Pacific Institute

Managing the Unmeasured – Colorado River

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

by Michael Cohen

Key Takeaways

Despite the severity of the current water crisis in the Colorado River and decades of management, research, and litigation, basic facts about the river, such as the exact number of people it supports , remain unknown.
A detailed accounting of where and how we use Colorado River water must be prioritized.

It’s all hands on deck for the Colorado River Basin. Nearing a quarter-century of drought (better described as a continuing shift to an ever-hotter and ever-drier climate), the most famous and important river in the West faces an existential crisis.

Seven months ago, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation called on Colorado River water users to decrease their use by 15-30% — in one year. Without such extraordinary efforts, the two major Colorado River dams—Hoover and Glen Canyon—could lose their ability to produce hydropower in less than a year and a half. Even more concerning is that the continued decline of storage at Lake Powell could threaten the ability to pass water through Glen Canyon dam, diminishing flows through the iconic Grand Canyon and accelerating the decline of Lake Mead.

In response, farmers offer not to farm, cities pledge to conserve more water, and groundwater recharge operations forsake storing water underground, to compensate for the long-term overuse of supply, exacerbated by continuing decline of that supply. Simply put, every acre-foot of water matters to prevent the system from collapsing.

One might think that because the Colorado River is one of the most tightly managed and scrutinized rivers on the planet, we would have a detailed account of how every acre-foot is used and accounted for, how many people and users rely on the river, and where those uses take place. Yet, despite the severity of the current crisis and decades of management and research and litigation, basic facts about the river and the basin remain unknown, challenging efforts to better manage the system and avert the imminent crisis.

Water Use

Surprisingly, we do not know how much Colorado River water is used each year, especially in the Upper Basin. In the Lower Basin, Reclamation carefully measures releases from Hoover Dam and withdrawals to the Las Vegas metropolitan area – as well as diversion and delivery points downstream – but generally estimates unmeasured return flows [1] “by multiplying a water user’s diversion by an unmeasured return flow factor.” The volume of unmeasured return flows is only about four percent of total Lower Basin consumptive use but exceeds Nevada’s total use. The actual error here is likely very small, but it does suggest that the precision of Lower Basin consumptive use records exceeds their accuracy.

While the annual Lower Basin Decree Accounting reports enjoy broad credibility, Upper Basin water use accounting is much more challenging and less accepted. As Reclamation notes in its periodic Consumptive Uses and Losses report, the reliability of Upper Basin water use and loss estimates “is affected by the availability of data and the current capabilities of data evaluation.” Reclamation also notes that “Quantitative measurements of water use were used wherever available, but the majority of the basin water use was theoretically calculated. In the tributary areas of the basin, records of diversions and return flows are not complete enough to allow direct calculation of consumptive water use.” The Upper Colorado River Commission (UCRC) notes, “Historically, the Upper Division States (UT, CO, WY, and NM) have used multiple methods to estimate water use for irrigation, but these estimates were not consistent at an interstate scale that would be helpful to water managers and decision-makers, nor could the data be generated in a timely manner.” These sentiments reflect long-standing challenges to estimating flows past hundreds of different diversion points, as well as surface and sub-surface return flows. In June, the UCRC adopted a new method to measure agricultural consumptive water use in the Upper Basin.

Uncertainty about actual Upper Basin water use challenges efforts to quantify annual shortages. For example, Upper Basin decision-makers claim to have suffered from almost one million acre-feet (MAF) of shortages in 2021. But determining exactly where those shortages occurred, by how much, and the economic impacts of such shortages, is difficult. For example, the State of Colorado’s Division 5 (the Colorado River headwaters sub-basin) recorded 234 “administrative calls” (curtailments) in 2021, but the records do not include the volumes associated with these calls or whether those curtailed were able to divert their requested water at some later time.

Water Supply

Many agencies estimate Colorado River flows and total water supply for the system, ranging from short and long-term snowpack and precipitation to “natural flows” and ‘’unregulated inflows.” One federal agency’s unregulated inflow forecasts account for physical factors such as precipitation and soil moisture and reservoir impacts (such as evaporation and change in storage) and measured (but not unmeasured) diversions, while Reclamation’s “unregulated inflows” account for both measured and unmeasured diversions. Reclamation estimates “natural flows” – the conventional measure of Colorado River annual water supply – based on Water Use (see discussion above) and its unregulated inflow forecasts, adding an element of uncertainty. Conventionally, Colorado River flows reflect an annual volume at Lee Ferry – the dividing point between the Upper and Lower basins, more than 765 river miles upstream from where the river used to meet the sea. Between Lee Ferry and Imperial Dam (630 river miles downstream), more than 1.2 MAF of “natural flows” would contribute to the river’s total discharge. That is, discussions about Colorado River supply typically ignore Lower Basin inflows that add another ten percent or so to the Lee Ferry volume – flow that is all consumed before the river reaches the sea.

Tribal Water Rights

The Colorado River basin is home to 30 federally recognized tribes, who have more than 3.2 MAF of recognized water rights. Twelve of the tribes still have unresolved water rights claims within the basin that could increase total settled tribal water rights well beyond 3.6 MAF. Recognition of unresolved water rights is long overdue and challenges efforts to estimate the location of future demands and uses as tribes develop their water rights and/or lease them to other users, again leading to significant uncertainty for Basin decision-makers.

Irrigated Acres

Colorado River basin water irrigates between 5 and 5.7 million acres of farm and ranch land – methods for measuring such acreage vary, and actual irrigated acreage changes year to year based on market conditions and water availability. A little more than half of the irrigated acreage exists within the hydrologic basin (though not within the institutional basin – see Basin Boundaries below). While new methods will improve understanding of both the extent of irrigated acreage and the amount of water used, we still don’t have a credible number for the number of acres irrigated within the basin, acres irrigated with Colorado River water that lie outside the basin, or the acreages of different crops. As we noted in our 2013 report, “the various agencies that report water and land use information for the Colorado River basin use a host of different terms that are often not comparable. The frequency and timing of many of these measurements are rarely synchronized.” It is important to be explicit here—for the sector that uses 70-80% of the Colorado River’s supply, we do not have a detailed understanding of just how many acres of agricultural land are irrigated with that water. As far as we know, no one has attempted another comprehensive accounting of irrigated acreage since our 2013 report, which seems long overdue.

Population

Conventionally, 40 million people use Colorado River water, an estimate from a 2012 report. But a decade later, we’ve learned that nearly seven million people in Southern California thought to use Colorado River water lack any physical connection to the river – the plumbing simply doesn’t exist to deliver water to them. On the other hand, the basin is home to some of the fastest-growing cities in the country – the combined populations of Arizona and the Las Vegas metropolitan area grew by almost 2 million people from 2010 to 2020. The conventional population estimates also mix direct use of Colorado River water (and its tributaries) with groundwater pumped from the basin. How many people actually use Colorado River water (or more accurately, water from the Colorado River basin)? Given the significant growth experienced and projected, we should know this number and we don’t. But it’s much less than 40 million.

Basin Boundaries

Scope – boundaries – matter as we measure and attempt to manage elements such as water use, exports, and water demands. Reclamation’s traditional map of the Colorado River basin excludes a large portion of the river’s former delta and the watershed draining to that delta, because it is a terminal basin that does not return flows to the river, even though the river flowed there repeatedly via gravity over millennia. This means that the basin’s institutional and hydrologic boundaries are not the same and means that millions of acre-feet of water that flow via gravity to the former delta are considered “exports” from the system – and that hundreds of thousands of acres irrigated with this water are deemed outside of the basin.

Boundaries also confound population estimates, because exports to Southern California and Wasatch Front and Front Range water agency service areas have often been counted as contributing to the use of their total service area populations, even if the plumbing doesn’t exist to deliver that water or if only a few molecules of basin water actually enter the service area. (For more discussion on the importance of boundaries see this blog post.)

Operational Neutrality

Reclamation’s August 24-month study “most probable” projection of Lake Mead’s December elevation determines the shortage tier for Lower Basin contractors and for deliveries to Mexico and helps set the operational tier for coordinated reservoir operations for the following calendar year. The 24-month studies show the projected physical elevations at each reservoir. In 2022, the August 24-month study “most probable” projection put Lake Mead’s December elevation at 1040.78’, which would have triggered 0.2 MAF of reductions in California and more than a MAF of total reductions in the Lower Basin and Mexico.

However, because Interior took actions to protect the elevation of Lake Powell and reduced releases from Glen Canyon Dam in 2022 by 0.48 MAF, the projected physical elevation at Lake Mead no longer determines the shortage tier. Instead, Reclamation now uses a separate and unpublished projected elevation, modeling the elevation of Lake Mead “as if” the 0.48 MAF had been delivered (“The reduction of releases from Glen Canyon Dam in water year 2022 (resulting in increased storage in Lake Powell) will not affect future operating determinations and will be accounted for “as if” this volume of water had been delivered to Lake Mead”), to determine shortage tiers and reservoir operations. That is, what is actually measured at Lake Mead is no longer the value that determines actual management and operations. Until the 24-month studies include a new column showing “operationally neutral” elevations, they won’t reflect future shortage triggers for Lake Mead.

Conclusion

What does this all mean? It means that as we respond to the declining reservoirs and risks of falling below power pool in the next year and a half, decision-makers won’t be armed with accurate or precise data on where and how we can reduce demands, especially in the Upper Basin. It may be difficult to identify just how we can get to the 15-30% reduction in uses as demanded by Reclamation if we don’t know exactly how much water we’re using now. Every acre-foot matters. That demands a detailed accounting of where and how we use Colorado River water.

[1] Unmeasured return flows are defined as “Mainstream water that has been diverted and which flows back to the Colorado River or the Colorado River Aquifer as measured or unmeasured flow and is available for use in the United States or in satisfaction of the Mexican Treaty Obligation”.

Guide for Developing Onsite Water Systems to Support Regional Water Resilience

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

Urban communities across the country are facing growing water challenges, including water scarcity, flooding, pollution, aging infrastructure, and more. These challenges present risks, but they also present an opportunity to rethink how we manage water, including adopting circular approaches in new developments that reduce their water footprint and improve urban water resilience. Onsite water systems, for example, collect, treat, and reuse water from onsite sources, such as wastewater, rainwater, and stormwater, for non-potable water uses like toilet flushing, outdoor irrigation, and cooling.

Onsite water systems have the potential to provide multiple benefits for a site, water and wastewater systems, communities, and ecosystems. For private sector developers, onsite systems can help reduce water scarcity risks, provide resilience to water supply disruptions, and support corporate water stewardship goals. For communities, onsite water systems can help enhance water supply reliability, improve water quality, reduce localized flooding, and increase urban green space.

This guide helps site developers consider how water systems can be planned, designed, and operated to provide multiple benefits and promote four desired outcomes: advancing water resilience, supporting equity, supporting the environment, and protecting public health. For each of these outcomes, the guide provides sample questions to consider, stakeholders to engage, resources to examine, and analyses to perform. The guide also offers insights on how the realization and magnitude of benefits can vary with the type of system, scale of adoption, and other context-specific factors.

December 9, 2022December 12, 2022

Water Advances on Global Climate Agenda at COP27

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Water Advances on Global Climate Agenda at COP27
Pacific Institute featured at COP for water resilience thought leadership, innovative tools

Dr. Amanda Bielawski & Jason Morrison

Key takeaways:

For the first time, water was visible in the final UN Climate Summit COP declaration.
Water solutions play a pivotal role in both climate mitigation and adaptation, with attention moving more toward adaptation at COP27.
The transformative change and radical collaboration needed are at the heart of the Pacific Institute’s work advancing water resilience.

As the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP27) closed in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, the science was grim. At the same time, water management’s role in climate mitigation and adaptation—the heart of the Pacific Institute’s work—was more widely recognized than ever before.

Photo: UN Climate Change Executive Secretary Simon Stiell shared opening remarks at COP27. Photo credit: UN Climate Change (COP27 in Sharm el-Sheikh to Focus on Delivering on the Promises of Paris | UNFCCC)

Climate mitigation progress falls short, placing more emphasis on adaptation

COP27 closed with the stark recognition there may be no feasible path to reach the Paris Agreement’s 1.5-degree goal. New research finds the last eight years are projected to be the warmest eight on record. Climate mitigation efforts have simply not progressed quickly enough—with devastating impacts felt primarily through the water cycle in the form of intensifying flooding and drought.

“United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres opened COP27 by acknowledging the world is approaching a tipping point—and urging a focus on rapid implementation of solutions: “The good news is that we know what to do and we have the financial and technological tools to get the job done . . . We need all hands on deck for faster, bolder climate action.”  

Photo: Secretary-General António Guterres addresses the opening of the Climate Implementation Summit at COP27 in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt. UNFCCC/Kiara Worth

Water breaks new COP barriers

While the water agenda rose in prominence during COP26 last year in Glasgow, it broke through new barriers this year at COP27. Visible in both the Blue Zone and Green Zone, water was recognized during negotiations as a powerful solution to address climate change both through mitigation and adaptation.

Notably, this is the first time the final COP declaration directly acknowledged the critical role of water and its many co-benefits:

“. . . Recognizing the critical role of protecting, conserving and restoring water systems and water-related ecosystems in delivering climate adaptation benefits and co-benefits, while ensuring social and environmental safeguards . . .”

The final declaration also urged Parties to include water in adaptation plans:

“. . . Emphasizes the importance of protecting, conserving and restoring water and water related ecosystems, including river basins, aquifers and lakes, and urges Parties to further integrate water into adaptation efforts . . .”

Now in its second year, the Water and Climate Pavilion united more than 40 international organizations, as well as Indigenous leaders, youth, and academics—to advance water on the climate agenda.

The Pacific Institute played a key role. Across more than a dozen sessions, many of them attended remotely, Pacific Institute colleagues shared water resilience thought leadership and innovative tools to build water resilience.

Photo: Jason Morrison, Pacific Institute President and Head of the CEO Water Mandate, (left) pictured with Vania Paccagnan of CDP (right), discusses the role of corporate action to build water resilience at COP27.

If climate is the shark, water is the teeth

To many, COP27 may feel like a far-off meeting. But, for millions of people around the world, decisions made during COP27—and decisions made by the public and private sector leaders every day of the year—will directly impact their personal lives and livelihoods. This is especially true through human interactions with water. As has been stated, “If climate is the shark, water is the teeth.”

A growing swell of research—some of it conducted over the past 30-plus years by the Pacific Institute—is unpacking the specific relationships between climate change and the water cycle. The science is clear. Climate change is intensifying water-related disasters, such as floods and droughts, which have affected millions and cost billions this year alone.

Photo 1: Aerial view of summer 2022 floods in the provinces of Sindh and Balochistan in Pakistan. Photo credit: UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe. Photo 2: Lake Powel on August 16, 2017, (left) and on August 6, 2022 (right). Photo credit: NASA. Photo 3: © UNICEF/Kate Holt; Somali women and children stand outside temporary tents in the Dagahaley refugee camp near the Kenya-Somalia border. 

The evidence is visible before us:

- Record-setting flooding in Pakistan earlier this year left one-third of the country submerged. An estimated 7.9 million people were displaced, while 1,700 died.
- On the other end of the water extreme, in the US West, the current 22-year megadrought is projected to be the driest period in 1,200 years. Lake Powell, the second-largest water-storage reservoir in the United States and a major source of water for millions, was photographed by NASA in August at its lowest level since the mid-1960s.
- Meanwhile, Oxfam warned in October that historic drought in East Africa is likely to kill one person every 36 seconds through the end of 2022.

Climate change is projected to increase the severity and frequency of these sorts of droughts and floods even further into the future, compounding an already concerning water crisis.

Transformation to water resilience—the heart of the Pacific Institute’s work

During the run-up to COP27, Christiana Figueres, who led the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) when the 2015 Paris Agreement was adopted at COP21, called for a new mindset and radical collaboration across sectors. Figueres wrote: “One company or one government alone cannot make the kind of difference we need; the transformations must be systemic and exponential, and delivered with justice in mind.”

This type of transformative change and radical collaboration are at the heart of the Pacific Institute’s work.

In 2019, the Pacific Institute announced an organizational goal to “catalyze the transformation to water resilience in the face of climate change” by 2030. This forward-looking goal builds on more than 30 years of thought leadership on climate-water connections. Long before this connection was recognized in mainstream policy discussions, the Pacific Institute conducted early research, made early warnings, and proposed some of the earliest solutions.

During the early 1990s, climate-water assessments were conducted both domestically and internationally—from the Bay Area of California to the Nile River Basin in Africa. In 1990, the Pacific Institute conducted one of the earliest assessments of sea-level rise impacts for the San Francisco Bay Area. In 2009, this analysis was expanded to cover the entire California coast, becoming a significant lever for policy change.

Photo: Area of San Francisco Bay Threatened by a 1-meter Sea-Level Rise: Southern Portion. From 1990 Pacific Institute report.

In advance of COP26 in Glasgow, the Pacific Institute launched its Water Resilience Issue Brief, calling on decisionmakers across the private and public sectors to rapidly scale solutions. Many solutions stem from what our colleague, Dr. Peter Gleick, Senior Fellow and Co-Founder of the Pacific Institute, describes as the “soft path” for water. This more-sustainable framework calls for decentralized infrastructure, innovative and efficient use of technology, the protection of ecosystems, and reversing the policy inertia historically focused on endlessly increasing water supplies. Some of the specific solutions include integrating nature-based solutions (NBS), which offer multiple co-benefits, as well as increasing inclusion of water efficiency and reuse approaches. Recent Pacific Institute research found water efficiency measures could reduce urban water use in California by up to 48 percent, while also playing a critical role in reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

Building an equitable movement powered by collective action

At COP27 and beyond, the Pacific Institute is convening and equipping decisionmakers, including utilities, corporations, and public policymakers, to serve as key levers of change. In all cases, we call for equitable approaches that prioritize the most impacted stakeholders, especially frontline communities often disproportionately impacted by climate change, as well as the natural environment.

During COP27, the Pacific Institute advanced this work during a wide range of sessions. Our colleague Dr. Peter Gleick provided an assessment of the integrated nature of water, climate, and food challenges for the Science, Technology, and Society session organized by the Japanese government.

Many sessions also focused on the pivotal role the corporate sector must play by reducing water impacts of their operations and value chains—and by uniting through collective action. The Pacific Institute is proud to partner with the United Nations Global Compact in leading the CEO Water Mandate, which unites more than 200 companies to build water resilience. This work was front and center at COP27:

- The CEO Water Mandate launched the new Water Action Hub 4.0, a global online platform that highlights more than 1,600 projects and 1,000 organizations to build water resilience. The 4.0 version adds the new Corporate Water Benchmark Tool for companies to gauge their water practices and performance against industry peers.
- The CEO Water Mandate’s water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH)-focused program, WASH4Work, also launched a new Corporate Declaration for Climate-Resilient WASH, establishing a framework for business WASH action across supply chains and in communities.
- Along with the Alliance for Global Water Adaptation, International Water Management Institute, and World Resources Institute, the Pacific Institute and the CEO Water Mandate also launched the Corporate Guidance for the Water Resilience Assessment Framework to measure and enhance resilience across a range of industries.
- The Pacific Institute and the CEO Water Mandate launched a new Stakeholder Engagement Guide for Nature-Based Solutions for inclusive, culturally appropriate engagement with diverse stakeholders.
- At the Climate Ambition Hub, we premiered the “Ripples of Water Resilience; Stories of Global Impact and Collective Action” campaign highlighting the collective action work of the Water Resilience Coalition.

All hands on deck

As United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres said in his COP27 opening remarks, “The good news is that we know what to do and we have the [tools] to get the job done.”

As we see the water-related impacts of climate change ravage communities around the world—from Pakistan to the US West—one thing is clear. The risks of not acting quickly enough are simply unacceptable.

Indeed, we have the tools. Through transformative change and radical collaboration, now is the time to rapidly accelerate one thing: action.

—

Contributions made to the Pacific Institute by December 31 will be matched dollar for dollar up to $100,000.

November 18, 2022November 18, 2022

Advancing Innovative Water Efficiency Solutions at the WaterSmart Innovations Conference 2022

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Key takeaways

Innovative water efficiency solutions not only reduce water use; They also offer multi-benefits, including reducing greenhouse gas emissions and improving water equity.
Pacific Institute research finds water efficiency efforts could reduce California’s urban water use by up to 48%.
Cross-sector collaborations uniting utilities, companies, and NGOs can effectively advance water efficiency solutions.

Pacific Institute research and innovative solutions related to water efficiency and conservation were recently featured at the 2022 WaterSmart Innovations Conference and Exposition in Las Vegas. From October 4 to 6, technical sessions covered a spectrum of water efficiency and conservation topics, including advancing the adoption of water-efficient products, alternative water supplies, and marketing and outreach.

Pacific Institute researchers presented three technical sessions on innovative water management approaches that save water and build long-term water resilience, while providing a range of related multi-benefits, including saving energy, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and supporting low-income communities. Below are summaries of the three Pacific Institute presentations and key takeaways.

Harnessing the Power of Water to Meet
Energy and Climate Goals

Heather Cooley, Director of Research, Pacific Institute

As conventional water sources become constrained, communities are considering more energy-intensive options, threatening to increase water’s energy and greenhouse gas footprints. Using California as a case study, this session drew on new data to develop future scenarios of water supplies and demands to estimate water’s energy and greenhouse gas footprints. For instance, key finding from Next10 report found that more comprehensive water conservation and efficiency efforts in urban California could reduce water related electricity usage by 19 percent, natural gas use by 16 percent, and GHG emissions by 41 percent cumulatively between 2015 and 2035. While focused on California, the methodology and results can help inform decisions for communities across the western United States and beyond. 

“Water and energy are intricately connected – we use energy across the water management cycle. This energy use results in greenhouse gas emissions, contributing to climate change. Urban water efficiency offers the greatest reductions in water-related energy use and greenhouse gas emissions.”

– Heather Cooley, Director of Research, Pacific Institute

Read more about the future of California’s water-energy-climate nexus here.

The Untapped Potential of California’s Urban Water Supply: Water Efficiency, Water Reuse, and Stormwater Capture

Dr. Sonali Abraham, Research Associate, Pacific Institute

This session highlighted the results of a recent Pacific Institute study that quantified California’s potential to significantly expand urban water efficiency, water reuse, and stormwater capture solutions. When implemented, these solutions can both reduce inefficient and wasteful water uses and expand local water supplies. Previous assessments have proven these options are also more cost effective than traditional approaches, which are also increasingly difficult to implement to expand supply. Tapping this potential would help solve California’s long-standing water problems and provide added benefits.

“California has made progress to reduce water use, but more is needed in the face of intensifying drought and climate change. Efficient technologies and practices can reduce California’s urban water use by 30% to 48%.”

– Dr. Sonali Abraham, Research Associate, Pacific Institute

Read more about the untapped potential of California’s urban water supplies here.

Advancing Water Efficiency in Low-Income Housing: Southern California Case Study

Cora Kammeyer, Senior Researcher, & Dr. Christine DeMyers, Research Associate, Pacific Institute

This session shared results from a cross-sector project in which corporations, NGOs, and water utilities worked together to install and monitor remote leak detection technology in three low-income apartment buildings in Southern California. The session covered the estimated water, energy, and cost savings from the project; stakeholder perspectives; and how the unique set of partners came together to make the project happen. The session also shared learnings from project implementation, including the project design and how to effectively partner across sectors. 

“With this project, we’re helping affordable multi-family housing properties realize the multiple benefits of participation in conservation and efficiency programs. The leak detection technology we are piloting saves water, reduces utility bills, and improves building maintenance workflow.”

– Dr. Christine DeMyers, Research Associate, Pacific Institute

Learn more about the project here.

To learn more about Pacific Institute’s work and keep up to date on future presentations and events, visit pacinst.org/presentations and sign up for our newsletter at pacinst.org/newsletter.

Stakeholder Engagement Guide For Nature-Based Solutions

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

This guide takes a pragmatic approach to stakeholder engagement by presenting general principles and best practices that should be considered throughout all stages of an NBS project, as well as outlining specific steps for incorporating stakeholder engagement throughout NBS project stages. The identified principles and best practices include engaging a diverse range of stakeholders; building long-term relationships and trust; communicating with empathy; prioritizing transparency and accountability; co-creating rather than imposing; recognizing mutual benefits; removing barriers to engagement; formalizing relationships; ensuring adequate financial support; and appointing well-trained, knowledgeable facilitators.

October 5, 2022October 5, 2022

Saving Water Makes Cents

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Water Efficiency Efforts Have Potential to Save Hundreds for Households and Millions for Communities, But Equity and Access Issues Must be Addressed

By Heather Cooley, Morgan Shimabuku, and Dr. Christine DeMyers

Key takeaways

For the past 30 years, water rates in the United States have risen faster than inflation and all other utility rates, adding to the struggle faced by millions of people across the nation to pay water and sewer bills.
More efficient devices and climate-appropriate plants can immediately cut household utility costs by hundreds of dollars annually, reducing the financial burden of water access.
Water efficiency is also frequently the least expensive source of new water for communities. Water efficiency investments reduce the need for expensive new water and wastewater infrastructure, saving communities hundreds of millions and in some instances billions of dollars in capital costs and millions more in annual operating costs.
A major equity issue remains, as lower-income households face barriers to access water efficiency programs. More work is needed to ensure full and equitable access.

Water efficiency supports affordability for households and the larger community

People across the United States are struggling to pay their water and wastewater bills. While water isn’t always the largest utility bill for US households, over the past 30 years, water rates have risen faster than inflation and other utility costs. This rising trend is expected to continue due to deferred maintenance, emerging contaminants, climate change, and the rising costs of construction among other factors.

A new Pacific Institute white paper, “Advancing Affordability through Water Efficiency,” finds water conservation and efficiency improvements improve water affordability for both conserving households and the larger community. Using national data on utility rates, the study shows that reductions in household water use provide an immediate reduction in water bills and, in some instances, wastewater and energy bills for the conserving household. Because water efficiency is typically less expensive than developing new supplies, case studies from the western United States show that water efficiency also helps utilities avoid the need to build expensive new water and wastewater infrastructure, resulting in lower utility bills and connection fees for the broader community over the long term.

Water affordability for conserving households

Water efficiency measures can result in an immediate reduction in household water bills and, for certain measures, wastewater and energy bills. Replacing old, inefficient devices inside the home, including showerheads, clothes washers, and toilets, could cut a household’s utility bills by $242 to $408 per year. For those homes with grass in hot, dry areas, installing plants suited to the local climate could provide additional savings on water bills. These savings are based on national average rates for water, wastewater, and energy and would be even larger for those living in communities with higher utility rates.

Importantly, for some measures, energy bill savings can be significant – even greater than water and wastewater bill savings. A WaterSense-labeled showerhead, for example, is estimated to reduce household water use and wastewater production by 2,700 gallons per year. Using national average water and wastewater rates, this translates to a savings of $16 per year on water bills and $19 per year on wastewater bills. But showerheads save hot water – and the energy required to heat that water. We estimate that household energy bill savings for a WaterSense-labeled showerhead can be $30 per year!

“A more-efficient showerhead alone can save $16 in water, $19 in wastewater, and $30 in energy bills annually.”

Water affordability for the larger community

Water efficiency can also provide long-term cost savings for the larger community by delaying or eliminating the need for new, costly water supply and treatment infrastructure—costs that would be passed on to a utility’s customers. The report examines long-term cost savings by synthesizing results from several recent avoided cost analyses from the Alliance for Water Efficiency. These analyses compare a conserving scenario (i.e., the cost of water with efficiency measures in place) to a non-conserving scenario (i.e., the cost of water without efficiency measures in place).

“Water efficiency typically represents the least expensive source of new water for communities.”

The water and wastewater costs avoided by water efficiency vary from community to community. For example, in Gilbert, Arizona – a small but rapidly growing town near Phoenix – water conservation and efficiency reduced water use from 244 gallons per person per day (gpcd) in 1997 to 173 gpcd in 2015. This reduction in water use resulted in savings of $341 million in capital costs for water and wastewater infrastructure and an additional $3.67 million per year in operating costs. In the absence of water efficiency, combined water and wastewater bills would have been 6.1% higher (averaging $657 compared to $619 per year) and connection fees 82% higher ($17,000 compared to $9,500 per connection).

Los Angeles has seen even greater cost savings from water efficiency improvements. There, per capita water use declined from 180 gpcd in the early 1990s to just 110 gpcd in 2016, avoiding additional water supply, treatment, and pumping costs totaling more than $11 billion. In the absence of water conservation and efficiency, customer water bills would have been more than 36% higher. Comparable levels of wastewater savings were also realized.

Making water conservation and efficiency programs accessible to everyone

While all households benefit from water efficiency improvements, the greatest cost savings are provided to conserving households. Yet, studies show that customers and households from lower income brackets and other hard-to-reach groups, such as renters, are less likely to participate in conservation and efficiency programs. This is because most utility-sponsored efficiency programs are focused on owner-occupied, single-family households with disposable income. For example, rebate programs require participants to pay the up-front cost for the more efficient device before receiving any monetary compensation, which can take several months. These programs are cost prohibitive for households that cannot afford the up-front investment. Greater effort is needed to ensure water conservation and efficiency programs are accessible to everyone, including low-income households, renters, and those in multi-family housing.

Recommendations

The findings from the report can inform policy decisions at the utility scale up to the federal level. For greater water efficiency and, thus, greater cost savings for all, the report recommends:   

Increase investments in water efficiency improvements. Water efficiency typically represents the least expensive source of new water and can help to improve community water affordability. Yet, funding for water efficiency is far less than for other sources of new supply. Federal, state, and local governments should increase investments in water efficiency to levels commensurate with other water supply options.
Design water efficiency programs to be accessible to customers in lower income households. For example, utilities can provide vouchers for discounts on water efficient devices upon sale, rather than offer rebates weeks or even months after purchase. Another approach is to provide fixtures and appliances at no cost to qualified households through device giveaways and direct-install programs. This program in Seattle, for instance, offers free water-saving toilets for income-qualified homeowners. Free leak detection services for income-qualified households can also help reduce water bills by catching leaks. For instance, in Sacramento, the Leak Free Sacramento program helps low-income residents make water repairs that increase efficiency free of charge. Utilities can also offer mechanisms to deliver conservation-related cost savings to renters. Finally, as illustrated in this report from River Network and the WaterNow Alliance, partnerships with community-based organizations help utilities build trust and overcome cultural barriers.   
Improve communications about the costs avoided by water efficiency improvements. Several studies sponsored by the Alliance for Water Efficiency have used avoided cost analyses to powerfully communicate the utility- and community-wide scale of monetary savings associated with water efficiency improvements. Water suppliers should develop and periodically update avoided cost analyses to share this information with ratepayers and elected officials. This will help increase public support for conservation and efficiency investments and programs.
Improve demand forecasting to avoid building unnecessary and costly new water supply and treatment infrastructure. Accurate demand forecasts are essential for fully realizing the benefits of water efficiency improvements. Yet, water suppliers routinely overestimate demand by forecasting that water demand will increase when it remains unchanged or even declines. Forecasters should regularly examine water-use trends, assumptions within their models, and the accuracy of past projections, and adjust their models as needed.

Increasing water efficiency is a proven strategy for stretching limited water resources. The Pacific Institute’s new white paper, “Advancing Affordability through Water Efficiency,” highlights the role water efficiency can play in advancing affordability for conserving households and the broader community. It also underscores the critical importance of designing efficiency programs that are fully and equitably accessible to all.

Advancing Affordability through Water Efficiency

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

This study finds that water conservation and efficiency improvements support efforts to improve water affordability for both conserving households and the larger community. Reductions in household water use provide an immediate reduction in water bills and, in some instances, wastewater and energy bills for the conserving household.

Left Out in Drought: California Fish

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

The report, “Left Out in Drought: California Fish,” finds warmer water temperatures, increasing algal blooms, and lower stream flows associated with the 2020-present drought have exacerbated the long-term decline of California’s fish populations and threatened the continued survival of some native fish species, many of which face extinction. Fish population health is recognized as a major indicator of freshwater ecosystem health more broadly.

The report synthesizes and summarizes US Geological Survey (USGS) flow data, state and federal fish counts, reports from state and federal agencies, and peer-reviewed literature. While the report focuses on data from the Sacramento River, San Joaquin River, and San Francisco Bay-Delta, the findings illuminate broader trends for drought-related impacts to fish and freshwater ecosystems across California and beyond.

Key Findings

Key findings include: 

- Water temperatures in the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers exceeded the lethal limit for salmon during multiple months in 2020 and 2021, decreasing fish survival rates. For example, the egg-to-fry survival rate for endangered Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon reached a historic low of 2.6% in 2021, largely due to high water temperatures. During the same year, in addition to experiencing historically high water temperatures, river flows reached an 11-year low of 6.4 million acre-feet.
- San Francisco Bay-Delta ecosystem conditions have worsened as the drought has progressed. Due to stagnant water, high water temperatures, and high nutrient levels, harmful algal blooms in the Bay-Delta were nearly twice as extensive in 2021 as they were in 2020, reducing oxygen levels and threatening fish.
- During droughts, smaller side streams and lakes are particularly vulnerable to loss of runoff from low rain and snowmelt. In some places, native fish species have adapted to these specific aquatic habitats, increasing their risk of extinction if these waterways don’t have enough flow. For example, the Lost River sucker and shortnose sucker, both federally listed endangered species, have native habitat in Tule Lake, a National Wildlife Refuge in northern California. In 2022, these fish had to be hand caught and transported to nearby holding ponds to survive, as the lake completely dried up over the summer.

July 11, 2022July 10, 2022

Pacific Institute Launches New Water and Climate Equity Strategy for United States

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Pacific Institute Launches New Water and Climate Equity Strategy for United States

Dr. Shannon McNeeley, Dr. Amanda Bielawski, Heather Cooley

Key Takeaways

The United States has not adopted the Human Right to Water, while millions of people across the country lack access to clean, reliable water or basic plumbing, and tens of millions rely on water systems with Safe Drinking Water Act violations.
The strategy responds to research needs at the intersection of water insecurity, climate change impacts, and social equity.
Collaborative approach to feature co-designed research working to support frontline communities through their partner networks.
This strategy builds on Pacific Institute’s longstanding work on water equity and the Human Right to Water.

Throughout the world and in the United States, water insecurity and climate change both disproportionately affect frontline communities—those who are impacted first and worst from climate change. Historically disadvantaged and marginalized communities, including rural communities, low-income communities, and communities of color, often suffer the most from environmental injustices related to climate change and lack of safe and reliable water from household and community water systems. However, the intersection of these challenges—the impacts of climate change on our ability to equitably meet the needs for water in overburdened and underserved communities moving forward—is not well documented or broadly understood.

Today, the Pacific Institute formally launched its new Water and Climate Equity (WCE) strategy designed to address community and decision maker needs by focusing research and outreach efforts on the nexus of water insecurity, climate change, and social inequity. The work aims to inform decision makers on the realities of the situation and highlight climate-resilient strategies to address the humanitarian water crisis in the context of current and future climate change.

This Water and Climate Equity work is one of three Pacific Institute focus areas supporting the Institute’s organizational goal to catalyze the transformation to water resilience by 2030. The Pacific Institute also focuses its research on nature-based solutions and water efficiency and reuse. The Institute plans to integrate equity throughout its research over time.

Water insecurity realities

More than 2.2 billion people globally lack access to safely managed drinking water (United Nations, 2019), while millions of people in the United States are without clean, reliable water, lack basic plumbing, or rely on water systems with Safe Drinking Water Act violations.

Today, the Human Right to Water is formally recognized by the United Nations, the State of California, and dozens of global businesses. Yet, the United States as a whole has yet to recognize the Human Right to Water or meet the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals for clean water and sanitation (SDG 6), climate action (SDG 13), or reduced inequalities (SDG 10).

Responding to community needs with a collaborative, co-designed research approach

Communities and community-serving organizations have long called for rigorous and empirical science-based research as a core strategy for protection from the negative impacts of climate change. To ensure the strategy was guided by community voices and needs, dozens of interviews were conducted with leaders working with and for frontline communities on water and climate justice issues. Responding to communities’ expressed needs for such research, the Pacific Institute will engage in a co-designed approach with communities through their support networks. This approach will include the collaborative co-development of research questions, project design, outcomes, and decision-support tools.

The collaborative approach aims to cross-pollinate leading ideas and practices with community needs and priorities across diverse regions and stakeholder groups. Co-designed research will result in technical insights and culturally appropriate and feasible recommendations for both frontline communities and their supporting networks and organizations. The work will aim to strengthen existing networks that mobilize science for environmental justice and the co-production of applied research and decision-support tools that are accessible and usable by those who need them the most.

Research focus and outcomes

Through collaborative research, the Pacific Institute will specifically examine the effects of climate change on small and medium-sized water and sanitation systems in frontline communities with water systems particularly vulnerable to climate change. The Water and Climate Equity strategy will analyze the distributional effects of environmental policy, as well as the equity and fairness of environmental policy processes pertaining to water systems in frontline communities. While this work will initially be focused on the United States, it may later be expanded to other geographies through the Pacific Institute’s international work and networks.

The overarching research questions include:

How will climate change, as a risk multiplier, exacerbate water-related risks for marginalized and low-income communities and communities of color, and how will this change or intensify those risks and responses in the future?
What are some viable ways to make the water and wastewater systems serving these communities more equitable and climate-resilient?
What are the barriers and opportunities for implementing those solutions in frontline communities?

The desired outcomes of this work initially include:

Providing evidence-based research and climate-resilient strategies for frontline communities on small to medium rural and disinvested urban water systems in the United States.
Elucidating the lack of the fulfilment of the Human Right to Water and WASH (water, sanitation, and hygiene) in the United States.
Integrating equity throughout Pacific Institute’s other programmatic areas, including research on nature-based solutions and water efficiency and reuse, as well as its efforts to advance corporate water stewardship.

Building on existing expertise through partnerships

Recognizing and respecting that there are already many individuals and organizations working in this area both in the United States and globally, the Pacific Institute’s research team will both build upon existing expertise and form strategic partnerships wherever possible. While the primary focus will be on climate-resilient water systems for frontline communities, target audiences will include:

community-based organizations (CBOs) that support frontline communities;
water and climate equity-focused non-governmental organizations (NGOs);
water utilities;
local, state, federal, and tribal policymakers; and
corporate leadership.

This work will target those who have the most leverage and obligation to provide water security and fulfill the Human Right to Water. It will rely on close partnerships with key supporting organizations and decision makers who would benefit from technical expertise and added capacity to conduct needed analyses.

The Pacific Institute is already closely partnering with the Rural Community Assistance Partnership (RCAP) and the Livelihoods Knowledge Exchange Network (LiKEN) to assess climate change impacts and preparedness needs in small, rural communities in the United States. It is also partnering with DigDeep on assessing the impacts of climate change on water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) in frontline communities throughout the United States.

Pacific Institute’s longstanding work on water equity

The Pacific Institute has been a strong voice for water equity for more than three decades. During the 1990s, the Pacific Institute called on global policymakers to formally recognize water as a human right. The Pacific Institute has also focused on related issues, such as drought equity, water affordability, and clean drinking water for disadvantaged communities.

The new Water and Climate Equity strategy launched today formally adds the climate change context to this longstanding water equity work by specifically exploring how climate change will exacerbate water stress for low-income communities and communities of color across the United States while highlighting solutions and strategies for water resilience in frontline communities by 2030 and beyond.

For more information, visit the Pacific Institute’s Water and Climate Equity page here.

July 5, 2022July 5, 2022

Ensuring Water Conservation and Efficiency Programs Are Accessible to All—In California and Beyond

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Ensuring Water Conservation and Efficiency Programs Are Accessible to All—In California and Beyond

Morgan Shimabuku, Pacific Institute Senior Researcher
Jessi Snyder, Self-Help Enterprises Director of Community Development

Key Takeaways:

Ensuring water conservation and efficiency programs are accessible is a challenge worth tackling to save water and money, especially for households and communities that need it most.
Funding these programs can be a challenge. This blog looks at state and federal opportunities, with a focus on California, where the legislature is considering a $200 million budget item for two low-income, direct-install water conservation programs.
There are several barriers to implementing water conservation and efficiency programs that are accessible to everyone. But there are already many creative solutions to overcoming these barriers to create access for people of all incomes.

Californians and others in the Western United States need to save water. This is true now amidst a historic megadrought, and it will continue to be true when this drought ends.

But many water conservation and efficiency programs aren’t accessible to low-income households. This is in a nation where, in 2020, 18.4% of households earned less than $25,000 per year, which is just under the federal poverty level for a household of four people. Research has shown that hard-to-reach groups, such as renters or low-income families, are less likely to participate in these programs.

This challenge is worth tackling. Making such programs more widely accessible would both help those struggling to afford their utility bills and save water. Notably, these water savings would occur immediately and into the future, helping provide immediate relief for households, as well as building long-term water resilience and contributing to system-wide affordability.

The challenge: Multiple barriers to water conservation and efficiency programs

There are several barriers to ensuring water conservation and efficiency programs are accessible to all. These include:

Not designed for limited-income customers: First, some utilities have strong conservation and efficiency offerings, but these programs are not readily available to customers with low to no income. As an example, rebate programs require participants to purchase new, efficient devices and then wait weeks to months before being partially reimbursed or given a credit on their utility bill. For those with limited income, bearing the cost upfront is not always possible and is a deterrent to participation.

Narrow eligibility requirements limit participation: A second type of barrier exists when utilities have low-income-specific efficiency programs, but they have narrow or burdensome eligibility requirements that limit participation. Renters and people living in multifamily housing are more likely to have lower incomes than those living in single family housing. Yet, many programs are not available to people in multifamily housing, in part because they often do not pay their water bill directly. Also, onerous proof-of-income requirements can create barriers to participation in these programs.

Lack of capacity to offer programs: A third type of barrier, common for customers of small water systems, is that some water utilities lack capacity and resources needed to offer any water conservation and efficiency programs. This challenge is most apparent in rural communities, but also can be found in small urban systems.

Trust and cultural barriers: Finally, trust and cultural barriers may exist for some customer groups, especially those that have been historically marginalized or left out of conservation and efficiency efforts.

Good news: Solutions exist

The good news is that there are creative solutions to overcome these barriers. These include:

Vouchers replacing rebates: Water utilities already offering conservation and efficiency programs can design them to be more accessible. For instance, instead of offering rebates for efficient device purchases, utilities can provide vouchers at the point of sale. This change would eliminate the need for a reimbursement process, identified as a major barrier to implementation.

Device giveaways and direct-install programs: Another option is to offer fixtures and appliances at no cost for qualified households through device giveaways or direct-install programs. Long Beach Water in Southern California, for example, is piloting a direct-install sustainable landscape program for homeowners living in low-income designated census tracts. Elsewhere in California, the City of Sacramento also offers a free leak-detection audit program that includes free device installations for low-income, single-family households in designated disadvantaged communities. Notably, this program is only offered to homeowners of single-family dwellings. As a result, it remains inaccessible to renters and those living in multi-family housing.

Multi-family housing solutions: While there are several challenges to delivering conservation and efficiency programs to renters and people living in multi-family housing, some utilities are exploring new models related to housing affordability more broadly, adding in the conservation and efficiency benefits. In New York City, for example, the Department of Environmental Protection includes water conservation and efficiency as an eligibility criterion for receiving the Multi-Family Water Assistance Program credit. Housing projects must, among other requirements, prove the average rent is affordable to households earning up to 60% of area median income, the property has been part of certified affordable housing efforts for a minimum of 15 years, all buildings have automated meters, and high-efficiency fixtures are installed in at least 70% of units. These requirements incentivize efficiency improvements and long-term affordable housing in New York City.

Alternative proof of eligibility: To reduce barriers created by proof-of-income, water utilities can accept proof of participation in existing low-income programs such as CARES, Medi-Cal, or others. There is also the option to allow for self-verification of income qualification, with annual audits of a subset of participants to assess validity. A third approach, already in use by Long Beach Water and City of Sacramento, is to create eligibility based on geographic location of a household in a community identified as disadvantaged or low-income through state or federal surveys.

Partnerships with related programs. Another solution that can help reduce multiple barriers to these programs is through partnership with existing organizations already delivering low-income direct-install programs. Partnering with energy conservation organizations, as some water utilities already do, is an effective opportunity to piggy-back on the existing program infrastructure and circumvent the challenging process of income qualification. This can be especially helpful for small water systems with limited capacity for offering their own programs. Energy utilities regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) are required to offer their low-income customers an energy efficiency direct-install program, called the Energy Saving Assistance Program (ESAP). ESAP has delivered energy efficiency upgrades at no cost to nearly 2 million income-qualified households since 2015.1 In some places, these upgrades include water-saving devices as well, although device offerings have been limited. Partners, particularly community-based organizations (CBOs), also offer trust-building opportunities. These opportunities can improve customer communication and recruitment. The Building Blocks of Trust by the River Network and WaterNow Alliance offer key components of successful utility and CBO partnerships.

Funding opportunities from state and federal governments

Securing funding for these programs can be challenging, but there are both federal and state funds that may help. From the federal government, funding through state-led Clean Water State Revolving Funds are eligible to provide loans and grants for water efficiency projects.

Some states are making efforts to address the challenge as well. In California, the legislature is considering up to $200 million to fund water efficiency assistance for low-income households. Advocates are proposing to split this funding in two ways. First, $150 million could supplement the energy utility ESAP, growing the program’s water conservation offerings to include, whenever possible, high-efficiency toilets and clothes washers. The other $50 million could fund a complementary grant program at the Department of Water Resources for new direct-install water efficiency programs for low-income households. Advocates estimate these programs could save the state billions of gallons of water per year and save the participating households tens of millions of dollars per year on their water and wastewater bills.

The power to act

With water utilities, energy utilities, CBOs, and state and federal agencies all on board, we can create opportunities for everyone to help save water in California and beyond. This will benefit not only the individuals themselves, but also their communities, utilities, and ecosystems. Amid the water crisis, exacerbated by climate change, we must forge these—and other—new solutions to stretch scarce water resources to meet the needs of all water users.

Self-Help Enterprises is a nationally recognized community development organization whose mission is to work together with low-income families to build and sustain healthy homes and communities. Since 1965, Self-Help Enterprises’ efforts have touched the lives of over 55,000 families.

¹ESAP statistics provided to Pacific Institute from Ed Osann (NRDC), obtained 4/21/2022 from K. Kulkarni, Senior Regulatory Analyst (CPUC), via email from CPUC.

Managing the Unmeasured – Colorado River

Key Takeaways

Water Use

Water Supply

Tribal Water Rights

Irrigated Acres

Population

Basin Boundaries

Operational Neutrality

Conclusion

Guide for Developing Onsite Water Systems to Support Regional Water Resilience

Overview

Water Advances on Global Climate Agenda at COP27

Advancing Innovative Water Efficiency Solutions at the WaterSmart Innovations Conference 2022

Key takeaways

Harnessing the Power of Water to Meet Energy and Climate Goals

The Untapped Potential of California’s Urban Water Supply: Water Efficiency, Water Reuse, and Stormwater Capture

Advancing Water Efficiency in Low-Income Housing: Southern California Case Study

Stakeholder Engagement Guide For Nature-Based Solutions

Overview

Saving Water Makes Cents

Water Efficiency Efforts Have Potential to Save Hundreds for Households and Millions for Communities, But Equity and Access Issues Must be Addressed

Key takeaways

Water efficiency supports affordability for households and the larger community

Water affordability for conserving households

Water affordability for the larger community

Making water conservation and efficiency programs accessible to everyone

Recommendations

Advancing Affordability through Water Efficiency

Overview

Left Out in Drought: California Fish

Overview

Key Findings

Pacific Institute Launches New Water and Climate Equity Strategy for United States

Pacific Institute Launches New Water and Climate Equity Strategy for United States

Key Takeaways

Water insecurity realities

Responding to community needs with a collaborative, co-designed research approach

Research focus and outcomes

Building on existing expertise through partnerships

Pacific Institute’s longstanding work on water equity

Ensuring Water Conservation and Efficiency Programs Are Accessible to All—In California and Beyond

Ensuring Water Conservation and Efficiency Programs Are Accessible to All—In California and Beyond

The challenge: Multiple barriers to water conservation and efficiency programs

Good news: Solutions exist

Funding opportunities from state and federal governments

The power to act

¹ESAP statistics provided to Pacific Institute from Ed Osann (NRDC), obtained 4/21/2022 from K. Kulkarni, Senior Regulatory Analyst (CPUC), via email from CPUC.

Harnessing the Power of Water to Meet
Energy and Climate Goals