[GPSCC-chat] The Future of Water - San Jose Mar 20 - Anyone Planning to Attend?

[Wes Rolley]

I won't be able to make this as I have other things for Thurs. Evening.  
However, this should be a very good session.  If the discussion after 
the movie sticks to the topic more than a bit of understanding might 
happen.   I have a few comments that I will suggest that might make for 
further discussion.

Since Professor Stewart-Frey is focused on climate change, it might be 
worth asking her to comment on the relationship between the Bay Delta 
Conservation Plan (a euphemism for Moonbeam Brown's Water Tunnels) and 
sea level rise.  In particular, the BDCP documentation does not consider 
that effect of sea level rise on the location of facilities.  They end 
up with the water tunnels terminating at the Clifton Forebay near Tracy 
and that location is only about 1 meter above current sea level.   This 
makes me question why we would spend $ tens of Billions on new 
infrastructure with a short lifespan as they will inevitably become 
saline.;l

We know that the demand for water will eventually cause all coastal 
areas to evaluate desalination.   If there is one area where technology 
is moving in the right direction to make solutions feasible, this is 
it.  One has only to browse E360 site from Yale or the Water Wired blog 
of Dr. Michael Campagna (Oregon State U) to find abundant reference to 
technologies that will greatly reduce the energy requirement for the 
process.  There are already technologies that could make use of the 
solid byproducts.   Then the major question becomes one of siting... 
where can you build the facilities to best provide the water at the 
least cost.

I see a conflict in the way that water is managed in this area. 
Conservation should always be a primary objective.  But the Santa Clara 
Valley Water District receives it's funds as a water wholesaler and, if 
everyone conserved to the maximum possible, the district would have a 
hard time meeting payroll.  In other words, they are motivated to sell 
more water so that they can build more projects or pay for those already 
built;

Finally, I would not be surprised to see a movement to limit the options 
for water users to take advantage of rain when it falls. While 
privatization is always a threat, we must consider that municipal 
utilities will eventually take the position that they should get all 
runoff.  For example, water on my property that is not absorbed into the 
ground would flow naturally into Anderson Reservoir.  I catch 250 - 300 
gal from each rain event and use that on our fruit trees.  The argument 
could be made that I would have no right to catch that water for home 
use but that it belongs to the Water District under the concept of prior 
use that is prevalent in most Western US states.   Something similar has 
been argued in a Florida court where a home owner went completely off 
grid and also off city water.  The court ruled that the homeowner did 
not have the right to do that since both the water and electric were 
municipal utilities and have a shared cost.   If homeowners were allowed 
to opt-out, then cost recovery would drive up the rates for everyone else




-- 
"Anytime you have an opportunity to make things better and you don't, 
then you are wasting your time on this Earth" - /Roberto Clemente/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cagreens.org/pipermail/sosfbay-discuss_lists.cagreens.org/attachments/20140318/2a6e8011/attachment.html>