Delta Counties Coalition Discussion on Alternatives to CA WaterFix - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Delta Counties Coalition Discussion on Alternatives to CA WaterFix Don Nottoli, Sacramento County Supervisor Chuck Winn, San Joaquin County Supervisor Katherine Miller, San Joaquin County Supervisor Diane Burgis, Contra Costa County Supervisor
Don Nottoli, Sacramento County Supervisor Chuck Winn, San Joaquin County Supervisor Katherine Miller, San Joaquin County Supervisor Diane Burgis, Contra Costa County Supervisor August 25, 2017
Attachment 1 Page 1 of 17
Introduction
Overview: Delta Counties Coalition
Alternatives to CA WaterFix
Presentation by Dr. Jeffrey Michael, University of the Pacific
How can we work together?
Attachment 1 Page 2 of 17
Overview: Delta Counties Coalition
The DCC works to give one voice to the Delta.
Our goals: improve the Delta ecosystem, provide a more reliable water supply for the State, and protect and enhance Delta communities.
The DCC works with local, state, and federal stakeholders to develop and implement solutions that address California’s water issues in a comprehensive, sustainable manner.
The DCC is about a diversified approach to CA water needs.
Attachment 1 Page 3 of 17
Invest in statewide and regional water storage
Upgrade current infrastructure
Levee system improvements
Conservation/water use efficiency
Environmental restoration Alternatives to CA WaterFix
Attachment 1 Page 4 of 17
Attachment 1 Page 5 of 17
Are likely alternatives a “Pareto Improvement”?
At least as good as WaterFix in every criteria, and Clearly superior in at least one area
Criteria:
Cost Water Supply Environmental (i.e. fish) impacts Protection from Earthquake or Sea-Level Rise Job Creation
Attachment 1 Page 6 of 17
Levees Recycling: Indirect Potable and Non-potable. Desalination: Seawater and Brackish Stormwater Capture Surface Storage Other Govt Spending (i.e. Housing, Health, Educ.)
Efficiency/Conservation Groundwater Storage West Delta Conveyance New Technology
Attachment 1 Page 7 of 17
All scenarios
Include $2-4 billion for Delta levees Each alternative investment is <50% of 2030 potential.
Two scenarios focused on water supply.
no surface storage and desalination in one alternative.
Environment Focus (SCVWD staff no-tunnel scenario)
Water supply scenario with a 1 maf cut to exports.
Ratepayer Focus
$8 billion to alternatives, ratepayers save $8 billion.
Attachment 1 Page 8 of 17
WaterFix Water Supply 1 Water Supply 2 Water and Fish Taxpayers Tunnels 16 Levees 4 4 4 2 Indirect Potable Reuse 3 5 5 2 Non-potable Reuse 2 4 4 1 Desalination Seawater 1 1 Desalination Brackish 1 1 1 1 Stormwater capture 1 2 2 1 Surface Storage 4 Lower Rates 4 Other Govt Spending 4
Attachment 1 Page 9 of 17
Attachment 1 Page 10 of 17
WaterFix Water Supply 1 Water Supply 2 Environment Ratepayers Net New Water Supply (acre feet, avg. annual) 172,000 884,000 1,430,000 430,000 659,000 Impact to Fish Negative, but permitted if no jeopardy Little to None Little to None Positive Little to None California Jobs Created From Investment (in job years) 119,000 160,000 160,000 160,000 136,000 Seismic and Flood Risk Protection Protects Water export
Protects Water Export, Other Infrastructure , Property, Public Safety Protects Water Export, Other Infrastructure , Property, Public Safety Protects Water Export, Other Infrastructure , Property, Public Safety Protects all interests, but at lower level than water supply alternatives. Increased Consumption of Other Goods and Services None None None None $8 billion
Attachment 1 Page 11 of 17
WaterFix Water Supply 1 Water Supply 2 Ratepayers Net New Water Supply (acre feet) 1,200,000 884,004 1,430,000 659,000 Impact to Fish Very Negative Little to None Little to None Little to None Jobs Created (in job years) 119,000 160,000 160,000 136,000 Seismic and Flood Risk Protection Protects Water export only Protects Water Export, Other Infrastructure, Property, Public Safety Protects Water Export, Other Infrastructure, Property, Public Safety Protects all interests, but at lower level than water supply alternatives. Increased Consumption of Other Goods and Services None None None $8 billion
Attachment 1 Page 12 of 17
The operating constraint on OMR flows produces
More freshwater outflow to Bay-Delta. No harm to fish from North Delta Intakes.
WaterFix operations could also be subject to future
“Apples to Apples” comparison should be based on
WaterFix is worse for Delta fish than No Action
WaterFix yield is on declining trend too.
Attachment 1 Page 13 of 17
Compared to the No Action Alternative Insurance against future regulatory actions. 2007 BDCP Objectives 1,500,000 af Yes, Section 10 ESA regulatory assurance 2013 draft BDCP EIR 392,000 af Yes, Section 10 ESA regulatory assurance. 2015 recirculated EIR 255,000 af No, Section 7 permit 2016 Draft Biological Assessment 225,000 af No, Section 7 permit Jan 2017 Final EIR 172,000 af No, Section 7 permit June 2017: Revised project description for Biops Adds unlimited pulse flows for salmon, not included in water supply modeling No, Section 7 permit Biological Opinions for Operations ? No, Section 7 permit SWRCB Permit ? No, Section 7 permit
Attachment 1 Page 14 of 17
2014 dollars. Source: Stratecon, Dr. Rodney Smith $- $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
$ per acre foot
Yield (million acre feet)
Staff alternative baseline EIR baseline
Attachment 1 Page 15 of 17
Due to local decisions, we can’t predict the exact
Analysis demonstrates many plausible alternative
Alternatives are Pareto improvements:
Achieves every goal at least as well as WaterFix. Far superior to WaterFix in at least one area.
Thus, California is better off under wide range of likely
Attachment 1 Page 16 of 17
How can we work together? Thank you.
Attachment 1 Page 17 of 17