Proposed Colorado bill would let housing developments collect own water with cisterns, but could have unintended consequences

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on April 6, 2008 at 7:09 am

This story was submitted to Aquafornia by regular reader & commenter Ray Wright, a retired water rights analyst. From the Daily Camera:

New housing developments could get to test out an old-fashioned way of conserving water.

On Friday the [Colorado State] Senate backed a bill that would let up to 10 new developments apply for permission to install cisterns to collect rainwater that drains off rooftops. The water would have to be used on lawns and gardens or to fight potential wildfires.

Democratic Sen. Chris Romer’s proposal would let the developments try out the idea over the next three years. The aim is to measure whether the cisterns prevent a lot of water from flowing into rivers and streams or whether most of it would have been soaked up by the ground anyway.

Ray adds this:
Here is a good example of “have-nots trying to steal from haves”….those who have the water because of a hundred and fifty years of priority ownership are expected to relinquish ownership, control and use because new people have just arrived who need water in the dessert southwest.

If this legislation is approved….it opens the doors to those with parking lots, commercial roofs and even large acreages to suddenly claim the water that falls on their property….this concept would destroy the 150 year prior appropriation water law in the west !

April 6, 2008 · Filed Under Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Are there limits to growth? Malthusian fears resurface, as spread of prosperity brings supply concerns

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on March 24, 2008 at 5:51 am

From the Wall Street Journal:

Now and then across the centuries, powerful voices have warned that human activity would overwhelm the earth’s resources. The Cassandras always proved wrong. Each time, there were new resources to discover, new technologies to propel growth.

Today the old fears are back.

Although a Malthusian catastrophe is not at hand, the resource constraints foreseen by the Club of Rome are more evident today than at any time since the 1972 publication of the think tank’s famous book, “The Limits of Growth.” Steady increases in the prices for oil, wheat, copper and other commodities — some of which have set record highs this month — are signs of a lasting shift in demand as yet unmatched by rising supply.

As the world grows more populous — the United Nations projects eight billion people by 2025, up from 6.6 billion today — it also is growing more prosperous. The average person is consuming more food, water, metal and power. Growing numbers of China’s 1.3 billion people and India’s 1.1 billion are stepping up to the middle class, adopting the high-protein diets, gasoline-fueled transport and electric gadgets that developed nations enjoy. The result is that demand for resources has soared. If supplies don’t keep pace, prices are likely to climb further, economic growth in rich and poor nations alike could suffer, and some fear violent conflicts could ensue.

Some of the resources now in great demand have no substitutes. In the 18th century, England responded to dwindling timber supplies by shifting to abundant coal. But there can be no such replacement for arable land and fresh water.

Read the rest of this story from the Wall Street Journal by clicking here. (Note: sometimes, when taking a link to a Wall Street Journal story, you can’t see the whole story, and it is asking you to buy a subscription. If you just want to read the one article without doing that, then click here and take the first article on the list.)

March 24, 2008 · Filed Under Development & Water, General Water Issues

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Five hard truths about Arizona’s (and the West’s) water supply; Arizona at a crossroads over water and growth, commentary says

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on March 10, 2008 at 1:01 pm

From the Arizona Republic, this commentary by Brad Udall, director of the Western Water Assessment at University of Colorado:

“Lake Mead 50% chance of drying up by 2021,” screamed headlines around the West in mid-February after the publication of a new study in the prestigious journal Science. Many water managers responded by accusing the Scripps Institution of Oceanography researchers of using overly pessimistic future scenarios and of politicizing climate change. While the water-manager complaints have some basis, there are also five hard truths about the future of water in Arizona and the Southwest that everyone should know.

The first truth is that global warming is here now - the signs around the West are unmistakable. Signs include earlier river runoff, earlier blooming of plants, increased fires, increased tree-killing insect pests, and substantial warming centered over the Southwest, including a record-setting summer in Phoenix last year with 32 days over 110 degrees. And there is every reason to believe that this warming will continue.

The second truth is that many impacts of climate change will be “delivered” through our water supplies. Climate science tells us we should continue to see less snow and more rain, earlier runoff and a more variable climate including more floods and droughts.

The third truth is that both climate theory and climate models indicate that dry areas of the planet will generally get drier and wet areas wetter, not at all good news for the American Southwest, where recent drying agrees with climate theory.

A 2005 study suggested that Arizona may lose 40 percent of its runoff over the next 50 years. Since 2004, five studies have found that Colorado River flow could decline by 5 percent to 50 percent over the next 50 years. That’s admittedly a big range deserving additional study and debate as we ponder Lake Mead’s future.

But let’s not overlook the agreement: No studies have suggested stable or increasing flows.

Find out the remaining truths, and what Arizona (and perhaps all of us) and all of us need to think about in this commentary from the Arizona Republic by clicking here.

March 10, 2008 · Filed Under Climate change & water supply, Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

More inland developments put on hold due to uncertainty of water

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 24, 2008 at 9:01 am

From Riverside’s Press-Enterprise:

In a sign of mounting water woes, two more developers in western Riverside County have to worry whether they will have the basic essential of water for their projects.

Eastern Municipal Water District officials, having already postponed a decision on whether they can supply water to seven developments, said Wednesday they cannot yet guarantee water to a proposed warehouse in Moreno Valley and a $300 million hotel and retail complex in Murrieta. The 61-acre project known as the Golden Triangle between Interstates 15 and 215 is considered Murrieta’s most important undeveloped piece of land.

“I empathize with them,” said John Potts, executive vice president of the Garrett Group of Temecula, which is developing the property. “I’m not sure if it’s simply because they have no choice and can’t guarantee the supply or if it’s done to move the political process to get a solution.”

The water agency has put off the decision on nine major developments at least until March. Without approval from the water district, the developments cannot go forward. Under state law, a development cannot be approved unless it has a water supply for at least 20 years. While some applaud the move, noting the difficulty of asking residents to conserve while continuing to approve large-scale developments, others see it a different way:

Some fear placing such major projects in limbo — two housing developments, six warehouses and the hotel/retail complex — could hurt the Inland economy.

Although it is coming as the housing industry is in a slump, the lack of water will hinder the industry’s ability to recover fully, said Inland economist John Husing. One of the most notable projects on hold is a distribution center for which shoe company Skechers USA Inc. has signed an 11-year, $100 million lease. “Everyone is concerned with resolving the issue so there will be no delay,” said Iddo Benzeevi, president of the center’s developer, Highland Fairview. The company hopes to begin construction by year’s end, with the warehouse ready for Skechers next year. That project is expected to generate 1,000 jobs.

Penny Newman, though, questioned whether those kinds of jobs benefit the Inland region. The executive director of the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice, she said warehouse jobs are generally low-paying, and some companies contract out the work. In addition, diesel-spewing trucks pull into warehouses with their goods, worsening already bad air pollution, Newman said. “Given the amount of pollution brought into the community, the tradeoff is just not worth it,” she said.

To read the full text of this story from the Riverside Press-Enterprise, click here.

January 24, 2008 · Filed Under Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Conservation over development: will it be a decision between lawns & jobs?

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 17, 2008 at 7:47 am

From the Los Angeles Times, this editorial:

Even a commodity as basic as water is an uncertain thing in Southern California. With a current drought in the Colorado River basin, the prospect of drier years ahead caused by global warming, squabbles over water contracts and a recent court ruling that threatens to cut supplies from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta by up to 30%, these are times for serious concern about keeping the region’s needs quenched.

A forward-thinking water district in Riverside County is the first major agency to make that abstract concern concrete, by putting construction projects on hold because of tight water supplies. Its decision outlines clearly how dire the choices are, and how much more painful they will become, if land and water planners don’t work together on major conservation projects.

Water agencies have played a dangerous game since 2001, when new state laws required them to determine that there would be enough water for 20 years to serve large new developments before approval could be granted. As dependent as this semi-arid area is on imported water, they gambled that the water would keep flowing. That is, until the Eastern Municipal Water District gave the region a much-needed reality check. Its planners studied the numbers and the forecasts and said: Sorry, the water isn’t there. The brakes were put on several new projects, including a giant Skechers USA warehouse near Lake Perris.

To read the full text of this editorial from the Los Angeles Times, click here.

January 17, 2008 · Filed Under Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Eastern Municipal Water District puts hold on projects due to water supply concerns

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 14, 2008 at 9:10 am

Thanks to David over at Westchester Parents for sending me this article which my news readers just seemed to miss. From the Los Angeles Times:

The planned distribution center for the footwear firm Skechers USA would rise on 1.7 million square feet in the Inland Empire, making it one of the largest warehouses in the United States. It would anchor a new community called Rancho Belago, a variation of the Italian for “beautiful lake,” after nearby Lake Perris reservoir.

Now, in a sign of growing water anxieties, the Skechers warehouse and six other large projects in western Riverside County are on hold until March or later because the local water agency could not promise to deliver water to serve them. The dilemma shows what can happen when construction and global trade, key drivers of the regional economy, are reined in by a potential lack of water.

“Just looking at the raw numbers, we kept coming up short,” said David J. Slawson, president of the board of directors of the Perris-based Eastern Municipal Water District, one of the largest districts in the state.

Slawson explains that his own livelihood as a land surveyor depends on growth, that no one on the board wants to hobble the economy. Still, he said, the restriction is “something we feel is necessary until we have some better numbers and we see some action statewide.” He says he’s surprised that other water districts have not paused to review their own supplies.

This winter is posing the first significant test of two little-known state laws passed in 2001 that link large development to the availability of water.

The Eastern district may be the first in the region to cite water as the reason for delaying approval of a large project because of the laws. Developers and water officials worry that more agencies may do the same, further weakening a building market already crippled by the sub-prime mortgage crisis. Although Inland Empire business leaders hope Eastern will ease its restrictions as early as March, the district is offering no guarantees.

“No water. No construction. It’s a bad combination,” said Borre Winckel, executive director of the Riverside County Building Industry Assn., which has seen a dramatic decrease in requests for building permits.

But state Sen. Sheila Kuehl (D-Santa Monica), sponsor of one of the two laws, says it is working the way it should, by requiring cities to be realistic about how ambitious developments can strain water supplies to the limit.

To read the rest of this story from the Los Angeles Times, click here.

The laws require water agencies to ensure that water will be there for new and existing customers for 20 years before approving new development.

January 14, 2008 · Filed Under Development & Water

City Councilman Zine stands alone in calling for building moratorium in L.A.

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 6, 2008 at 7:56 am

From the Daily Breeze, this editorial:

Once again, West Valley City Councilman Dennis Zine stands alone among Los Angeles leaders in dealing seriously with the city’s water crisis.

Don’t let the latest storms fool you. At best, L.A. is on pace for an average annual rainfall, which is far below what the region needs to end its drought. With water from Northern California cut off due to environmental concerns - and with the city’s voluntary water-reduction goals largely ignored - L.A.’s water shortage is greater than ever.

To which Zine hints at the possibility few others in City Hall will even acknowledge - a building moratorium. At a time when Los Angeles might, like Long Beach before it, soon have to start rationing water, it defies reason to keep approving new developments that further stretch depleted resources. Zine says L.A. may need to put a halt on future growth, or at least demand that new developments offer plans to use less water.

He is right. And if his peers in City Hall were as concerned with L.A.’s future as they were with developers’ campaign contributions, they would agree.

L.A. construction picture by flickr photographer krapistan. Click on the picture to see it enlarged and to visit the flickr website where you can see other great photos by krapistan & other great flickr photographers.

January 6, 2008 · Filed Under Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

LA City Councilman proposes restricting development until stricter water use regulations are adopted in new developments

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on January 3, 2008 at 7:54 am

From the Daily Breeze in Torrance:

With water supplies getting tighter, one Los Angeles city councilman believes the city needs to consider blocking new residential development until regulations can be adopted to limit water use in new projects.

Councilman Dennis Zine said he offered the proposal because Angelenos have largely ignored Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s plea for voluntary water saving. “It’s a drastic step but we need to start discussing this,” Zine said. “The more we build, the more water is consumed. The slower we are to act on it, the worse the consequences. How are we going to put some teeth in our water conservation?”

In a motion submitted last month, Zine asked city departments to consider a land-use policy that would require all new residential development to occupy a water-use “footprint” of 10 percent less than the previous usage of the property. The Department of Water and Power and the Department of Building and Safety said they are looking at Zine’s proposal.

Under state law, developers of more than 500 units must prove there is enough water for future residents, and so far the DWP has never rejected a project based on water shortfalls.

If the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California - which sells water to the DWP and other utilities - were to ration or dramatically cut supplies, then the DWP would reconsider its ability to provide for new customers, DWP Spokesman Joe Ramallo said.

To read the full text of this article from the Torrance Daily Breeze, click here.

Photo of construction in downtown Los Angeles by flickr photographer krapistan.

January 3, 2008 · Filed Under Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

State Department of Finance releases population growth figures for 2007

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on December 26, 2007 at 9:15 pm

The latest population data for California has been released from the Department of Finance. California’s population grew modestly:

California’s population grew to 37,771,000 on July 1, 2007 according to official population estimates released by the State Department of Finance. The growth of 1.17 percent, representing 438,000 new residents during the fiscal year, continued the pattern of slower growth rates each year since the 2.0 percent growth in 2000.

The balance of 565,000 births and 238,000 deaths resulted in a natural increase of 327,000 persons. This accounted for 75 percent of the 2007 fiscal year growth. Natural increase remains a continuing source of the state’s growth this decade. Net migration contributed over 111,000 new residents or 25 percent of the growth. This estimate includes all legal and unauthorized foreign immigrants, residents who left the state to live abroad, and the balance of hundreds of thousands of people moving to and from California from within the United States. During the fiscal year, the state gained 200,000 new foreign immigrants and, similar to the last two years, experienced a modest loss of 89,000 persons to other states.

Since Census 2000, the state has grown by 3.9 million persons for an overall growth rate of 11.5 percent. There have been 3.9 million births, 1.7 million deaths for a natural increase of 2.2 million added to 1.5 million foreign immigrants and 125,000 domestic migrants.

To access the report data and press release, click here.

December 26, 2007 · Filed Under Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

San Diego water officials consider more fees for new development

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on December 23, 2007 at 8:23 am

From the North County Times:

Some San Diego County water officials want to tack a new fee on to new housing. Proponents say California is running out of water, and that the fee would force new development to cough up cash to offset the water it would use. Opponents say it could add to the already high cost of housing and stymie development.

Proponents say the fee would offset new development’s water use by generating money to for water conservation equipment such as low-flow shower heads and toilets, or by finding and buying “new” supplies, such as water recycling and seawater desalination. “You could replace 5,000 toilets in existing developments,” said Keith Lewinger, the Fallbrook Public Utility District official who proposed the idea at the San Diego County Water Authority’s December meeting. “It (the fee) really primes the conservation pump.”

But other water officials who oppose the idea said developers already pay expensive water meter fees to tap into existing water supplies. They say a new fee would jack up housing prices, could create a de facto moratorium on home-building, and represented a knee-jerk reaction to the state’s current water-supply worries.

To read the rest of this article from the North County Times, click here.

December 23, 2007 · Filed Under Development & Water

More people leaving California than coming in, but population is still growing

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on December 20, 2007 at 9:26 am

From the Los Angeles Times:

California’s population continued to grow modestly in the last fiscal year despite a significant exodus of residents to other states, according to a state report released Wednesday.

The annual study by the Department of Finance showed that 89,000 more people moved out of California than moved here from elsewhere in the United States. California’s population did grow in fiscal 2007 — but the growth rested on births and the arrival of more than 200,000 immigrants from other countries.

The shift dovetails with the state’s weakening economy and is most likely related, said Howard Roth, chief economist for the Department of Finance. Those who left, Roth said, were fleeing an economy in which just 5,800 jobs per month were created — down from more than 20,000 per month the previous year. Jobs were lost in housing, finance, construction and other sectors, and key indicators like the number of automobiles sold were also down, he said.

People who are leaving the state, he said, are probably doing so because they believe they’ll do better elsewhere. “If you’re someone in finance and you haven’t already been laid off . . . or if you’ve lost your job here and maybe your house, maybe you’re thinking that there are better prospects out there in other states,” he said.

The trend toward reduced “domestic migration” — which began in 2005 and has increased dramatically since — is a sharp turnaround from nearly a decade of sustained population growth.

With California’s population growth expected to increase 65% over year 2000 census numbers by the year 2050, explosive population growth is expected to put a great strain on our water resources. So, is this trend going to continue?

The exodus is in some ways similar to the early 1990s, when a national recession, tumbling housing market and massive cutbacks in Southern California’s defense industry at the end of the Cold War prompted 1.2 million people to move to other states.

But Roth said the trend should be less severe this time because the state’s economic problems — and image problems — are not as great. “It won’t be the lasting problem we had in the 1990s,” Roth said. “It will go away.”

To read the rest of this article from the Los Angeles Times, click here.

December 20, 2007 · Filed Under Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Careful urban planning is key to solving California’s water crisis

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on December 16, 2007 at 10:24 am

From the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, this commentary by Kenneth Willis, who carries a long list of credits: he’s a member of the Upland City Council, chairman of Chino Basin Water Master Board, secretary/treasurer of San Antonio Water Co., treasurer of West End Consolidated Water Co., and chairman of the Policy Review Committee of Inland Empire Utilities District.

With greater frequency the press is reporting on the dire water situation confronting Southern California. The drought is real. The remaining question is this: “How long a drought will it be?” The answer: “Very long.”

Normally, Southern California attains the water it needs from three sources: the Sierra Nevada Mountains (the State Water Project); the Rocky Mountains (The Colorado River); and finally, local precipitation (annual rain storms, etc.) During this past rainy season, all three of these sources were “turned off” by Mother Nature. Our rainfall was less than Death Valley’s!

Water experts are expecting that the weather pattern for the 2007-08 rainy season will be a reflection of this past year’s experience, i.e., with “little or no change.”

To add to the problems we face, a federal court ruling has decided that a rather small creature called the “Delta Smelt” is in danger due to water exports through the Sacramento Delta leading to the California Aqueduct. Thus about one-third of those exports are to be curtailed.

This will have quite an effect upon us locally in what we refer to as the Chino Basin. Note that we do not import Colorado River water into the Chino Basin due to an existing high salt content. Thus we rely upon less-salty state project water, which and is delivered by the Metropolitan Water District. Salt is an important factor here due to a judgment in 1966 referred to as “Orange Co. vs. Chino Basin.” This judgment forces us to control the salt content of the Santa Ana River as it is ultimately fed into Orange County’s water supply (yes, after we have already used it!)

The Santa Ana is a very delicate river due to the very high reliance upon it for water needs throughout all the water basins along its path.

Water agencies are faced with three alternatives that can help stretch our water supply. These are conservation, reclamation and recharge.

This is a great commentary, well worth the click through to read it. Mr. Willis touches on many aspects of the water crisis, including outdoor landscaping, groundwater basin recharge, and this about curbing development:

Should we stop all building? It is a fact that our population will continue to increase as the net number of births over deaths continues to rise. Moreover, immigration into California from other states and nations will happen so long as there are employment opportunities. The demand for some type of clean, affordable shelter will always be necessary. What we can do is direct new housing to conform with our new reality by insisting upon higher density, fewer big-lot “McMansions” and firm restrictions on landscape programs.

If we attempted to stop all development in Southern California our economy would crumble around us. Hundreds of thousands of unemployed construction workers and related professionals would no longer spend money on goods and services. We need construction-related commerce to employ millions of other people.

Such an economic loss to our economy would be devastating. We would lose the tax base needed to maintain public education, public safety and a host of other important functions. California would experience a full-scale economic depression brought on by an inability of our society to adapt to a new reality.

To read the rest of this commentary posted at the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, click here.

December 16, 2007 · Filed Under Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Eastern Municipal Water District first to postpone water service to new developments

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on December 12, 2007 at 6:29 am

From Riverside’s Press-Enterprise”

Tight water supplies in California are prompting an Inland agency for the first time to postpone promises that it can deliver the water needed for seven major developments, officials said Tuesday. The delay by the Perris-based Eastern Municipal Water District includes a 2.4-million square-foot distribution center proposed by Highland Fairview Properties for eastern Moreno Valley, said David Slawson, an Eastern Municipal board member.

Skechers USA Inc. signed an 11-year lease for the facility worth an estimated $100 million that some commercial real estate brokers say may be the largest ever signed for a distribution center in the Inland area and, possibly, the United States.

Highland Fairview President Iddo Benzeevi said he thinks the water issue will be resolved. He also said water agencies need the time to develop a plan to address the water supply concerns. “We’re not sure yet how it may affect the project but we are working closely with the EMWD and the city,” he said

Details on the other six developments weren’t immediately available Tuesday. Under state law, large developments must get “will-serve” letters from water districts, promising they can supply water for 20 years, before construction proceeds. Randy Record, an Eastern Municipal board member, said the district will re-evaluate issuing those letters to the developments in March, when agency officials have a better sense of the statewide water supply situation, including winter rain and snow counts.

Record said he wants to make sure the water supply of people who are here is not compromised because of new development.

To read the rest of this article from Riverside’s Press-Enterprise, click here.

December 12, 2007 · Filed Under Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Task force to study effects of building on alluvial fans

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on December 10, 2007 at 1:34 pm

From the San Bernardino Sun:

An assortment of more than 50 officials gathered Friday to examine the dangers of building homes on alluvial fans, in the inaugural meeting of a panel Gov. Schwarzenegger had signed off on in 2004.

The group - comprising politicians, flood-control experts, developers and environmentalists - spent the meeting of the Alluvial Fan Task Force reviewing Riverside County’s areas prone to flooding and debris flows. The task force is charged with studying potential development in alluvial fans - the sort of floodplain that contributed to 16 deaths in the Christmas Day 2003 debris flows in Waterman Canyon and Devore.

Local alluvial fans are from centuries of runoff made up of sediment spewed forth from canyons from the San Bernardino Mountains to Malibu. They are considered to be dangerous to build on. That’s because, as history has shown through the sediment that is already there, a lot can be expelled rapidly out of the canyons - and the results can be deadly, along with expensive.

“It’s a dream come true,” Susan Lien Longville, director of the Water Resources Institute and wife of former Assemblyman John Longville, D-San Bernardino, who sponsored the legislation in 2004, said of Friday’s session at the Riverside County Flood Control District. “This is a perfect time, especially because of a dip in development because of the economy, so next time we will be ready for thoughtful land-use decisions.”

David Mlynarski, owner of MAPCO, a Southern California developer that has done significant work in San Bernardino and Riverside, said he was optimistic that some good guidelines can come out of the task force’s work. But he expressed some concern that the panel’s recommendations would lead to regulations pinning more expenses on developers. “When you are talking about new regulations, the idea is always good to start with, but if its not implemented properly and consistently, it can become an unfair problem,” Mlynarski said. “The issue is, who pays for it? Do the people who settled the area long ago and are now making money by selling it get a free ride, and the developer is required to fix it?

To read the full text of this article from the San Bernardino Sun, click here.

December 10, 2007 · Filed Under Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Water concerns delay permit extensions in the Antelope Valley

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 28, 2007 at 10:58 pm

From the Antelope Valley Press:

As new-home sales continue to lag, housing developers are trying to delay deadlines for projects submitted for approval back when the market was booming. Members of the city’s Planning Commission spent more than an hour Tuesday discussing whether to extend those deadlines for seven builders holding plans to construct 773 homes in various locations.

The commission’s discussion focused on the lack of direction from the City Council concerning water use in the city and how best to obtain the governing body’s opinion.

In Lancaster, tentative tract maps for housing developments are valid for two years after they have been accepted by city planners. The validity of those maps can be extended at the discretion of the Planning Commission for three years, for a total of five. In the past, such extensions would have been granted with little or no comment. Now, commission members are discussing whether the extensions should be limited until more is learned about the future supply of water.

To read the full text of this article from the Antelope Valley Press, click here.

November 28, 2007 · Filed Under Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

The water energy connection from a contractor’s point of view

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 21, 2007 at 7:01 am

From Contractor’s Magazine on the heels of yesterday’s story in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, here’s an article on the connection between electrical use & water use:

Water consumes energy. Drinking water, that is. And it can consume quite a lot of energy depending on what needs to be done to it to get it to a faucet or showerhead, noted Gary Klein, who works in the demand analysis department of the California Energy Commission. Water, from the source to the consumer, can use from 2,000 to 20,000 kWh per million gallons, Klein said, with pumping accounting for most of that energy. Water uses more energy if it has to be pumped over a mountain, more still if it’s in the form of seawater and has to be desalinated.

Klein talked about the water- energy relationship at the semi-annual meeting of the Plumbing Manufacturers Institute here in early October.

Water uses energy for supply, end uses and wastewater treatment. Twenty to 25% of the nation’s stationary energy use goes to water, Klein said, with most of that consumed by end uses: pumping water up highrises, heating water, pumping it through cooling towers, or clothes drying, which is water removal. Treatment and supply only take up about 5% of that energy.

Saving water, therefore, Klein said, saves energy in conveyance and treatment. Saving energy can save cooling tower water. Cutting the air conditioning load can reduce the amount of energy needed to pump cooling water at a power plant.

The article does get technical about fittings, but keep reading on for interesting tidbits like this on showerheads:

The distance from the showerhead to the bather and the size of the droplets affects the temperature of the water. Short people will need hotter water because it cools as it drops, Klein said.

The issue then, revolves around bather satisfaction with the shower, whether it’s 2.5-GPM or some other number. The plumbing industry and environmentalists have focused on GPM as the nexus of water saving, Klein explained, but it really comes down to whether the bather is happy with the shower. “You’ve got to provide people with what they want,” he said, “and only then can you talk about efficiency.”

To read the full text of this article from Contractors Magazine, click here.

November 21, 2007 · Filed Under Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

California state law says developers must prove sufficient water before building, but is the law effective?

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 17, 2007 at 5:41 am

From KPBS in San Diego:

California law says cities have to show there will be sufficient water before they let developers build any project of more than 500 homes. That’s supposed to prevent runaway development in a state where water supply is often in question. There’s just one problem: No one from the state is checking that the water cities and counties say will be there, will actually be there.

Santee city officials refused to speak with us on camera. But they issued a written statement affirming there is sufficient water to serve Fanita Ranch [housing development in the approval stages] if the city approves it.

McIntyre: I would say that’s relying on paper water because it assumes that past supplies will meet the needs of new demand.

Mindy McIntyre is a water program manager with the Planning and Conservation League in Sacramento.

McIntyre: So the Colorado River and the state water project will be able to meet all the needs of the future. That simply isn’t true.

So, if the state doesn’t check to make sure cities and water agencies’ projections are verifiable, whose job is it? It turns out, it’s your job. It’s left up to citizens to try to determine whether the complex projections are true. We checked with the City of San Diego to see in the past seven years how many times has the water supply estimate for housing projects been challenged. The answer: Not even once.

Last month, San Diego city attorney Mike Aguirre wanted to halt new development until a judge determined just how much water would be available for San Diego. The city council said no, and instead unanimously approved 560 new condos.

To read the full text of this story from KPBS in San Diego, click here.

October 17, 2007 · Filed Under Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Water concerns could hamper desert development

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 14, 2007 at 6:49 am

From the Los Angeles Daily News:

Antelope Valley officials are concerned that a record-dry year and uncertain water supplies could lead to delays or a halt in construction in the sprawling High Desert. County officials have already determined that there is insufficient water to serve a 650-home development proposed in west Lancaster, putting the future of that project in limbo. “Everyone is kind of waiting to hear from the state as to how much water we are going to get. Everybody is holding their breath,” said Melinda Barrett, manager of Los Angeles County’s water conservation program.

The situation will depend on how the state handles the deepening water crisis caused by drought conditions and a federal judge’s ruling in August that water flowing through the California Aqueduct from Northern California must be cut by 30 percent to protect the delta smelt, a small fish threatened with extinction. “Given the unknowns, we are not not panicking. We are concerned. The water districts are concerned, and we are going to work with them to see how this will play out,” Palmdale Assistant City Manager Laurie Lile said.

District 40, which provides water to much of Lancaster and west Palmdale, gets 60 percent of its water from the Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency, a water wholesaler that gets its water from the State Water Project.

“In addition to record-dry conditions, there’s also this recent court ruling about the delta smelt,” Barrett said. “What that means is that AVEK can’t assure they can deliver water. If they can’t assure it, then we can’t assure delivery of water to this project.”

To read the full text of this article from the Los Angeles Daily News, click here.

October 14, 2007 · Filed Under Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

“Why are we planning for growth when we need to cut back?” asks editorial

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 13, 2007 at 7:39 am

From the Albuquerque Tribune, this editorial which paints a gloomy picture for the southwest:

If we don’t stop wasting public resources on growth that could well end up impoverishing us all, I see a systems breakdown caused by bad water, water shortages and aquifer depletion, traffic congestion, air pollution, astronomical fuel prices, global warming, drought and increasingly expensive trucked-in food.

The systems breakdown and drought in the West will cause a growing exodus from California, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, Utah and New Mexico to the Midwest and East Coast, where water and public transit and agriculture are more stable.

If the mountain snowpacks in California and Colorado continue to recede, as they will during the next 18 years, unless we do the impossible and reverse global warming, ruinous things will happen.

Every state that depends on the Colorado River for some of its water will be left drier than ever. In Albuquerque, that means not only will our aquifer continue to shrink, but our water table in the valley will lower drastically, affecting agriculture just when we need to start growing more of our own food.

California’s shrinking snowpack, which is the source of the vast majority of its water, will have an impact on New Mexico. California desalinization and recycling processes will require massive new amounts of energy. And chances are that will have to come from coal-fired power plants in Navajo-owned parts of New Mexico and other coal-rich areas, heating up global warming. Long waits for nuclear power would be impractical.

October 13, 2007 · Filed Under Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

Water supplies and gridlock discussed at local meeting

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 12, 2007 at 6:53 am

Water officials gathered yesterday for a breakfast meeting at the Diamond Club (somewhere here in Southern California) to discuss water issues and the state of the current legislation.

From the North County Times:

Jeff Kightlinger, general manager of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, said the situation isn’t going to get better on its own, especially if the region adds an expected 7 million residents during the next two decades.

Lighter snowfall in the Sierras has made seven of the last 10 years among the driest on record, Kightlinger said. Though his agency has so far coped through efficiency and better storage capacity, he said, the region now must take more dramatic measures in conservation, efficiency and importing.

“We can’t live in a world where we’re short of water 70 percent of the time and still make our economy work,” Kightlinger told several dozen civic and business leaders at The Diamond stadium complex in Lake Elsinore. “This really is a time when we’re going to have to pull together as a water community.”

For a venue where most breakfast meetings are for networking with local chamber of commerce members, the 7:30 a.m. confab drew an unusually large number of elected officials, some from as far away as Riverside and Valley Center. City council members, developers and state legislators will all have a role to play in conserving water, Kightlinger suggested.

To read the full text of the article from the North County Times, click here.

Kightlinger also told attendees that the water supply situation is critical, and could lead to water rationing in the future, perhaps in 2009. From the Riverside Press-Enterprise:

In years past, Kightlinger said, Metropolitan Water could plan on meeting its customers’ needs for seven years in a 10-year span. With the ruling and drought, Kightlinger said the inverse is true: Metropolitan will only be able to plan on meeting customers’ needs three of 10 years. “It is inevitable we will be faced with serious water issues down the road if something isn’t done,” Kightlinger said.

He said he believes the ultimate solution will be a $3 billion to $4 billion system that will pump water from the northern delta area, before the smelt’s habitat would be affected, to Southern California. Funding for the project already is available. The conveyance idea, however, has been opposed for decades for environmentalists, who believe it will harm the ecosystem, and agricultural interests in the southern delta area who fear they might be deprived of fresh water. Kightlinger said, however, that a number of environmentalists have come around to the idea, and the conveyance may help restore the fragile delta ecosystem.

Jeffries, a member of the state’s Republican Water Task Force, said legislators have tried to put language in a proposed water bond measure that will reaffirm the right to build the conveyance. Partisan gridlock on the other issues in that water bond, however, has made it unlikely that the conveyance, and other water issues, will be addressed in the February primary election.

To read the full text of this article from Riverside’s Press-Enterprise, click here.

October 12, 2007 · Filed Under Development & Water

Share Your Thoughts - Post A Comment

← Previous Page — Next Page →