Keywords:flood management, infrastructure, storage
The California Water Supply and Demand Model (CWSD) examines the ways in which California’s water supply and demand are likely to be affected...
The California Water Supply and Demand Model (CWSD) examines the ways in which California’s water supply and demand are likely to be affected by climate change; its purpose is to serve as a base for quantifying these impacts in economic terms. California’s water future is modeled under conditions of no adaptation to climate change, and under several projected water use adaptation scenarios taken from the literature; climate change adaptation scenarios include water used for energy, the urban or residential sector, and agriculture.
The main CWSD compares key categories of water inputs and outputs on a month-by-month basis to capture seasonality in water availability. A supplementary model allows for the main model’s beginning surface reservoir storage to result from water supply and demand interactions over a stylized previous 100 years. Three areas of water use are both especially critical and vulnerable to climatic change: the energy, agriculture, and urban sectors. In the energy module, water demand is a based on different scenarios of coal, nuclear and renewable power use, conservation technology, state population trends, and projected temperatures. In the agriculture module, crop and animal water use by county is a function of projected summer temperatures by county. In the urban module, residential, industrial/commercial, and public water use are based on projected levels of socio-economic growth.
The purpose of this Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation (SLWRI) Feasibility Report is to document the U.S. Department of Interior (Interior), Bureau of...
Surface water and groundwater management are often tightly linked, even when linkage is not intended or expected. This link is especially common in...
Surface water and groundwater management are often tightly linked, even when linkage is not intended or expected. This link is especially common in semi-arid regions, such as California. This paper summarizes a modeling study on the effects of ending long-term overdraft in California’s Central Valley, the state’s largest aquifer system. The study focuses on economic and operational aspects, such as surface water pumping and diversions, groundwater recharge, water scarcity, and the associated operating and water scarcity costs. This analysis uses CALVIN, a hydro-economic optimization model for California’s water resource system that suggests operational changes to minimize net system costs for a given set of conditions, such as ending long-term overdraft. Based on model results, ending overdraft might induce some major statewide operational changes, including large increases to Delta exports, more intensive conjunctive-use operations with increasing artificial and in-lieu recharge, and greater water scarcity for Central Valley agriculture. The statewide costs of ending roughly 1.2 maf yr of groundwater overdraft are at least $50 million per year from additional direct water shortage and additional operating costs. At its worst, the costs of ending Central Valley overdraft could be much higher, perhaps comparable to the recent economic effects of drought. Driven by recent state legislation to improve groundwater sustainability, ending groundwater overdraft has important implications statewide for water use and management, particularly in the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta. Ending Central Valley overdraft will amplify economic pressure to increase Delta water exports rather than reduce them, tying together two of California’s largest water management problems.
Surface water reservoirs provide water supply and flood management benefits by capturing water when available and storing it for use when needed. Surface...
Surface water reservoirs provide water supply and flood management benefits by capturing water when available and storing it for use when needed. Surface reservoirs are commonly operated more for seasonal or short-term inter-annual needs. Groundwater aquifers generally provide longer-term storage and a source of water and seasonal storage in areas where surface water is limited. This paper reviews the benefits and challenges of water storage in California’s evolving water system, and provides some quantitative insights from an integrated analysis of this system.
Water storage should not be viewed as isolated projects. For today’s water management objectives and conditions, surface water and groundwater storage should be considered and analyzed as parts of larger systems or portfolios of actions that include a wide variety of water sources, types and locations of storage, conveyance alternatives, and managing all forms of water demands. Such an integrated, multi-benefit perspective and analysis is a fundamental departure from most ongoing policy discussions and project analyses.
The pilot study described in this paper focused on water storage and concludes that ability to utilize additional water storage in California varies greatly with its location, the availability of water conveyance capacity, and operation of the system to integrate surface, groundwater, and conveyance facilities.
At most, California’s large-scale water system could utilize up to 5-6 million acre-feet of additional surface and groundwater storage capacity, and probably no more, which would likely provide 50-150 taf/year of additional water delivery for each million acre foot of additional storage capacity alone. The water supply and environmental performance of additional storage capacity is greatest when surface and groundwater storage are operated together. The benefits, and likely cost-effectiveness, of coordinating surface and groundwater storage and conveyance operations greatly surpass the benefits of expanding storage capacity alone, greatly expanding water delivery increases to as much as 200 taf/maf of additional storage capacity.
Because we did not quantify and compare the economic value and costs of water supply and other benefits of expanding storage capacity, we cannot yet say if particular expansions would be economically justified. Similarly, because we did not comprehensively analyze the environmental impacts of expanding storage capacity or specific storage projects, we cannot yet say if particular expansions would be environmentally justified. Further, this study does not consider reoperation of existing facilities, water demand management, changes in prioritization of water uses or rights, or other policy or regulatory actions that might change the ability to supply water demands using existing water storage capabilities.