Solar Energy and Groundwater in the San Joaquin Valley

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | October 26th, 2022

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requires groundwater users to bring their basins into balance over the next two decades. In the San Joaquin Valley, this

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requires groundwater users to bring their basins into balance over the next two decades. In the San Joaquin Valley, this will likely mean taking more than 500,000 acres of agricultural land out of intensive irrigated production. Local and regional economies could be stressed as a result, with some regular employment opportunities in agriculture disappearing and public revenues declining if lands are not put to new uses. As landowners and newly formed groundwater agencies tackle the groundwater deficits in their areas, utility-scale solar development—already an attractive option for landowners owning property with or without water rights—could offer an opportunity to keep lands that exit irrigated production economically productive. Moreover, development could provide multiple benefits by helping to supplement habitat and mitigate dust generation on transitioning lands. However, the expansion of solar hinges on whether state-level energy system planning processes—in conjunction with local land use planning—can address the transmission challenges that threaten the region’s promise as a solar power hub.

Source area management practices as remediation tool to address groundwater nitrate pollution in drinking supply wells

Journal of Contaminant Hydrology (Elsevier) | July 19th, 2019

Nitrate in drinking water may cause serious health problems for consumers. Agricultural activities are known to be the main source of groundwater nitrate contaminating ru

Nitrate in drinking water may cause serious health problems for consumers. Agricultural activities are known to be the main source of groundwater nitrate contaminating rural domestic and urban public water supply wells in farming regions. Management practices have been proposed to reduce the amount of nitrate in groundwater, including improved nutrient management practices and “pump and fertilize” with nitrate-affected irrigation wells. Here, we evaluate the feasibility and long-term impacts of agricultural managed aquifer recharge (Ag-MAR) in the source area of public water supply wells. A numerical model of nitrate fate and transport was developed for the Modesto basin, part of California's Central Valley aquifer system. The basin is representative of semi-arid agricultural regions around the world with a diversity of crop types, overlying an unconsolidated sedimentary aquifer system. A local public supply well in an economically disadvantaged community surrounded by farmland was the focus of this study. Model scenarios implemented include business as usual, alternative low-impact crops, and Ag-MAR in the source area of the public supply well. Alternative nutrient management and recharge practices act as remediation tools in the area between farmland and the public supply well. Improved agricultural source area management practices are shown to be an effective tool to maintain or even enhance groundwater quality in the targeted supply well while remediating ambient groundwater.

Source, distribution, and management of arsenic in water from wells, Eastern San Joaquin Ground-Water Subbasin, California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | October 15th, 2008

Sources of high-chloride water and managed aquifer recharge in an alluvial aquifer in California, USA

Hydrogeology Journal (Springer) | July 3rd, 2015

South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Sustainability Plan

South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency | December 19th, 2019

South of Kern River Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for Certain Lands Overlying the Kern County Subbasin

South of the Kern River Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (SoKR GSAs) | July 27th, 2022

Spectral characterization of dissolved organic matter in groundwater to assess mixing with oil-field water near selected oil fields, southern California

Science of The Total Environment (Elsevier) | September 16th, 2023

SSALTS Final Phase 3 Report: Evaluate Potential Salt Disposal Alternatives to Identify Acceptable Alternatives for Implementation

Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV-SALTS) | October 31st, 2016

The purpose of the Strategic Salt Accumulation Land and Transportation Study (SSALTS) is to identify the range of viable Central Valley alternatives for salt disposal to

The purpose of the Strategic Salt Accumulation Land and Transportation Study (SSALTS) is to identify the range of viable Central Valley alternatives for salt disposal to provide input for consideration during development of the Salt and Nitrate Management Plan (SNMP) for the region under the jurisdiction of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley Water Board). The findings have been used to guide discussions regarding establishment of regional salt management policies and the need for changes to the existing Central Valley Water Board Water Quality Control Plans (Basin Plans) to facilitate salt disposal in a manner that is most beneficial to the region and consistent with the State Water Resources Control Board’s (State Water Board) Recycled Water Policy. This work is being conducted under the direction of the Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV-SALTS) initiative, which is developing the SNMP for the Central Valley. The SSALTS project has been conducted in three phases (Figure 1-1): Phase 1: Identify and Characterize Existing Salt Accumulation Study Areas – The selection of representative study areas served as archetype situational examples to facilitate discussions regarding salt accumulation and disposal in the Central Valley. Each of these study areas was characterized to establish baseline information that was subsequently used to support development of salt disposal alternatives in Phases 2 and 3. Phase 2: Develop Potential Salt Management Strategies – Phase 2 of SSALTS developed potential long-term salt disposal alternatives in three parts: (1) in-valley alternatives; (2) out-of-valley alternatives; and (3) hybrid alternatives that combined in-valley and out-of valley salt disposal options. Phase 3: Evaluate Potential Salt Disposal Alternatives to Identify Acceptable Alternatives for Implementation – Alternatives developed under Phase 2 were evaluated in this report using selected feasibility criteria (e.g., regulatory, institutional, economic, technological, etc.). The outcome of this evaluation was the identification and prioritization of acceptable salt disposal alternatives for potential incorporation into Central Valley SNMP as salt management implementation measures. The Phase 1 and Phase 2 SSALTS final reports were submitted to the CV-SALTS Executive Committee in December 2013 and September 2014, respectively (CDM Smith 2013; CDM Smith 2014). The Phase 3 SSALTS draft report was submitted to the CV-SALTS Executive Committee in March 2015. Comments were received and incorporated into the Phase 3 SSALTS draft report. The Executive Committee recommended postponing the finalization of the Phase 3 SSALTS report until a draft of the Nitrate Implementation Measures Study (NIMS) report was completed, so that salt and nitrate implementation measures and mitigation strategies could be coordinated. While based on the March 2015 Phase 3 SSALTS draft report – and thus including the changes based on the March 2015 Phase 3 SSALTS draft report – and thus including the changes based on the original comments, the September 2016 Phase 3 SSALTS draft report had major changes in terms of content and structure. The September 2016 Phase 3 SSALTS draft report was sent to the Project Committee on September 20, 2016 and comments were received on October 5, 2016. The second set of comments were addressed and incorporated into this October 2016 Phase 3 SSALTS final report. Appendix E. provides the comments and responses on the September 2016 Phase 3 SSALTS draft report. The Phase 3 SSALTS report provides a path forward, based on the foundation of Phases 1 and 2 and CV-SALTS Executive Committee discussions.

State and green crimes related to water pollution and ecological disorganization: water pollution from publicly owned treatment works (POTW) facilities across US states

Palgrave Communications | August 1st, 2017

Green criminologists often refer to water pollution as an example of a green crime, but have yet to produce much research on this subject. The current article addresses�

Green criminologists often refer to water pollution as an example of a green crime, but have yet to produce much research on this subject. The current article addresses the need for green criminological analyses of water pollution problems, and draws attention to an overlooked issue: water pollution emissions from state owned public water treatment facilities or POTWs. Legally, POTWs may emit certain quantities and kinds of pollutants to waterways following treatment. This does not mean, however, that those emissions have no adverse ecological or public health impacts, or that those emissions cannot also be employed as examples of green crimes or green-state crimes. Indeed, from the perspective of environmental sociology and ecological Marxism, those emissions generate ecological disorganization. Moreover, POTW emissions contain numerous pollutants that generate different forms of ecological disorganization. The current study uses POTW emissions data drawn from the US EPA’s Discharge Monitoring Report system for 2014 to illustrate the extent of pollution emitted by POTWs in and across US states as one dimension of ecological disorganization. To contextualize the meaning of those data, we review US water pollution regulations, review the health and ecological impacts of chemicals emitted by POTWs, and situate those emissions within green criminological discussions of green crime and greenstate crimes.

State Plan of Flood Control Descriptive Document (2010)

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | January 15th, 2010

This report provides an inventory and description of the existing flood control works (facilities), lands, programs, plans, conditions, and mode of operations and mainten

This report provides an inventory and description of the existing flood control works (facilities), lands, programs, plans, conditions, and mode of operations and maintenance (O&M) for the State-Federal flood protection system in the Central Valley of California. This flood protection system is composed of federally authorized project levees and related facilities for which the State has provided assurances1 of cooperation to the federal government. These State-provided assurances are an important distinction for what constitutes the State-federal flood protection system since other flood protection facilities in the Central Valley are not covered by State assurances and are not part of the State-federal system. Collectively, the facilities, lands, programs, conditions, and mode of O&M for the State-Federal flood protection system in the Central Valley are referred to as the State Plan of Flood Control (SPFC). This SPFC Descriptive Document is the first time that an inventory of the SPFC has been compiled or referenced in a single document. Until now, much of the information on the SPFC has been individually maintained for each of the many flood protection projects that constitute State-federal flood protection along the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers and tributaries. For example, much of the information contained in sections of this report originates in 118 individual project (unit-specific) O&M manuals. The O&M manuals provide key information about each project and how it should be operated and maintained (see reference digital versatile disc (DVD) at the back of this report). In addition, since the individual projects for the system were implemented over almost a century, some information may have been lost or never obtained. In those cases, gaps exist in the information presented in this report and further research is required. It is important to note that the SPFC is only a portion of the larger system that provides flood protection for the Central Valley. The SPFC relies on many other features that do not meet the definition of the SPFC. For example, non-SPFC reservoirs provide substantial regulation of flows to levels that SPFC facilities can mostly handle. Private levees, locally operated drainage systems, and other facilities work in conjunction with SPFC facilities. Management practices such as emergency response, floodplain management, and other practices are part of the overall flood protection system. All parts of the system, including the SPFC, depend on other parts of the system to operate as a unit. This report is structured as a reference document for the SPFC. It includes narrative descriptions, tables, and figures, especially maps, to help the reader find information for this complex flood management system. Some sections include summary sections for readers who only need an overview of the subject. RELATED DOCUMENT: State Plan of Flood Control Descriptive Document 2016 Update