Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

July 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    
My Photo
Blog powered by TypePad

Favorite Blogs

  • Aguanomics
    The economics of water (and some other stuff), courtesy of economist David Zetland.
  • Water SISWEB
    From UC-Davis water students. More than just a blog, it's a water resources community social bookmarking site. The users run the show, and all can participate.
  • Great Lakes Law
    Noah Hall's blog about - what else - all things wet and legal in the Great Lakes region!
  • Misublog
    Laura Makar's blog is designed to inform and contribute to the discussion of water policy.
  • AWRA
    The water resources blog of the American Water Resources Association.
  • Campanastan
    That's 'Campana-stan', or 'Place of Campana', formerly 'Aquablog'. Michael Campana's personal blog, promulgating his Weltanschauung.
  • Waterblogged
    Shaun McKinnon of the Arizona Republic.
  • Waterblogged.info
    Jared Simpson's water blog. Great writing and insight, for non-water wonks, too.
  • Water For The Ages
    Abby, another PNWer, writes about global water issues with passion and concern.
  • Crooks and Liars
    John Amato's blog about...'Crooks and Liars'.
  • H2O Podcast
    Joseph Puentes does us WaterWonks a service by posting podcasts of conferences, etc.
  • H2ONCoast
    Oregon's North Coast water blog by Rob Emanuel of Oregon State University's Sea Grant program.
  • Aquafornia
    Aqua Blog Maven's awesome Southern California water blog. Everything you need to know about SoCal water issues, and more!
  • Western Water Blog
    The 'mystery blog' about Western USA water issues. What more can I say?
  • WaterWired
    All things fresh water. A service of the Institute for Water and Watersheds at Oregon State University (water.oregonstate.edu).
  • Water Words That Work
    From Eric Eckl, a communications and marketing expert for environmental and other progressive causes.
  • Watercrunch
    The sound when water and people collide. Robert Osborne emphasizes Southeastern USA water issues. Excellent graphics and features.
  • John Fleck
    Science writer at the Albuquerque Journal. Great stuff on climate, water, and more.
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Land & Water

June 25, 2008

Florida Purchases Sugar Land to Help Restore Everglades

Nope, that's not Sugar Land, TX, but land used to grow sugar cane for sugar production in Florida.

GR2008062500140 Florida is spending $1.75B to purchase about 292 square miles of U.S. Sugar Corporation's holdings in the Everglades (see map, courtesy of the Washington Post). Those holdings equal the land area of the entire city of New York - all five boroughs.

Read about it in the New York Times.

U.S. Sugar Corporation is the USA's largest sugar cane grower. Here is the complete media kit from U.S. Sugar, which contains the statement of President and CEO Robert H. Buker, Jr., the details, Q&A, etc:

Download us_sugar_media_kit.pdf

The South Florida Water Management District, a quasi-governmental entity of the State of Florida, will assume control of the land, which will not occur for 6 years.  

It's not quite a done deal yet, however. More work needs to be done over the next few months.

The importance of the land acquistion cannot be underestimated. The purchased land will add about 1 million acre-feet of storage, and taking land out of agricultural production will reduce the phosphorus and nitrogen loads to the system. The former was a particular issue. Some of the "natural plumbing" will be restored.

The negotiations were a well-kept secret, and the announcement surprised a number of people.

Let's hope the Everglades are on the road to better health. 

“Most agencies want to spend the money making things happen and not spend the money finding out if they work." – Dr. William Dietrich, UC-Berkeley geomorphologist

June 18, 2008

Sarah Bates on Land and Water: And Ne'er the Twain Shall Meet?

Drought_591 Yet another rant on the land-water nexus from Aquadoc, right? Not so fast, my friend.

Sarah Bates, one of the best thinkers on this topic, who doesn't rant and is always worth reading, sent me this notice about a short piece she just posted to the Science Progress site.

The photo from the article, courtesy of AP/Ed Andrieski, is of a "lake" near Frisco, CO.

To whet your appetite, here are the first three paragraphs:

A recent issue of National Geographic featured a compelling story on the double-barreled threat facing western states: rapid population growth and climate change. “The American West was won by water management,” proclaims the article. “What happens when there’s no water left to manage?”

This question vexes more than water managers. It may seem absurd to approve development without reliable water supplies, but that is exactly what has happened in many communities—leaving homeowners and other taxpayers holding the bill when extravagant measures become necessary to gain access to water.

Just as homeowners demand, and building codes require, safe wiring and solid foundations for their dwellings, they also deserve to know that their drinking water taps will deliver clean, reliable water for decades to come. Moreover, states are currently reckoning with the question of what happens when there is little water left to manage—two weeks ago, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a statewide drought.

Development is still progressing in some states despite the recent water shortages, and in areas where the supply is suspect. Agricultural water rights are being transferred to urban areas. But there are some places where concerns are being expressed, such as in Nevada, where Las Vegas' plan to pump rural ground water is casuing alarm among some.

Bates mentions the recently-passed Colorado law that gives local governments the right to deny developments without adequate water supplies, but the law gives local governments the power to permit such development. There are no "time horizons" prescribed in the Colorado law, unlike in other states.

So what would an ideal water supply assurance law look like? Back to Bates' article:

According to Utah law professor Lincoln Davies such a law would be: (1) mandatory; (2) stringent; (3) statewide; (4) broadly applicable, applying to more than just large projects; and (5) interconnected with broader planning mechanisms for land, water, and environmental protection. Thus far, no state statute meets all these criteria, though the legislation enacted in California in 2001 comes closest.

She's written just a short paper this time around, but she mentioned that she will be preparing a more detailed policy briefing paper with specific legislative options for making this (land-water) link.

I'll anxiously await that one.

And some day, it'll all be right.

"Life has two rules. Number one: never quit. Number two: remember rule number one." -- Duke Ellington
 

June 11, 2008

Are Golf Courses 'Green'?

An appropriate post on the eve of the U.S. Open.

As a youngster I worked summers as a caddy in the fresh air of the White Mountains of New Hampshire and the salt-laden, moisture-soaked air of Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Since I stopped caddying I have picked up golf clubs exactly once, in a moment of weakness about 18 years ago. And that was in Kennebunkport, Maine, at the golf club frequented by President George H.W. Bush. The Downeaster who was the club sentinel chided me for my tacky wardrobe - barely "golf-ready". "The President will be on the course today!" he said. "Of the USA?" I exclaimed. "No," he scolded, "Of the club!"

I'll try to be objective here.  

I remember when many of us - including yours truly - automatically assumed that golf courses were good land uses - after all, they were lush and green, cement- and asphalt-free. Wasn't it much nicer to see a beautiful fairway than a sea of tile roofs? Little did we know what lay under the surface.

But golf courses use a lot of water (and let's not forget the fertilizers and pesticides). The water and chemical use issues have been poorly-kept secrets for years. In general, golf courses are far from being "green". But the water use issue is front and center now, what with water shortages, droughts, global warming, and growth in water short-areas (e.g., Southwest USA) where courses are being built to satify demand.

Frank Deford, well-known sportswriter and commentator addressed this issue today on his weekly commentary on NPR. It's a good commentary. He made some interesting points:

  • There are 16,000 (give or take) golf courses in the USA, half the world's total 
  • USA golf courses occupy the same area as Delaware
  • The courses average 312,000 gallons of water per day (from Audobon International)
  • Each of the 57 golf courses in the Palm Springs, CA, area uses 1,000,000 gallons per day (It's a desert, stupid!)
  • A poll of golfers indicated that 41% of those polled believe global warming is a myth

I used to go to a conference each summer in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, where the Chamber of Commerce bragged of the 100 golf courses in the immediate vicinity.

Deford noted that the May 2008 issue of Golf Digest featured a candid article by John Barton, "How green is golf?" about golf course water and chemical use and environmentalism. Barton states categorically that golf courses face a crisis over water.

The magazine also interviewed seven leading "thinkers" at the intersection of golf and the environment. Interesting to read what they think.

Although there is quite a way to go, things are getting better at some golf courses with respect to water and chemical use. "Organic" methods are gaining traction. Water use is being monitored. Golfers are becoming more aware. Maybe we'll get that "global warming myth" figure down to 30%.

An inveterate (invertebrate?) golfer-hydrologist once lectured me: "Don't forget - golf courses provide ground water recharge." "But what's in the recharge water?" I replied.

Now, if we could just get golfers out of those carts! 

"Golf is a good walk spoiled." -- Mark Twain

June 08, 2008

The Golan Gamble: Middle East Peace...Or Not?

300px-Golan_heights_rel89B Okay, here's a good one: Turkey provides Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria with just about all the water they could possibly use, Israel withdraws from the Golan Heights, and everybody is happy!

Someone's been smoking too much of the evil weed, right? Actually, maybe not.

Check out this story from the Jerusalem Report in the 5 June 2008 Jerusalem Post.

The plan would provide water in the amount of 2 - 3 billion cubic meters ( 1.6 - 2.4 million acre-feet) per year from the Ceyhan and Seyhan Rivers of Turkey.The plan was originally proposed by Turkey in the 1980s, but was shelved when Turkish-Syrian relations soured in the 1990s.  

From the article by Leslie Susser:

The water would be channeled from Turkey, which enjoys a huge water surplus, in underground pipes and overland canals through western Syria to the southern slopes of Mount Hermon, where it would flow into a dam along the length of the northern stretch of a new Israeli-Syrian border, providing hydro-electric power and serving as a major obstacle against a tank blitz from the Golan Heights, which would be returned to Syria as part of the projected peace package. Some of the water en route would be diverted to Lebanon and water from the dam channeled to Israel, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority.

"Everybody wins," says the plan's author, water engineer Boaz Wachtel, an Israeli fellow at the Washington-based Freedom House, which promotes democracy, peace and human rights. "The Arabs and Israelis get water and stability, the Turks hard currency and enhanced international status."

But this is not a done deal. Again, from the article:

But the dream of peace with Syria with all its attendant benefits - Syria in the pro-Western Arab camp, freed from Iranian tutelage and no longer supporting Palestinian and Lebanese militants - is not universally shared. Israeli hawks, who oppose any withdrawal from the Golan, accuse Wachtel and Liel of living in a fantasy world - and the government of Ehud Olmert of playing dangerous games in its efforts to survive the corruption scandals engulfing the prime minister. There is, they say, no chance of Syria breaking away from the radical Iranian-led axis and handing over the Golan would simply be turning it into an Iranian forward base for attacking Israel. "All this talk about making peace and sharing water is pie in the sky," scoffs the Likud's Yisrael Katz, chairman of the Knesset's Golan caucus.

And more:

The outcome of negotiations with Syria as well as the fate of Wachtel's ambitious water scheme could depend on the results of the next Israeli election. With Olmert wobbling over corruption allegations, pundits are talking about a November ballot, with the Likud's Benjamin Netanyahu, who opposes territorial compromise with Syria, the front-runner according to public opinion polls.

Here's what Likud leader and former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu thinks of the idea. No, he's not a fan.

Ah, water - the great peacemaker! This will get interesting.

"You don't make peace with friends. You make it with very unsavory enemies." -- Yitzhak Rabin

May 12, 2008

Planner's Guide to Wetland Buffers for Local Governments

11272_d18_01small Okay, I must have been asleep because this little guide was released by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) in March 2008.  A friend of mine who knows far more about wetlands and local governments than I recommends it highly.

Here you can download a free pdf copy or purchase one if you like.

From the WWW site:

The upland area surrounding a wetland – the wetland buffer – is essential to its health and survival. Healthy wetlands and buffer areas help to control flooding, protect water flows, conserve native plants and wildlife, and support nature-friendly land use and development. Local governments are often better situated than state and federal environmental authorities to control activities on the lands that surround wetland resource areas, because they are not just concerned with wetland functions, but also with surrounding land uses and the benefits wetlands provide for their communities. Based on ELI’s detailed examination of more than 50 enacted wetland buffer ordinances around the nation and nine model ordinances, as well as several hundred scientific studies and analyses of buffer performance, the Planner's Guide to Wetland Buffers for Local Governments identifies both the state-of-the-art and the range of current practice in protection of wetland buffers by local governments. The Guide provides to local governments considering enacting or amending a wetland buffer ordinance what they need to know to manage land use and development in these important areas.

Enjoy!

"Philosophers are people who don't want what they can't have." -- Unknown

April 18, 2008

Colorado Tackles the Land Use-Water Availability Nexus

Well, here I go again - getting off on the land use - water availability nexus. Must be my impending 60th birthday!Homemap                                                                               

Yesterday Alberta, today Colorado. Connecting land use and water availability - what a concept! Next you thing you know, a single agency will be jointly managing/regulating water quantitity and quality.

In its 10 April 2008 edition, The Durango Herald reported that the Colorado House of Representatives approved a bill that would inject water availability concerns into local subdivision planning. Joe Hanel's story appears below.

DENVER - In Colorado, urban growth has always been a matter for local governments to decide.

But on Wednesday, the House of Representatives declared that the water used by new subdivisions is a matter of statewide concern.

The House approved House Bill 1141, which requires developers to prove they have adequate water supplies before city councils give their approvals to build.

The bill by Rep. Kathleen Curry, D-Gunnison, was delayed for almost two months while she rewrote it.

Although Curry called the bill a "baby step," it drew fire from developers and several Republicans. The current law requires proven water supplies before county commissions, but not city councils. Curry's bill applies to new developments of 50 or more houses.

Rep. Don Marostica, R-Loveland, who is a land developer, said anti-growth city councils will abuse the bill.

"I don't think Representative Curry wants to stop growth, but that's what this bill is going to do," Marostica said.

He predicted water prices will spike in the next few days as developers try to protect themselves from Curry's bill.

As indicated by Rep. Marostica's comments, this bill, if enacted, will ruffle many feathers. It really inserts the state into a an area long regarded as a local prerogative.

And some municipalities are already addressing the issue. As Hanel indicated in his article, Loveland's master plan already addresses the water supply it will need for its 150,000 future residents. The town had 61,000 in 2006, and 37,000 in 1990, according to the Census Bureau.

Hanel continues:

The story is the same across the state. Three million people are expected to move to Colorado in the next 30 years, mostly to the Front Range. The Colorado River Basin is the last substantial supply available to the state, and some Western Slope water experts think the river might be tapped out already.

What? The Colorado River? Tapped out? You think?

The article goes on:

Water crises have already struck some Front Range subdivisions.

Rep. Marsha Looper, R-Calhan, has several constituents who have to truck in water in her Colorado Springs-area district.

"We need this bill. I wish this bill would have run 20 years ago," Looper said.

Some said the bill wasn't stringent enough. Rep. Claire Levy (D-Boulder) said: "It seems like what we have here is something that's supposed to provide assurance of a long-term water supply, when it's still speculative about whether that supply will be available."

But Rep. Curry said that it's best to go one step at a time when talking about local land-use planning. She was happy to finally take the debate to the House of Representatives and said that she appreciated the debate, which Colorado has needed to have.

The House approved HB 1141 on a voice vote. It faces one more vote in the House before heading to the Senate. So there is a ways to go yet.

"There's plenty of water. It's just not in the right location." -- Colorado state Rep. Don Marostica (R-Loveland), referring to HB 1141

April 17, 2008

Acknowledging the Land Use-Water Availability Nexus...in Alberta?

Albertamap I told a friend that I often think of Alberta as the "Wyoming of Canada". Not only is it energy-rich, but it also has that kind of independent attitude that distrusts government at all levels, especially federal governments. Come to think of it, a comparison to Texas might be more apropos (it and Alberta have approximately the same land area), but I'm closer to Wyoming. But you get my point. It's a "red" province.

That is why this story by Renata D'Aliesio in the 15 April 2008 Calgary Herald threw me for a loop. Premier Ed Stelmach is proposing a sweeping change in the way Alberta makes land-use decisions, and it is based on water availability. Given Alberta's "Wild West" reputation and the fact Premier Stelmach is not exactly a flaming liberal, this change is indeed something.

From the story:

In a draft copy of the province's sweeping land-use framework obtained by the Herald, the government concedes Alberta's development has reached "a tipping point." Albertans' quality of life will deteriorate, the report warns, if the province sticks with what it calls its current laissez-faire approach to planning.

"If we want our children to enjoy the same quality of life that the current generations have, we need a new land-use system," says a December draft of the government's land-use framework, a blueprint for overhauling planning decisions in Alberta.

The blueprint calls for dividing Alberta into six regions according to major watersheds. The regions would be expected to create individual land plans tied to their water limits. [emboldening mine]

This is not a done deal, however; there are other necessary conditions:

New provincial policies and laws, which still have to be hashed out, would provide the guidelines for these plans, which require cabinet approval.

The government's blueprint identifies key hot spots in need of immediate attention, urging:

- "Metropolitan plans" for the Calgary and Edmonton regions that promote high-density infill development, intensify transportation corridors and establish a direction for future growth;

- Special attention to pressures in southern Alberta, which has the largest population, but the least amount of water. A regional plan here would consider how much coal bed methane drilling the Calgary-Edmonton corridor could support and outline development limits on the Rockies' environmentally sensitive eastern slopes;

- The introduction of a growth plan for oilsands-rich northeast Alberta so the burgeoning region is prepared to handle billions of dollars in additional capital investment.

This comes a decade after Alberta shelved regional planning, so this is quite a change. But not everyone is in favor of this, and the powerful energy industry is casting a wary eye towards the blueprint.

Time will tell, but Alberta deserves kudos for trying to plan land use around water availability.

"Without planning, we have a tyranny of small decisions." -- Steve Kennett, Pembina Institute, an Alberta environmental think tank

April 03, 2008

New Policies on 'Waters of the US' Jurisdiction

Header

Jane Rowan, President of the American Water Resources Association(AWRA), posted this item on the AWRA blog.

She begins:

New guidance to determine federal jurisdiction of some “waters of the United States” may lead to a more holistic view of the watershed and justify a National Water Policy.

On June 5, 2007, the Assistant Secretary of the Army and the Assistant Administrator for Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), signed into effect a Memorandum for the Corps of Engineers Director of Civil Works (Corps) and EPA Regional Administrators to coordinate on Jurisdictional Determinations (JDs) under Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404. This charge to collaboratively document JDs is a result of the Supreme Court decisions made under Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County vs. The US Army Corps of Engineers S 531 U.S. 159 (2001) (‘‘SWANCC’’) and the 2006 Supreme Court consolidated cases Rapanos v. U.S. and Carabell v. U.S. (known as the “Rapanos” decision).

And here's her ending [emboldening mine]:

Our nation must think creatively about implementing a water policy where all governmental agencies – federal, state, and local – apply similar methods to adequately value water resources to wisely manage their use.

Read her entire post - it's good stuff.

"Legislatures respond, they seldom lead." -- Jack Davies, former Minnesota state senator

March 26, 2008

Lester Brown's Plan B 3.0: Saving Civilization, One Planet at a Time

Lester R. Brown, who's been around forever and productive that entire time, has just published his revised Plan B 3.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization. He is Founder and President of the Earth Policy Institute (EPI).

Here is the Table of Contents (T of C), from where you can download the entire book for free. You can also buy copies on the WWW site.

Below is the press release from EPI.

6a00d8341bf80a53ef00e5517b5d58883_2

“In late summer 2007, reports of ice melting were coming at a frenetic pace. Experts were ‘stunned’ when an area of Arctic sea ice almost twice the size of Britain disappeared in a single week,” writes Lester R. Brown in his new book, Plan B 3.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization (W.W. Norton & Company).

“Nearby, the Greenland ice sheet was melting so fast that huge chunks of ice weighing several billion tons were breaking off and sliding into the sea, triggering minor earthquakes,” notes Brown, President and Founder of the Earth Policy Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based independent environmental research organization.

These recent developments are alarming scientists. If we cannot stop this melting of the Greenland ice sheet, sea level will eventually rise 23 feet, inundating many of the world’s coastal cities and the rice-growing river deltas of Asia. It will force several hundred million people from their homes, generating an unimaginable flood of rising-sea refugees.

“We need not go beyond ice melting to see that civilization is in trouble. Business-as-usual is no longer a viable option. It is time for Plan B,” Brown says in Plan B 3.0, which was produced with major funding from the Farview, Lannan, Summit, and Wallace Genetic foundations, the U.N. Population Fund, Fred and Alice Stanback, and Andrew Stevenson.

“Plan B 3.0 is a comprehensive plan for reversing the trends that are fast undermining our future. Its four overriding goals are to stabilize climate, stabilize population, eradicate poverty, and restore the earth’s damaged ecosystems,” says Brown. “Failure to reach any one of these goals will likely mean failure to reach the others as well.”

Continuing rapid population growth is weakening governments in scores of countries. The annual addition of 70 million people to world population is concentrated in countries where water tables are falling and wells are going dry, forests are shrinking, soils are eroding, and grasslands are turning into desert. As this backlog of unresolved problems grows, stresses mount and weaker governments begin to break down.

The defining characteristic of a failing state is the inability of a government to provide security for its people. Somalia, Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Haiti, and Pakistan are among the better known examples. Each year the number of failing states increases. “Failing states,” notes Brown, “are an early sign of a failing civilization.”

“Even as the accumulating backlog of unresolved problems is leading to a breakdown of governments in weaker states, new stresses are emerging. Among these are rising oil prices as the world approaches peak oil, rising food prices as an ever larger share of the U.S. grain harvest is converted into fuel for cars, and the spreading fallout from climate change.”

“At the heart of the climate-stabilizing initiative cited above is a detailed plan to cut carbon dioxide emissions 80 percent by 2020 in order to hold the future temperature rise to a minimum. This initiative has three major components—raising energy efficiency, developing renewable sources of energy, and expanding the earth’s tree cover. Reaching these goals,” says Brown, “will mean the world can phase out all coal-fired power plants.”

In setting the carbon reduction goals for Plan B, we did not ask “What do politicians think is politically feasible?” but rather “What do we think is needed to prevent irreversible climate change?” This is not Plan A: business-as-usual. This is Plan B: an all-out response at wartime speed proportionate to the magnitude of the threats facing civilization.

“We are in a race between tipping points in natural and political systems,” says Brown. “Which will come first? Can we mobilize the political will to phase out coal-fired power plants before the melting of the Greenland ice sheet becomes irreversible? Can we halt deforestation in the Amazon basin before it so weakens the forest that it becomes vulnerable to fire and is destroyed? Can we cut carbon emissions fast enough to save the Himalayan glaciers that feed the major rivers of Asia?”

Although efforts have been made in recent decades to raise the efficiency of energy use, the potential is still largely untapped. For example, one easy and profitable way to cut carbon emissions worldwide is simply to replace incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescent bulbs that use only a fourth as much electricity. Turning to more efficient lighting can reduce world electricity use by 12 percent—enough to close 705 of the world’s 2,370 coal-fired power plants.

In the United States, buildings—commercial and residential—account for close to 40 percent of carbon emissions. Retrofitting an existing building typically can cut energy use by 20–50 percent. The next step, shifting to carbon-free electricity to heat, cool, and light the building completes the transformation to a zero-carbon emissions building.

We can also reduce carbon emissions by moving down the food chain. The energy used to provide the typical American diet and that used for personal transportation are roughly equal. A plant-based diet requires about one fourth as much energy as a diet rich in red meat. The reduction in carbon emissions in shifting from a red meat–rich diet to a plant-based diet is about the same as that in shifting from a Chevrolet Suburban SUV to a Toyota Prius hybrid car.

In the Plan B energy economy, wind is the centerpiece. It is abundant, low cost, and widely distributed; it scales easily and can be developed quickly. The goal is to develop at wartime speed 3 million megawatts of wind-generating capacity by 2020, enough to meet 40 percent of the world’s electricity needs. This would require 1.5 million wind turbines of 2 megawatts each. These turbines could be produced on assembly lines by reopening closed automobile plants, much as bombers were assembled in auto plants during World War II.

In the development of renewable energy resources, Brown notes, we are seeing the emergence of some big-time thinking—thinking that recognizes the urgency of moving away from fossil fuels. Nowhere is this more evident than in Texas, where the state government is coordinating an effort to build 23,000 megawatts of wind-generating capacity (the equivalent of 23 coal-fired power plants). This will supply enough electricity to satisfy the residential needs of over 11 million Texans—half the state’s population. Oil wells go dry and coal seams run out, but the earth’s wind resources cannot be depleted.

Solar technologies also provide exciting opportunities for getting us off the carbon treadmill. Sales of solar-electric panels are doubling every two years. Rooftop solar water heaters are spreading fast in Europe and China. In China, some 40 million homes now get their hot water from rooftop solar heaters. The plan is to nearly triple this to 110 million homes by 2020, supplying hot water to 380 million Chinese.

Large-scale solar thermal power plants are under construction or planned in California, Florida, Spain, and Algeria. Algeria, a leading world oil exporter, is planning to develop 6,000 megawatts of solar-thermal electric-generating capacity, which it will feed into the European grid via an undersea cable. The electricity generated from this single project is enough to supply the residential needs of a country the size of Switzerland.

Investment in geothermal energy for both heating and power generation is also growing fast, notes Brown. Iceland now heats nearly 90 percent of its homes with geothermal energy, virtually eliminating the use of coal for home heating. The Philippines gets 25 percent of its electricity from geothermal power plants. The United States has 61 geothermal projects under way in the geothermally rich western states.

The combination of gas-electric hybrid cars and advanced-design wind turbines has set the stage for the evolution of an entirely new automotive fuel economy. If the battery storage of the typical hybrid car is doubled and a plug-in capacity is added so that batteries can be recharged at night, then we could do our short-distance driving—commuting to work, grocery shopping, and so on—almost entirely with cheap, wind-generated electricity.

This would permit us to run our cars largely on renewable electricity—and at the gasoline-equivalent cost of less than $1 per gallon. Several major automakers are coming to market with plug-in hybrids or electric cars.

With business as usual (Plan A), the environmental trends that are undermining our future will continue. More and more states will fail until civilization itself begins to unravel. “Time is our scarcest resource. We are crossing natural thresholds that we cannot see and violating deadlines that we do not recognize,” says Brown. “These deadlines are set by nature. Nature is the timekeeper, but we cannot see the clock.”

The key to restructuring the world energy economy is to get the market to tell the environmental truth by incorporating into prices the indirect costs of burning fossil fuels, such as climate disruption and air pollution. To do this, we propose adopting a carbon tax that will reflect these indirect costs and offsetting it by lowering income taxes. We propose a worldwide carbon tax to be phased in at $20 per ton each year between 2008 and 2020, stabilizing at $240 per ton. This initiative, which would be offset at every step with a reduction in income taxes, would simultaneously discourage fossil fuel use and encourage investment in renewable sources of energy.

“Saving civilization is not a spectator sport,” says Brown. “We have reached a point in the deteriorating relationship between us and the earth’s natural systems where we all have to become political activists. Every day counts. We all have a stake in civilization’s survival.”

“We can all make lifestyle changes, but unless we restructure the economy and do it quickly we will almost certainly fail. We need to persuade our elected representatives and national leaders to support the environmental tax restructuring and other changes outlined in Plan B. Beyond this, each of us can pick an issue that is important to us at the local level, such as phasing out coal-fired power plants, shifting to more-efficient light bulbs, or developing a comprehensive local recycling program, and get to work on it.”

We all need to educate ourselves on environmental issues. For its part, the Earth Policy Institute is making Plan B 3.0 available for downloading free of charge from its
WWW site.

“It is decision time,” says Brown. “Like earlier civilizations that got into environmental trouble, we have to make a choice. We can stay with business as usual and watch our economy decline and our civilization unravel, or we can adopt Plan B and be the generation that mobilizes to save civilization. Our generation will make the decision, but it will affect life on earth for all generations to come.”

"We are here on Earth to do good to others. What the others are here for, I don't know." -- W.H. Auden

March 14, 2008

'The Unforeseen': Review

About a week ago I posted an item about The Unforeseen, Laura Dunn's documentary about land development issues in the Austin, TX, area.

This morning on NPR's Morning Edition featured a review by critic Kenneth Turan of the Los Angeles Times.

Turan makes some good points. The film is not the typical 'tree-hugger' flick; in fact, Dunn does not demonize real-estate developer Gary Bradley, and that is one of the film's strengths. She reports on a land-use issue and the resultant '30 years' war' it fomented. The row led to an Austin environmental movement that stopped growth, and that produced a property-rights backlash that helped elect Geroge W. Bush governor. 

Unfortunately, the worst fears of many came true, as the Barton Springs area was not 'saved'.

Definitely a must-see.

"No good deed goes unpunished." -- Clare Boothe Luce

More Ethanol Production = More Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia?

Hypoxia_landWell, the chickens are coming home to roost.

As I reported last April, the rush to plant more corn to produce more ethanol may have deleterious effects on our efforts to reduce the size of the hypoxic "dead" zone in the Gulf of Mexico.

There is now more than speculation about these effects.

Thanks to John Fleck I came across this post on Simon Donner's Maribo blog. Here is a large part of what Donner says:

The Mississippi dumps a massive amount of nitrogen, largely in the form of the soluble ion nitrate, into the Gulf each spring. It promotes the growth of a lot of algae, which eventually sinks to the bottom and decomposes. This consumes much of the oxygen in the bottom waters, making life tough for bottom-dwelling fish and creatures like shrimp. The Dead Zone has reached over 20,000 km2 in recent years.

The primary source of all that nitrogen is fertilizer applied to corn grown in the Midwest and Hypoxic_zone_graph Central US. Reducing the Dead Zone to less than 5000 km2 in size, as is suggested in US policy, will require up to a 55% decrease in nitrogen levels in the Mississippi.

The new US Energy Policy calls for 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels by the year 2022. Of that, 15 billion can be produced from corn starch. Our study found meeting those would cause a 10-34% increase in nitrogen loading to the Gulf of Mexico.

Meeting the hypoxia reduction goal was already a difficult challenge. If the US pursues this biofuels strategy, it will be impossible to shrink the Dead Zone without radically changing the US food production system. The one option would be to dramatically reduce the non-ethanol uses of corn. Since the majority of corn grain is used as animal feed, a trade-off between using corn to fuel animals and using corn to fuel cars could emerge.

Read the abstract of the article published by Donner and his colleague Christopher Kucharik.

For more reading on the subject: Zachary Sugg sent me this link to a publication from the World Resources Institute (WRI), Thirst for Corn: What 2007 Plantings Could Mean for the Environment, by Liz Marshall.

"If at first you don't succeed, transform your data set." -- Unknown

November 25, 2007

Jim Thebaut's New Film: 'The American Southwest: Are We Running Dry?'

RdsmnocropJim Thebaut, president of the non-profit The Chronicles Group and the man who made the landmark film Running Dry about the world humanitarian water crisis, is back behind the camera.

Until about two weeks ago I had not encountered Jim for about two years, after having seen his film and met him at the Third World Water Forum (3WWF) in Kyoto, Japan, in March 2003.  The film so impressed me that I invited him to the University of New Mexico, my former institution, to show the film and meet with the university and local communities. Both he and the film were huge successes.

So I was pleasantly surprised when I saw Jim sitting in the breakfast room st the Embassy Suites Hotel in Albuquerque, NM, during the AWRA meeting. He told me he was in New Mexico waiting for the film crew for his new water documentary, The American Southwest: Are We Running Dry? Below is a copy of the press release.

Download southwest_press_release_14_nov_2007.pdf

Grants to support the flim have been made by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA), American States Water Company (ASWC), as well as other organizations. Vegas PBS will present the film, which will debut in Fall 2008 on Western PBS stations followed by live in-studio simulcast town hall meetings.

Jim's skills as a filmmaker will be welcomed to depict a complicated problem, one that affects us all, not just the USA Southwest. My hope is that, given the sponsors, this will not be more of the "SOS" but a critical look at what needs to be done and what might happen if no substantive changes are effected. Jim assured me that this will be the case - it will be a solutions-based approach. 

I hope to see discussions of:

  • coordination of land use planning and water planning (both quality and quantity);
  • regional approaches, even those involving parts of different states (e.g., NW Arizona and Southern Nevada) ; and
  • what will happen if the Southwest is in fact in the midst of a "megadrought" period (c. 40-50 years), i.e., a view of the apocalypse and how we will cope with it.

See my 21 July 2007 post, "The Struggle to Secure Water in the Southwest USA".

But if anyone can present the real story, it's Jim Thebaut. I'll anxiously await The American Southwest: Are We Running Dry?

"Civilization exists by hydrological consent, subject to change without notice" -- my apologies to Will Durant (his original quote had "geological")

"The greatest national folly we could commit would be to exhaust the Treasury trying to make over the West in the image of Illinois."  -- Texas historian Walter Prescott Webb, Harper's magazine, May 1957, as reported by Marc Reisner, Cadillac Desert, 1986 (p. 5)

October 11, 2007

Does Judge Parker Live in Eastern Nevada?

John Fleck alerted me to this 'Judge Parker' comic strip. Hmmm...methinks the Judge is tackling the issue of "water farms".

The last panel says:

"A company in Nevada has been slowly buying agricultural properties all over the West."

"So?"

"They're buying the property to gain access to the water underneath."

I070930jp

(Courtesy King Features)

You go, Judge!

"Our society...[should be more] than lower taxes, larger homes, grandiose vacations, material consumption, and gladiator entertainment." - Unknown, Letter to the Editor, Corvallis Gazette-Times,  6 February 2002 [from Bill Robbins, Oregon State University]

August 13, 2007

The Threatening Storm: Katrina, New Orleans, and the Future

Great article by Michael Grunwald from Time. Check it out here.

Grunwald pins the blame for the Katrina disaster squarely on the shoulders of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. But it is not just the Corps; it's Congress, pork-barrel politics, lobbyists, et al. It's all of us.

We don't have any national water policy. "It's a sinister system," says American Water Resources Association (AWRA) president Gerry Galloway, a former Army brigadier general who is now a visiting scholar at the Corps. "Water is a national-security issue, but we treat it like the Wild West. The big guns get the money."

And the future is not getting any brighter.

Here are some more Katrina stories from USA Today: about basic services and luxury condos.

"There are more horses' asses than horses." -- Cicero

July 29, 2007

Hurricane Katrina and the Impact of Engineers

Ken Reid, Executive Director of the American Water Resources Association (AWRA), saw this in the EWRI electronic newsletter and sent it to me. I decided to post it after attending the Universities Council on Water Resources (UCOWR)/National Institutes of Water Resources (NIWR) 2007 Annual Meeting in Boise, ID, where one of my engineer colleagues reported "almost zero progress" in restoring New Orleans. Another colleague related how he had told his students for over 20 years that in the USA, great devastation could be caused by a "water natural disaster" if 1) a "megaflood" inundated a large city; or 2) a powerful hurricane struck a coastal metropolis. He said New Orleans was a "twofer".

I also heard Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) speak last February on the devastation and suffering she saw by helicopter a few days after Katrina struck. She couldn't bear to see the people trapped on roofs, some with the bodies of friends and relatives, desperately signaling for help that was far too long in arriving.

Hurricane Katrina and the Impact of Engineers

Lod

From Lopez, John A., 2006. The Multiple Lines of Defense Strategy to Sustain Coastal Louisiana. Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation, Metairie, LA (at www.saveourlake.org).

The Thoughts of Stephan Butler, P.E., M.ASCE

Office of Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
2007 ASCE Congressional Fellow

Note: Stephan Butler is a participant in ASCE's Congressional Fellowship program, which since 1996 has given engineers the opportunity to spend a year's term working in the U.S. Congress.

In April’s Congressional Fellow Report I touched on the importance of access and proximity to our elected officials and briefly described my job function and the policy proposals on which I’ve been working. This month I would like to drill deeper into those topics, illustrating the discussion with stories from my visits to Louisiana.

When I arrived on Capitol Hill I made visiting Louisiana my first order of business, on the belief that I would be better able to consider federal policy matters and their implications on Louisiana if I understood the problems being faced by its citizens while rebuilding and recovering from hurricanes Katrina and Rita. With this goal in mind, I met with some of the citizens and professional groups involved in the rebuilding of New Orleans. I was especially touched by my meetings with representatives from the grassroots groups Levees.org, the Episcopal Relief and Development Office of Disaster Response, Jericho Road (Episcopal Housing Initiative) and All Congregations Together. These groups represent the residents of New Orleans who, acknowledging a present leadership vacuum in the local community, have banded together to reconstruct their own neighborhoods and communities. Jericho Road, for instance, aims to be the catalyst that will bring displaced families home by providing quality housing opportunities for low income families. They hope their efforts will lead to long term housing collaborations throughout the city and in that way empower individuals, rehabilitate neighborhoods and transform communities.

I also met with Levees.org founder Sandy Rosenthal, whose group is advocating for an independent bipartisan Levee Commission to investigate the failure of the federal flood protection in metro New Orleans. The grassroots group, which now numbers over 12,000 members, was recognized as a “powerful force” by Congressman Bobby Jindal, who stated the following: “The voice of Levees.org members over the past year has been a powerful force in helping members of Congress and the White House see the importance of providing South Louisiana with Category 5 hurricane protection and giving Louisiana a share of offshore energy royalties so that Louisiana can begin to rebuild its coasts."


Also, I was fortunate to get a personalized tour of the Port of New Orleans with Deborah Ducote Keller, P.E., Director of the Port Development Division, past president of the ASCE’s New Orleans Branch and resident of St. Bernard Parish. During the tour of the facilities and the adjacent neighborhoods, I found myself overwhelmed and in shock. As a World Trade Center first responder after 9/11, I thought I understood devastation, but the impact on New Orleans stretches for mile after square mile. Vast regions of the city and surrounding parishes are obliterated. The houses continue to be safety and health hazards, as they still need to be gutted and demolished; the roadways have lost their top courses, are buckled, and have sink holes; other crucial infrastructure is similarly destroyed.

Seeing the scope of the problem confirmed my belief that I made the correct decision by coming to work on Capitol Hill, which has allowed me to bring engineering ideas, such as the Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation’s work on multiple lines of defense and better land use practices, to Washington, D.C., for consideration by law makers.

More broadly, I believe that the USA’s infrastructure systems have deteriorated to the point where this country’s future economic competitiveness is in jeopardy and our elected officials, who are entrusted with safeguarding our nation’s future, have ignored the warnings. Reversing or even arresting the decline of infrastructure systems will require creative solutions and visionary leadership from the engineering community.


In this context, there are two readily-apparent ways for engineers to affect change. First, engineers need to position themselves better by seeking public office, which would provide them with proximity and access to the legislative process. Second, in order to help Congress to better understand technology transfers and complex scientific principles before implementing new policies, the engineering discipline should actively recruit and pitch its professionals for placement on lawmaker and committee staffs. This second tactic is likely to require a cultural shift in the engineering profession. Talented engineers will not readily pursue alternative but important career paths if they think that their work will be dismissed or devalued by the profession, including its societies and licensing boards. Likewise, lawmakers and committees are unlikely to understand the benefits of having engineers on their staffs and deferring to their judgment on important social issues without a significant public relations campaign by the profession. The stakes are high enough, however, that extreme measures are necessary.

I firmly believe that engineers must get involved in the political process in order to affect change, and I urge every engineer who reads this article to consider competing for an appointment to the Congressional Fellowship or support an employee who would like to do so. The Fellowship provides one of the best ways to share your expertise and experiences with our country’s top decision-makers. Also, it allows you to learn new approaches to communication, managing, problem-solving and advocating for vital public works projects.

"And Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job." -- George W. Bush, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, to then-FEMA Director Michael Brown, 2 September 2005.

July 21, 2007

The Struggle to Secure Water in the Southwest USA

While trying to think of a title for this post, I realized why not just parrot the title (with a "USA" added) of the May-June 2007 issue of Western Water magazine, published bi-monthly by the Water Education Foundation (WEF) in Sacramento, CA. You will have to pay $3 to read the entire issue but it's worth it.

Before I delve into the article and the issues it broaches, let me say that the WEF is an excellent source for information and educational materials for teachers, students, and others interested in the mysterious, wonderful, frustrating milieu we call "Western water". Check it out. 

Mayjune07ww

Back to the article - Editor Rita Sudman Schmidt assembled a group of Colorado Basin "movers and shakers" to discuss the region's water future. The idea for this discussion had been floated to the WEF by Rita Maguire, former head of Arizona's DWR (ADWR) and now CEO of Think AZ, a research institute working on public policy issues in AZ. Maguire wanted to look beyond Arizona and the WEF was the mechanism for her to do this. She wrote a white paper, and the group addressed some of the issues she raised in it.

I met Maguire in Merida, Mexico, several years ago when we both spoke at a workshop organized by the US and Mexican National Academies of Sciences. She impressed me.

Appropriately, the meeting took place in Las Vegas last March with Maguire facilitating. The discussion group consisted of:

  • Patricia Mulroy, Southern Nevada Water Authority
  • Herb Guenther, Arizona DWR
  • Jeff Kightlinger, Metropolitan Water District of SoCal
  • Jerry Zimmerman, Colorado River Board of California
  • Dennis Strong, Utah DWR
  • Jayne Harkins, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation - Lower Colorado Region Office
  • Sid Wilson, Central Arizona Project

Note that three Colorado Basin states are not represented: New Mexico, Wyoming, and Colorado.

I won't give you a blow-by-blow account of the article, but some of my impressions. Be forewarned: this may be some pretty stream-of-consciousness type stuff.

One of the things that struck me was the continued growth in the Las Vegas area that is spilling over into Mohave County, Arizona - both to the southeast (Kingman, AZ, area) and northeast (Mesquite, NV area) of Las Vegas.

Arizonar1c1_2I drove through Mesquite four years ago en route to Las Vegas from Albuquerque and was amazed at what it had become in the 15 years since I had last been there. I also drove through St. George, Utah, and was similarly awed. It was fitting that before seeing either place, I had driven past Lake Powell, which at the time was about 35% of capacity. The last time I had seen Lake Powell and Glen Canyon Dam was the spring of 1983, when Reclamation was sweating the lake spilling over the top of the dam. 

Kingman is off the above map, about 80 miles southeast of Boulder City/Hoover Dam on Highway 93. It is on Interstate 40 (old Route 66); see the map below. Kingman is the seat of Mohave County, with a metropolitan area of about 35,000. Marizona I always think of it (albeit unfairly) as nothing more than the childhood home of Andy Devine (born in Flagstaff, actually) - who played Jingles, Wild Bill Hickok's comedic sidekick in the 1950s TV series, and hosted the kiddie show Andy's Gang - and little else. I'm showing my age.

I read several months ago of a developer's plans to build 60,000 homes in the Kingman area. I thought it was a misprint. How many people can local Dairy Queens employ? But it was not a misprint. According to the Western Water article, the NW corner of Arizona will grow by 500,000 people in the next 25 years! Las Vegas is fueling the growth. A new bridge is being constructed across the Colorado River just below Hoover Dam. When completed in 2010 it will connect Interstate 15 with Highway 93 and significantly shorten the commuting time between Kingman and Las Vegas.

Now, my take on all this.

  1. Where is the water for all the new residents in NW Arizona and elsewhere coming from? Ground water is being increasingly invoked as a potential source; ADWR is studying aquifers in Mohave County. But is pumping ground water sustainable? And how about the transboundary nature of certain aquifers? Current compacts among states really don't deal with ground water very well, if at all [see my 15 July 2007 post]. When ground water is treated, it's often viewed as "tributary" ground water - connected to surface water. But if you are pumping from depths of 2000 feet, that assumption may not be a good one. And what do you do when the ground water is gone?
  2. What the article further illustrated to me is the continuing disconnect between land use planning and water planning. We recognize it, but do little about it. Do we really want or need 500,000 more people in NW Arizona? Remember, that growth is due to growth in another state (Nevada) that is spilling into Arizona as people look for cheaper housing. In the face of higher energy prices, are all most of these people going to commute to the Las Vegas area? Are these communities really supposed to be sustainable for 100 or 200 years?
  3. The article reminded me of a perceptive comment from a US government scientist a few years ago. He was giving a Southwest USA drought talk, and afterwards, he said that what drove him crazy was seeing Western governors going to Washington with their palms outstretched asking for drought-relief money while preaching the virtues of growth back home. Political courage, anyone?
  4. What really disturbs me is that these problems are regional in nature, yet we are dealing with them piecemeal - sometimes not even at the state level, but at the county or municipal level. What Clark County (Las Vegas area) does influences Mohave County and the state of Arizona. Yet Clark County doesn't factor that into its decisions and policies. The converse is true as well. But we all examine the problems from our own little perspective - what's good for AZ, or NV, or Kingman, caring little about how our decisions impact the other folks.
  5. With all due respect to the discussants, who are very bright people, I did not read anything provocative or visionary. The people represented certain water constituencies, so I didn't expect them to propose solutions that might counter their constituencies' agendas.   
  6. A friend of mine recently told me he thought the future would see power being concentrated in smaller governmental units, away from states, to counties and municipalities. In the Southwest USA, I think the opposite might occur, where "regional authorities" run the show. Given our track record, that might not be such a bad idea. Certainly, draconian measures may be required. But we need to do a better job than we are doing now.
  7. Andy's Gang was ahead of its time, what with Froggy the Gremlin and his wonderful double entendres, his foil, played by