The Multistate Battle over the Colorado River(nymag.com)
nymag.com
The Multistate Battle over the Colorado River
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/04/the-multistate-battle-over-the-colorado-river.html
29 comments
Because the least economically valuable use of the water is agricultural, which is also by far the highest use of water. It makes no sense for a city to desalinate water for ten times the price that it's being sold for agricultural purposes. Unfortunately the politics and property rights of water in the West prevent economically rational water allocation. Instead, city dwellers are legally required to buy ever lower flow shower heads, which make approximately zero difference in overall water usage, while rice farmers flood their fields.
This is the real problem. In most of southern NM and even west TX, these farmers use so much water that mosquitoes become a problem for parts of the year. In the desert....
Agriculture needs big reform here. Either cut it out, or make them pay their big share of water. But I guess nobody wants to buy a 50 dollar bag of almonds or pecans.
Personally, I might miss pecan pie once a year, but otherwise wouldn't even notice if both products ceased to exist.
Agriculture needs big reform here. Either cut it out, or make them pay their big share of water. But I guess nobody wants to buy a 50 dollar bag of almonds or pecans.
Personally, I might miss pecan pie once a year, but otherwise wouldn't even notice if both products ceased to exist.
Desalination is quite expensive, but some plants are operating and more are planned. Agricultural customers will probably not use desalination because of costs; it's more economical to plant their fields with signs decrying the 'congress created dustbowl' (at least for the highway adjacent signs); and residential customers likely increase conservation efforts, but it's an option (and if Wikipedia is correct, it tends to be less expensive than importing water from nearby agencies). Determining where to build the plants and environmental review, and the size of the projects make it a lengthy process, and there are often other project options which could be less costly and may be synergistic with other government efforts; for example expanding wastewater reclamation can meet sewage treatment goals and reduce potable water needs or excess reclaimed water can be directed towards aquifer recharging.
I knew it was expensive, but I really thought most of the costs were in the energy. And, being in a desert means that solar is really effective - the latitude certainly helps too.
I also saw that drewnick also posted that San Diego has a desal plant. That one sounds small - but I could see that scaled up x10, and then drop 20 of them along the coastlines.
Reclamation should also be definitely part of the overall plan too. But if the water input is gown that far down, no amount of reclamation will fix low source.
I also saw that drewnick also posted that San Diego has a desal plant. That one sounds small - but I could see that scaled up x10, and then drop 20 of them along the coastlines.
Reclamation should also be definitely part of the overall plan too. But if the water input is gown that far down, no amount of reclamation will fix low source.
None of that exists in a vacuum.
The salt has to go somewhere, and brine (concentrated salt water) is harmful to the environment and wild-life. I imagine the only effective way to handle it is to designate a deep water area that is politically acceptable to 'sacrifice' and pump the output entirely to that site. This is of course going to be extremely energy intensive and also will probably leak frequently as earthquakes and ship anchorage destroy the pipe.
Any form of thermal based power generation is going to have similar issues with it's cooling water (which is required in the heat differential that produces useful energy). Cars have radiator fans and waste heat from the engine for this exact reason.
Radical changes to reduce the quantity of water lost to current uses are probably required. I suspect one of them might be to boil the hell out of some of the waste treatment water that's clearer, or even as a distillation method, and send it off for use in recreation field watering and some farming where that makes sense. Lawns as a decorative feature or social status symbol should be banned. Greenhouses and Solar Updraft Tower hybrids ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_updraft_tower ) might be a required conversion for farming regions.
The salt has to go somewhere, and brine (concentrated salt water) is harmful to the environment and wild-life. I imagine the only effective way to handle it is to designate a deep water area that is politically acceptable to 'sacrifice' and pump the output entirely to that site. This is of course going to be extremely energy intensive and also will probably leak frequently as earthquakes and ship anchorage destroy the pipe.
Any form of thermal based power generation is going to have similar issues with it's cooling water (which is required in the heat differential that produces useful energy). Cars have radiator fans and waste heat from the engine for this exact reason.
Radical changes to reduce the quantity of water lost to current uses are probably required. I suspect one of them might be to boil the hell out of some of the waste treatment water that's clearer, or even as a distillation method, and send it off for use in recreation field watering and some farming where that makes sense. Lawns as a decorative feature or social status symbol should be banned. Greenhouses and Solar Updraft Tower hybrids ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_updraft_tower ) might be a required conversion for farming regions.
I live in Carlsbad, CA. We procure 50M gallons a day from the Pacific Ocean. [0]
San Diego saw this coming 10y ago and took action.
0. https://www.carlsbaddesal.com/
0. https://www.carlsbaddesal.com/
For the curious: 50M gallons is 153 acre-feet. Multiply by 365, that's just shy of 56000 acre feet per year.
So three of these plants would be approximately 1% of the water allocated in the original Colorado River compact.
So three of these plants would be approximately 1% of the water allocated in the original Colorado River compact.
Thank you for this calculation. This water is primarily residential, versus the Colorado River compact water, which is majority agricultural.
California exports hay (grown on Coloradio River compact water) to other countries, including China and the Middle East. [0]
[0] https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/environment/2017/09/28/...
California exports hay (grown on Coloradio River compact water) to other countries, including China and the Middle East. [0]
[0] https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/environment/2017/09/28/...
Something like 80% of the water used in California goes to agriculture. Another 10% to industry. The remaining 10% includes all the grass lawns you see (which are increasingly irrigated with recycled water) and all residential and urban life. There is plenty of water in California, it is just mismanaged. I imagine that's true everywhere else in the west as well. Water rights laws are some of the most corrupted things there are.
Further proof of the blind insanity of capitalism. They are basically shipping water across the ocean from one desert to another.
"The company announced in January 2016 that it paid $31.8 million for 1,790 acres. Some of its fields run alongside the Colorado River.
The company grows hay for cows in its dairy in Saudi Arabia, where the monarchy has set a policy of growing less alfalfa, wheat and corn to reduce pumping of groundwater from the depleted aquifers of the Arabian Peninsula."
"The company announced in January 2016 that it paid $31.8 million for 1,790 acres. Some of its fields run alongside the Colorado River.
The company grows hay for cows in its dairy in Saudi Arabia, where the monarchy has set a policy of growing less alfalfa, wheat and corn to reduce pumping of groundwater from the depleted aquifers of the Arabian Peninsula."
> Further proof of the blind insanity of capitalism.
While I agree the pitfalls of unchecked Capitalism are rather dire, you have to realize this business model is only possible because of USDA subsidies; under no other circumstances could this be a profitable endeavor if ti were left to Market forces alone, were it not for the State offsetting the obscene expenses it simply wouldn't be possible.
Furthermore, insuring these crops should be a matter for those respective nations and a premium should be placed on them as that is their final destination--especially since the House of Saud refuses to use it's own water but expects CA to use it's fertile soil and limited water supply to feed its dairy cattle.
While I agree the pitfalls of unchecked Capitalism are rather dire, you have to realize this business model is only possible because of USDA subsidies; under no other circumstances could this be a profitable endeavor if ti were left to Market forces alone, were it not for the State offsetting the obscene expenses it simply wouldn't be possible.
Furthermore, insuring these crops should be a matter for those respective nations and a premium should be placed on them as that is their final destination--especially since the House of Saud refuses to use it's own water but expects CA to use it's fertile soil and limited water supply to feed its dairy cattle.
It’s only insane because we aren’t charging enough for the water. It’s not properly accounting for the real cost of the water usage.
How many acre-feet does San Diego consume yearly?
> I live in Carlsbad, CA
When I worked in Carlsbad driving in from Southern OC, I remember seeing the construction for Poseidon, it was in the midst of the financial crisis but Carlsbad is an affluent city with mainly older residents and I recall thinking to myself: these guys know how to spend their money right.
If I recall correctly Poseidon supplies not just all of Carlsbad but also to the greater San Diego area and parts of Riverside and OC and is on track to recover it's costs ahead of schedule, right?
When I worked in Carlsbad driving in from Southern OC, I remember seeing the construction for Poseidon, it was in the midst of the financial crisis but Carlsbad is an affluent city with mainly older residents and I recall thinking to myself: these guys know how to spend their money right.
If I recall correctly Poseidon supplies not just all of Carlsbad but also to the greater San Diego area and parts of Riverside and OC and is on track to recover it's costs ahead of schedule, right?
Yes, it supplies about 10% of the region's water. At a 2x cost compared to other methods, but for residential the economics still make sense.
> We can’t have a city or agricultural area dry up and wither while others thrive.
The Owens Valley begs to differ...
> Like it or not, you’re all part of L.A.
Yes and that's precisely the problem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owens_Valley
The Owens Valley begs to differ...
> Like it or not, you’re all part of L.A.
Yes and that's precisely the problem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owens_Valley
Key Takeaways:
* “Right now, the Lower Basin uses over 10 million acre-feet a year, while the Upper Basin uses under 5 million acre-feet,” says Rebecca Mitchell, director of the Colorado Water Conservation Board
* I’m thrilled to death we have infrastructure in place that allows us to use the water when it’s available.” > Utah has the right to use about 1.7 million acre-feet of water from the Colorado, but it cannot collect from Lake Powell (its major aqueduct, the Central Utah Project, connects only Salt Lake City with the river’s tributaries)
* > Colorado River Compact > The fundamental flaw of this compact is that it was signed at a time of unprecedented rain and snowfall in the basin, which led its original framers to assume that 15 million acre-feet of water flowed through the Colorado every year
* “If the last 30 years repeats itself, the Lower Basin will have to cut its use by about 1 million acre-feet,” says Hasencamp
* The writer Marc Reisner described the Colorado as the “American Nile.” The Hualapai call it Hakataya, “the backbone.” > Colorado River > described > Hualapai > Starting in the early 20th century, much of the Colorado’s natural majesty was corralled into a system of reservoirs, canals, and dams that now provides drinking water for 40 million people, irrigation for 5 million acres of farmland, and sufficient power to light up a city the size of Houston
* Currently, the Upper Basin uses only about 4.5 million acre-feet of water every year, leaving roughly 2 million acre-feet that the four states are theoretically entitled to as they keep adding population
* While the explosive population growth of Arizona and Nevada originally put pressure on California to draw down its use in the 1990s, now the Upper Basin states of Utah and Colorado — each of which added over a half-million residents in the past decade — are adding strain to the system
* John Fleck has authored several books on the Colorado and serves as a writer-in-residence at the University of New Mexico; he says the tension between the two basins was palpable at the Stegner conference, with many Lower Basin negotiators expressing their frustration with those from the Upper Basin seeming to cast the current crisis as one that California, Arizona, and Nevada have created and are responsible for solving
* But that framework is set to expire in 2026, giving officials in the seven states through which the Colorado and its tributaries flow — along with their peers in Mexico and the 29 tribes whose ancestors have depended on the river for millennia — an alarmingly narrow window to come to a consensus on how to share a river that’s already flowing with one-fifth less water than it did in the 20th century
* “Right now, the Lower Basin uses over 10 million acre-feet a year, while the Upper Basin uses under 5 million acre-feet,” says Rebecca Mitchell, director of the Colorado Water Conservation Board
* I’m thrilled to death we have infrastructure in place that allows us to use the water when it’s available.” > Utah has the right to use about 1.7 million acre-feet of water from the Colorado, but it cannot collect from Lake Powell (its major aqueduct, the Central Utah Project, connects only Salt Lake City with the river’s tributaries)
* > Colorado River Compact > The fundamental flaw of this compact is that it was signed at a time of unprecedented rain and snowfall in the basin, which led its original framers to assume that 15 million acre-feet of water flowed through the Colorado every year
* “If the last 30 years repeats itself, the Lower Basin will have to cut its use by about 1 million acre-feet,” says Hasencamp
* The writer Marc Reisner described the Colorado as the “American Nile.” The Hualapai call it Hakataya, “the backbone.” > Colorado River > described > Hualapai > Starting in the early 20th century, much of the Colorado’s natural majesty was corralled into a system of reservoirs, canals, and dams that now provides drinking water for 40 million people, irrigation for 5 million acres of farmland, and sufficient power to light up a city the size of Houston
* Currently, the Upper Basin uses only about 4.5 million acre-feet of water every year, leaving roughly 2 million acre-feet that the four states are theoretically entitled to as they keep adding population
* While the explosive population growth of Arizona and Nevada originally put pressure on California to draw down its use in the 1990s, now the Upper Basin states of Utah and Colorado — each of which added over a half-million residents in the past decade — are adding strain to the system
* John Fleck has authored several books on the Colorado and serves as a writer-in-residence at the University of New Mexico; he says the tension between the two basins was palpable at the Stegner conference, with many Lower Basin negotiators expressing their frustration with those from the Upper Basin seeming to cast the current crisis as one that California, Arizona, and Nevada have created and are responsible for solving
* But that framework is set to expire in 2026, giving officials in the seven states through which the Colorado and its tributaries flow — along with their peers in Mexico and the 29 tribes whose ancestors have depended on the river for millennia — an alarmingly narrow window to come to a consensus on how to share a river that’s already flowing with one-fifth less water than it did in the 20th century
The article is deceptive by omission. It only vaguely hints that the entire issue is agriculture. Stop farming the desert and there’s plenty of water for drinking regardless of population growth.
The simple answer that moneyed interests aren’t interested in.
But then you would have to pay those farmers for their water rights.
Probably better off just eminent domain’ing the land the rights are attached to. It’s still worth it. Ag is just not that big an industry in the grand scheme.
> * Currently, the Upper Basin uses only about 4.5 million acre-feet of water every year, leaving roughly 2 million acre-feet that the four states are theoretically entitled to as they keep adding population
> * While the explosive population growth of Arizona and Nevada originally put pressure on California to draw down its use in the 1990s, now the Upper Basin states of Utah and Colorado — each of which added over a half-million residents in the past decade — are adding strain to the system
> * John Fleck has authored several books on the Colorado and serves as a writer-in-residence at the University of New Mexico; he says the tension between the two basins was palpable at the Stegner conference, with many Lower Basin negotiators expressing their frustration with those from the Upper Basin seeming to cast the current crisis as one that California, Arizona, and Nevada have created and are responsible for solving
The Upper Basin states have been using less than their allotment for decades, and allowing the Lower Basin states to use more than their allotment. If the Upper Basin states want to use more (up to their actual allotment), and that creates a crisis because the Lower Basin states have grown used to using more than their allotment, it seems fair to me to claim that the crisis is in fact the fault of the Lower Basin states. If the one giving charity doesn't keep doing so forever and a crisis results, that's not the fault of the one who stops giving charity...
> * While the explosive population growth of Arizona and Nevada originally put pressure on California to draw down its use in the 1990s, now the Upper Basin states of Utah and Colorado — each of which added over a half-million residents in the past decade — are adding strain to the system
> * John Fleck has authored several books on the Colorado and serves as a writer-in-residence at the University of New Mexico; he says the tension between the two basins was palpable at the Stegner conference, with many Lower Basin negotiators expressing their frustration with those from the Upper Basin seeming to cast the current crisis as one that California, Arizona, and Nevada have created and are responsible for solving
The Upper Basin states have been using less than their allotment for decades, and allowing the Lower Basin states to use more than their allotment. If the Upper Basin states want to use more (up to their actual allotment), and that creates a crisis because the Lower Basin states have grown used to using more than their allotment, it seems fair to me to claim that the crisis is in fact the fault of the Lower Basin states. If the one giving charity doesn't keep doing so forever and a crisis results, that's not the fault of the one who stops giving charity...
Seems like sort of a classic debt vs. equity problem. The government obviously cannot deliver on a promise of X amount of water regardless of rainfall. It would make a lot more sense if the rightsholders received a percentage of the inflow. The good thing about the dam is that it can absorb fluctuations on the scale of a few years, but as we see, it can't absorb a decade long decline, and they should reduce allocations proportionately without having to declare an emergency to do it. That way, farmers would have at least a few years to make adjustments.
The thing is, there’s more than one dam. Keeping Lake Powell ‘full’ means Lake Mead gets less water for their electric generation. And the upstream lakes have to release more water than they want to.
They’ve been haggling over that water forever and no one is going back to their constituents admitting defeat so Phoenix can have more golf courses per capita than any other place on earth. Maybe making that up but I’ve lived in the Phoenix valley for almost 25 years and there’s a lot of golf courses.
They’ve been haggling over that water forever and no one is going back to their constituents admitting defeat so Phoenix can have more golf courses per capita than any other place on earth. Maybe making that up but I’ve lived in the Phoenix valley for almost 25 years and there’s a lot of golf courses.
Yeah it's kinda crazy.aybe if i golfed I'd feel differently, but still its a losing battle
This reminds me of bacigalupi's excellent novel, 'the water knife'.
Of course, it's also probably a bad idea to plant water-thirsty stuff in a desert too. You plant what the climate and area supports.