An article from Slate.com caught my eye this week: “California’s Next Megadrought Has Already Begun.”
Overall, it’s a pretty grim read.
California’s cities have more than enough water to withstand the current drought and then some. They simply don’t use that much. Not true for agriculture, which uses 80 percent of California’s water—10 percent of that just on almonds. Though it’s still a national powerhouse, fed increasingly by fast-depleting groundwater supplies, the state’s agriculture industry has likely begun a long-term decline due mostly to simple math. Abnormally dry conditions have dominated in 11 of the last 15 years, and the cuts have to come from somewhere. Agriculture is the elephant in the ever-shrinking room of California water.
But isn’t agriculture also a political and economic powerhouse in California? If ag goes into a major decline as a result of continued drought, what’s going to happen to the state’s already shaky economy? Will corporate agriculture begin shifting assets to areas with more stable water supplies? There will be a real estate ripple through the central valley, and more. It’s hard to see where this ends unless it’s several years of above average rainfall, something not in the cards right now.
And other areas of the Southwest? Are cities like Phoenix living on borrowed time?
California has now imposed mandatory restrictions on watering lawns. The Sacramento Bee reports:
California regulators on Tuesday ordered every water agency in the state to restrict how often customers can water their landscaping, an unprecedented move that marks another milestone in the severe and ongoing drought.
The decision was adopted unanimously by the State Water Resources Control Board and will take effect in about 45 days. Officials at the water board said it is the first time any state in the nation has imposed an emergency water conservation requirement on every local water agency within its borders.
A Los Angeles Times editorial calls it “just a taste of what’s to come.”
A U-T San Diego editorial cites several types of available policy responses, including pricing strategies to reduce water use, desalination, purification and recycling, and controlling waste.
To what extent is Hawaii looking forward to the potential for an extended drought here? Climate change may lead to a decline in annual rainfall. As all of these California stories say, it’s way too late to address the water issues when you’re in the middle of an extended drought. The planning, and the investment, really needs to start long before the rain stops.
We lose water every day from leaks resulting from our aging infrastructure. We fail to capture what are likely large amounts of runoff that goes to the ocean instead of being saved and purified. Has Hawaii County altered its policies in light of their experience with drought over the past several years? Maybe folks from there and Maui can share their experience.
It’s all sounding like an apocalyptic science fiction yarn as modern society hits the revenge of the desert.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Hawaiino,
I am sorry you find me opinonated and ill informed. We may be having a tiff over semantics because I agree with most of what you said above about recharge and periodic (and flashy) stream flows.
Massive clearance of forests and unregulated use of wells did reduce water supplies early in the development of Oahu. I agree that the cause was not urbanization. Rather it was bad land use and water infrastructure practices.
I do not know why you think we have a water shortage. The Board of Water Supply is able to provide water for existing and planned development , and has taken prudent measures to conserve and develop water supplies. We do not have a water shortage on Oahu, nor is there insufficient water infrastructure.
No development gets approved for development if it has insufficient water for fire protection and for consumption.
I agree with your point that the original comment claiming that we were in danger of paving over the areas needed for aquifer recharge is wrong, but it is also true that we need to protect lands above the 50 inch isohyet and above the Pearl Harbor aquifer from any uses that would reduce recharge of the aquifer. In that case, increasing the amount of impervious surfaces (roofs, pavement) could affect recharge.
And yes the City and the State do have regulations which require mitigation. I am one of the people helping to develop and enforce those regulations.
I’m trying to find information on droughts and water runoff. This is the first thing I found.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/s/surface_runoff.htm
Urbanization can lead not only to reduced water supply, but also to polluted water.
Here’s the second thing I found:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/08/140901-climate-change-water-runoff-mountains-california-drought/
As global warming warms currently cold areas in snowcapped mountains, more trees will grow higher in the mountains. This means less water flowing into watersheds. Not good for California.
I am trying to find information on global warming, evaporation and runoff. Global warming, IIRC, means more evaporation; in rainy areas that means more rain, in snowy areas, more snow, in dry areas, drought. But if the soil in a humid climate becomes dessicated during a dry spell, and if plants wither, then the ground is less able to absorb water (e.g., if you put a damp sponge under running water, the sponge will absorb it, whereas water will run right off a dry sponge). So this might become a problem in humid climates like Hawaii. (But I cannot find information on this.)
a good place to start on assessments of impacts on Hawaii and other Pacific Islands is this: http://www.pacificrisa.org/projects/pirca/
Generally, the consensus is that we will experience more drought (5% less rainfall is one estimate), higher temperatures (with today’s highest temperatures being the temperatures on the coolest day by mid-century), and more intense storms (including an increase in the likelihood of hurricanes).
All of these have obvious impacts on aquifer recharge which underlines the importance of protecting and improving aquifer recharge, and finding ways to catch and use storm water.
Lopaka
Apologies and truce… We share more than we differ. I’ll blame it on the (my) wine… I was responding to a generalized ignorance expressed as opinion (by others) to a specific individual (you) who is, after re-reading all your posts, neither.
Well, you do have an opinion, but it seems grounded in fact or experience, and that’s a good thing.
“In the 1980s, it was estimated that the sustainable yield of Oahu’s freshwater resources would be reached by the year 2000. However, because of the closure of the water-intensive sugar industry, combined with a modest economy, upcoming, new groundwater sources and successful conservation measures, the estimate has been pushed back to beyond the year 2020.”
— Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Kalaeloa Desalination Facility, September 2008 – Honolulu Board of Water Supply
“Considering present patterns of potable water use, projected demands from the City’s population projections to 2030 and available potable groundwater sources, it is estimated that the sustainable yield of Oahu’s natural freshwater sources may be reached within 20 years.”
— Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Kalaeloa Desalination Facility, September 2008 – Honolulu Board of Water Supply
As California Loses Hydro Resources to Drought, Large-Scale Solar Fills in the Gap
https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/solar-becomes-the-second-biggest-renewable-energy-provider-in-california
California Drought Tests History of Endless Growth
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/05/us/california-drought-tests-history-of-endless-growth.html?_r=0