Spreck Rosekrans is an Economic Analyst at EDF
Since we’re neighbors let's be friends.
This old Safeway jingle comes to mind in the wake of the East Bay Municipal Utility District’s decision to withdraw its plans to expand Pardee Reservoir, in the Sierra Nevada mountains of Northern California, and to work instead with neighboring Contra Costa Water District.
Expanding Pardee would have buried a beautiful stretch of the Mokelumne River that is a popular recreation area for boaters (myself included) and others in the nearby foothill communities. Instead the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) intends to invest in the expansion of the less controversial (and “offstream”) Los Vaqueros Reservoir, owned and operated by the Contra Costa Water District (CCWD).
There are three reasons to cheer this decision.
First, as an environmentalist I celebrate California's rivers and lament that dams have impeded the flow on so many of our streams, especially in the Sierra Nevada. I understand of course that we live in a semi-arid state and that we need to provide reliable water to 39 million people and our world-class agricultural economy, so many dams are necessary. But it's a good thing whenever we can meet our water supply needs and still allow our rivers to flow.
Second, as an EBMUD customer, I feel more comfortable with water stored close to home. The viability of EBMUD's Mokelumne River aqueduct depends in part on the stability of the notoriously fragile levees in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta on which it rests. I am pleased that EBMUD engineers have taken steps to ensure the aqueduct's seismic reliability and that we EBMUD customers have made significant financial contributions to levee repair and maintenance on certain islands. Still it seems risky to depend so heavily on uninterrupted supplies from so far away. The Los Vaqueros option will improve reliability as it is located in the Bay Area.
Third, I am pleased to see improved cooperation between local water agencies. It is particularly important in the Bay Area that our water utilities be better integrated, both physically and institutionally. This is true not only of CCWD and EBMUD but also of the other agencies that supply water to the contiguous cities around the Bay: Zone 7, Alameda County Water District, Santa Clara Valley Water District and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. In a logical world these districts would not only provide each other additional options in the event of a pipeline outage, but would also establish criteria for sharing supplies in the event of hydrologic shortages. For example, in 2008 drought and endangered species concerns significantly limited diversions from the Delta on which many cities in the South and East Bay depend, but the Tuolumne River flows that supply cities on the peninsula were scarcely affected. With increased integration, these agencies could better share water in times of crisis.
EBMUD’s change in plans makes sense from an environmental perspective and from a reliability perspective. The choice seems obvious and could have been made some time ago. Unfortunately, however, the change in course came about only after massive grassroots opposition (kudos to the Foothill Conservancy and their colleagues), a court ruling, and changes in leadership at both agencies.
Subscribe via RSS