet. But the Delta provides more than just drinking water; its resources support a large chunk of California’s agribusiness, and it just happens be the home of the endangered Delta Smelt. Unfortunately, the Delta is under siege—not just from urban and rural consumers, but also from rising sea levels and never-ending drought.
And while climate change, species protection, and ears that every predicted earthquake catastrophe known as “the big one” hold some sway, it’s clear that California’s big water players, known as “water buffalos,” will not sit idly by as decisions are made about the water they depend on for survival. These water buffalos—comprised of agribusiness as well as large urban centers and commercial interests—are focused on keeping the water flowing, and their needs sometimes trump future planning.
It’s a precarious situation, and the Delta’s survival depends upon how the parties involved will manage competing demands and interests. Recently, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s administration came up with the Deltavision Blue Ribbon Task Force in an attempt to develop a workable plan to protect the Delta and maintain the state’s water supply. The current Task Force suggestions include using recycled water for irrigation and industry, the construction of additional desalination plants, and new infrastructure in the form of reservoirs and peripheral canals. The Task Force also calls for stricter oversight of water rights permits to insure that the agricultural industry is not using more than its allocated water share.
What do you think? Can the situation in California be used as a test case for other communities similarly stuck between urban, rural, and environmental interests? And can an entity like the Delatavision Task Force really make a difference?
By Elizabeth Cutright
Editor
Water Efficiency
It’s a dilemma that faces many water purveyors: how to balance urban and agricultural water needs, while protecting and maintaining environmentally delicate water sources. One need only look to northern California’s Sacramento Delta for a real-world example of just how difficult it is to manage competing demands while protecting a finite resource.
In California, there has long been tension between the relatively water-rich north and the arid south. Surrounded by desert and charged with supplying water to dense urban areas, southern California depends on remote water sources to meet demand. In fact, almost 20 million state residents get at least some of their water from the Sacramento Delta—a small patch of land in the north where the ocean and rivers meet. But the Delta provides more than just drinking water; its resources support a large chunk of California’s agribusiness, and it just happens be the home of the endangered Delta Smelt. Unfortunately, the Delta is under siege—not just from urban and rural consumers, but also from rising sea levels and never-ending drought.
And while climate change, species protection, and ears that every predicted earthquake catastrophe known as “the big one” hold some sway, it’s clear that California’s big water players, known as “water buffalos,” will not sit idly by as decisions are made about the water they depend on for survival. These water buffalos—comprised of agribusiness as well as large urban centers and commercial interests—are focused on keeping the water flowing, and their needs sometimes trump future planning.
It’s a precarious situation, and the Delta’s survival depends upon how the parties involved will manage competing demands and interests. Recently, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s administration came up with the Deltavision Blue Ribbon Task Force in an attempt to develop a workable plan to protect the Delta and maintain the state’s water supply. The current Task Force suggestions include using recycled water for irrigation and industry, the construction of additional desalination plants, and new infrastructure in the form of reservoirs and peripheral canals. The Task Force also calls for stricter oversight of water rights permits to insure that the agricultural industry is not using more than its allocated water share.
What do you think? Can the situation in California be used as a test case for other communities similarly stuck between urban, rural, and environmental interests? And can an entity like the Delatavision Task Force really make a difference?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
