Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Water Rate Increases throughout U.S.

USA Today reports that the prices for water have increased over the last 12 years in municipalities all over the U.S. The trend is expected to continue as municipalities grapple with infrastructure costs and upgrades that loom ahead.

Notable Western cities rate hikes:

Reno +37%
Cheyenne +64%
Phoenix +69%
Denver +78%
Salt Lake City +80%
Colorado Springs +97%
Las Vegas +129%
San Francisco +211%

Adjusting for inflation, rates have gone up do to increased electric costs for water utilities, federal regulatory costs, and labor, among other things. Some have likely gone up simply because rates were previously too low. In many states, municipal utilities are restricted from saving funds collected each year for future maintenance costs, therefore deferring price hikes until upgrades are unavoidable. Now that many municipalities face looming maintenance projects and upgrades, they have no other choice but to make significant rate increases.

Some cities, especially San Francisco and Las Vegas, have been using rate manipulation as a tool to decrease water use per capita. Both cities rely on expensive infrastructure to import water from other locations, and support large populations that put increasing pressure on their limited water supplies.

Water remains comparatively cheap in most places, and despite rate hikes, billions of gallons of water are wasted each year. Prices would likely have to go much higher in order to see much of a decrease in use for things like lawn-watering and car-washing, two very water-intensive uses. However, for low-income communities, the costs of water can be especially burdensome, and low-income communities often have less access to newer, more efficient water appliances, and rely on outdated infrastructure. It is a challenge for managers and policymakers to figure out ways to raise funds to cover the costs of maintaining water infrastructure, while avoiding disproportionate financial burdens on certain sectors of society.


Monday, October 22, 2012

A Twenty-First Century Water Policy: A Review - 1 of 3

The Pacific Institute released A Twenty-First Century Water Policy this year. The book outlines the problems we face in our country with regard to water policy, and the gaps that future policy approaches need to address to meet today's (and tomorrow's) water management needs. This is the first in a series of three entries that review the book.

Think of A Twenty-First Century Water Policy as a State of the Union address, a dozen chapters assessing where we are and where we should go with regard to water policy in the United States. The scope is incredibly wide, and that is not lost on the authors, who labor to paint a picture of the nation's water resources in the first two chapters: first that our freshwater resources, though relatively abundant in the U.S., are distributed unequally across our geography, most of the water in the eastern half. And second, population growth throughout the last century has led to massive projects that boil down to manipulating surface water and withdrawing groundwater supplies in order to meet needs, often at the expense of ecosystem health and environmental quality. Incremental policy changes has led to siloed management situation where each state regulates water a little differently, several agencies all have some level of interest in water management, and coordination between all of these governing entities is minimal. Peak water, a sort of limit of how much water can be withdrawn for human use without diminishing future supply, may have already been passed, especially in the West. And increase energy development projects, which require water, put even more strain on water-strapped communities throughout the West. The authors maintain that a new approach is needed: a "soft path" that re-focuses our policy strategy to deliver "water-related services matched to users' needs and resource availability," instead of relying completely on 19th century infrastructure and decision-making solutions.

Associated Press
Water injustice is the focus of the third chapter. Abundant research in the field of Environmental Justice has uncovered depressing evidence that environmental costs are disproportionately borne by low-income communities and communities of color. Current water policies mostly fail to address environmental justice issues. A few of the examples are: subsistence-dependent communities being more susceptible to contamination rates than more affluent communities; higher risks associated with industrial activities; less access to water-related recreation; contamination from energy development; and vulnerability to climate change. Regulatory agencies do a poor job at enforcing water quality standards in low-income communities and communities of color to the same rigorous level as higher-income or white communities. Each of these issues can result in cumulative risks disproportionately borne by the poorer, more rural communities in our country.

These issues have been pinpointed by many researchers throughout the last few decades. The Pacific Institute suggests that environmental justice be more officially integrated into a comprehensive federal water policy framework by encouraging more collaboration between the different regulatory agencies and states, and by recognizing the human right to water.

The pitfalls of our current water policy approach are pretty well known. And I believe the "soft path" to water management is our best chance at avoiding massive water shortages and ethical violations. The next entry will highlight some of the more specific issues involved in the "soft path," including water quality, ecosystem services, urban infrastructure issues, agriculture, energy, and climate change. The final entry will address specific policy strategies suggested by the authors, and discuss the ways in which the soft path can be adopted and implemented.

The last entry will also include my internal monologue over whether the soft path can ever or will ever be implemented in our country, call it the diatribe of a tormented cynic.

Thursday, October 18, 2012

Clean Water Act turns 40

Today marks the official 40th anniversary of the Clean Water Act becoming law. The milestone has spurred a number of editorial content across the Internet - from Kristen Bell to the National Geographic. On this blog, I've already highlighted the law, its effect on pollution mitigation, and where the law currently falls short meeting our water management needs today here. Managers and commenters across the web have raised other issues that should be addressed in order to strengthen the CWA and water policy in the United States:

- Clarify the scope of the act to include small tributaries and waters that have ecological impacts on the waters of the United States (National Geographic)

- Focus on policy mechanisms to address non-point source pollution like fertilizer run-off and urban stormwater (LA Times)

- Retrofit urban and rural water infrastructure to meet current and future needs more efficiently (LA Times), especially sewage treatment plants (NY Times)

The benefits of the 1972 Clean Water Act are obvious. The Chattanoogan lists some of the statistics:


  • The number of Americans receiving clean drinking water has increased from 79 percent in 1993 to 92 percent in 2007;
  • More than 2,000 water bodies identified as impaired in 2002 now meet water quality standards;
  • 60 percent more Americans were served by publicly-owned wastewater treatment facilities from 1968 to 2008.

The act was passed by a bi-partisan Congress. In today's political context, it's difficult to imagine a bi-partisan effort that would strengthen the CWA. But that's exactly what needs to happen in order for our country to face the coming water-related crises.

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Fracking Protest Rally in Denver next week

Fracking is a hot topic in the world of energy natural resource management. With the increase of hydraulic fracturing activities throughout the West, activists and environmental groups are trying to bring attention to some of the environmental risks associated with the oil extraction process. Next week, demonstrators opposing Colorado fracking activities will congregate at Civic Park in Denver's Capitol Hill on October 23 as part of Frack Free Colorado, an event that will include live music, speeches, and lectures.

Click for more info
Fracking has been popularized lately because of natural gas' cleaner emission profile than coal. However, it is not environmentally blameless, often presenting risks of groundwater contamination and generating highly polluted, saline waste water.

Source: RealAspen, Frack Free Colorado

Monday, October 15, 2012

Happy Birthday, Clean Water Act!

This week 40 years ago, Congress passed the Clean Water Act, overriding President Nixon's veto, and setting in motion new regulations that would dramatically improve the quality of the waters of the United States.

Over the last decade, however, the power of the Clean Water Act has been gently chipped away by loopholes for small, seasonal waterways and wetlands. In addition, the CWA does not have a strong regulatory mechanism that addresses non-point source pollution, which accounts for the majority of pollution inputs to our waterways today.

As we celebrate this important environmental milestone, it would be a good time to re-evaluate our policy strategies for ensuring clean waterways in the future.

Check back here next week for a review of Pacific Institute's newest release, A Twenty-First Century Water Policy, which provides a framework for a new kind of federal water policy designed for today's sociopolitical and economic realities.

Thursday, October 11, 2012

Disease Resistant Trout stocked in Colorado River

Source: Troutpursuit.blogspot.com
July monsoons sent silt and debris coursing down the Colorado River, which led to severe fish kills. So wildlife officials are stocking the effected areas with Hofer rainbow trout. As a bonus to anglers, the stocked rainbow trout will be resistant to whirling disease, which effects some species of trout and salmon. Officials hope that the stocked fish will help replenish fish populations after this summer's kills, and also introduce whirling disease resistance into the rest of the population.

Source: RealVail

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

Lawsuit filed over Chesapeake Cap-and-trade water pollution policy

The Food and Water Watch and the Friends of the Earth filed a lawsuit this week against the cap-and-trade policy that is being proposed for the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The cap-and-trade approach uses market-based forces to buy and trade pollution credits among point and non-point sources, which proponents believe will lower the overall amount of pollution entering the Chesapeake Bay.

However those who oppose the policy say that it creates a "right to pollute" and that all pollutants entering the waterways of the United States should be illegal according to the Clean Water Act.

The difficulty, of course, is implementing any kind of policy that would address nonpoint sources. The Clean Water Act has been immensely successful in addressing point source pollution over the last three decades. The challenge for water managers today is nonpoint sources such as runoff coming from farms and ranches, and even urban runoff from yards and parks. The Clean Water Act introduced TMDLs (Total Maximum Daily Load) for waterways, which is a total maximum volume of a pollutant that a waterway can tolerate before it becomes harmful. However, the CWA does not introduce any rigorous federal policy to fund or enforce the states' implementation of TMDLs. As a result, the majority of pollutants entering waterways of United States today are from of nonpoint sources.

A cap-and-trade policy would allow non-point sources like farmers or ranchers to sell pollution credits to point sources if they implement BMPs, or best management practices, to limit their inputs, thus providing an incentive for non-point sources to mitigate pollution. This is an incentive-based approach, like conservation easement programs, which have been implemented with some success across the United States.

One inherent weakness of a cap-and-trade policy is that it focuses on endpoints (certain points a long a waterway where pollutants are measured), so upstream polluters have less of a motivation to limit inputs then polluters close to an endpoint. Another difficulty is that best management practices implemented on farms and ranches often are unpredictable in terms of limiting pollution inputs in a certain timeframe. This will make any trade difficult and hard to implement, and potentially make point source polluters less interested in facilitating trades. And finally, the volume of pollutants entering a waterway from individual farms and ranches is usually a very small amount, and so compensation for BMPs would likely be correspondingly tiny.

So far, very few cap-and-trade policies have been implemented at any significant scale, and even fewer have been successful. It remains to be seen whether the Chesapeake Bay cap-and-trade plan will succeed.

I personally would be interested in hearing what policy solutions the Food and Water Watch and other organizations opposing cap-and-trade policies have to address non-point sources.

Source: HuffPost (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/wenonah-hauter/fighting-pollution-tradin_b_1941188.html)

Prior appropriation doctrine the topic of New Mexico water lawsuit

A group of farmers and ranchers in New Mexico is filing a lawsuit against the Middle Rio Grande Water Conservancy District. The lawsuit claims that the Conservancy District illegally limited water deliveries for all users despite the prior appropriation doctrine, which states that senior water rights holders are entitled to their full allotment before Junior water rights holders, even in times of water shortage and drought.

Many water policy experts across United States have predicted that conflict over water in the West will intensify over the coming decades as the population grows, water uses shift, and uncertainty about climate change continues to illuminate problems in our water management strategies.

Source: http://m.westernfarmpress.com/government/new-mexico-s-fight-senior-water-rights-intensifies



Friday, October 5, 2012

Pres Obama visits Hoover Dam: Will he prioritize water projects in next term?

On October 2nd, President Obama visited Hoover Dam in Henderson, Nevada the day before the first presidential debate. It was his first visit to the spectacular piece of history and water infrastructure. Unfortunately, the visit did not inspire him to include any promises to address sustainable water management in the debate the next day in Denver, Colorado.

Both presidential campaigns have so far been conspicuously silent on many environmental issues including climate change and water conservation. They have both generally addressed the need for upgraded infrastructure and energy independence, but the specifics on how these goals will be met sustainably have not been mentioned.

Source: Pete Souza
The focuses of the campaigns each cycle are often a reflection of the concerns of the voting public. Therefore, the silence on environmental issues is an indication that these issues matter less to most voters compared to the more salient issues like the economic recovery and job creation. This is unfortunate, because environmental crises are not far-off issues. Many western cities are reaching critical crisis points because of aging or inadequate water infrastructure, lack of funding, and growing populations that place demands out of proportion to the already stressed water supply. Nationwide policy on sustainable water management, along with creative and reliable funding mechanisms are needed now.

Investing in water infrastructure solutions would address economic recovery needs and create jobs, and now is an opportune time for either presidential candidate to connect those dots.

Drought affects waterfowl productivity, therefore hunting

Colorado: The Fort Morgan Times staff reported this week that duck hunters this season may be a little disappointed. The drought conditions in Colorado prompt many migratory birds to pass it by for better conditions elsewhere. Weather conditions greatly impact hunting conditions, and variable weather, as most hunters know, can mean a very unpredictable hunting trip. In addition, the drought has impacted the amount of land producing corn and other feed crops that often attract waterfowl to the area, and has brought lake levels down to their lowest in years.

The wetland ecosystems in the intermountain west are adapted to drought cycles and a dry spell of one or two seasons will actually improve productivity afterwards. However, prolonged drought, which is predicted to occur with more frequency and severity across the world according to climate change models, could mean more drastic ecosystem damage.

Source: The Fort Morgan Times

Tuesday, October 2, 2012

San Bernardino groundwater to be pumped to supply Orange Co

San Bernardino County just approved a management plan for the transport of groundwater near the Mojave Desert into nearby Orange County.

Santa Margarita Water District is working with Cardiz, Inc. to construct the pipeline, which will pump approximately 50,000 acre-feet of groundwater annually. According to USGS reports this exceeds the natural recharge rate of the groundwater in the region by 45,000 acre-feet a year. However proponents of the project say the natural recharge rate is closer to 30,000 acre-feet per year.

Several groups oppose the plan including a local mining operation that fears their operations will be affected by depleted groundwater, and the National Park Service and several environmental groups who are concerned about the ecosystem effects of withdrawing that much water.

Proponents of the plan point to the financial benefits in job creation and tax revenue for the local community.

Source: http://www.dailybulletin.com/breakingnews/ci_21672499/hearing-underway-cadiz-water-project

Image source: mojavedesert.net