California's current drought
is not the state's driest spell on record in terms of total
precipitation. If the state feels this drought as a particularly severe
one, says Peter Gleick, the blame may fall partly on humans.
"The severity of the drought has been compounded by poor planning,
poor management, and population growth putting pressure on already
overcommitted resources," says Gleick, president of the Oakland,
California-based Pacific Institute, a nonprofit that conducts
interdisciplinary research on water issues. "It is the third year of the
drought, and we did not act in the first two years as though anything
was abnormal."
That appears to be changing. This spring, water agencies across the state are taking dramatic actions
to meet demands for water despite having less of it. Of the many large
and small efforts, some are particularly creative. Here, National
Geographic takes a look at five efforts across the state, from the
Sacramento area in the north to the Santa Barbara area in the south.
Lompico: Linking to a Bigger Neighbor
In a typical year, the Santa Cruz Mountains community of Lompico
relies on its local creek and three wells for its water supply. But this
year, water levels are way down: "One of our wells that produced the
most water is producing half" of its usual amount, says Lois Henry,
president of the Lompico Water Board.
In January, the state formally designated Lompico as an area in
danger of running out of water. That brought state money, about
$160,000, to pay for an intertie, an emergency pipe connecting Lompico
to the neighboring San Lorenzo Water District. Given the desperate
circumstances, the state also waived the environmental impact
assessments that otherwise would have been required for the project. The
first week of May, the intertie was connected.
To avoid such close calls in the future, some Lompico residents want
to merge water systems permanently with their bigger neighbor. That
would be costly: To pay for the infrastructure improvements required for
a merger, including bringing the intertie up to code, Lompico would
have to pass a $2.75 million bond, assessed on taxes over 30 years.
But maintaining the status quo isn't cheap either, says Henry. With
only 500 customers paying currently, "it costs a whole lot more money"
per customer, she says. "We have the highest water bills in Santa Cruz
County."
Gleick, the water issues expert, thinks a merger would benefit
Lompico. "Combining small water agencies can help build resilience," he
says.
The Kern County Water Agency in the San Joaquin Valley serves the
cities of Bakersfield, Tehachapi, and Taft, and the bulk of its water
supplies agricultural customers. But this year its three key
surface-water sources—the State Water Project, the Friant-Kern Canal,
and the Kern River—are supplying far less water than normal.
Kern County farmers are already pretty efficient water users, says
Jim Beck, general manager of the Kern County Water Agency. "Because
we've experienced high costs for water in Kern County compared to other
areas, we have some of the leading technology in the nation," he says.
Farmers already are using micro-sprinkling and drip irrigation, and
doing laser leveling of fields to reduce runoff.
In wet years, farmers banked extra water, storing it in a groundwater
aquifer for dry years. "This year we're making withdrawals from those
bank accounts," Beck says.
To deliver banked water to farmers in the northern county, the water
agency is contemplating an extreme measure: investing in diesel pumps to
run the California Aqueduct in reverse for about 47 miles.
The aqueduct normally flows just one way, south, like water flowing
downstream. The water agency, with its store of groundwater, is situated
south of some of its northern customers. Historically, to serve these
customers, the agency relied on an outside entity to put water into the
aqueduct north of its upstream customers.
In exchange, the agency put the same amount of water into the
aqueduct farther south to serve other downstream customers (not its
own). This year, there may not be enough water from the outside being
added upstream to do a typical exchange. So the agency's solution could
be to pump its own groundwater in reverse to serve its northern
customers.
The water agency will make day-by-day decisions on whether to run the
aqueduct backward, depending on emerging water delivery schedules. The
estimated $5 million to $10 million capital cost, plus operational
costs, would be borne by district water users.
"We think it's an important tool in our toolbox, should we need it,"
says Beck. "We will continue full tilt to get this permitted and begin
the installation," in hopes of having it online by mid-June.
Sacramento: So Long to Lawns
Sacramento's water rights to the Sacramento and American Rivers are
so senior that the city, the state's capital, has never had to worry
about water. It is only now installing water meters, and currently just
51 percent of local customers have them. Without meters to charge them
according to the amount of water used, customers have had no incentive
to conserve, and the city has earned a reputation as a profligate water
consumer.
Now that's changing. River flows are projected to be so low this year
that water levels may fall below the city's pumps. On January 14, for
the first time in history, the Sacramento city council enacted a water
shortage contingency plan—targeting a 20 percent reduction in
consumption.
In the hot valley city, 60 percent of residential water goes to
watering yards, says Terrance Davis, the drought and sustainability
manager for the city's Department of Utilities. So since the plan was
announced in January, the department has spent $200,000 on a public
outreach campaign to educate water users on new restrictions that limit
yard watering to just two days a week. "That allows us to target our
enforcement," says Davis.
Sacramento residents seem to be embracing conservation. They've made
more than 4,000 calls already this year to report water-wasting
neighbors, up from 233 during the same period last year. Water wasters
first get a warning; those who receive a fourth notice face a $1,000
fine.
After the city council enacted the 20 percent reduction target in
mid-January, February saw a 12 percent reduction in total water demand
and March a 16 percent reduction, says Davis.
A new pilot program, passed on March 4, will pay people up to $1,000
to replace their front lawns with drought-resistant or native plants.
The department has set aside $200,000 for the program through July 2015,
says Davis, and 700 people are on the waiting list. "The water savings
will be pretty dramatic," he says. "We're selling them on the idea that
it can actually look really good," he says.
Gleick supports the program. "It is long past time that Sacramento
and other western cities got serious about eliminating lawns," he says.
Fair Oaks: Caring for the River
Fair Oaks, a town of about 30,000 northeast of Sacramento, benefits
from abundant access to the American River, so its water supply is not
directly affected by the drought. But the town derives a lot of tourism
dollars and local pride from its setting on the lower American River, a
draw for rafters, kayakers, and bikers. The dry conditions threaten to
diminish that.
To preserve this resource, Fair Oaks made an agreement with local
business groups, environmental organizations, and other water districts
to protect the American River.
The town has invested millions in drilling wells to develop a backup
groundwater supply. In years when surface-water supplies get tight for
neighboring water districts, Fair Oaks pumps groundwater for some or all
of what the city needs. In that way, it leaves the city's surface-water
allocation in the river to benefit neighbors and the river's ecosystem.
"Being a utility isn't mutually exclusive to being a steward of the
environment," says Tom Gray, general manager of the Fair Oaks Water
District.
Montecito: Buying Water From Farmers
Montecito, the idyllic seaside village near Santa Barbara that's home
to one of Oprah Winfrey's residences, is working to impress on its
water users that conservation is a virtue.
Like many cities in dry southern California, Montecito had a
long-standing policy to encourage conservation by pricing water in
tiers, depending on water usage—but didn't restrict total consumption.
With this drought, that has changed. The water board declared an
emergency on February 11 and began water rationing on February 21.
Rationing means a moratorium on issuing new water service permits, a
ban on draining and refilling pools, and strict limits on outdoor
watering, with penalties imposed for violations. Several residential
customers have received penalties of $1,500 to $2,000 for exceeding
their allotments, says Tom Mosby, general manager of the Montecito Water
District. "We're finding the fine gets their attention quickly."
But for the most part, "the community has responded well beyond our
expectation," he says. Montecito water customers cut usage by 48 percent
in March, compared with the preceding year, and when final April
figures are tallied, officials expect a similar reduction.
Still, the district is working to line up other sources. One
possibility: buying water from rice farmers north of the Sacramento
Delta, who would fallow their fields and profit from the sale of their
water rather than their crop.
Such creative measures may get these water districts through the
current year of drought. But with projected population growth and the predicted loss of the Sierra snowpack due to climate change, water managers need to be thinking longer term, says Gleick.
"If we continue to pretend that the future climate is going to look
like the past, we will fail to put in place the policies needed to bring
our water system into any sort of sustainable balance," he says.
And it's not just the human influences on climate change and water
availability that must be considered: California's paleoclimatic record
shows that extreme droughts have plagued the state over the past two millennia, including mega-droughts of 100 years.
Statewide, planning for longer-term drought
isn't happening yet, says Curtis Creel, assistant general manager of
the Kern County Water Agency. "This is a new area for a lot of water
managers within California and something we're really wrestling with,"
he says.
No comments:
Post a Comment