Life on an island makes one keenly aware of water issues. Cisterns to capture rainwater from the roof before it collects pollutants from the street is a very good start. I used one for years when we had a vegetable garden. New Zealand has this figured out very well. All buildings in the northern town of Russel have cisterns. When the fire trucks are called out, one team goes to the fire and another team goes out to the private cisterns to collect sufficient water, with owners' consent, to fill the tanker to fight the fire. That's community spirit! Time for some changes to the LA county building codes.
11
Not only should such water be kept and used, but places that flood need to do the same. These are real shovel ready projects that don't get enough notice. And they help with any perceived effects of global warming while still benefiting us directly.
2
yet another example of American short sided hubris...why is it so hard to think beyond the obvious solution to a problem and contemplate unintended consequences? Is this cultural or simply human? Perhaps if we are fortunate enough, this global climate crisis will transform our thinking...we need to think beyond our own immediate greed. I pray we can. I have faith humanity has been endowed with the capacity to problem solve...we just need to overcome ....greed... and consider as some cultures do, the seventh generation and beyond
5
I have lived in Arroyo Grande in San Luis Obispo county for over 10 years. I have a 650 gallon rain barrel which fills with about .80 inch of rain, and if daylight I run a hose out the spigot at the bottom when it starts overflowing. almost none of the rain runs off into the street from my house. If I had the room I would have had a multi thousand gallon tank. If we all did a little to save water in our yards collectively it would make a big difference. I have all cactus and succulents and my front yard looks much like a yard looks in Tucson.
13
"50 billion gallons by 2035 from 8.8 billion gallons now."
How can anyone know what a 19 year time frame can produce?
If we started today, why would it take anywhere near that long?
How can anyone know what a 19 year time frame can produce?
If we started today, why would it take anywhere near that long?
3
The second paragraph begins with the statement that Californians cut their water use by 25%. True for urban uses, but not true for agriculture which uses 80% of California's water. Until some economic realism enters the water pricing equation we will continue to heavily subsidize irrigation for alfalfa for export while building desalinization plants producing urban water at $2,300/acre foot.
25
I would also point out that storm runoff (into the ocean) serves a purpose. Countless marine species, some of them food for the fish we eat, rely on reductions in ocean salinity. Of course, if the runoff is from a city, they have to contend with pollution.
6
Numerous comments extoll cisterns. I did too, until I looked at the precipitation patterns of Central California where I live. Rain mostly happens in 3-4 months. The cistern you built would be dry for 6-8 months of the year. Unless you build it yourself, a purchased system including labor will cost you $1-4/gallon of storage capacity (non potable) In SF you might save 6-8 gallons per gallon of storage capacity during the non drought year. How much are you willing to spend to save non-potable water? Potable water costs about 1 penny/gallon and sewage treatment costs another 1.5 cents/gallon, in San Francisco. Are you going to invest 20-50 cents to save a gallon of irrigation water a year? I rather doubt it.
Cisterns have their place in the world, but it is not in a place where water costs pennies and rain happens during one season.
There are many many much more cost effective ways to save water. Increasing the cost of water would be an excellent start. Farmers don't pay a tenth of what I pay for water.
To increase ground water recharge, we could start by banning macadam parking lots. Replace all parking lot pavement with porous pavers or crushed rock. Treat all sewage and put it in leach fields or man made marshlands. Many choices.
Cisterns have their place in the world, but it is not in a place where water costs pennies and rain happens during one season.
There are many many much more cost effective ways to save water. Increasing the cost of water would be an excellent start. Farmers don't pay a tenth of what I pay for water.
To increase ground water recharge, we could start by banning macadam parking lots. Replace all parking lot pavement with porous pavers or crushed rock. Treat all sewage and put it in leach fields or man made marshlands. Many choices.
10
Yes, this will be nice. But let's not get ahead of ourselves. With 13 million households in California, saving enough water for a year for about 10% of them, isn't going to be THE salvation, is it?
2
What might really help would be if California could use the money they pay in Federal taxes to solve this problem. For every dollar that California pays in federal taxes, it gets back 78 cents. Meanwhile, red welfare states like Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi get $1.66, $1.78, and $2.02 back respectively. Makes it a bit annoying to hear all the folks with bright ideas tell us how "rich and stupid" we are.
Source: http://visualeconomics.creditloan.com/united-states-federal-tax-dollars/
Source: http://visualeconomics.creditloan.com/united-states-federal-tax-dollars/
8
But nobody wants to build reservoirs to catch and hold this water. It is easier, and much cheaper, to complain about a lack of water later on.
2
Stomwater capture and storage is an idea that has been bandied about for at least the last 20 years but just starting to be taken seriously which seems like a pretty typical timespan for any good idea to take hold (yes we are collectively that dense). Water capture and storage will become a relevant issue nationwide and globally as our planet's climate continues to change.
2
Just make sure it does not go the other way and have it made it illegal to collect your own runoff.
Other places have.
Other places have.
4
The East Coast corollary to California in terms of a water crisis is Florida. Sinkholes, encroaching salt lines in freshwater rivers, retired snowbirds swelling the population and depleting the underground aquifers.... it's like California in the 1950s. Jeb! will have plenty to do from 2017-2020, beholden to Pres. Trump's FEMA.
1
TV news showed construction projects in San Francisco for underground parking garages etc. in which pure ground water is pumped away via fire hoses to the nearest storm drain, 1000s of gallons a day. Supposedly, local legislation is planned to mandate recycling of the water, though why that was not done years ago is maddening. San Francisco has a 3rd tunnel near completion to bring water from Hetch Hetchy 200+ miles away, so maybe it will lose its lethargy about wasting water.
6
Southern California lets rain water simply drain into the ocean while it ships in water from the Colorado River and Northern California? Unbelievable.
Here's an idea: Build some reservoirs to hold ALL of that water for the period six months from now when NONE will be falling from the sky. There. Problem fixed. Oh, and don't allow anyone to use it for watering plants or grass, on the penalty of severe fines or imprisonment. Grass doesn't naturally grow in Southern California. Its only purpose is to beautify landscapes. Learn to make scraggy desertscapes beautiful. It's not hard.
But I marvel at this article. How in the world did California get so rich? It must have inherited its wealth. That's the only time rich and stupid coincide. And there is no better example of rich and stupid than California's mismanaged water resources.
Here's an idea: Build some reservoirs to hold ALL of that water for the period six months from now when NONE will be falling from the sky. There. Problem fixed. Oh, and don't allow anyone to use it for watering plants or grass, on the penalty of severe fines or imprisonment. Grass doesn't naturally grow in Southern California. Its only purpose is to beautify landscapes. Learn to make scraggy desertscapes beautiful. It's not hard.
But I marvel at this article. How in the world did California get so rich? It must have inherited its wealth. That's the only time rich and stupid coincide. And there is no better example of rich and stupid than California's mismanaged water resources.
3
Sure and democrats run the city and the state, that should tell everyone how smart they are. You could actually allow this water to recharge groundwater as well.
2
"Here's an idea: Build some reservoirs to hold ALL of that water ...". Oh my god, S.D., you've nailed it! Why didn't us mere mortals think of this?!?
4
January set records for rainfall, yet the TV news the other day showed our nearby Lexington Reservoir at only 20% of capacity, even though San Jose (and Apple) is on a building spree. We're toast.
6
When I moved to Long Island, NY, in 1972, a common sight were house lot plots of land with chain link fencing around them, dug about 30 feet deep. Storm drains brought neighborhood rain runoff water to these pits to recharge the aquifer that provided the Island with all of its' water needs. Why is such an obvious solution, common in a dense suburban area, so under-used a half-century later?
I feel as if we choose to not try to see how common problems have been solved by others.
I feel as if we choose to not try to see how common problems have been solved by others.
7
In areas with high water tables it is common to see housing developments built around a "pond" that is actually more correctly a sump, designed to control the water rather than recharge. In today's world, what you describe would be probably be considered a pest breeder and a drowning hazard. But some communities do recharge water tables with treated sewage effluent, using settling ponds or heavily watered fields.
1
PAUL NATHE,
So. Cal. does have quite a few holding ponds in the Santa Ana river bed. They are designed to recharge the aquifer beneath OC.
So. Cal. does have quite a few holding ponds in the Santa Ana river bed. They are designed to recharge the aquifer beneath OC.
5
As mentioned previously, why isnt southern california making a greater use of recycled (grey) water. Apparently it is being used in Orange county to some extent. Well you can add the southbay of the SF bay area to that equation. The city of Santa Clara has long been using grey water for dust control and watering of municipal areas of vegetation. It has pipes in the ground specifically for the purpose of distribution and use of grey water. I lived in Silicon Valley for several years while this usage was going on and never even smelled it. Astronauts re-use their water so if its good enough for them, why is it not good enough for us eartlings? But first things first! Get the greater use of grey water going. Later on the same pipes that distribute grey water for other than human consumption can be used to distribute water for human consumption when the technology is satisfactory to everyone. And while installing the re-claimed water piping, you also have the opportunity of replacing aging water distribution pipes. In fact while upgrading existing water and sewer, you could also be installing re-claimed water piping.
4
San Diego has a grey water facility.
4
I live up the coast in a smallish city that gets all its water from one small watershed that feeds one short river. Many millions of gallons shoot down that river and out to sea in the wet season, and we'd like to divert a bit of it to a parched neighboring water district that's overdrafted its ground water. It's called a water exchange, and we'd get something in return.
But the regulatory to jump throw are large. Salmon have mighty defenders.
But the regulatory to jump throw are large. Salmon have mighty defenders.
3
I'm just throwing out an idea. A big part of the issue seems to be not getting enough snow and too much sun. Utilize the sun (solar panels/wind turbines) to power pumps that pump the run-off water up to where the snow should be and use snow makers. It would take a lot of snow makers for sure and I'm not sure you can scale it up enough cost effectively (that would have to be figured out), on the upside, ski resorts would flourish and could share the subsidy.
4
The word "pollutants" is used too generally in this piece. In an overcrowded, sprawling place like Los Angeles, that runoff pollution includes massive amounts of nitrogen fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides from irrigated lawns, parks, public landscaping and playing fields; animal and human waste; tire dust from the seeminly endless network of roads and freeways; motor oil that bad people dump down storm drains; and many tons of solid debris. Mixed in with those clots of mostly plastic detritus are thousands and thousands of hypodermic needles. Used needles. They wash up on my local beaches throughout the storm season. In my immediate community the needle tossers are mostly heroin addicts, but I have seen gutters littered with what appear to be insulin hypos in neighborhoods of nearly cities where rates of diabetes are high. Hypos are everywhere. I'm all for catching and using storm runoff, but keep in mind that the stuff is hazardous waste.
Rain barrels and cisterns are a nice idea for areas that receive rain regularly, as they get flushed out. Cisterns need regular maintenance even with constant rain (I have seen some frightening cisterns in the wetter parts of the Hawaiian islands). But Los Angeles is feast or famine when it comes to precipitation. I fear that if too many private entities are allowed to have water capture and storage systems, sanitation and pest control problems will arise. It is something best left to the municipal and county agencies.
Rain barrels and cisterns are a nice idea for areas that receive rain regularly, as they get flushed out. Cisterns need regular maintenance even with constant rain (I have seen some frightening cisterns in the wetter parts of the Hawaiian islands). But Los Angeles is feast or famine when it comes to precipitation. I fear that if too many private entities are allowed to have water capture and storage systems, sanitation and pest control problems will arise. It is something best left to the municipal and county agencies.
9
Minnows and koi will eat mosquito larvae, which is one way to make sure pests don't become a problem. Any larvae that escape to become adults can be eaten by bats. Bat houses and fish can help. Mosquito predators are your friends.
4
Passion for Peaches.
Most if not all, rain capture systems here in Ca. are covered to prevent said pests and evaporation from our bountiful sunshine. To do otherwise would be a waste of energy and time capturing said water.
Most if not all, rain capture systems here in Ca. are covered to prevent said pests and evaporation from our bountiful sunshine. To do otherwise would be a waste of energy and time capturing said water.
3
I am confused. They are building a train for 100 billion, or so. I love trains. I road the BART a few days ago. But, water is way more important and they can't find one percent of the train cost. Seems very strange.
22
It's the Democrats, from city council to county supervisors to Gavin Newsom, Kamala Harris, and Jerry Brown. Winkin', Blinkin', and Nod. A bullet train to nowhere, but no desalination plants aside from one (1) in parched San Diego County. Sacramento wiped out the Central Valley farm towns.
3
Charles,
Your under the assumption that our Republicans ( yes, they still exist in Ca.) ( they talk about hating it here, yet they don't leave...?) would be willing to fund the huge tax appropriations needed to build and then power desalination plants? Heck, they haven't stopped watering their lawns yet!
By the by, Central Valley can stop watering Almonds and rice anytime they want. Both are shipped to foreign markets mostly. Almost all of the Big Ag. in the Valley are Republican by the way.
Your under the assumption that our Republicans ( yes, they still exist in Ca.) ( they talk about hating it here, yet they don't leave...?) would be willing to fund the huge tax appropriations needed to build and then power desalination plants? Heck, they haven't stopped watering their lawns yet!
By the by, Central Valley can stop watering Almonds and rice anytime they want. Both are shipped to foreign markets mostly. Almost all of the Big Ag. in the Valley are Republican by the way.
8
Give residents state tax credits for installing rain barrels for these winter rains. That way, every family could use slightly less water for any outdoor needs, by tapping into those barrels. Not a cure-all, but a small help. Multiplied by thousands, it might be a slightly bigger help. And a nice supplement to building cisterns, reservoirs, run-off treatment facilities, etc.
14
It's trivial because you can only collect a small amount when it rains, just winter. If you collect 150 gallons in winter it's about 0.1% of a typical home's usage. You'd get a far better return from removing your lawn. A much better strategy is to divert taxes to more reservoir storage and capture water where more flows
5
TV weather guy said 1 inch of rain supplies 50,000 households for one day.
4
Capturing rainwater is hugely important, but I disagree with one point in the article: there is indeed still a role for large infrastructure projects. What LA needs to do is set up a system similar to what Orange County has just to the south, wastewater treatment and reuse.
It's hardly ever mentioned, due to the supposed "gross-out factor" but I believe this is overblown, and wastewater recycling can be a huge part of the future water supply. We already are required to treat wastewater to almost drinking water quality, but then pump that water into the ocean. Reuse of this water is much cheaper and more environmentally friendly then desalinization, and has the added benefit of being a concentrated source unlike rainwater, meaning it can be easily added to existing infrastructure.
Both rainwater capture and wastewater recycling should be part of our response to climate change and drought.
It's hardly ever mentioned, due to the supposed "gross-out factor" but I believe this is overblown, and wastewater recycling can be a huge part of the future water supply. We already are required to treat wastewater to almost drinking water quality, but then pump that water into the ocean. Reuse of this water is much cheaper and more environmentally friendly then desalinization, and has the added benefit of being a concentrated source unlike rainwater, meaning it can be easily added to existing infrastructure.
Both rainwater capture and wastewater recycling should be part of our response to climate change and drought.
17
1000 Million Dollars.
Simple math: 20 Billionaires ante up 50 million each as a gift to their grandchildren. No referendums. No waffling, Just love and beneficence.
Simple math: 20 Billionaires ante up 50 million each as a gift to their grandchildren. No referendums. No waffling, Just love and beneficence.
4
How about limiting mansions to only one swimming pool per house, and no new swimming pool construction allowed? Symbolic perhaps, but leveling the playing field a bit.
4
This is common sense. Too bad the tech age has seemed to miss the common sense part of life. Turn off everything and live. It is a truly learning experience.
2
As a first step, California should provide rain barrels to any resident who wants one.
5
This is already happening in the form of rebates. My 60-gallon rain barrel was covered entirely by my rebate from the state.
6
But rain barrels breed mosquitoes which spread the Zika virus.
1
Charles,
Rain barrels are covered.
Rain barrels are covered.
3
I remember watching video i L.A. of rain induced floods washing vehicles out to sea during the last big El Nino in the late 1990s, which was during yet another drought and wondering why they wee letting all that rain water go to waste. I'm dumbfounded that nothing has been done since considering the drought situation since.
Plus, what's this nonsense about "not knowing where the money will come from" to build a water harvesting system? What about taxing the Silicone Valley billionaires and those complaining about the homeless "riff raff" they have to face, or all those building mega-mansions in LA with 5 swimming pools? They obviously have money to squander, Tax them to pay for it, plain & simple.
Plus, what's this nonsense about "not knowing where the money will come from" to build a water harvesting system? What about taxing the Silicone Valley billionaires and those complaining about the homeless "riff raff" they have to face, or all those building mega-mansions in LA with 5 swimming pools? They obviously have money to squander, Tax them to pay for it, plain & simple.
12
Or just selling the water rather than foolishly taxing.
This would be a fantastic public works project ala FDR/Bernie Sanders - or whoever. In many more parts of the country, too.
Or, we could just spend it all pointlessly invading another country. Oh, wait - It wasn't pointless, Halliburton makes millions off it.
Or, we could just spend it all pointlessly invading another country. Oh, wait - It wasn't pointless, Halliburton makes millions off it.
7
...and so did Dick Cheney's "blind trust," as he was CEO of Halliburton when the Iraq campaign was planned by the Project for the New American Century ("PNAC"--whose membership included Cheney, Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush, and John Bolton) from 1997-2000, and then made reality with the manipulated 2000 presidential election. As is the custom for CEOs, Cheney's remuneration included stock and stock options.
Participation in PNAC descends from free speech into the realm of war crimes and crimes against our own Constitution. It is tantamount to being present--and active--at the Wannsee Conference of January 30, 1942, which set forth the mechanisms of the Final Solution, which killed off European Jewry, including my family still there.
Participation in PNAC descends from free speech into the realm of war crimes and crimes against our own Constitution. It is tantamount to being present--and active--at the Wannsee Conference of January 30, 1942, which set forth the mechanisms of the Final Solution, which killed off European Jewry, including my family still there.
4
You couldn't have the WPA or the TVA anymore because of unions. Nice thought though.
4
Or foolishly spending it on Solyndra, credits for electric cars, production tax credits for wind energy. Plenty of waste and plenty of decent investments to be made if only democrats understood that.
1
The holy grail is to enable storm water to be captured where it falls. The earth has too little water or too much water. The holy grail is to keep the earth in equilibrium.
Parjana is the holy grail in storm water management. Parjana is a proven paradigm shift in how the world manages water. Parjana's energy passive solution enables the earth to naturally infiltrate water and allows mother nature to process and clean the water as the earth originally intended.
We would like to share our current projects in California that are designed around storm water capture/ rain harvesting.
Parjana is the holy grail in storm water management. Parjana is a proven paradigm shift in how the world manages water. Parjana's energy passive solution enables the earth to naturally infiltrate water and allows mother nature to process and clean the water as the earth originally intended.
We would like to share our current projects in California that are designed around storm water capture/ rain harvesting.
4
A large number of small actions can yield huge results.
A few years ago a graduate study in my suburban town outside Boston estimated that about a quarter of stormwater runoff could be captured on site if every household made small improvements (like trench drains; redirected downspouts; small rain gardens; tree filters; dry wells) to their properties. The maximum expense was low: $1200 if paying a contractor and $200 for DIY projects.
It will be interesting to see if our highly individualistic culture can change enough to encourage this kind of collective, distributed response.
This is a similar issue to the abatement of lead water service lines into houses: the engineering is simple if we can muster the communal will to implement the solution.
Given how few people act for the common good, I am not holding my breath.
A few years ago a graduate study in my suburban town outside Boston estimated that about a quarter of stormwater runoff could be captured on site if every household made small improvements (like trench drains; redirected downspouts; small rain gardens; tree filters; dry wells) to their properties. The maximum expense was low: $1200 if paying a contractor and $200 for DIY projects.
It will be interesting to see if our highly individualistic culture can change enough to encourage this kind of collective, distributed response.
This is a similar issue to the abatement of lead water service lines into houses: the engineering is simple if we can muster the communal will to implement the solution.
Given how few people act for the common good, I am not holding my breath.
17
A citation to the study would be helpful, if one could be found.
Our current individualistic culture was created by propaganda, quite opposed to the community reality that was the norm from the pilgrims forward for hundreds of years. No wilderness family made it on their own; even those in more solitary occupations like trappers worked in groups, with their local merchants, and had families. Only car culture and the rise of advertising, which needed to break peer- and community influence and turn us into individual consumers who made individual buying decisions altered it. It's a concoction to sell. The new realities of the 21st century will - we can hope - lead us to rediscovering the power of communities to work together. Humans have been doing it from the dawn of time and still do. If we haven't lost the ability by staring individually into our individual phones all day. That's a good litmus test - does any given activity currently divide and isolate us, or give us ways and information to work together?
Our current individualistic culture was created by propaganda, quite opposed to the community reality that was the norm from the pilgrims forward for hundreds of years. No wilderness family made it on their own; even those in more solitary occupations like trappers worked in groups, with their local merchants, and had families. Only car culture and the rise of advertising, which needed to break peer- and community influence and turn us into individual consumers who made individual buying decisions altered it. It's a concoction to sell. The new realities of the 21st century will - we can hope - lead us to rediscovering the power of communities to work together. Humans have been doing it from the dawn of time and still do. If we haven't lost the ability by staring individually into our individual phones all day. That's a good litmus test - does any given activity currently divide and isolate us, or give us ways and information to work together?
3
Or, you could raise the price of water to its replacement cost (concessions to low income areas$
People do respond to prices
People do respond to prices
3
Well, in fact the Pilgrims tried communal farming, but it was a disaster and led to famine. They then pivoted to individual ownership of plots, and productivity soared.
1
The real problem is not the drought, it's the incessant construction business and the filling of planning review boards with contractors. Despite the drought in Sacramento, a new community of 5300 homes is in the works. Water conservation only works for humans, the native plants and animals have nowhere to go when all the surface water and ground water goes for car washes and agriculture.
44
Harvested water--storm runoff and grey water, would challenge an established system, but more control over use of utilities by homeowners, as is the case with those who use solar panels, would re-distribute spending patterns in the local economy. It would be excellent to see Hetch Hetchy, and other natural river systems, restored. And it seems likely, these changes will need to be made, anyway.
6
In some parts of the world, rooftop rain harvesters supply a portion of each household's water. You can find directions about how to build simple ones on the internet.
5
It is a cultural problem, and as such it is about people's (and more so, business') behavior. In the drier areas of the Mediterranean countries, there aren't private lawns, grass lined industrial parks, or golf courses everywhere. Hydroponic and low-water-use agriculture is way ahead of California and Arizona (Baja California is also more advanced).
Agriculture is the culprit: For example, almond farmers in the desert-like San Joaquin Valley. The Westlands Water District has pumped more than one-million acre feet of groundwater in the past two years – more water than Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco combined use in a whole year – to produce these nuts, threatening the region’s water supply, and causing the ground to sink more than a foot in some areas. Most of these almonds are exported. Why should taxpayers fund aquifers when big business uses most of the water?
Agriculture is the culprit: For example, almond farmers in the desert-like San Joaquin Valley. The Westlands Water District has pumped more than one-million acre feet of groundwater in the past two years – more water than Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco combined use in a whole year – to produce these nuts, threatening the region’s water supply, and causing the ground to sink more than a foot in some areas. Most of these almonds are exported. Why should taxpayers fund aquifers when big business uses most of the water?
21
Duh . . . . doncha think somebody ought to get crackin' with this? Er, put their money where their mouth is? Something like that, anyway?
2
A long long time ago, I heard a story on the radio about an inventor who had designed a water-permeable road surface. At the time, the cost would be enormous for re-surfacing, but he was advocating for all new projects to use this material, which would preserve the water table. I don't have time to look it up right now, but someone else, maybe in the governor's office, can google it.
8
Just such a permeable road surface was installed in recent years in my area. The construction took about five months, and the area covered was one block. This project may have been a particularly advanced, and thus expensive, version, with many layers to create a strong surface but still maximum absorption. It's clearly a great idea, but probably not affordable. It does, however, show the benefits of yesteryear's cobblestones over asphalt. Asphalt seals the surface, creating more run-off and the ground beneath does not absorb any water.
7
This should be expanded to the rest of CA. There are plenty of hills and mountains east and south of Sacramento that could be partially dammed to slow the flooding and at the same time save some of the precious water.
You must not be familiar with the mindset of our current State legislators. Or the anti-gravity folks who control the political narrative.
You see, here in California, we just don't DO surface storage (reservoirs) these days, because ... maybe you should ask them to explain it.
Which is why this whole discussion is odd: since the Greens won't let us capture rainfall and snowmelt when it falls in the hills, how can they be so enthusiastic about capturing the same water when it falls in cities? If you love beaches, don't you want the rain to carry sediment to the river mouth, then to be distributed south by tidal action?
One day, I hope soon, we will all get together and have a real world discussion.
You see, here in California, we just don't DO surface storage (reservoirs) these days, because ... maybe you should ask them to explain it.
Which is why this whole discussion is odd: since the Greens won't let us capture rainfall and snowmelt when it falls in the hills, how can they be so enthusiastic about capturing the same water when it falls in cities? If you love beaches, don't you want the rain to carry sediment to the river mouth, then to be distributed south by tidal action?
One day, I hope soon, we will all get together and have a real world discussion.
5
Because dams are last-generation tech. They create mosquito-breeding reservoirs and devastate forests, which accelerates runoff problems. They eliminate healthy fish populations (at a time when ocean fish are in decline) and upset the entire ecosystem of an area, both plant and animal, all of which affects the soil capacity to absorb and process water. Real world discussions require real information, not demonizing others, and they require innovative solutions that are scientifically and technologically sound. If we haven't learned from the last 50 years, we can expect the same tragic results; if we do something different, based on what we learned, we can expect better.
5
In fact, reservoirs do not "devastate forests" here in California. I highly recommend that you come see for yourself. You see, snow and rain fall in the mountains and forests, and whatever the trees and soil don't take up flow - naturally - to low points in watersheds. Reservoirs temporarily hold that water so that it can be provided further downstream in a measured way, rather than let it all flood and run out to sea all at once.
I hope you will not continue to mischaracterize others' views as "demonizing". Just read with an open mind. And come see for yourself.
I hope you will not continue to mischaracterize others' views as "demonizing". Just read with an open mind. And come see for yourself.
2
"There is no indication where that money might come from". No, we're building a train.
5
Yea, but that will cost only $50-$80 billion.
1
Would it make sense to somehow route all this runoff water directly to the underlying aquifer for, er, a rainy day?
5
I wonder if you could confirm your numbers. You state that 200 billion gallons is enough for 1.4 million households for a year. But the usual metric is that one acre foot (about 326,000 gallons) is enough for 2 households, so quick back of the envelope suggests that 200 billion gallons is enough for only about 600,000 households, or about 60 percent less. In either case, the amount if frankly not significant.
Also, the cost of capturing this relatively small amount of water is very high, especially if it must be stored in surface storage facilities (where, by the way, it tends to evaporate at a non trivial rate). These storage facilities must be build to accept peak rainfall periods, but since that peak is very short, the average amount stored over a year is quite small and the cost of the facility per gallon stored is ruinously high. Any such (very filthy) stored water then must be conveyed (by new mains) to existing treatment plants.
There are other, much more efficient and more reliable ways to capture water. Seawater desalination is the chief among these.
Also, the cost of capturing this relatively small amount of water is very high, especially if it must be stored in surface storage facilities (where, by the way, it tends to evaporate at a non trivial rate). These storage facilities must be build to accept peak rainfall periods, but since that peak is very short, the average amount stored over a year is quite small and the cost of the facility per gallon stored is ruinously high. Any such (very filthy) stored water then must be conveyed (by new mains) to existing treatment plants.
There are other, much more efficient and more reliable ways to capture water. Seawater desalination is the chief among these.
5
Desal is neither efficient nor reliable, since it cannibalizes its source by drastically increasing the salinity of the oceans and bays surrounding it, eliminating fishing and tourism industries and increasing polluting emissions, which accelerate the climate change that is diminishing the snowpack, which is where freshwater came from. Giant infrastructure just isn't the magic bullet that the last century thought and there is no easy way to put thousands of new houses on coastal dunes to enrich developers who can promise the water will magically flow from the tap.
3
The data doesn't support your fantasies about desalinization being a cheap source of water. Here are some facts based on a study published this year by the California Public Utilities Commission:
Sources Traditional source Conservation Recycling Desalination
Lowest Cost Example $25 $137 $396 $2,367
Average of Examples $793 $1,335 $2,869 $3,389
Highest Cost Example $1,456 $4,580 $5,800 $5,100
(Prices in Dollars Per Acre-Foot)
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/uploadedFiles/CPUC_Public_Website/Content/About_U...
Sources Traditional source Conservation Recycling Desalination
Lowest Cost Example $25 $137 $396 $2,367
Average of Examples $793 $1,335 $2,869 $3,389
Highest Cost Example $1,456 $4,580 $5,800 $5,100
(Prices in Dollars Per Acre-Foot)
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/uploadedFiles/CPUC_Public_Website/Content/About_U...
3
Please read my comments again. You will see that I don't call desalination "cheap", but instead contend that it is less expensive, all-in, than building infrastructure to capture the relatively little water available in semi-arid regions from irregular rainfall.
I also hope you will try to understand that there is no such thing as "cannibalizing" the ocean. The amount of water molecules on the planet never changes, they just move around. The water cycle means that water that is not stored underground and in the soil evaporates into the atmosphere, and then falls as (mostly) rain, and mostly into the oceans. That rain is essentially salt free.
Also, on the scale of the oceans, the amount of water treated by the desalination process is almost not measurable. It is infinitesimally small.
So, please relax and have a look at the future. We can either deny science, or use it to create sustainable solutions for the water needs of people all over the world.
I also hope you will try to understand that there is no such thing as "cannibalizing" the ocean. The amount of water molecules on the planet never changes, they just move around. The water cycle means that water that is not stored underground and in the soil evaporates into the atmosphere, and then falls as (mostly) rain, and mostly into the oceans. That rain is essentially salt free.
Also, on the scale of the oceans, the amount of water treated by the desalination process is almost not measurable. It is infinitesimally small.
So, please relax and have a look at the future. We can either deny science, or use it to create sustainable solutions for the water needs of people all over the world.
As it gets hotter and drier, that $1 Billion dollars will be found, since we all know you can't drink money.
20
As a lifetime Californian, and having been through a couple of droughts (late 1970's), the idea of capturing rain water instead of letting it run into the ocean occurred to me when I was child. Instead, we plan and try to build grossly expensive desalinization plants to pull back out of the ocean what flowed into it. The idea is so stunningly obvious, the only question is why it didn't happen years ago.
41
Actually, it is much more efficient to let stormwater run off into the ocean, and instead desalinate ocean water, than to capture filthy stormwater in the short periods it is available and then build the infrastructure needed to store, convey, and treat it.
Stormwater is available only intermittently, and with very uncertain periodicity. In contrast, ocean water is always available, every single day, with perfect reliability. And, the all-in cost of ocean desalination is much lower per gallon that the all-in cost of stormwater.
So, let's have this discussion, but base it on real numbers. The answer clearly is to let stormwater flow to the sea, and to build more desalination plants.
Stormwater is available only intermittently, and with very uncertain periodicity. In contrast, ocean water is always available, every single day, with perfect reliability. And, the all-in cost of ocean desalination is much lower per gallon that the all-in cost of stormwater.
So, let's have this discussion, but base it on real numbers. The answer clearly is to let stormwater flow to the sea, and to build more desalination plants.
9
Actually, Don, I think that both David and I are talking about run off and the overflow from rivers and reservoirs that just runs downhill and into the ocean over a day or two or three or four. Not necessarily the "dirty water" that has already run over streets, down gutters, through sewers and out into the ocean. The water we're talking about isn't necessarily "filthy" at all. But there is just no place to put this water that is falling/melting up in the mountains. There should be. And many of us were thinking about this a long, long time ago. That legislators haven't is a crime.
4
Mr. Bee:
This article is about capturing stormwater. The point is that this is not economically rational. The point is that, before William Mulholland, god sent that water to the sea (we didn't "dump" it into the ocean).
If we care about people (especially poor people), we should be very careful to watch our pennies, and the most reliable source of water is the ocean, and the less expensive way to treat it to potable standard is desal.
And if it matters, I am a Berkeley grad, so please let's not paint this as a central California vs. southern California matter.
This article is about capturing stormwater. The point is that this is not economically rational. The point is that, before William Mulholland, god sent that water to the sea (we didn't "dump" it into the ocean).
If we care about people (especially poor people), we should be very careful to watch our pennies, and the most reliable source of water is the ocean, and the less expensive way to treat it to potable standard is desal.
And if it matters, I am a Berkeley grad, so please let's not paint this as a central California vs. southern California matter.
It never fails to amaze me how any story about California in the New York Times will bring out a crowd of people not from California pointing out that "see...California IS doomed, we knew it all along." I particularly appreciate the New Yorkers who chide Californians for living in an unsustainable way. In case you are unaware, your East Coast lives require vast amounts of energy in heating and AC to work. Try living in New York in the winter without heat before you go on about how California is a desert where no one should live in the first place.
51
Don't see any "California is doomed" in these comments.
2
Who knew that people in Southern California refrained from using AC in the summer?
PAS, you mistakenly assume that someone making a comment with a posted geographical other than California must never have lived in California or is not a native Californian living elsewhere in the moment.
I always find it so discouraging that a mere $1 billion could result in a long living payoff for millions and yet as a society we just write off the fact that the useless war in Iraq was at one time costing us $4 billion a month!
109
Wars are a profit center. Those billions go to arms manufacturers, many if not all in the U.S. The billions which might be spent on our national infrastructure go to companies which don't have quite the influence as do the arms manufacturers.
33
This is something that can't be emphasized enough. Those who promote war must explain how resources can be squandered so lavishly and how this somehow benefits the nation.
28
You can't expect to live in a semi-desert environment with tens of millions of people consuming a dwindling resource and not expect that resource to dry up eventually. Blame it on climate change if it makes you feel better. But drought is cyclical and California has not prepared for the current extended cycle. The good life comes at a cost.
9
It is simply not true that water is somehow "dwindling". The amount of water on this planet has not changed over recorded time, and will not change in the future. The water cycle is the water cycle, and the same water is perpetually recycled.
Climate change does not reduce the amount of water on the planet, it merely means that more is stored in the atmosphere/clouds and more precipitation falls as rain instead of snow. It also means that precipitation will occur in different patterns as the planet warms, and then cools again.
Supply is supply. It does not change.
On the other hand, demand continues to rise with rapid population growth. When I was younger, the Greens all cried out for Zero Population Growth...until it become politically incorrect. Today, the Greens have become Science Deniers. Oh well.
Climate change does not reduce the amount of water on the planet, it merely means that more is stored in the atmosphere/clouds and more precipitation falls as rain instead of snow. It also means that precipitation will occur in different patterns as the planet warms, and then cools again.
Supply is supply. It does not change.
On the other hand, demand continues to rise with rapid population growth. When I was younger, the Greens all cried out for Zero Population Growth...until it become politically incorrect. Today, the Greens have become Science Deniers. Oh well.
4
Yes, the total amount of water on the planet is not changing, but global climate change has impacted and will continue to impact the patterns of precipitation. Most experts predict that this means less rain and snowfall in California. Supply DOES change.
Don Billings,
Your comment about the water cycle and the total water supply on the planet are entirely correct. Why attach an entirely gratuitous attack on a strawman you call 'the Greens'?
Your comment about the water cycle and the total water supply on the planet are entirely correct. Why attach an entirely gratuitous attack on a strawman you call 'the Greens'?
1
Inexplicably, the article made only an elliptical reference to the mandatory regulations already in place (found here: http://www.lastormwater.org/). Applied to new construction by individual homeowners, the costs (for which, incidentally, there are no subsidies or tax breaks) can be considerable -- attributable both to design (requiring, among other things, extensive civil engineering) and implementation (such as building an aesthetically logical means of capturing water above ground where the local geology -- don't forget we have earthquakes too -- does not permit below ground water retention).
1
I've been saying this for years! What took you so long to figure it out California?
2
40,000,000 people is th problem
23
"Nowhere is the disparity felt more than in parched Los Angeles, with its short winters and its overwhelming reliance on water imported from Northern California and the Colorado River. "
Deserts are parched?
Deserts are parched?
3
Los Angeles is not a desert. It has a Mediterranean climate.
1
Lots of the Mediterranean lands are deserts, L Marlin.
2
Here's a radical thought: require all new homes in the drought-stricken areas to include a large cistern in the basement, or underground. Then direct roof runoff via the gutters into the cistern, and use that water for toilet flushing.
In my own home I use as much rain water as possible for toilet flushing by trapping rain water from the roof in 16 55-gallon drums. I don't have it piped into the house, so it does involve lugging lots of water ... certainly not a solution for the masses, I know. But I do get exercise in the hauling, and I don't have to pay a gym a membership fee for it. Using drinking-quality water for toilet flushing doesn't make much economic sense.
In my own home I use as much rain water as possible for toilet flushing by trapping rain water from the roof in 16 55-gallon drums. I don't have it piped into the house, so it does involve lugging lots of water ... certainly not a solution for the masses, I know. But I do get exercise in the hauling, and I don't have to pay a gym a membership fee for it. Using drinking-quality water for toilet flushing doesn't make much economic sense.
59
With as much seismic activity this region contends with, cistern construction would be a costly and complex solution.
3
Large volume containers can be economically produced with plastic and other composite materials that can withstand seismic activity.
9
Any new home constructed anywhere should have thousand gallon cisterns included. You can also throw in extreme thermal efficiency, storm shelters, roofs that won't blow off, backup generators, and above all solar power.
18
4,000 gallons. a) Four 1,000 gallon doughnuts can receive a load of trucked-in water. b) Rule of thumb size to conserve annual rainfall on house with 800 square foot steel roof.
1
As my grandmother used to say, "too soon old, too late smart". California has been aware of the problem since at least the 1920's.
32
For how many decades now should state and city officials have already been working diligently on this problem? Two? Three? Four? Or more?
3
What are they going to do with all the storm runoff? Use it to water lawns? They can't drink it, or cook with it, or shower with it - it's polluted with rubber dust and motor oil and gasoline residue and who knows what else. How are they going to filter / treat that water so it's actually good for something?
10
So-called gray water systems use runoff for plants, waste transport, and semi-industrial tasks. The cost of filtering is reduced by a significant amount, as there is a separate system for the non-potable water. Another reason for infrastructural investment.
20
Gray water and stormwater are completely different concepts. Stormwater falls from the sky. Gray water is household wastewater, from washing machines and sinks. Not relevant.
2
Capturing storm water in settlement basins allows it to seep back into the aquifer. The massive amount of storm water that runs off the San Gabriel and San Bernardino mountains (natural forested areas) can be captured in settlement basins before it runs into urban areas and collects significant pollutants. Storm water captured in urban areas can be purified sufficiently in treatment plants to allow that water to be directed back into an aquifer or as non-potable supply. A treatment plant to do this is being proposed for a location near LAX.
.
.
3
Places like Yemen have had systems in place for thousands of years to trap and use seasonal storms. I am always amazed when I see how poorly we use the resource in our western states.
45
Yes, but the Central Valley is one of the best-utilized agricultural regions in the world, often managing to get 3 crop turns per year.
Southern California should look at what they accomplish in Bermuda where much of the rain is collected from rooftops and stored in cisterns. The same practice is used in Greece. Building codes for new construction should include this new home construction. The cost per home would be minimal and water savings dramatic.
39
“Storm water is an important new resource for California that is underappreciated and undercaptured,”
With the exception of the obvious issues regarding flooding and erosion, any type of water is underappreciated. It seems as though California and similar communities are having some type of "Flint Moment". It would have been so much easier to have handled this years ago. No doubt some knew the day of reckoning was near.
With the exception of the obvious issues regarding flooding and erosion, any type of water is underappreciated. It seems as though California and similar communities are having some type of "Flint Moment". It would have been so much easier to have handled this years ago. No doubt some knew the day of reckoning was near.
6
Ancient Rome had a sophisticated system of storm water management. I guess we've sunk further than we have realized as a civilization.
23
i realized it
2
You can still marvel at the Aqueduct in Segovia, Spain, built in 99 A.D. and 99-ft. tall coincidentally, with not a speck of mortar between the chiseled stones.
Redd Fox's character in Sanford & Son called California, " Shake & Bake USA " a wonderfully accurate descriptive for the state. The Paradise has become the Dry Desert. All those cars creeping along clogged Freeways for waayyy Too Long has 'paid off' in spades. Smog wasn't just fouling your lungs it turns out. The Bible was right again, You do Reap what you Sow !
3
Funny--I went surfing before riding my bike in the warm sunshine to work this a.m. I wonder how your Long Island morning compared.
Please don't waste your time fretting about California's woes, Ed. We've got a lot of smart folks who are working on solving them ourselves...
Please don't waste your time fretting about California's woes, Ed. We've got a lot of smart folks who are working on solving them ourselves...
3
That's a choice comment, considering "The World's Longest Parking Lot" is your very own LIE. As Surfer noted, we'll be just fine. There are problems that arise no matter where one lives. The question is does one rise to the occasion to tackle it, or take potshots at those who do? Cheers!
6
Many freeways here now have smart lanes, Ed, where all drivers can use them via Fastrack. Imagine that on the LIE.
Here in New Mexico where "drought" describes business-as-usual. 13 inches is a good year. We capture every drop that hits every roof at our place, two-car garage, chicken shed and house. 9000 gallons of cisterns allows us to have a garden and some flowers. Since our well has gone dry, water harvesting provides our whole irrigation budget. 'T'aint that hard, L.A.
70
What needs to happen is every green space needs to be designed to accept runoff. Not really as difficult as one might think. Simply remove a few feet of dirt to create a depression and have your gutter run to it. The water might sit there a few hours or a few days but will eventually it will be reabsorbed and if done on a large scale will raise the water table. The additional plus is this serves as a filter so than fertilizer and the such does not find its way to the ocean. In Florida where I live near an inland river this approach is required by law for filtration purposes of all new construction and any project that comes up to be refurbished.
44
Just be sure to put mosquito dunks or something to kill them in the water.
3
Just be sure mosquitos can't breed in the sittin water!
3
Of course, our beloved bureaucrats will deem those puddles to be Vernal Pools which must be regulated and protected.
Southern California used to dump all of its rain into the sea. Lately there are some innovative projects, some mentioned here. But think for a moment if Southern California had developed on its own resources, in place of 'stealing' water from places and farmers hundreds of miles away. We sometimes forget that there were people that lost 'their river to the force of Mulholland.
While at the same time diverting what was theirs, infrequent, seasonal, but heavy rain, dumped into the sea. There exists a role model already.
Many, many islands in the world have no better or more frequent source and no river to draw from. Cisterns. Every house, every building,,, they all have a roof,, and they all 'harvest' the rain in gutters.
At a minimum, every roof, every parking lot, perhaps many streets, should empty their infrequent offerings from the sky into storage. If not to drink,, then certainly for lawns, fountains, grey water uses, toilet flushing, car washing. This is where every dry island in the Caribbean gets its water, Azores, Canary Islands, many to most Pacific islands.
Every parking lot sits atop a cistern, every house and all of its roof top gutters pour into a private cistern,,, by simple building department regulation. Every new building permit, must accompany this improvement. keep them small, keep the systems simple. Pay for them one at a time. Split the cost, public and private. All will benefit.
While at the same time diverting what was theirs, infrequent, seasonal, but heavy rain, dumped into the sea. There exists a role model already.
Many, many islands in the world have no better or more frequent source and no river to draw from. Cisterns. Every house, every building,,, they all have a roof,, and they all 'harvest' the rain in gutters.
At a minimum, every roof, every parking lot, perhaps many streets, should empty their infrequent offerings from the sky into storage. If not to drink,, then certainly for lawns, fountains, grey water uses, toilet flushing, car washing. This is where every dry island in the Caribbean gets its water, Azores, Canary Islands, many to most Pacific islands.
Every parking lot sits atop a cistern, every house and all of its roof top gutters pour into a private cistern,,, by simple building department regulation. Every new building permit, must accompany this improvement. keep them small, keep the systems simple. Pay for them one at a time. Split the cost, public and private. All will benefit.
102
Another feel-good non solution. Like chicken soup, cisterns can't hurt, but solutions must be based on reality.
For example, here is San Diego, some people believe that tearing out their little patch of (green house gas sequestering) lawn will make it all better. But they don't realize that, given population growth, demand for potable water will increase in 3 years by an amount that will take total demand right back where it was before. Not a solution.
I have a rain barrel. It captures enough water to meet my outdoor water needs for about one day. But it rains infrequently, and exactly during the months when I don't need to water outdoors.
Water captured in cisterns in unfit for drinking or most household use. Treatment is expensive, and ruinously so if done one a small scale. If there is no alternative, and the only option is live like a third world country, cisterns have their appeal. But we have much better options.
Let's dispense with childlike thinking.
For example, here is San Diego, some people believe that tearing out their little patch of (green house gas sequestering) lawn will make it all better. But they don't realize that, given population growth, demand for potable water will increase in 3 years by an amount that will take total demand right back where it was before. Not a solution.
I have a rain barrel. It captures enough water to meet my outdoor water needs for about one day. But it rains infrequently, and exactly during the months when I don't need to water outdoors.
Water captured in cisterns in unfit for drinking or most household use. Treatment is expensive, and ruinously so if done one a small scale. If there is no alternative, and the only option is live like a third world country, cisterns have their appeal. But we have much better options.
Let's dispense with childlike thinking.
Of course, the Repubs will all decry, "We can't afford it!" My answer to them: drink the poisoned water your party created in Flint, Michigan, to save $5 million over two years...and will cost $1.5 billion to remedy.
Flint was a case of genocide by malign neglect of a minority, poor population--the
Flint was a case of genocide by malign neglect of a minority, poor population--the
3