Los Angeles County’s Climate Cost Challenge

Center for Climate Integrity | April 2nd, 2024

Within the first two months of 2024, the City of Los Angeles had already exceeded its average annual rainfall, receiving nearly 15 inches of rain in back-to-back deluges.

Within the first two months of 2024, the City of Los Angeles had already exceeded its average annual rainfall, receiving nearly 15 inches of rain in back-to-back deluges.1 The storms flooded roads, brought massive wind gusts, ripped down trees, and killed nine people.2 The year prior was the hottest year ever recorded, including unseasonably hot weather into the fall months in Southern California. In October 2023, a wildfire ripped through rural lands southeast of the City of Los Angeles, destroying multiple buildings and forcing approximately 4,000 people to evacuate. With climate-driven disasters in Southern California growing more intense every year, it’s more important than ever for communities to invest in a growing range of climate adaptation and resilience projects. This study is the first-ever attempt to calculate the costs of preparing for and adapting to 14 different climate impacts on municipal, county, state, and federal governments in Los Angeles County.

Making Water Conservation a California Way of Life Proposed Regulation Review of the Water Board’s Standardized Regulatory Impact Analysis (SRIA)

Mesa Water District | September 28th, 2023

Maladaptation to drought: a case report from California, USA

Sustainability Science (Springer) | October 15th, 2015

The interactions between natural water availability and societal water demand and management are complex. In response to gaps in empirical research of the adaptive capaci

The interactions between natural water availability and societal water demand and management are complex. In response to gaps in empirical research of the adaptive capacity of social and environmental systems to climate stresses, we provide an assessment of responses to water scarcity during a multi-year drought in California. In particular, we use Barnett and O’Neill’s (Global Environ Change 20:211–213, 2010) criteria for maladaptation to examine responses in the agricultural and energy sectors to a multi-year (2007–2009) California drought. We conclude that despite evidence in both sectors of resiliency to the impacts of the drought, some of the coping strategies adopted increased the vulnerability of other systems. These other systems include California’s aquatic ecosystems and social groups that rely on those ecosystems for their health or employment; future generations whose resources were drawn down in the near-term, where otherwise those resources would have been available at a later time; and current and future generations who were, or will be, exposed to the effects of increased greenhouse gas emissions. This case study demonstrates that California’s current strategies for dealing with long or severe droughts are less successful than previously thought when short- and long-term impacts are evaluated together. This finding is particularly relevant given projections of more frequent and severe water shortages in the future due to climate change. This study recommends a shift from crisis-driven responses to the development and enactment of long-term mitigation measures that are anticipatory and focus on comprehensive risk reduction.

Marine heatwaves need clear definitions so coastal communities can adapt

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | April 3rd, 2023

Modernizing the system: California Water Fix finance and cost allocation (White paper #3)

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) | August 10th, 2017

The third in a series of policy papers prepared for the consideration of Metropolitan’s Board of Directors in advance of planned summer meetings and decisions in fall 2

The third in a series of policy papers prepared for the consideration of Metropolitan’s Board of Directors in advance of planned summer meetings and decisions in fall 2017. Modernizing and improving California’s water system is essential for the reliable delivery of water supplies to much of the state. About 30 percent of the water that flows out of taps in Southern California homes and businesses comes from Northern California watersheds and flows through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. But the Delta’s declining ecosystem and 1,100 miles of levees are increasingly vulnerable to earthquakes, flooding, saltwater intrusion, climate change and further environmental degradation. California WaterFix is the product of more than a decade of review, planning, rigorous scientific and environmental analysis and unprecedented public comment. This white paper provides information about the costs of the project, including adjustments of capital, mitigation and O&M costs to 2017 dollars. The financing plan is presented with financial assumptions and a range of financing scenarios. The cost allocation information covers Metropolitan’s anticipated financial commitment, an estimate of member agency wholesale rate impacts, and metrics to assess retail level impacts. Using this information and when compared to costs for other local supply alternatives, California WaterFix would provide a cost-effective supply for Southern California’s water portfolio.

Mokelumne watershed avoided cost analysis: Why Sierra fuel treatments make economic sense

Sierra Nevada Conservancy | April 10th, 2014

High-severity wildfires in forests of California’s Sierra Nevada pose a serious threat to people and nature. Although proactive forest management can reduce the risk of

High-severity wildfires in forests of California’s Sierra Nevada pose a serious threat to people and nature. Although proactive forest management can reduce the risk of high-severity wildfire, the pace and scale of fuel treatments is insufficient, given the growing scope of the problem. Using the upper Mokelumne River watershed as a representative case, we sought to answer the following question: Does it make economic sense to increase investment in fuel treatments to reduce the risk of large, damaging wildfires? Our analysis suggests that the economic benefits of landscape- scale fuel-reduction treatments far outweigh the costs of wildfire. 

More state and local attention to financing can advance sustainable groundwater management

Berkeley Law Center for Law, Energy, & the Environment | April 12th, 2025

Natural Hazard Mitigation Saves Interim Report

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) | June 30th, 2018

NRDC Portfolio-Based BDCP Conceptual Alternative - Appendix A: Alternative Water Supply Cost and Yield Estimates

Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) | January 16th, 2013

This conceptual alternative proposes a smaller capital investment in a Delta facility, in comparison with the current BDCP preliminary project, and an investment of some

This conceptual alternative proposes a smaller capital investment in a Delta facility, in comparison with the current BDCP preliminary project, and an investment of some of the savings in regional water supply tools. This analysis includes estimates of the capital cost and water supply benefits of regional investments. The capital costs associated with water recycling are well established. In state-wide projects, these costs are estimated to range between $6,430 and $6,470 per acre-feet (“AF”) of permanent water recycling capacity. Capital, or initial/one-time costs for urban water use efficiency are less well established, as these costs are usually expressed in total annual costs and the costs of efficiency programs can vary widely. Due to the variation of cost estimates, this analysis focuses on the cost estimates provided in the California Water Plans of 2009 and the 2013 update in order to present a consistent source and methodology. The $3,230/AF to $4,860/AF capital cost for urban water efficiency programs is explained in greater detail below. Other alternative water supply investments are also promising, such as improvements in agricultural water use efficiency, improved groundwater management and stormwater capture and reuse. Our analysis has not focused on these types of investments because cost and yield information vary widely. However, our analysis is not meant to exclude investments in these types of supplies, which will be cost-effective investments in many localities. RELATED DOCUMENTS: NRDC Portfolio-Based BDCP Conceptual Alternative – Summary Benefits of a diversified portfolio approach to the Bay-Delta and water supply NRDC Portfolio-Based BDCP Conceptual Alternative - letter of water agency and organizational support

Patterns, drivers, and a predictive model of dam removal cost in the United States

Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution (Frontiers) | July 24th, 2023