The great drain robbery: Starbucks pours millions of litres of precious water down the drain at its coffee shops
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 6, 2008 at 7:59 am
Thanks to David over at Westchester Parents for sending me this one! From the U.K.’s Sun (which I think is similar to the Enquirer -?):
STARBUCKS was blasted by environmental experts last night after The Sun discovered it pours millions of litres of precious water down the drain at its coffee shops. The giant coffee chain has a policy of keeping a tap running non-stop at all its 10,000 outlets worldwide, wasting 23.4 MILLION litres a day. That would provide enough daily water for the entire two million-strong population of drought-hit Namibia in Africa or fill an Olympic pool every 83 minutes.
Every Starbucks branch has a cold tap behind the counter providing water for a sink called a “dipper well”, used for washing spoons and utensils. Staff are banned from turning the water off under bizarre health and safety rules — bosses claim a constant flow stops germs breeding in the taps.
Starbucks has built up a massive chain, popular with coffee drinkers from Hollywood stars to builders, and proudly boasts of its work for the environment. But water companies accused the firm of HARMING the environment by frittering away a vital natural resource.
Apparently, this is also done in the Starbucks on this side of the big pond, too, so says the undercover team which went worldwide in their investigation. You can find out more about this shocking story, even view the photos & videos evidence from the U.K.’s Sun by clicking here!
Leaders’ example is all wet: Records show dozens of O.C. officials have increased their water consumption even as region faces a drought
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 4, 2008 at 6:16 amFrom the O. C. Register:
City leaders in Orange County topped off their swimming pools, soaked their yards or overlooked major plumbing leaks – even as water suppliers warned of a worsening drought and urged everyone to conserve, records and interviews show.
Those suppliers have said that residents will face higher prices and water rationing if the region cannot cut its consumption by at least 10 percent. But water records for 59 city officials show that two-thirds of them have fallen well short of that target this year.
In fact, half of them have increased their water consumption in 2008, compared with the same time last year. And some of them continue to use as much water in a week or so as the average resident of their city might use in a month.
19 out of the 59 reduced their water consumption by 10% or more. Read more from the O.C. Register by clicking here.
When will Los Angeles run out of water? Sooner than you think.
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 4, 2008 at 6:07 amFrom AlterNet:
Los Angeles has been sleeping far too long. But the question is not when will it wake, but rather what it will do once it does wake and realize the water is gone.
“We are way better than Third-World countries with no water supply,” explains California Department of Water Resources drought coordinator Wendy Martin, “but it will take a significant change to keep ours.”
Martin is speaking of California at large, but the science is in and the climate crisis isn’t hard to figure out. Water isn’t a renewable resource, so that makes Los Angeles the state’s parched yet still bloated problem.
According to the Los Angeles Times, the state’s water reserves are nearly finished, which leaves California with two options: Pray for rain, or suck off Northern California’s supply. Guess which one it’s going to try first?
If you guessed both, you’re right. Indeed, California will revive a decades-old plan for a statewide water bank that will flow water to where it is needed most. Right now that means it flows from Northern California farmers and others to agencies in Southern California, whose citizens have lately been engaging in Option Two rather than studying up on reality — specifically, the geographical and environmental kind.
“We as a state entity looking out for the broader good,” Department of Water Resources Director Lester Snow told the Times, “are not going to allow somebody to have 100 percent supplies and be hosing off sidewalks while a community has no fire protection and poor-quality water to drink.”
He may not have mentioned Los Angeles by name, but anyone who has ever read Day of the Locust or seen “Chinatown” could tell you that Los Angeles has always been a managed fantasy. Like its redheaded stepchild Las Vegas, it’s a consumption and recreation oasis in the desert running on Hollywood simulations and immigrant labor, which is to say distractions from its more geographical reality.
Read more from AlterNet by clicking here.
Friends of the River commentary on the other great debate going on right now - that over agricultural water use
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 3, 2008 at 1:30 pmFrom Friends of the River, this commentary by Executive Director Paul Tebbel:
There is a great debate going on at the moment, but you probably have not heard about it. No, we are not talking about last night’s Biden-Palin moderated argument. We are talking about the debate surrounding California and agricultural water use. How big is the issue? What’s at stake? Well, agriculture uses roughly 80% of the water consumed in California. That water mostly comes from rivers… places you probably care about like the Sacramento River, San Joaquin River, Feather River, Trinity River… the Tuolumne, Mokelumne and more. The more water used for crops the less water stays in those rivers.
Agriculture is important. Agriculture is a big part of the economy of California, which is a big part of the economy of the country. Agriculture actually produces something of value (no credit default swaps or collateralized debt obligations are grown in the Central Valley fields). Still, a year of drought like we’ve had also draws sharp attention to the fact that there simply is not enough water to go around. What can be done?
The Pacific Institute has written a wonderful report that outlines possible solutions and charts a path towards a more sustainable water future for California. Unfortunately, it’s pretty dense stuff and hard to get through. I’ve written a Cliff-Notes summary of the report and we’ve put in on our website here. We hope you take a few moments to read our condensed, lay person version. We think it’s important information for those tens of thousands of people who love rivers. We also think it’s important for people that may not love rivers but simply like to drink water, and by last count there are about 37 million people that fit that description in the Golden State.
Click here for the Friends of the River take on the Pacific Institute report on agricultural water conservation.
Water rationing falls short of EBMUD’s goal
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 3, 2008 at 6:00 amFrom the San Francisco Chronicle:
Nearly five months after an East Bay water district imposed the strictest water rationing plan in the Bay Area, the agency’s 1.3 million customers have cut back - but not quite as much as officials had hoped.
Savings across parts of Contra Costa and Alameda counties served by the East Bay Municipal Utility District have reached 11.3 percent, officials said Wednesday. Water managers had hoped fixed leaks, shorter showers, and less frequent lawn watering would net a 15 percent reduction.
With experts forecasting the third dry winter in a row, the district said the pressure is on. “There will be rain this weekend, but who knows for how many days, or how much rain will make it into our reservoirs - this weekend and this winter,” said Laura Luong, public information representative at the district. “Since we declared the drought May 13, (savings) started slow, but our customers are getting the message. We just need to remind them that they need to conserve for what’s to come.”
Read more from the San Francisco Chronicle by clicking here.
Mike Taugher explains the good and the bad of EBMUD’s system:
The Oakland-based district, which serves 1.3 million people in the East Bay, depends on a fairly isolated water system. It gets 95 percent of its water from aqueducts connected to the Mokelumne River in the Sierra Nevada.
The river’s watershed received very little snow or rain after mid-February, prompting district officials to forecast dangerously low reservoirs. The East Bay district is one of a few water agencies around the state that have imposed water rationing of some kind this year.
Although the district is vulnerable to droughts, it can also recover more quickly than other California water agencies. A single year of average rain and snow would refill the district’s reservoirs.
Read more from Mike Taugher by clicking here.
Time to tap into water-wise farmers’ well of ideas, say Gleick & Cooley in rebuttal to recent commentary
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 2, 2008 at 6:42 amFrom the Modesto Bee, this rebuttal by Peter Gleick, Juliet Christian-Smith & Heather Cooley of the Pacific Institute, in response to James O’Banion’s recent commentary:
Water supply constraints have reduced the amount of water available for California this year, causing economic losses and midseason fallowing for many farmers. Independent of what we might want, it is very likely that there will continue to be serious constraints on water available to all California users, including agriculture.
At a recent state Board of Food and Agriculture meeting in Sacramento, Secretary of Agriculture A.G. Kawamura stated that because of changes in the timing and reliability of water supply, “doing nothing is not an option.”
We agree and think it is time for an open and honest discussion about the full range of ways to respond to the water crisis in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and throughout the state. Certainly, new infrastructure for water supply is one option that might be necessary. But it is also critical that farmers explore another promising option: agricultural water conservation and efficiency.
A new Pacific Institute report, “More with Less: Agricultural Water Conservation and Efficiency in California,” does this by looking at what innovative California farmers are already doing and offering ideas to help overcome barriers to further improvements.
We may be facing another drought year. The Old Farmer’s Almanac and the National Weather Service’s Climate Prediction Center are forecasting a third dry winter in a row for California. While they both could be wrong, of course, even most optimists don’t think it likely that there will be more water for agriculture in coming years as population and environmental pressures grow, uncontrolled development in the Central Valley continues, and climate changes get worse.
Read more of Gleick & Cooley’s commentary in the Modesto Bee by clicking here.
Use `carrot’ for water conservation, says editorial
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 1, 2008 at 7:43 amFrom the Pasadena Star News, this editorial:
ALL Pasadenans - and much of the San Gabriel Valley - have seen those clever ads, in the papers, on our Web site and on bus stops around town - aimed at goading citizens into conserving water during the current version of California’s permanent drought. You know the ones - the mock mug shots of Tap-On Tina, Busted-Sprinkler Bruno and Light-Load Loretta.
Their criminal offenses? Running the faucet while brushing their teeth, dumping 500 gallons a month because they put off fixing the garden pipe, throwing one pair of jeans in the wash when it might use 50 gallons to do so.
Yes, wasting water is a serious offense, and many of us get the picture - we’ll go straight, come clean, realize the error of our ways.
Problem is, as the Pasadena City Council lectured Water & Power Department managers, that during the current conservation campaign, city water usage has actually gone up 3 percent.
And if that’s a crime, which it figuratively is, the council laid into plans to make it literally one.
Something’s gone badly wrong if we had come to the point at which the city’s public utility was considering severe penalties for the little guys among the city’s water users - the households - when the big tappers keep spraying a gusher out of their spigots.
Read more of this editorial from the Pasadena Star News by clicking here.
O.C. prepares for possible water cutbacks
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 30, 2008 at 8:25 amHere’s a story I posted two days ago that appeared on my news wire with a new date. From the O. C. Register:
The reality of the drought situation and water shortage in California has hit several Orange County cities.
Local governments in recent months have put into action a variety of programs to encourage residents to conserve water. And where that has not worked, cities have mandated conservation. These efforts have come with the realization that failure to do so could eventually hit the cities and residents with higher utility bills and possibly, penalties.
Some cities are adopting resolutions to encourage residents to cut down their everyday water consumption. Others have tiered rate structures, which automatically impose higher rates on those who use more water. Still others slap direct fines and penalties on any type of water wastage.
Conservation could become mandatory as early as next year if the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which provides roughly half of Orange County’s water, decides to cut back city water allotments in early spring 2009.
If Metropolitan’s board votes in favor of the cutbacks, cities that do not conserve can expect to face fines. And those penalties will likely be passed on to residents. “We’re facing a very challenging time,” said Jeff Kightlinger, general manager of Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. “This is as challenging a drought period as we’ve been in.”
Read more from the O. C. Register by clicking here.
Fresno mulls buying back lawns to save water
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 29, 2008 at 8:48 amFrom the Belleville News Democrat (in Illinois-?), a story about Fresno, California, which means it must be a slow day for news in Illinois:
Would you sell your lawn to the city to save water and cut your utility bill? Would you buy a house with no lawn or with only water-stingy native plants? Both are possibilities as Fresno, Calif., officials look at ways to conserve water as the city grows. Those ideas, along with more traditional conservation methods, are part of an Urban Water Management Plan approved by the City Council last month.
The plan outlines conservation goals for the city and offers ideas to attain those goals - such as lawn buy-backs.
It doesn’t detail how some of those ideas would work. But the plan “shows us where we are, and where we’re headed,” said Garth Gaddy, Fresno’s assistant director of public utilities.
The plan, which took several years to write, looks at current water usage in Fresno and predicts how growth will affect water resources through 2030, when the city’s population is expected to reach at least 760,000. A second plan - the Metropolitan Water Resources Management Plan - looks even further, forecasting Fresno’s water needs through 2060.
There is no penalty if the city doesn’t follow its plan. But homeowners will see higher water bills if they choose to not conserve after meters are installed citywide by 2013, Gaddy said. Unlike most California cities, Fresno does not charge homeowners for the volume of water they use; an agreement with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, however, requires the city to begin charging a metered rate by 2010.
“We’re offering a lot of carrots with incentives and different programs,” Gaddy said. “But that water bill will be the only stick.”
Read more from the Belleville News Democrat by clicking here.
Water saving plan drowns; Council says Pasadena Water and Power’s proposals are insufficient
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 28, 2008 at 5:50 amFrom the Contra Costa Times:
Pasadena’s plan to cut residential water use by imposing penalties on water wasters has fallen apart amid charges it didn’t go far enough. The city is left essentially where it was in December when residents were asked to voluntarily cut back. Since then, water useage has risen 3 percent.
Residents could have faced penalties for hosing off driveways, using fountains without a recycling device, and watering plants between 8 a.m. and 7 p.m. Restaurants would have been barred from serving water to customers unless they asked for it; landscape watering would have been limited to three times a week; and fines would have been imposed for allowing excess water to run onto streets or sidewalks.
But Pasadena Water and Power Manager Phyllis Currie got a grilling when she presented the plan to the Pasadena City Council at its last meeting. Members charged that penalties alone will not work, are set up unequally, and even accused Currie of being ill-prepared to discuss the issue. “I question that people will actually respond to this,” said Councilman Sid Tyler.
Councilman Victor Gordo called the plan “ineffective and totally indefensible” and said the method it uses to impose penalties is unfair. “It penalizes a very narrow group, while leaving untouched larger water users. It targets people with 3-gallon fountains, while leaving alone people with 20,000-gallon swimming pools.”
Read more from the Contra Costa Times by clicking here.
O.C. prepares for possible water cutbacks
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 27, 2008 at 6:47 amFrom the O.C. Register:
The reality of the drought situation and water shortage in California has hit several Orange County cities. Local governments in recent months have put into action a variety of programs to encourage residents to conserve water. And where that has not worked, cities have mandated conservation. These efforts have come with the realization that failure to do so could eventually hit the cities and residents with higher utility bills and possibly, penalties.
Some cities are adopting resolutions to encourage residents to cut down their everyday water consumption. Others have tiered rate structures, which automatically impose higher rates on those who use more water. Still others slap direct fines and penalties on any type of water wastage.
Conservation could become mandatory as early as next year if the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which provides roughly half of Orange County’s water, decides to cut back city water allotments in early spring 2009. If Metropolitan’s board votes in favor of the cutbacks, cities that do not conserve can expect to face fines. And those penalties will likely be passed on to residents.
“We’re facing a very challenging time,” said Jeff Kightlinger, general manager of Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. “This is as challenging a drought period as we’ve been in.”
Read more from the O.C. Register by clicking here.
Water rationing grows increasingly likely for San Diego
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 26, 2008 at 6:46 amFrom the Voice of San Diego:
For the first time since 1992, San Diego is facing the possibility of water rationing, a step that could happen as soon as January. The threat is expected to loom for years as Southern California readjusts to the tightest drinking water supplies it has experienced in almost two decades.
The Metropolitan Water District, the Los Angeles-based wholesaler that provides about 75 percent of San Diego County’s supply, will consider as soon as January whether to cut deliveries to the 13 million people it serves — including the San Diego County Water Authority, which provides water to the city of San Diego and 23 other local agencies.
While no decision has been made, many believe a 10 percent reduction is a foregone conclusion. Mike Markus, general manager of the Orange County Water District, said he is “fairly certain” that Metropolitan’s board of directors will cut deliveries regardless of whether the winter is wet. That sentiment is increasingly common among water managers throughout Southern California.
“We’re going to run out of water next year, and people don’t have a clue,” said Mark Weston, general manager of the Helix Water District in La Mesa. But water districts don’t want to make water-use restrictions mandatory, he said, until Metropolitan formally declares that it’s cutting back.
Read more from the Voice of San Diego by clicking here.
Water report targets farmers: Think tank says they can help Delta with more conservation; some balk at findings
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 26, 2008 at 6:42 amFrom Stockton’s Record:
A solar-powered probe buried in Keith Robertson’s walnut orchard tells the fourth-generation farmer how much water the young trees need. Not far off, drip lines dampen vineyards, and sprinklers spritz a fine mist on almond trees. While old-fashioned flood irrigation is employed on Robertson’s mint-green alfalfa fields, any excess water is pumped back for reuse.
After all this, he bristles when someone suggests farmers should save more water. “I grew up out here and did every job there is,” he said. “I hate to have someone else tell me how to do it when they’ve never seen a hayfield.”
Such is Robertson’s reaction to a water think tank’s recent report suggesting that farmers could help save the overstretched Delta by conserving enough water to fill anywhere from three to 20 hypothetical reservoirs.
Among other tactics, the Pacific Institute recommends growers shift a small percentage of water-thirsty field crops to less demanding varieties and reduce flood irrigation in favor of sprinklers or drip lines. It also calls for changes in water rights, groundwater management and a shift in subsidies, all controversial ideas.
Some farmers think the report missed one big point:
“They don’t even mention what this would do to the food supply,” south Delta farmer Alex Hildebrand wrote to Gleick. Dropping field crops such as alfalfa and grains means less feed to produce milk, cheese, ice cream and eggs, he said.
Gleick responded that farmers have been growing more food with less water for years, and some water conservation methods proposed in the report can increase both farm productivity and profits.
Read more farmer reaction to the report from Stockton’s Record by clicking here.
Water conservation starts with you
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 25, 2008 at 2:19 pmFrom the Del Mar Times:
New clean water service fees enacted by the Del Mar City Council and approved by residents through a mail ballot, contain an interesting new charge. Besides a flat service charge, for the first time the city is adding a monthly charge based on volume of water usage. At their meeting last week, City Council members also began the process of updating city codes to allow for water rationing.
Welcome to the California drought.
Expect moves like Del Mar’s to become increasingly more common with harsher restrictions to follow in many areas.
Cities have begun considering a drought conservation program that instills levels of severity in regard to water usage. Level One would simply encourage voluntary conservation, Level Two would require a reduction in consumption by as much as 20 percent and Level Three would put a moratorium on new development by not allowing new water meters. Level Four? Start collecting your buckets.
Read more from the Del Mar Times by clicking here.
Study subtly aimed at getting more water for environment
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 25, 2008 at 7:00 amFrom the Modesto Bee, this commentary, written by James E. O’Banion, chairman of the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority:
The Pacific Institute study detailing agricultural water use in California ignores some very important facts and reaches misleading conclusions that appear to be aimed at something other than maximizing the beneficial use of water by farmers.
California farmers are already growing more food and fiber with less water, and they’re getting even better at it. The problem with relying on water exported from the Sacramento- San Joaquin Delta is simple — reliability. It won’t matter what crop choice or irrigation system is used if the allocation of delta water to farmers is reduced to zero.
One fact continuously misrepresented by study co-author Peter Gleick is the amount of water leaving the delta and how it is used (”Study sees more profit in drier farms,” Sept. 8, Page A-1). Looking at the Sept. 15 data from the state’s Delta Operations Summary, the total water flow into the delta is 13,000 cubic feet per second. Of that, only 3,350 cfs is being exported for agriculture, urban and environmental uses south of the delta; another 3,350 cfs is being used in-delta; and, 6,300 cfs (about half of the water flowing through the delta) is being forced out to the ocean for water quality-environmental purposes.
In other words, while only 25 percent of the water released from upstream reservoirs is being exported today, a full 50 percent of the water released from reservoirs is being routed to the ocean in the name of the environment.
Read more of this editorial from the Modesto Bee by clicking here.
Celebrating with sips: We’re starting to conserve, but not nearly enough for the shortages ahead
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 25, 2008 at 6:36 amFrom the Long Beach Press-Telegram, this editorial:
Thanks to drought-conscious consumers, water usage in Long Beach is the lowest in a decade. The best way to celebrate is to use even less of it.
You won’t be surprised to learn that there isn’t going to be enough water to go around despite our best efforts so far. Water experts, who met this week at a conference at the Aquarium of the Pacific, offer a variety of solutions, but they all agree that shortages are worsening.
Charles Keine, a manager with the California Department of Water Resources, said state and local agencies must increase water storage capacity and repair dams and levees that bring water to farms and cities. But that won’t be enough.
Ryan Alsop, government and public affairs director of the Long Beach Water Department, said there has to be a paradigm shift throughout the region in our relationship with water. In other words, we need an attitude adjustment. If we don’t do it, somebody else will do it for us, and it won’t be cheap. Water and sewer rates in Long Beach go up 18.5 percent Oct. 1, which is a moderate warning about what likely lies ahead.
Read more of this editorial from the Long Beach Press Telegram by clicking here.
Santa Clarita Valley water suppliers declare water supply alert and call for voluntary actions to conserve water supplies
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 19, 2008 at 11:40 amFrom the Santa Clarita Family of Water Suppliers, this press release:
On June 4, 2008, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger issued a statewide drought proclamation in response to continued dry weather conditions which have resulted in below normal water supplies. This is the first drought declaration issued in California in over 16 years. Therefore, the Santa Clarita Valley Family of Water Suppliers has prepared a Voluntary Water Conservation Action Plan which calls on residents and businesses in the Santa Clarita Valley to take reasonable actions to reduce water use and eliminate waste.
This Water Alert is aimed at increasing awareness of the critical water supply conditions throughout California and the immediate need for conservation. The Voluntary Water Conservation Action Plan provides simple and easy steps for residents and businesses to take. If successful, this plan could reduce water usage by up to 10 percent. The water suppliers will continue to assess water supply conditions through the end of 2008 and into next year. If water supply conditions worsen in 2009, further actions may be necessary to ensure available water supplies for Valley residents.
Liquid justice: Shortage prompts city to consider a policing program to target water-wasters, but some experts see another way
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 18, 2008 at 4:13 pmFrom Pasadena Weekly:
When the city declared a potential water shortage late last year, the Pasadena Water and Power Department launched a conservation campaign that grew to include stylish newspaper and bus-stop ads featuring mug shots of fictionalized water criminals.
“Wasting water is a serious offense,” reads the caption underneath such dastardly characters such as Busted Sprinkler Bruno, Lawn Soaker Lana, Driveway Hoser Dave and Long Shower Larry, each representing a specific wasteful behavior that officials are asking residents to cease.
While these advertisements appear to get the conservation message across in a playful way — really, what could be taking teenage Larry so long? — they may also be preparing us for a time when people who do such selfish things would actually be treated as criminals.
On Monday, City Council members are expected to set a schedule of fines that, if put into effect at a later date, would make such activities as hosing off a driveway or watering a lawn during most daylight hours an infraction that could carry penalties of $50, $100 or $200. First-time violators, however, would be let off with a warning.
In spite of the warning, Pasadena residents have not reached a goal of using 10% less water:
… some water experts believe there is a way Pasadena could reach its conservation goals without imposing fines and keep prices down for those who do their part. Michael Hurley, chair of the city’s Environmental Advisory Commission and a water resources manager with the environmental consulting firm Malcolm Pirnie, believes the city should adopt a budget-based water rate structure.
Like many other utility companies, PWP bases its water rates on meter size and actual usage. The larger your meter, the more you pay up-front — a type of “standby charge,” explained Kwan, that covers the cost of having water ready to deliver through a big or small meter. When it comes to what people actually use, there’s a tiered rate structure for each meter size that starts charging more per gallon after a certain level of usage is reached.
Switching to a budget-based rate structure would determine a reasonable amount of water use for each household and business in Pasadena by taking into account how many people are using water at the location and how much irrigation is required for the lot. Use less than your budget and pay a very low rate; go over your fair share and pay double or triple that rate, or more.
Read more from Pasadena Weekly by clicking here.
Anaheim asks residents & businesses to cut back on water
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 18, 2008 at 4:02 pmFrom the O. C. Register:
One of the county’s largest cities is calling on residents and businesses to cut back on water usage in light of the statewide drought.
The call for voluntary water conservation applies to the city’s 54,000 residential units and 7,000 commercial customers, including major water users such as Disneyland, Angel Stadium and the Honda Center, as well as dozens of large hotels. Those customers receive water through the Anaheim Public Utilities Department.
The resolution is intended to motivate the public to take the need for saving water more seriously.
“Anaheim’s outreach campaign and our enhanced conservation programs have allowed us to currently hold off on recommending greater appeals for water-use reduction,” Mayor Curt Pringle said in a statement.
The city might consider adding a “drought surcharge” to water bills if drought conditions persist, but the council would consider that later, said Mike Ebbing, spokesman for Anaheim’s Public Utilities Department.
Read more from the O.C. Register by clicking here.
Think tank solutions run dry in our valley; “if we followed all of co-author Peter Gleick’s suggestions around here, we could end up with thousands of thirsty city dwellers and ruined cropland”, says editorial
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 15, 2008 at 5:45 amFrom the Modesto Bee, this editorial, which starts out by noting that while the Pacific Institute may be sincere in their suggestion that farmers could save a considerable amount of water by changing their irrigation techniques, their ideas wouldn’t work in this part of the valley:
Perhaps the study’s conclusions are applicable in some areas of the valley, but if we followed all of co-author Peter Gleick’s suggestions around here, we could end up with thousands of thirsty city dwellers and ruined cropland. Many of our farmers flood irrigate — the very practice the Pacific Institute finds so wasteful. By switching to sprinklers and drip systems, says Gleick, farmers could save millions of gallons that then could be used to water the lawns of city dwellers. While true, it doesn’t tell the whole story.
Flood irrigation does more than simply help tomatoes, peaches, walnuts, almonds, alfalfa and hundreds of other crops grow. It is also crucial for replenishing our underground aquifer — the largest source of fresh water for everyone.
Modesto pumps 60 percent of its residential water from underground. Turlock gets 100 percent of its water underground, as do Ceres, Riverbank, Oakdale and most other cities. Some cities, such as Stockton, depend too heavily on wells and have overdrafted their aquifer and now are forced to buy water from others. If there’s none to sell and the wells go dry, people will go thirsty.
Irrigation helps ensure that won’t happen around here.
Read more of this editorial from the Modesto Bee by clicking here.