The value of marsh restoration for flood risk reduction in an urban estuary

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | March 21st, 2024

The Value of Water Supply Reliability in Urban Water Systems

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management (Elsevier) | January 4th, 1994

Reliability is an important dimension of urban water supply. While out-of-pocket losses appear small, water customers place high values on reliability. This demand for re

Reliability is an important dimension of urban water supply. While out-of-pocket losses appear small, water customers place high values on reliability. This demand for reliability can be measured by contingent valuation methods, while the costs of providing various levels of reliability can be estimated through hydrologic simulation. A framework for optimizing reliability is presented and the contingent valuation survey is described. Results from three Colorado towns are presented.

The Vernalis Adaptive Management Program (VAMP): Report of the 2010 Review Panel

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | May 11th, 2010

Panel members were asked by the Delta Science Program to carry out an independent review of a 12-year VAMP (Vernalis Adaptive Management Plan) experimental program design

Panel members were asked by the Delta Science Program to carry out an independent review of a 12-year VAMP (Vernalis Adaptive Management Plan) experimental program designed to develop water management measures that would provide protection to juvenile Chinook salmon migrating through the San Joaquin River system and associated Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta (Delta) waterways. The Charge to the Panel was expressed as a series of three questions that the Panel was obligated to address: 1) Do the results to date from the VAMP study provide useful scientific information about the relationship between salmon survival and each of the following factors: Flows, Exports, and Barrier installation at the head of Old River? 2) How can the results from the VAMP to date be used to inform the State Water Resources Control Board's (SWRCB) current efforts to review and potentially revise the San Joaquin River flow objectives and their implementation? 3) How can the experiences to date from the VAMP study be used in a scientific manner to inform future monitoring and study efforts related to determining appropriate flow, operational, and water quality requirements to protect San Joaquin River fisheries (specifically Chinook salmon and steelhead)?

The vertical distribution and biological transport of marine microplastics across the epipelagic and mesopelagic water column

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | July 6th, 2019

Plastic waste has been documented in nearly all types of marine environments and has been found in species spanning all levels of marine food webs. Within these marine en

Plastic waste has been documented in nearly all types of marine environments and has been found in species spanning all levels of marine food webs. Within these marine environments, deep pelagic waters encompass the largest ecosystems on Earth. We lack a comprehensive understanding of the concentrations, cycling, and fate of plastic waste in sub-surface waters, constraining our ability to implement effective, large-scale policy and conservation strategies. We used remotely operated vehicles and engineered purpose-built samplers to collect and examine the distribution of microplastics in the Monterey Bay pelagic ecosystem at water column depths ranging from 5 to 1000 m. Laser Raman spectroscopy was used to identify microplastic particles collected from throughout the deep pelagic water column, with the highest concentrations present at depths between 200 and 600 m. Examination of two abundant particle feeders in this ecosystem, pelagic red crabs (Pleuroncodes planipes) and giant larvaceans (Bathochordaeus stygius), showed that microplastic particles readily flow from the environment into coupled water column and seafloor food webs. Our findings suggest that one of the largest and currently underappreciated reservoirs of marine microplastics may be contained within the water column and animal communities of the deep sea.

The Water Districts of California

Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) | April 1st, 1979

The Water Footprint of California’s Energy System, 1990–2012

Pacific Institute | February 1st, 2015

A new article by Julian Fulton and  Heather Cooley  evaluates the amount of water consumed in meeting California’s energy needs – also referred to as the water foot

A new article by Julian Fulton and  Heather Cooley  evaluates the amount of water consumed in meeting California’s energy needs – also referred to as the water footprint of energy. The article, published in Environmental Science and Technology, examines how the water footprint of energy changed between 1990 and 2012 – finding that the amount of water consumed substantially increased over recent decades without utilizing more of the state’s water resources, but rather by relying more heavily on water resources from outside the state. Much of that increase is attributable to the production of bioethanol, which recent energy policies have promoted to meet state greenhouse gas targets. Fulton and Cooley demonstrate that while efforts to mitigate climate change in California have been successful in reducing greenhouse gases, these policies may have shifted burdens from energy to water, rather than alleviate them. They conclude that more integrated analysis and planning of water and energy systems are needed to ensure that climate adaptation and mitigation strategies do not work at cross purposes. Abstract: California’s energy and water systems are interconnected and have evolved in recent decades in response to changing conditions and policy goals. For this analysis, we use a water footprint methodology to examine water requirements of energy products consumed in California between 1990 and 2012. We combine energy production, trade, and consumption data with estimates of the blue and green water footprints of energy products. We find that while California’s total annual energy consumption increased by just 2.6% during the analysis period, the amount of water required to produce that energy grew by 260%. Nearly all of the increase in California’s energy-related water footprint was associated with water use in locations outside of California, where energy products that the state consumes were, and continue to be, produced. We discuss these trends and the implications for California’s future energy system as it relates to climate change and expected water management challenges inside and outside the state. Our analysis shows that while California’s energy policies have supported climate mitigation efforts, they have increased vulnerability to climate impacts, especially greater hydrologic uncertainty. More integrated analysis and planning are needed to ensure that climate adaptation and mitigation strategies do not work at cross purposes.

The water footprint of water conservation using shade balls in California

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | July 16th, 2018

The interest in quick technologic fixes to complex water problems increases during extreme hydroclimatic events. However, past evidence shows that such fixes might be ass

The interest in quick technologic fixes to complex water problems increases during extreme hydroclimatic events. However, past evidence shows that such fixes might be associated with unintended consequences. We revisit the idea of using shade balls in the Los Angeles reservoir to reduce evaporation during the recent drought in California, and question its sustainability by revealing the water footprint of this technologic water conservation solution.

The Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins Fifth Edition

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) | May 31st, 2018

The preparation and adoption of water quality control plans (Basin Plans) is required by the California Water Code (Section 13240) and supported by the Federal Clean Wat

The preparation and adoption of water quality control plans (Basin Plans) is required by the California Water Code (Section 13240) and supported by the Federal Clean Water Act. Section 303 of the Clean Water Act requires states to adopt water quality standards which "consist of the designated uses of the navigable waters involved and the water quality criteria for such waters based upon such uses." According to Section 13050 of the California Water Code, Basin Plans consist of a designation or establishment for the waters within a specified area of beneficial uses to be protected, water quality objectives to protect those uses, and a program of implementation needed for achieving the objectives. State law also requires that Basin Plans conform to the policies set forth in the Water Code beginning with Section 13000 and any state policy for water quality control. Since beneficial uses, together with their corresponding water quality objectives, can be defined per federal regulations as water quality standards, the Basin Plans are regulatory references for meeting the state and federal requirements for water quality control (40 CFR 131.20). One significant difference between the state and federal programs is that California's basin plans establish standards for ground waters in addition to surface waters. Basin Plans are adopted and amended by Regional Water Boards under a structured process involving full public participation and state environmental review. Basin Plans and amendments thereto, do not become effective until approved by the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board). Regulatory provisions must be approved by the Office of Administrative Law. Adoption or revision of surface water standards are subject to the approval of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Basin Plans complement water quality control plans adopted by the State Water Board, such as the Water Quality Control Plans for Temperature Control and Ocean Waters. It is the intent of the State and Regional Water Boards to maintain the Basin Plans in an updated and readily available edition that reflects the current water quality control program. This Basin Plan covers the entire Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. A separate Basin Plan covers the Tulare Lake Basin. The Basin Plan was first adopted in 1975. In 1989, a second edition was published. The second edition incorporated all the amendments which were adopted and approved since 1975, updated the Basin Plan to include new state policies and programs, restructured and edited the Basin Plan for clarity, and incorporated the results of triennial reviews conducted in 1984 and 1987. The Third Edition - 1994 incorporated all amendments approved between 1989 and 1994, included new state policies and programs, edited and restructured the Basin Plan to make it consistent with other regional and state plans, and substantively amended sections dealing with beneficial uses, objectives, and implementation programs. The current edition (Fourth Edition - 1998) incorporates two new amendments approved since 1994. One amendment deals with compliance schedules in permits and the other addresses agricultural subsurface drainage discharges. In this Basin Plan, "Regional Water Board" refers to the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board and "State Water Board" refers to the State Water Resources Control Board. Appendix Updates and amendments  are at the State Water Board "Basin Plan" page

The Water Rights Process

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | June 1st, 2002

A water right is a legal entitlement authorizing water to be diverted from a specified source and put to beneficial, nonwasteful use. Water rights are property rights, bu

A water right is a legal entitlement authorizing water to be diverted from a specified source and put to beneficial, nonwasteful use. Water rights are property rights, but their holders do not own the water itself – they possess the right to use it. Some water rights require a permit or license from the State Water Resources Control Board, whose objective is to ensure that the state’s waters are put to the best possible use and that the public interest is served. In making decisions, the Board must keep three goals in mind: • Developing water resources in an orderly manner. • Preventing waste and unreasonable use of water. • Protecting the environment. The State Board’s duties are not limited to permits and licenses. It may be called upon to adjudicate water for entire systems or to act as a “referee” or fact-finder in court cases involving water rights.

The Well Fixer's Warning

The Atlantic | August 17th, 2021

The well fixer and I were standing at the edge of an almond orchard in the exhausted middle of California. It was late July, and so many wells on the farms of Madera Co

The well fixer and I were standing at the edge of an almond orchard in the exhausted middle of California. It was late July, and so many wells on the farms of Madera County were coming up dry that he was running out of parts to fix them. In this latest round of western drought, desperate voices were calling him at six in the morning and again at midnight. They were puzzled why their pumps were coughing up sand, the water’s flow to their orchards now a trickle.