Publications – Page 2 – Pacific Institute

Water and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Ensuring Access to Water as Shutoff Moratoriums Lift

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic sparked a nationwide discussion around the practice of water utilities disconnecting service to households that are unable or fail to pay their bills, as this places affected households and their communities at greater risk of transmitting COVID-19. In response, many water utilities, governors, and state legislatures in the U.S. placed temporary moratoriums on water service disconnections.

As these moratoriums lift, solutions are needed to ensure the most vulnerable members of communities are not disconnected from essential water services for lack of ability to pay, while allowing utilities to regain or maintain financial stability. This Issue Brief identifies practical approaches that water utilities and state and federal government can take to maximize water access while preserving utility revenue and preventing excessive debt accumulation.

In this Series

Issue Brief: Water and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Equity Dimensions of Utility Disconnections in the U.S.

Issue Brief: Water and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Impacts on Municipal Water Demand

Issue Brief: Water and the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Business Framework for Water & COVID-19: Practical Actions to Contain the Pandemic

Fact Sheet: Water and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Reopening Buildings After Shutdowns: Reducing Water-Related Health Risks

Incorporating Multiple Benefits into Water Projects: A Guide for Water Managers

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

Adapting to climate change, coupled with the need to address aging infrastructure, population growth, and degraded ecosystems, requires significant investment in natural and built water systems. These investments present a significant opportunity to support not only water, but to provide economic, social, and environmental benefits. By considering co-benefits, water managers can increase funding through collaborative partnerships and co-funding opportunities, build partnerships, and garner public support.

This guidebook uses a “multi-benefit framework” to provide a modular, flexible approach for water managers interested in incorporating multiple benefits into water management decisions. It can be applied to a wide range of projects and programs, from designing water efficiency programs to prioritizing stormwater project funding and developing co-funding models for multi-benefit projects. A list of “Dos” and “Don’ts” is provided, covering everything from project vision to defining key metrics and communicating with decision-makers.

In this Series

Scaling Green Stormwater Infrastructure Through Multiple Benefits in Austin, Texas: Distributed Rainwater Capture on Residential Properties in the Waller Creek Watershed

Resources

Webpage: A Multi-Benefit Approach to Water Management

Resource Library: Multi-Benefit Resource Library

Scaling Green Stormwater Infrastructure Through Multiple Benefits in Austin, Texas: Distributed Rainwater Capture on Residential Properties in the Waller Creek Watershed

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

The City of Austin, Texas is facing an increasingly uncertain water future, from decreasing water supplies and more intense droughts to periodic flooding and water quality impairments. Austin is addressing these challenges head on, from investments in water efficiency and water reuse to rainwater harvesting and stormwater management. These investments present a significant opportunity to support not only water, but to provide economic, social, and environmental benefits. By considering these co-benefits, water managers can increase funding through collaborative partnerships and co-funding opportunities, build partnerships, and garner public support.

For this case study, the Pacific Institute collaborated with the City of Austin, Texas, National Wildlife Federation, and Texas Water Trade to scale green stormwater infrastructure on residential properties in Austin. Using the Pacific Institute’s “multi-benefit framework,” the authors evaluated the multiple benefits and beneficiaries of these projects and opportunities to co-fund these investments. The framework outlines a process for engaging with stakeholders to systematically evaluate and incorporate the broad benefits and trade-offs of water management options into decision-making.

The experience of Austin can be used by other cities around the United States as they incorporate their own co-benefits into their water management projects.

In this Series

Incorporating Multiple Benefits into Water Projects: A Guide for Water Managers

Resources

Webpage: A Multi-Benefit Approach to Water Management

Resource Library: Multi-Benefit Resource Library

Urban and Agricultural Water Use in California, 1960 -2015

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

Water is the lifeblood of California, providing for the household needs of 40 million people and supporting one of the most productive agricultural regions in the world, various commercial and industrial activities, and the health and viability of the state’s aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems.

This report examines statewide urban and agricultural water-use trends from 1960 to 2015. It finds that during this period California experienced a dramatic decoupling between water use and growth, due to improvements in urban and agricultural efficiency, as well as a shift to higher-value crops and less water-intensive commercial and industrial activities.

Yet water use in California is still high; rivers and streams are under stress from overuse, and groundwater is over-tapped. Climate change and continued growth are increasing pressure on the state’s water resources, including on water supply, demand, and quality. To address these challenges, more effort is needed to improve the water-use efficiency of homes, businesses, industries, and farms. The report also calls for the state to improve data collection and online systems to make data more easily, quickly, and readily available.

Water and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Reopening Buildings After Shutdowns: Reducing Water-Related Health Risks

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

Under normal conditions, the flow of tap water through building water systems prevents the buildup of bacteria and metals in pipes, and hot water tanks. But after a period of shutdown, like during the coronavirus pandemic, stagnant water may breed bacteria including Legionella (the cause of Legionnaires’ disease), leach lead and other metals from pipes and plumbing, take on unpleasant tastes and odors, or build up potentially harmful disinfection by-products.

This fact sheet seeks to raise awareness of these risks and outline the steps water utilities and building managers can take to protect the public health as businesses and schools begin to reopen following COVID-related closures.

In this Series

Issue Brief: Water and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Equity Dimensions of Utility Disconnections in the U.S.

Issue Brief: Water and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Ensuring Access to Water as Shutoff Moratoriums Lift

Issue Brief: Water and the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Business Framework for Water & COVID-19: Practical Actions to Contain the Pandemic

Issue Brief: Water and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Impacts on Municipal Water Demand

Op-Ed: No COVID-19 Models Are Perfect, But Some Are Useful

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Op-Ed

The global coronavirus pandemic has brought renewed interest and focus on scientific models as we try to get a handle on what the future will bring, how many people will fall sick and die, what the economic impacts will be, and what actions politicians should take. But confusion abounds about what these “models” say and how to reconcile their often seemingly conflicting visions of the future. Recent political attacks on these models reflect a lack of understanding about what models are, how they work, and their usefulness and limitations. Conservative Fox News commentator Laura Ingraham attacked models on her show. Senator John Cornyn, a Republican from Texas tweeted “After #COVID-19 crisis passes, could we have a good faith discussion about the uses and abuses of ‘modeling’ to predict the future?”

Models are all around us. Without knowing it, we all use models all the time to try to understand outcomes of complex situations. The decisions you make on how to spend your monthly paycheck or save for retirement are financial models. The car you drive and the toaster in your kitchen were both designed with engineering models. Advertisers make models of consumer behavior, preference, and consumption of media when they design and buy ads. These models depend on science, but also on human behavior and actions that are far less predictable.

Even a recipe for bran muffins is a model—and a good example of the kind of models we use every day without thinking about it. Cooks combine centuries of knowledge about the chemical behavior of different ingredients with their personal experiences to create a model—a recipe—for what they hope is a delicious bran muffin. But whether the “bran muffin model” actually produces a good muffin or a burned hockey puck depends not just on the recipe but on factors completely out of the control of the recipe designer. When you set your oven for 400°F, does it heat to only 350°? Will you mistake a teaspoon of salt for a tablespoon of baking soda? Will you fall asleep and burn the muffins? Will the recipe maker’s tastes match your own?

Because of these uncertainties and unknowns, scientists who work with models try not to call the outcomes “predictions”—rather we call them “projections” or “scenarios.” A prediction implies more accuracy and certainty than many models provide. For all these reasons, scientists often repeat the classic aphorism “All models are wrong, but some are useful,” by which we mean models are only as good as our understanding of the scientific knowledge that goes into them. But useful models help us understand how science and human choices interact, providing valuable insight for policymakers.

This op-ed originally appeared in TIME.

The Impact of Using Low-Saline Oilfield Produced Water for Irrigation on Water and Soil Quality in California

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

In California, drought and a reduction in natural water availability in recent decades have led to a search for alternative water sources for agriculture. One controversial potential source is oilfield-produced water, a byproduct of oil extraction.

This study, produced by researchers at Duke University, RTI International, California State University-Bakersfield, and the Pacific Institute, examines the potential environmental, soil quality, and crop health risks of blending oilfield-produced water with surface water for irrigation in the Cawelo Water District in Kern County, California. The study finds that salt and boron soil accumulation can pose long-term risks to soil sodification, groundwater salinization, and plant health, and suggest that oilfield-produced water in California be blended with freshwater and used to irrigate boron-tolerant crops.

The study scope was limited to inorganic constituents such as sodium, boron, and naturally occurring radioactive materials.

Article: Is Food Irrigated with Oilﬁeld-Produced Water in the California Central Valley Safe to Eat? A Probabilistic Human Health Risk Assessment Evaluating Trace Metals Exposure

Op-Ed: Opportunities Are Plentiful to Sustain California Agriculture in the Face of Water Supply Uncertainties

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Full Commentary

This commentary was published in CalMatters on April 23, 2020, in response to “California water policies inhibit food production by Valley farmers,” April 16, 2020, CalMatters:

There is no evidence supporting the author’s claim that the San Joaquin Valley’s water supply challenges are linked to California’s food security or the rise in foreign produce imports.

Drivers that do cause increasing importation of produce from other countries include:

Consumer demand for fresh, inexpensive produce year-round.
Fewer environmental, health and safety protections in foreign countries that drive down labor and production costs as compared to California.
Federal policies that encourage agricultural imports, including special rules that allow specific crops to be imported, and low tariffs for foreign produce.

It is also important to remember that while produce imports have increased, so too have produce exports. California’s agricultural exports have increased twenty-fold in the past half century — from $1 billion in value in 1975 to $20 billion in 2017.

Nationally, we export about $40 billion of agricultural products annually. There is nothing wrong with importing or exporting food; we live in a global economy, which is extremely important to California’s prosperity. Agricultural exports provide major benefits to California farmers.

California agriculture has made significant strides in reducing water use while maintaining or increasing crop outputs and revenues, by increasing efficiency and switching to higher value, less thirsty crops. There remain plenty of opportunities to sustain California agriculture in the face of water supply uncertainties, which can be done without compromising domestic food supplies.

The author’s attempt at fear mongering over food security, and capitalization of the COVID-19 crisis and peoples’ concerns about the safety and wellbeing of their families, is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts.

Mapping Public Water Management: Proof of Concept

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

What cannot be measured cannot be managed. Poor water management poses major risks to agriculture, industry, and local communities. However, there is a critical lack of information available about local water conditions, making better management difficult. This technical note, a collaboration between the Pacific Institute and the World Resources Institute, documents the results of a public water management pilot with six companies and 41 facilities, creating an updated question set to better understand conditions of public water management from a stakeholder perspective. It is part of a project to map public water risk by harmonizing and sharing water risk information among industrial water users on access to information on water quantity and quality, the state of infrastructure, the existence and enforcement of allocations and caps, and local pricing systems.

Key Findings

Scalability: Crowdsourcing data from industrial water users through the distribution of this standardized question set is a feasible and scalable method to collect information. An average response time of 17 minutes suggests that information can be crowdsourced effectively with partnered industrial water users. Validity: The field validation exercises shown in this technical note identify how stakeholders view the generated dataset as credible and valuable for informing local actions. In addition to a high rate of accuracy, validation exercises suggest that the generated data is a reasonable proxy for local water management conditions.

Scaling Corporate Water Stewardship to Address Water Challenges in the Colorado River Basin

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

The Colorado River Basin states face significant water challenges, including the overallocation of water, long-term drought, and climate change. This report, commissioned by the Walton Family Foundation, explores the potential for corporate water stewardship to help solve these challenges. Through corporate water stewardship, companies identify and manage water-related business risks, understand and mitigate their adverse impacts on ecosystems and communities, and contribute to more sustainable management of shared freshwater resources. The report examines a set of key corporate water stewardship actions, along with associated drivers and barriers, to identify how the private sector could help address water challenges and advance water stewardship in the Colorado River Basin. Ten associated case studies highlight examples of corporate water stewardship best practices applicable to the Western United States and the Colorado River Basin.

Key Findings

Corporate water stewardship in the Colorado River Basin is still relatively nascent. Compounding this challenge is the lack of forums, relationships, and institutions to help bring together diverse water users, including companies, who do not typically collaborate on shared water challenges. Two key strategies for advancing the maturity and reach of corporate water stewardship in the Basin are (1) to expand water stewardship education, decision-making data, and starter tools about the value of water stewardship and (2) to facilitate local collaboration on water stewardship. Strategy 1: Support Water Stewardship Education, Decision-Making Data, and Starter Tools at the Global Level

Support improved corporate reporting on water use and stewardship activities.
Support online educational and risk assessment tools to help companies get started.
Support investor-led efforts to engage companies in corporate water stewardship.

Strategy 2: Facilitate Local Action on Water Stewardship

- Target engagement on water-intensive industries in the Basin.
- Target value chain engagement on industries with important supply chains in the Basin.
- Support platforms to facilitate relationship-building and knowledge sharing between companies and NGOs, water utilities, and other key water stakeholders.

Resources

Collection of Corporate Water Stewardship Case Studies Individual case studies: Central Nebraska Irrigation Project Ceres Connect the Drops Initiative Diageo Water Blueprint Ecolab Smart Water Tools for Business Decision Making Feed Crop Irrigation & Nutrient Efficiency for California Dairies Intel’s Corporate Water Stewardship Strategy P&G’s Holistic Water Stewardship Approach The California Water Action Collaborative Water Restoration Partnership: Danone North America & Bonneville Environmental Foundation (Change the Course) Xylem’s Sustainability-Linked Loan Facility

Economic Evaluation of Stormwater Capture and Its Multiple Benefits in California

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

Urban stormwater is becoming an increasingly important alternative water supply in California. However, current economic analyses do not adequately evaluate co-benefits provided by different stormwater investments. As a result, urban stormwater capture is undervalued. This research from the Pacific Institute demonstrates that urban stormwater capture investments may be more economically feasible than expected, especially when capitalizing on economies of scale and incorporating co-benefits of projects. Pacific Institute researchers examined the levelized cost of water for 50 proposed stormwater capture projects in California, characterizing the projects by water source, process, and water supply yield. In addition, the authors incorporated co-benefits of projects into the analysis to examine the net benefit of proposed projects. The article demonstrates that for projects that reported even a limited number of additional benefits, the net levelized cost of urban stormwater capture decreased by 85%, with some of the projects demonstrating a net benefit. Thus, scaling urban stormwater capture projects to capitalize on economies of scale and incorporating co-benefits of projects can dramatically improve the economic feasibility of these projects. Learn more and download the article here.

Resources

Excel Spreadsheet: Supporting Information and Data for Economic Evaluation of Stormwater Capture and Its Multiple Benefits in California

Op-Ed: Hand-Washing Is Critical in the Fight Against Coronavirus, but What If You Don’t Have Safe Water?

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

watwater

Op-Ed

Originally published in The Hill.

The coronavirus pandemic is shining a spotlight on the weaknesses of social, economic and health safety nets we’ve long taken for granted, including our water system.

It’s hard to wash your hands if you don’t have access to running water in your home or your water has been cut off for inability to pay, as it has for thousands of households around the country. Fear and confusion about the safety of tap water are driving people to strip shelves of bottled water, leaving nothing for those with health conditions that require it. The health of vital personnel that operate thousands of water and wastewater plants around the country is being threatened.

We have an opportunity now to deliver on the human right to water by including urgent infrastructure upgrades and ratepayer protections in the coronavirus relief packages currently being negotiated. After decades of deferred maintenance and disinvestment, it is time to shore up the systems that keep our communities healthy and ensure even the most vulnerable among us have access to safe water and sanitation.

More than a hundred years ago, American water utilities took the lead in designing, testing and building some of the first advanced water-treatment plants to deliver some of the safest water in the world. At the time, viruses and bacterial contamination in drinking water were causing repeated epidemics of water-related diseases, including cholera, dysentery, typhoid and more, which killed tens of thousands of people every year.

As modern water systems were put in place, the United States effectively eliminated these diseases. Between 1910 and 1940, the innovation of filtered, disinfected drinking water reduced mortality rates by nearly half in major cities and cut the infant mortality rate by three-quarters. Diarrheal death rates fell from 120 to 10 per 100,000 people. Typhoid death rates fell from 30 to under 1 per 100,000. Disinfected water delivered more health benefits than almost any other modern health intervention. Yet worldwide, hundreds of millions of people still lack access to this necessity.

The United States still has a world-class water system and some of the best water utility managers and operators in the world, but the benefits of those systems are not universally available to all Americans. Worse, parts of the system are failing because of inadequate investment, weak and failing federal regulations and inadequate social safety nets. Nationally, we spend 84 billion dollars less than we should every year to maintain and upgrade our water and wastewater infrastructure.

The tragedy in Flint, Mich., highlighted how bad decisions, political interference in water agency operations, underinvestment and economic malfeasance can lead to disastrous impacts. This tragedy is being repeated in other disadvantaged communities around the nation. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are known to lack access to safe water; more than 200,000 people in California alone don’t have hot and cold running water or flush toilets. The gross failure in this country to recognize the human right to safe and affordable water permits water utilities to cut off water delivery to families unable to pay utility bills, which leads directly to increases in waterborne diseases.

The current pandemic offers an opportunity to rethink many things about our nation, including how to ensure that every person has safe and affordable water. There must be clear communication about the safety of our treated water supply from viruses and other contaminants. We must also ensure water services are available to everyone to help stop the spread of the virus. In the past few days, temporary suspensions of water shutoffs for inability to pay have been announced in more than 250 communities around the nation. Detroit has identified 3,600 households whose water has been shut off for more than a year and is trying to restore service to help address the ongoing health crisis.

Any national stimulus package must include money to water utilities to ensure continued reliable delivery of safe water. We must invest in state-of-the-art technology to upgrade drinking water systems. Water shutoffs to the poor must be permanently banned and replaced with a guaranteed minimum water supply for basic needs. Finally, we must not neglect homeless populations desperately in need of hand-washing stations and toilets.

Let’s turn this crisis into an effort to rebuild our public water systems and reestablish trust in one of the most important services any modern, first-world country must provide – safe and affordable water services for all.

Corporate Water Resilience in an Uncertain Future

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

Around the world, businesses are experiencing adverse physical effects of climate change, from increased operational costs and disrupted production to social unrest in communities in which they operate. These impacts are most prominently expressed through changes in the water cycle, including precipitation shifts and extreme drought.

To build resilience to a changing climate and thrive into the future, businesses will need to adequately consider, mitigate, and adapt to the water-related risks of climate change to their core operations, their local communities, supply chains, and broader networks. Towards this end, this discussion paper summarizes the existing literature on the physical water-related risks of climate change to businesses, and provides actionable examples of how businesses can address these risks and create corporate water adaption and resilience.

The paper was produced by the Pacific Institute, in partnership with the UN Global Compact’s CEO Water Mandate, which the Pacific Institute serves as Co-Secretariat for, along with CDP, Suez, and WBCSD.

Key Findings

Businesses throughout the world are already experiencing water-related impacts of climate change.
Businesses need to address water-related risks arising from climate change impacts to not only their direct operations, but also their local communities, supply chains, and broader networks. Failure to do so threatens business continuity and long-term value creation.
Despite a growing number of businesses assessing and managing the potential physical impacts of climate change on their business operations, action is not at the scale, degree, or urgency warranted. This situation has been compounded by the lack of structured approaches to support businesses on their climate resilience journey, although this is changing.
Adaptation to water-related risks of climate change will require dramatic improvements in the efficiency of water use, the elimination of pollution in order to ensure the water remaining in water catchments is safe to use, investments in healthy catchments and water infrastructure, support for adaptive water governance, and the strengthening of the adaptive capacity of local communities.
There are case examples of company adaptive strategies to build their water resilience. Solutions are clear, action needs to be accelerated, and partnerships will continue to be important.

Comment Letter on the Draft Water Resilience Portfolio for the State of California Regarding a Multi-Benefit Approach

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

This comment letter focuses on how the California Water Resilience Portfolio can incorporate multiple benefits when prioritizing and funding water management strategies throughout the state. It was sent on behalf of a group of interested parties with significant experience in evaluating and considering the multiple benefits of water-related projects, and it was directed to the Governor’s Water Portfolio Program at the California Natural Resources Agency.

Resources

Webpage: Water Resilience Portfolio Initiative Webpage: Advancing Sustainable Water Solutions

Comment Letter on the Draft Water Resilience Portfolio for the State of California

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

This comment letter conveys summary comments and suggestions on the draft Water Resilience Portfolio released by California state agencies, drawing on the considerable experience Pacific Institute has around themes of water efficiency, stormwater management, and the Salton Sea. The letter was authored by staff at Pacific Institute and directed to the Governor’s Water Portfolio Program at the California Natural Resources Agency.

Resources

Webpage: Water Resilience Portfolio Initiative

Op-Ed: Water Scarcity Will Increase Risk of Conflict, Says New National Intelligence Report

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

But report is less comprehensive than previous assessments and omits key flash-points for water conflict.

By Dr. Peter Gleick, President Emeritus of the Pacific Institute

Op-Ed

On December 20, 2019, President Trump signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act (Public Law 116-92), including the Intelligence Authorization Act of FY2020. Section 6722 of that law required a report be prepared on the national security effects of “global water insecurity” and be submitted within 180 days (by late June 2020) to “the congressional intelligence committees, the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate.”

The Trump administration failed to deliver this report on time, finally releasing the unclassified version three days after the November 2020 election. That report, “Water Insecurity Threatening Economic Growth, Political Stability” (National Intelligence Council Memorandum NICM-2020-05949) was sent from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence on November 6th – though it is dated July 10, 2020 – to the congressional committees noted in the Act as well as House and Senate leadership.

The report concludes that “Governments, industry, and civil society are facing an increasing risk of water insecurity as demand grows and supply is increasingly strained.” It attributes these increased risks to “development practices, agriculture, and environmental degradation” and to “poor governance and resource management” that affect both water availability and quality.

It also notes that while most of these risks will be experienced in developing countries, “some developed countries will also experience water strains” and the countries that experience water problems will suffer health and disease problems, growing economic and social inequality, reduced economic growth, and “a greater risk of internal political instability.” For countries that share water resources, water is likely to become a flashpoint for geopolitical competition.

There is nothing new in the report that hasn’t been acknowledged in a long series of previous military and intelligence community reports on water scarcity. To its credit, given the efforts of the Trump administration to eliminate any mention of climate change in government studies, the new report does mention the risks of climate change:

“Anthropogenic degradation of landscapes and waterscapes and climate change are effecting [sic] the quantity, quality, and timing of water supplies… Multiple climate models indicate increasing variability, intensity, and occurrence of droughts and floods.”

But overall, this report is far less comprehensive and detailed on the nature and likelihood of water-related security threats than previous intelligence community assessments, including the 2012 report from the Defense Intelligence Agency “Global Water Security” and the 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review, which stated:

“Competition for resources, including energy and water, will worsen tensions in the coming years and could escalate regional confrontations into broader conflicts – particularly in fragile states.” And “Climate change may exacerbate water scarcity and lead to sharp increases in food costs. The pressures caused by climate change will influence resource competition while placing additional burdens on economies, societies, and governance institutions around the world. These effects are threat multipliers that will aggravate stressors abroad such as poverty, environmental degradation, political instability, and social tensions – conditions that can enable terrorist activity and other forms of violence.”

The new report notes the connections between water problems and threats to human health, including the lack of adequate safe and affordable water and sanitation to billions of people, the link between water and economic development, and the risk to political stability and domestic unrest. It makes the following observation about lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic:

“…as the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated, some wealthier countries also lack adequate resilience mechanisms to manage multiple or cascading threats simultaneously, and thus remain vulnerable to systemic shocks.”

There are some noticeable gaps and omissions in the new assessment. It paints, in broad brushstrokes, regions of the world where water security problems are likely to be most severe. While there are no surprises – it identifies the arid Middle East, north Africa, and southern/southeastern Asia as high-risk basins – it fails to explicitly address high-risk examples like the ongoing disputes over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam on the Blue Nile, the worsening farmer-pastoralist violence in Nigeria, Niger, Mali, and surrounding countries, drought-related violence seen in recent years in India, Iran, Iraq, and parts of Latin America, or even the recent violence associated with the dispute between the United States and Mexico over the waters of the Conchos River, a major tributary of the Rio Grande.

Other gaps in the assessment include the weak discussion of climate-related risks mentioned above, no discussion of the challenges these water problems will pose for US military forces and intelligence assets, or any assessment of the issue of water as a casualty or weapon of conflict, as seen in recent years in Iraq and Yemen. US responses or potential solutions are also not discussed, such as the diplomatic role of the State Department in negotiating agreements among disputing parties, the role of the US in providing economic and technological development assistance to countries seeking to address water inequities, shortages, or quality problems, or the value of international law and treaties.

A report on water security that is five months late is better than no report at all, but the growing threat of water-related violence around the world, including risks that directly and indirectly affect US economic and security interests, requires far more attention from the federal government than it has been given in recent years. There is an opportunity now for the next administration to give it the attention it deserves.

This post appears on Circle of Blue, and originally appeared on Peter Gleick: Water. Climate. Sustainability. Dr. Peter Gleick is a world-renowned expert, innovator, and communicator on water and climate issues.

Comment Letter on the Proposed Urban Water Conservation Reporting Regulations for the State of California

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

This comment letter expresses comments and suggestions in response to proposed regulation under the California Code of Regulations around reporting urban water conservation information for water utilities. The Pacific Institute is a frequent user of water-related data. This letter is focused around the value and need for the data provided as well as ways improve the dataset. The letter was authored by staff at Pacific Institute and directed to the California State Water Resources Control Board.

Resources

Map: Urban Water Use Webpage: State Board Monthly Reports Webpage: Index of Conservation Regulations

Op-Ed: California Can Solve Its Water Shortage With the Water We Have. Here’s How.

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Op-Ed

California is at a water crossroads.

We can continue our costly, 100-year-old pattern of trying to find new water supplies, or we can choose instead to focus on smarter ways of using – and reusing – what we already have.

With a population projected to top 50 million by mid-century, a booming economy and a changing climate, there is no question we need to shore up our water systems. But we don’t need an all-of-the-above strategy that sacrifices affordability and environmental health. Just like with energy, we must focus on the solutions that are better for our planet and pocketbooks.

The cheapest water is the water we save.

Californians have made real strides to conserve over the past several decades. San Francisco and Los Angeles use the same amount (or less) water today as they did 30 years ago, despite substantial growth.

And farmers have dramatically increased economic output over the last 30 years while using the same amount of water – effectively producing more food and income for every drop of water.

But far more can be done.

Research from the Pacific Institute found that appliance and fixture upgrades, leak repair and landscape changes could reduce urban water use by up to 5 million acre-feet annually – enough water to supply more than 13 million families for a year.

On farms, precision irrigation and other water-wise practices could reduce water use by 6 million to 7 million acre-feet annually while maintaining food production and farmer income. This untapped potential for water efficiency should always be our first step towards water security.

There are also new, innovative sources of local supply.

Less than 20% of urban wastewater is being reused. There are still more than a million acre-feet of treated water we could reclaim to meet local needs. Water reuse opportunities can be found across the state, but are especially important in coastal areas, where waste(d) water is discharged into and pollutes estuaries and the ocean.

Urban runoff is another viable local option. Our cities were designed to remove rainwater to reduce flood risk, literally flushing freshwater down storm drains. Rain gardens, green streets, and parks can help us catch and store more rain.

While gray infrastructure like pipes and pumps will continue to play an important role in our water system, green infrastructure can turn urban spaces into a sponge that allows water to sink into the ground to replenish underground aquifers for later use.

Water efficiency, reuse and rainwater capture not only save money compared with costly sources like seawater desalination, they also save energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which will be key for avoiding unmanageable climate impacts.

Water conservation during California’s last drought saved enough electricity to power the cities of Berkeley, Burbank and Santa Cruz for a year. Less energy use means less power plant pollution, helping California achieve our clean air and climate goals.

There are other benefits to consider as well. Reuse reduces the need to divert water from streams already stressed by rising temperatures and shrinking snowpack and can curb ocean pollution associated with sewage outfalls. Plants used to soak up runoff also filter out oil, fertilizer and other chemicals before they reach our water supply. And, of course, green spaces help to cool and beautify communities while providing a place for people to enjoy the outdoors.

California has a chance to model what a truly resilient water system looks like, combining nature and technology to make the most of every drop and dollar. Just as we are doing in the energy sector, we should be focusing on no-regrets water projects that make economic and environmental sense.

As state leaders work to meet Gov. Gavin Newsom’s call for 21^st Century California water plan, I urge them to focus on sources that are both cost-effective and climate smart.

This op-ed originally appeared in CalMatters.

Op-Ed: When It Comes to Climate-Change Adaptation, As Goes California, So Goes…the World

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Op-Ed

It’s almost biblical: Apocalyptic images of fires sweeping through communities. The worst droughts in recorded history, followed by floods overwhelming dams and levees. Homeless encampments. Power outages for millions of people.

Is this the “end of California as we know it” and the result of a “failure to live sustainably” as New York Times opinion writer Farhad Manjoo suggested? Is the state “ungovernable” (the Economist) and a failed, “collapsing” experiment (Forbes)? Are we suffering the inevitable consequence, as some right-wing pundits have gloated, of a “series of foolish, unrealistic policy choices” (Rich Lowry, National Review) and democratic attempts at social engineering (Travis Allen, San Francisco Chronicle) ?

In another era, Joan Didion poetically described a future in California that “always looks good in the golden land, because no one remembers the past. Here is where the hot wind blows and the old ways do not seem relevant.” That hot wind is still blowing, now spreading burning embers that threaten to consume us all. Californians remember the past only enough to understand how it has failed us and that it can no longer be a guide to our future. What we thought we understood about yesterday’s climate, energy and water systems, housing, transportation, and education, no longer serves us.

Flames engulf a burning building at the Soda Rock Vineyards during the Kincade fire in Healdsburg, California, U.S., on Sunday, Oct. 27, 2019. The wildfire that erupted in Californias wine country minutes after a PG&E Corp. power line went down has prompted an expanded evacuation order, as officials warn high winds could drive the blaze toward one of the regions largest towns. Photographer: Phil Pacheco/Bloomberg via Getty Images

But the idea that California’s failures and challenges are unique is wrong. What’s happening here offers all Americans a glimpse into the failures and challenges of the U.S. as a whole. California’s worsening wildfires look a lot like the worsening hurricanes and flooding afflicting Florida and the rest of the Gulf Coast. The homeless problem in California is difficult and unsolved, but it’s certainly not unique to the Golden State. America has never successfully tackled the shame of having deep poverty despite being the richest nation on the planet. California’s hesitant and uncertain steps toward a zero-carbon-energy future are the same steps the whole planet must take to overturn and reverse the damaging legacy of 150 years of burning fossil fuels. The state’s imperfect but real commitment to social and cultural inclusion isn’t a fad or a whim but the only actions a truly just, equitable, democratic society can take.

How California chooses to respond to its problems will either be a guide to the rest of the country if it gets it right, or a cautionary tale if it fails. And it’s not just about the little things, like banning straws or plastic bags. The state has also led the way in moving to more renewable energy, real cuts in greenhouse-gas emissions, the nation’s best automobile standards, rapidly expanding electric car technology, and the restoration of rivers and natural ecosystems. These are all efforts that tend to threaten the existing political and corporate status quo; efforts that have made the state a target of Donald Trump’s petty tweets and more substantive legal and regulatory assaults.

The good news is that California is an economic powerhouse—by some measures the world’s fifth largest economy. The state is increasingly powered by one of the most racially, ethnically, and socially diverse population in the world—a strength, not a weakness. The fires will be put out, the power will go back on, and the debate about how to respond will continue.

When Mark Twain was visiting London in 1897, a rumor started that he had fallen ill and then died. To an inquiring reporter, he wrote “The report of my death was an exaggeration.” Reports of the death of California, or its dream, are an exaggeration. Rather than signing a death certificate, or gloating about the worsening challenges California faces, the rest of the country and the world should start taking lessons from California: watch to see the challenges that arise, how the state responds, hope we succeed, and plan their own actions accordingly.

This article originally appeared in Time.

Water, Sanitation and Hygiene: Three Essential Ingredients to Resilient Agricultural Supply Chains

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

Agricultural workers are expected to be some of the worst affected from the projected impacts of climate change, resulting in sixty percent of work hours lost due to heat stress in 2030. Climate change will also significantly the water cycle, introducing greater uncertainty into agricultural supply chain operations.

Providing WASH resources can make companies more resilient and productive in the face of climate change. This booklet provides information for sectors that are reliant upon the agricultural supply chain to protect and improve water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) resources for the people and business in the regions in which they operate.

The booklet was developed by Water Aid, along with the United Nations Global Compact CEO Water Mandate, for which the Pacific Institute is co-secretariat, DIAGEO, the Alliance for Water Stewardship, and WASH4WORK.

Op-Ed: Climate-Equitable Water

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Op-Ed

The failure to meet basic needs for safe water and sanitation worldwide is one of the great tragedies of our age, with billions of people paying the price in illness and poverty. The international community and countless local activists are currently engaged in a renewed drive to end the global water crisis. As corporate executives, investors and politicians from around the world descend on New York City this week to debate the future of the environment, however, we must confront the fact that the water crisis is on a collision course with another great tragedy: the chaos that our economic system has unleashed on the Earth’s climate.

In the run-up to the UN Climate Action Summit now underway in New York, our organizations, Water.org and the Pacific Institute, have been examining the connections between climate change and Water.org and WaterEquity’s mission: to empower people to invest in providing access to clean water and sanitation. Our research reinforces the conclusion that water action must be part of climate action, or else it will be part of the problem. Universal water and sanitation, as a promise, is inextricably tied to the climate future that our investments are building. Innovative investment tools like climate finance facilities, microfinance, bonds and insurance can get us closer to meeting that promise.

Meeting water and sanitation needs has traditionally required substantial energy, resulting in the emission of greenhouse gases. The water sector accounts for 4% of national electricity use in the United States, more than 9% in India and China. A recent Pacific Institute assessment using International Energy Agency data predicts that meeting the United Nations sustainable development goal of water and sanitation for everyone will double the water sector’s energy needs between 2014 and 2030. That’s largely due to an increase in energy-intensive seawater desalination, large-scale water-transfer projects and collection and treatment of wastewater.

The dream of universal safe water, though, does not need to come at the expense of the climate. We can meet both water and climate needs with smart investments.

A crucial part of this is to look for anywhere water is lost or wasted. Improvements in water efficiency can simultaneously reduce pressure on overdrawn and scarce water resources while providing services to more people. This includes plugging the massive leaks in many water systems out of which escapes an estimated 20% of the water distributed in the developing countries where Water.org works. And it means better managing groundwater to reduce unsustainable use, pumping costs and drying up of wells. In India, for example, groundwater levels are falling fast, and every 10-meter drop in the water table will demand extra pumping power equivalent to four new 500-megawatt power plants.

Another answer is to shift our water and sanitation systems away from fossil fuels to renewables. In fact, sanitation systems even have the potential to go beyond carbon neutrality: The energy flushed away in domestic wastewater is far greater than the energy required to treat it; if this can be harnessed, sanitation systems would become a power source.

It may sound like an easy choice to redirect investments into smarter, greener, less wasteful water solutions, but there’s a caveat. We must start at the base of the economic pyramid where water and energy development are most needed. People living in poverty already lack safe water and sanitation, and they are the most vulnerable to the droughts, floods, storms and rising seas that climate change is bringing. They will stay vulnerable if planners and investors continue to ignore climate change and build the wrong systems in the wrong places, wasting money, time and lives. If smart green systems are just for the better-off, the injustices that lie beneath the water crisis will only grow deeper.

At the base of the economic pyramid, we believe smarter finance will be just as important, and maybe more so, than smarter plumbing in solving the water crisis without fueling the climate crisis. And smarter financing is available: More than $463 billion is currently held in climate-change investment funds according to the Climate Policy Initiative.

Water.org has already helped catalyze nearly $2 billion in microfinance to empower 22 million people with water and sanitation solutions. The repayment rate on the loans is a remarkable 99%, better than U.S. banks generally expect from domestic borrowers.

Microfinance is also suited to support utilities to reduce water loss and emissions and help poor communities most vulnerable to climate change to adapt to climate shocks. Green bonds can support low-carbon, climate-resilient investment in utilities and are currently underutilized: They represent just 2.5% of all new debt issued last year, based on data from Dealogic and the Climate Bonds Initiative. Pooled bonds can facilitate the efforts of smaller water-service providers to access capital markets, lowering their riskiness and raising their creditworthiness. Innovative insurance can cushion vulnerable low-income groups and small farmers.

It will cost far less to do this right than to fail to do it at all.

Image credit: Water.org, Flickr, Creative Commons

This article originally appeared in Reuters Breakingviews .

Op-Ed: Protecting the Environment in Times of War

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Full Op-Ed

This story is part of Covering Climate Now, a global collaboration of more than 300 news outlets to strengthen coverage of the climate story.

War is a miserable thing. It kills and maims soldiers and civilians. It destroys infrastructure, cultures, and communities. It worsens poverty and development challenges. And it damages and cripples vital ecological and environmental resources.

Over the past 150 years, international law and principles related to war and armed conflict have evolved to try to limit some of the worst evils of violence by protecting civilians, medical and community infrastructure, and to some degree, the environment. But these protections are inadequate: Current international constraints are too weak, inadequately enforced, or both.

Fresh water and water systems are a disturbing example. The data shows an increasing trend of water-related conflicts and violence against natural or built water systems, where water is a trigger, weapon, or casualty of conflict. But we must also confront a world where worsening environmental conditions, including human-caused climate change, also contribute to the risk of population displacements, tensions, armed conflict, and war.

It is time for renegotiating and strengthening the international law protecting resources and the environment—a green Geneva Convention to protect resources, ecosystems (including the climate), and critical civilian water and energy infrastructure. We can start by building on the International Law Commission’s new draft environmental principles that were recently provisionally adopted at the United Nations, and adding a set of principles like those proposed for the protection of water infrastructure by the Geneva Water Hub of the University of Geneva.

The problem. Over the long history of human conflicts, a set of ethical standards and legal constraints have evolved to try to limit or ban certain actions, behaviors, and weapons, and to protect certain populations and assets from destruction. In theory, these rules and codes of conduct, referred to as jus in bello (“the law in waging war”) or “international humanitarian laws,” help to protect civilian populations, prisoners of war, medical personnel and facilities, and non-military property and infrastructure—including the environment.

In practice, however, these laws have largely failed to prevent attacks on basic civilian infrastructure and the natural environment, and they do not appear to impose accountability on governments in a way that limits military operations. Extensive evidence shows the growing effects of armed conflicts on civilians, built infrastructure, and the natural environment—especially water. Similarly, threats such as climate change are worsening the risks of agricultural failure, coastal flooding, population displacement, economic disruption, and political failures contributing to violent altercations. Over the past few decades, persistent war and violence by nation-states and subnational groups has led to the “de-development” of entire countries, including Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, and others. Infrastructure has been destroyed, incomes and quality of life has plummeted, fertility and life expectancies rates have fallen, infant mortality and unemployment has soared, large numbers of people have been physically displaced from their homes and lives, and even the most rudimentary aspects of survival have been challenged, including access to basic energy and safe water and sanitation. In Yemen, for example, attacks on civilian water systems have led to a massive epidemic of cholera, with over 1 million cases reported and over 2,000 deaths.

Three core problems exist: The current international laws of war inadequately protect natural resources and the environment in the context of civil war or local conflicts. Militaries and armed groups inconsistently identify and differentiate among legitimate and illegitimate targets and ambiguous language in current laws and agreements creates loopholes for the military. And the enforcement of laws of war—and punishment of violators of these laws—are rare and subjective.

Yet disdain for—and prohibition against—intentionally targeting civilian infrastructure is rooted in custom, religious rules, and ethical codes of behavior that go back thousands of years, to early Sanskrit, Jewish, Christian, Islamic, and other cultures. In the fourth century BC, Alexander the Great tore down defensive weirs built by the Persians along the Tigris River, describing attempts to block access along the river as “unbecoming to men who are victorious in battle.” In 1439, Charles VII of Orleans instituted a law holding officers responsible for “the abuses, ills and offences” committed by the men they commanded. The Lieber Code of 1863, promulgated by President Lincoln during the US Civil War, provided guidance for Union armies in the field, stating in part: “Military necessity…does not admit of the use of poison in any way, nor of the wanton devastation of a district. It admits of deception, but disclaims acts of perfidy; and, in general, military necessity does not include any act of hostility which makes the return to peace unnecessarily difficult… The use of poison in any manner, be it to poison wells, or food, or arms, is wholly excluded from modern warfare. He that uses it puts himself out of the pale of the law and usages of war.”

It must be noted, of course, that these guidelines failed to prevent or constrain extensive human rights abuses during the Civil War, including General Sherman’s historically destructive march across Georgia laying waste to towns, farms, and all symbols of civilian society—acts that still reverberate in the region today.

Modern versions of international principles and laws evolved from these early guidelines. The humanitarian justification for these protections rests on the understanding that access to basic resources like water and sanitation, or protection of the environment, is critical for human health and the prevention of enormous human suffering. The first Geneva Convention in 1864 called for protecting non-combatants, prisoners of war, and wounded soldiers. As time went on, these protections became more well-defined: The1868 St. Petersburg Declaration states “the necessities of war ought to yield to the requirements of humanity” and “the only legitimate object which States should endeavor to accomplish during war is to weaken the military forces of the enemy.” The 1874 Brussels Protocol forbids “any destruction or seizure of the enemy’s property that is not imperatively demanded by the necessity of war.” The first Hague Conventions and Declarations (of 1899 and 1907) sought “to diminish the evils of war, as far as military requirements permit” and included the famous Martens Clause:

“Until a more complete code of the laws of war has been issued, the High Contracting Parties deem it expedient to declare that, in cases not included in the Regulations adopted by them, the inhabitants and the belligerents remain under the protection and the rule of the principles of the law of nations, as they result from the usages established among civilized peoples, from the laws of humanity, and the dictates of the public conscience.”

After the Second World War, efforts were made to develop even stronger legal protections for civilians and infrastructure. The 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention’s Article 53 prohibits deliberate or indiscriminate destruction of property belonging to individuals or “the State, or to other public authorities” and Article 147 bans “extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.” Even more explicit civilian and environmental protections were developed with the 1977 Protocols to the Geneva Convention, including Protocol I, which limits warfare that causes “superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering” or “widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment”), prohibits indiscriminate attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure, and protects civilian infrastructure critical to the survival of civilian populations. The 1977 Protocols also prohibit military actions when the “collateral damage” to civilian objects and noncombatants is excessive in relation to the military gains.

Other international declarations, laws, and agreements explicitly protect the environment and natural resources from war and conflict. The 1976 Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques includes specific protection of the “hydrosphere” and bans “weather modification” with the intent of causing damage or destruction. The World Charter for Nature and similar language in the Stockholm Declaration and Rio Declaration says that States shall “ensure that activities within their jurisdictions or control do not cause damage to the natural systems located within other States” and “nature shall be secured against degradation caused by warfare or other hostile activities.”

But the question remains: Are these protections relevant—or sufficient—to address the threat of human-caused climate changes and related threats to resources?

The state of current international laws of war. All these efforts, legal statements, and principles fail to adequately protect civilians and the environment during armed conflicts. The 1991 civil war in Somalia destroyed the water system, which in turn contributed to outbreaks of cholera affecting 55,000 people. The destruction of Yemen’s urban water system between 2016 and 2019 has led to massive cholera outbreaks and suffering. ISIS attacked major dams along the Tigris and Euphrates rivers and used them as weapons to either deny downstream populations of water or to flood areas for military purposes.

Recent trends related to water offer insights into the weaknesses and limitations of current international humanitarian environmental law. The Water Conflict Chronology database identifies water as a trigger, weapon, and casualty of armed conflict. The chart shows the number of recorded events, per year, since 1930 and the dramatic increase in recent years. When characterized by the type of conflicts, we also see a shift from nation-to-nation conflicts toward sub-national events including riots, civil wars, and terrorism.

The chart shows a large increase in the number of reported events after the mid-1980s. Conclusions about trends in water-related conflicts should be made with caution because of changes in media coverage, access to broader sources of information, and increased attention focused on the problem. Nevertheless, incidences of water-related conflicts have been rising rapidly. While the use of water as a weapon and attacks on water systems can be found in every time period and continent (except Antarctica), the past decade has seen a dramatic increase in such attacks focused in the Middle East and North Africa—particularly in Iraq, Syria, Yemen— involving civil conflicts with major outside and proxy forces.

These trends suggest serious limitations to the protections offered by current humanitarian laws of war.

Most constraints on actions during conflict have been formulated in the context of interstate war, not civil wars, subnational conflicts, or local internal violence. Yet most recent violence has been subnational, not nation-to-nation.

The ambiguity of language in the laws makes it easier to exploit loopholes. Militaries inconsistently identify and differentiate among legitimate and illegitimate targets and fall back on claims of military “necessity” and “proportionality.

Even when violations seem clear, enforcement and punishment of violators of these laws are rare. Parties to the Geneva Conventions have an obligation to enforce its provisions and to bring to trial persons who have allegedly violated its provisions. but nations have been unable or unwilling to enforce relevant provisions. Consequently, a new Environmental Geneva Convention is needed, focused on protecting the environment, natural resources, and vital civilian infrastructure that supports basic needs like water, food, and energy.

Two modest international efforts at strengthening protections of the environment and resources during conflicts have recently moved forward. The first is adoption by the International Law Commission of the United Nations of draft principles governing protection of the environment during armed conflict. The second is a set of principles for the protection of water infrastructure developed by the Geneva Water Hub of the University of Geneva.

The International Law Commissions draft principles apply to the protection of the environment before, during, and after armed conflict. They broadly require States to protect land and resources, constrain military operations that may damage the environment, prevent and mitigate environmental degradation where populations are displaced, and avoid engaging in environmental modification techniques having severe, long-term effects. Following armed conflicts, the principles call for States to repair, compensate, and remediate all environmental damages and remove hazardous remains of war.

The Geneva List of Principles on the Protection of Water Infrastructure is an effort to broadly develop rules to protect crucial water supply and sanitation infrastructure and systems and was developed in part due to the recent increase in attacks on such infrastructure. Unlike the ILC’s principles, which focus on State actors, the Geneva List of Principles is designed to apply to both State and non-State actors.

Among its key principles are that parties to conflicts should refrain from using water-related infrastructure as a means of warfare, and the use of poison against water and water infrastructure is prohibited. Water systems and water-system personnel are presumed to be civilian and must not be attacked. Parties to conflicts must take all feasible precautions to protect civilians and civilian infrastructure, avoid locating military objectives near water-related infrastructure, and establish protected zones around water-related infrastructure. Water infrastructure containing “dangerous forces” such as dams and dikes, should not be objects of attack. Control over water delivery or access must not be used to force the displacement of civilians. Humanitarian relief efforts and personnel involved in water-related activities must be respected and protected.

And occupying powers must provide and maintain basic water and sanitation services.

It remains to be seen whether any newly crafted or strongly worded principles will be more effective at protecting natural resources and the environment than the previous 150 years of efforts to design effective international humanitarian laws of war. Comprehensive principles must be universally accepted, taught to military commanders and their political counterparts, and especially, actively enforced by the international community—with punishments for violations meted out by States themselves or the international criminal court system.

Until then, the growing value and importance of climatic systems, water, energy, food, and other vital environmental resources will continue to make them vulnerable as targets or weapons of war, or as triggers of violence and armed conflict.

This article originally appeared in Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

Setting Site Water Targets Informed by Catchment Context: A Guide for Companies

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

The world’s water resources are under growing pressure from rising water consumption, pollution, weak governance, and climate change, exposing businesses to increased water-related risks caused not only by their own water use and discharge, but also by the catchment context in which they operate.

This guide outlines how companies can set site water targets that maximize impact and improve water security by simultaneously addressing shared catchment challenges and aligning corporate water strategies with societal goals, including the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. By accounting for catchment conditions, companies’ water targets can drive informed actions at the local level, address shared water challenges, and catalyze collective action. This helps companies act as leaders and sites become more resilient and adapt to water challenges.

The guide was developed by the United Nations Global Compact CEO Water Mandate, for which the Pacific Institute is co-secretariat, along with CDP, The Nature Conservancy, UNEP-DHI Centre for Water and Environment, the World Resources Institute, and WWF.

In this Series

Case Study: Setting Site Water Targets Informed by Catchment Context Case Study: Santa Ana River Watershed, California

Case Study: Setting Site Water Targets Informed by Catchment Context CASE STUDY: Noyyal-Bhavani River Basin, South India

Case Study: Setting Site Water Targets Informed by Catchment Context CASE STUDY: Upper Vaal River Basin and Berg and Breede River Basins, South Africa

Setting Site Water Targets Informed by Catchment Context Case Study: Santa Ana River Watershed, California

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

By setting water targets that are informed by the local catchment context, companies can maximize impact and improve water security by addressing the key water challenges in the region and aligning their strategies with public sector goals, including the local water management goals and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. This case study documents a two-year pilot test of a new approach to setting site water targets in the Santa Ana River Watershed in Southern California.

The purpose of this pilot was to help participating companies understand the local water context and engage with peer companies, public sector water managers, and other stakeholders in the catchment to align on key water challenges and set meaningful site targets. The case study was developed by the Pacific Institute and the United Nations Global Compact CEO Water Mandate, for which the Pacific Institute is co-secretariat.

In this Series

Setting Site Water Targets Informed by Catchment Context: A Guide for Companies

Case Study: Setting Site Water Targets Informed by Catchment Context CASE STUDY: Noyyal-Bhavani River Basin, South India

Case Study: Setting Site Water Targets Informed by Catchment Context CASE STUDY: Upper Vaal River Basin and Berg and Breede River Basins, South Africa

Plumbing the Depths: Californians Without Toilets and Running Water

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

California’s Human Right to Water law states that “every human being has the right to safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water adequate for human consumption, cooking, and sanitary purposes.” But to date, the policy discussion on meeting California’s Human Right to Water has largely overlooked the failures of water and sanitation service that emerge because of a lack of household plumbing.

This report fills that gap by measuring the number of Californians without toilets and hot and cold running water because of incomplete household plumbing and homelessness. To achieve full realization of the Human Right to Water in California, the authors propose that the state address the problem of inadequate plumbing within California’s larger policy framework of the Human Right to Water.

Key Findings

Key findings of the report include:

In 2015, 208,000 Californians had inadequate access to toilets. 88,000 people lived in a household without a private indoor flush toilet. Another 120,000 people experiencing homelessness were also unlikely to have adequate access to a toilet.

In 2015, 211,000 Californians had inadequate access to hot and cold running water. 91,000 people lived in a household without hot and cold running water. Another 120,000 people experiencing homelessness were also unlikely to have adequate access to hot and cold running water.

Incomplete plumbing was a problem throughout the state, in both urban and rural areas. Counties with the highest rates of housing without toilets were San Francisco (2.3 percent), Humboldt (0.89 percent), and Imperial (0.60 percent), while counties with the highest rates of housing without hot and cold indoor piped water were Shasta (0.96 percent), Imperial (0.73 percent), and San Francisco (0.71 percent).

Many Californians live in buildings with shared bathrooms, which are often poorly maintained. Housing units with incomplete plumbing were concentrated in low-income urban areas with high numbers of Single-Room Occupancies. Public health agencies have often found shared toilets to be unclean or in disrepair.

Many single-family homes also lacked a private toilet or indoor running water. There were 17,000 stand-alone structures (single-family homes, mobile homes, and temporary shelters) that lacked an indoor flush toilet. These households did not have access to shared facilities in the building.

Most households with incomplete plumbing lacked a toilet, shower, or both. The majority (86 percent) of those with incomplete plumbing lacked either a toilet, hot and cold water, or both. The remaining 14 percent lacked only a tub or shower.

Income and race correlated with incomplete plumbing by census tract. Median household income was the strongest predictor of rates of incomplete plumbing. Racial makeup was also statistically significant.

Resources

Appendix I: Data on Plumbing in California (.xlsx spreadsheet)

Water and Sanitation in California (PowerPoint presentation)

In this Series

A Survey of Efforts to Achieve Universal Access to Water and Sanitation in California

Measuring Progress Toward Universal Access to Water and Sanitation in California: Defining Goals, Indicators, and Performance Measures

When the River Meets the Sea

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

This presentation on the Salton Sea presented by Michael Cohen at the 2019 GWC Summer Conference covers progress at the sea, the Colorado River and the sea, new bargains, and potential solutions.

The Cost of Alternative Urban Water Supply and Efficiency Options in California

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

Urban communities, farms, businesses, and natural ecosystems depend upon adequate, reliable, and affordable supplies of clean water. As populations and economies grow and as climatic changes alter both water supply and demand, traditional options for meeting freshwater needs are becoming less available, reliable, and effective. As we approach peak water constraints on traditional water supplies, more effort is needed to reduce water demands through a wide range of conservation and efficiency technologies and policies, and to develop alternative, non-traditional water sources.

A key factor in the adoption of these strategies is their economic feasibility; yet, only limited and often confusing data are available on their relative costs. To fill this gap, this analysis, published in the journal Environmental Research Communications, evaluates the costs of four groups of alternatives for urban supply and demand based on data and analysis in the California context: stormwater capture; water recycling and reuse; brackish and seawater desalination; and a range of water conservation and efficiency measures. It also describes some important co-benefits or avoided costs, such as reducing water withdrawals from surface water bodies or polluted runoff in coastal waterways.

Learn more and download the article here.

Moving Toward a Multi-Benefit Approach for Water Management

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

There is broad recognition that adapting to climate change, coupled with the need to address aging infrastructure, population growth, and degraded ecosystems, will require rethinking programs and policies and investing in our natural and built water systems. Many of the strategies for addressing water challenges can also provide other benefits, including reducing energy use and greenhouse gas emissions, providing wildlife habitat, and enhancing community livability. However, identifying and quantifying these benefits for water management strategies can be challenging.

This report proposes a framework for systematically identifying and incorporating the multiple benefits and trade-offs of water management strategies into decision-making processes. The framework can help users broaden support for a policy or project; identify opportunities to share costs among project beneficiaries; minimize adverse and unintended consequences; optimize the investment of time, money, and other resources; and increase transparency associated with water management decisions.

Resources

Webpage: A Multi-Benefit Approach to Water Management

Resource Library: Multi-Benefit Resource Library

Comment Letter on the Progress of Phase 1 of the Salton Sea Management Program

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

Comment letter on the progress of Phase 1 of the Salton Sea Management Program sent to the California State Water Resources Control Board by Alianza Coachella Valley, Audubon California, Defenders of Wildlife, Environmental Defense Fund, KDI, the Pacific Institute, and the Sierra Club.

Resources

Webpage: Salton Sea

Webpage: Current Information on the Salton Sea

Comment Letter on the State Water Board’s Low Income Water Rates Assistance Draft Report

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

This comment letter provides feedback and recommendations on the draft report “Options for Implementation of a Statewide Low-Income Water Rate Assistance Program.”

Sustainable Landscapes on Commercial and Industrial Properties in the Santa Ana River Watershed

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

Pressures on water resources are intensifying due to aging infrastructure, population growth, and climate change, among other factors. With vast expanses of water-intensive turf grass and large impervious surfaces, most urbanized communities are ill-adapted to these pressures.

This study finds that there are significant opportunities for the business community in California’s Santa Ana River Watershed to contribute to shared watershed goals through investments in sustainable landscape practices on their properties. These landscapes can improve surface water quality, flood management, and water supply reliability, while also reducing energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions, sequestering carbon, improving ecosystem and human health, promoting economic activity, and enhancing community resilience. While focused on the Santa Ana River Watershed, the project approach and findings are relevant to urban communities around the world.

The project includes an interactive mapping tool that allows users to explore the potential benefits of sustainable landscaping practices across the Santa Ana River Watershed. This project is a collaboration between the Pacific Institute, California Forward, the CEO Water Mandate, and the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority.

Resources

Online Mapping Tool: Sustainable Landscapes in the Santa Ana River Watershed

Informational Flyer: Multiple Benefits of Sustainable Landscapes

Video: Sustainable Landscapes in Southern California Offer Multiple Benefits. What Role Can Businesses Play?

Comment Letter on the Proposed North Lake Project at the Salton Sea

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Comment Letter

This comment letter sent to Phil Rosentrater, Executive Director of the Salton Sea Authority, on behalf of Alianza Coachella Valley, Audubon California, Defenders of Wildlife, Environmental Defense Fund, Kounkuey Design Initiative, the Pacific Institute, and Sierra Club California discusses the proposed North Lake Project at the Salton Sea.

Resources

Webpage: Salton Sea

Water Service Disconnections in California

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

When a person fails to pay their water utility bill, their water service can be disconnected. Lack of water in the home compromises health, and renders housing legally uninhabitable and untenantable. Shutoffs also pose a financial burden; in addition to the original debt, there are usually fees associated with late payment, notice of an impending shutoff, and service reconnection.

Water utilities in California have vastly different procedures on service disconnections. This fact sheet, based on a survey of California water utilities, examines practices and fees associated with water shutoffs in the state. It includes recommendations for water utilities to reduce shutoff rates and increase revenue collection by improving debt and service disconnection practices. The recommendations would allow some residents to avoid water shutoffs, thereby supporting public health and housing security.

Measuring Progress Toward Universal Access to Water and Sanitation in California: Defining Goals, Indicators, and Performance Measures

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

In 2012, California’s Human Right to Water was passed, calling for safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water for all citizens. Yet while this statute has served as the touchstone for drinking water and sanitation efforts in the state, access to this basic right remains unrealized in many California communities.

This report from the Pacific Institute investigates what realizing the human right to water in California would mean in terms that are concrete, measurable, and aligned with prevailing laws and norms in the state. The approach the author develops is modeled after the service ladder framework employed by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF) for monitoring progress toward water and sanitation internationally. It offers a range of service levels as a way of measuring progress, and differentiating between the large numbers of people who experience moderate problems and the small numbers with acute problems. The ladders create broad classes of service levels that facilitate communication of broad patterns of variation and identify high-priority areas for policy interventions.

Resources

Appendix I: California Service Ladders for Measuring the Human Right to Water and Sanitation

Appendix II: Data Sources For Performance Measures on Water and Sanitation

Video: Measuring Access to Water and Sanitation in California

In this Series

A Survey of Efforts to Achieve Universal Access to Water and Sanitation in California

Plumbing the Depths: Californians Without Toilets and Running Water

Water, Security, and Conflict

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

This issue brief summarizes the current understanding of water and security threats and their links to conflict, migration, and food insecurity. The authors review the key drivers behind growing water risk, describe and illustrate water and security pathways, and present approaches for reducing water related risks to global security.

The brief is the result of a joint project between the Pacific Institute and the World Resources Institute and part of the Pacific Institute’s ongoing work on water and conflict. It aims to provide professionals in the defense, diplomacy, and development fields with knowledge to inform proactive policies and action that can be enacted before crises erupt.

Key Findings

Key findings include:

A wide range of water-related risks undermine human well-being and can contribute to political instability, violent conflict, human displacement and migration, and acute food insecurity, which in turn can undermine national, regional, and even global security.

Political instability and conflicts are rarely caused by any single factor, such as a water crisis. Instead, water crises should be seen as contributing factors to instability.

While water risks have threatened human civilizations over millennia, today’s global population growth and economic expansion—together with threats from climate change—create a new urgency around an old problem.

Water risk is not only a function of hazards, such as extreme droughts and floods, it is also a function of a community’s governance capacity and resilience in the face of natural hazards.

No single strategy is sufficient to reduce water risk. Instead, multifaceted approaches will be needed.

Resources

Tool: The Water Conflict Chronology website

Integrating Water Efficiency into Long‐Term Demand Forecasting

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Executive Summary

Full Report

Overview

Per capita water use in the United States has fallen by more than 40% since the 1970s. In some areas, reductions in per capita water use have offset continued population and economic growth, such that total water use has remained constant or even declined. A key driver in reducing per capita water demand is the greater uptake of water efficient appliances and fixtures.

Many demand forecasts do not adequately account for efficiency improvements and the resulting changes in per capita water usage, thereby overestimating future water demand. Overestimating future water demand can, for example, result in millions of dollars of unnecessary expenditures, loss of consumer confidence and goodwill, and adverse impacts on system water quality and local economies.

This report aims to help water planners and managers improve the reliability of long-term water demand forecasts by more accurately accounting for factors likely to affect future demand, including building codes, efficiency standards, and third-party certification programs.

The report was produced by researchers at the Pacific Institute, Institute for Sustainable Futures at the University of Technology Sydney, and the Alliance for Water Efficiency. It was published by the Water Research Foundation.

Stormwater Capture in California: Innovative Policies and Funding Opportunities

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

Stormwater has traditionally been managed to mitigate flooding and protect water quality. However, its potential as a local water supply has gained recent attention in water-stressed areas. As climate change increases the risk of both floods and droughts in California, urban stormwater capture also offers a significant opportunity to enhance community resilience. Moreover, stormwater capture, especially when done with green infrastructure, can improve air quality, provide habitat, and reduce energy use, among other benefits.

State agencies have made major efforts to support stormwater capture, from adopting statewide stormwater use goals to clarifying the regulatory framework and dedicating funds for green infrastructure and multi-benefit stormwater projects. This report presents a summary of regulations, laws, and statewide initiatives that create the legal framework for stormwater capture in California. In addition, the report explores examples of successful stormwater programs, initiatives, and funding schemes from communities in California and beyond that directly and indirectly support stormwater capture and use. It concludes with a set of recommendations to overcome obstacles and expand stormwater capture in the state.

A Survey of Efforts to Achieve Universal Access to Water and Sanitation in California

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

In 2010, the United Nations General Assembly recognized the human right to water and sanitation. Two years later, in 2012, California became the first state in the nation to enact legislation recognizing the human right to water for consumption, cooking, and sanitary purposes. This statute has served as the touchstone for drinking water and sanitation efforts in the state.

This report, by the ACLU of Northern California and the Pacific Institute, provides a comprehensive overview of efforts of state agencies and non-governmental stakeholders to advance implementation of the human right to water in California. It identifies challenges to universal access and explores potential solutions, including improving data collection on onsite wastewater treatment systems, such as septic, and making the right to sanitation explicit.

In this Series

Measuring Progress Toward Universal Access to Water and Sanitation in California: Defining Goals, Indicators, and Performance Measures

Plumbing the Depths: Californians Without Toilets and Running Water

The World’s Water, Volume 9

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

Volume 9 in the The World’s Water book series offers insights into critical global water problems, overviews of data and analysis around water use and management, and case studies of some of the greatest water challenges around the world. It provides analysis on corporate water stewardship, the human right to water and sanitation, water-use trends in the United States, the water footprint of California energy, the consequences of the severe five-year California drought, water markets and economic strategies for water management, and the cost of alternative water supply and demand strategies. Additionally, concise “water briefs” provide updates on water’s role in conflict around the globe, a meeting held at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in the Vatican on the human right to water, and critical issues around public access to water through drinking fountains.

Available for purchase as pdf here. The World’s Water Volume 9 is also available in the following formats: As a print-on-demand softcover book for $55.00. As a Kindle ebook for $9.99.

Resources

Select chapters and data tables from previous editions of The World’s Water

In this Series

Volume 8 Volume 7 Volume 6 Volume 5 Volume 4 Volume 3 Volume 2 Volume 1

Op-Ed by Peter Gleick: We Have Seen The Future Of Water, And It Is Cape Town

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Full Op-Ed

Cape Town is parched. Severe drought and high water use have collided in South Africa’s second largest city, and unless the drought breaks, residents may run out of water in the next few months when there simply isn’t enough water left to supply the drinking water taps.

In response to this looming “Day Zero” ― currently projected in May ― city managers have imposed new and unprecedented restrictions, including limiting residential water use to 50 liters (around 13 gallons) per person per day. They released plans to open 200 community water points to provide emergency water in the event of a shutoff – for four million people. As the crisis worsens, water scarcity will sharpen South Africa’s economic inequalities, inflaming tensions between wealthier and disadvantaged communities.

Cape Town is not alone. Water crises are getting worse all over the world. The past few years have seen more and more extreme droughts and floods around the globe. California just endured the worst five-year drought on record, followed by the wettest year on record. São Paulo, Brazil, recently suffered a severe drought that drastically cut water supplies to its 12 million inhabitants – a drought that also ended in heavy rainfall, which caused extreme flooding. Houston was devastated in 2017 by Hurricane Harvey, the most extreme precipitation event to hit any major city in the United States.

Severe droughts and floods. Water rationing. Economic and political disruption. Urban taps running dry. Is this the future of water?

Any city, in building a water system, tries to prepare for extreme weather, including floods and droughts. It also considers estimates of future population growth, projections of water use and a host of other factors. Cape Town’s water system is a relatively sophisticated one, with six major storage reservoirs, pipelines, water treatment plants and an extensive distribution network. Its water managers, and South Africa’s overall water expertise, are among the best in the world.

The problem is that the traditional approach for building and managing water systems rests on two key assumptions. The first is that there is always more supply to be found, somewhere, to satisfy growing populations and growing water demand. The second is that the climate isn’t changing.

Neither of these assumptions is true any longer.

Many regions of the world, as in Cape Town, have reached “peak water” limits and find their traditional sources tapped out. Many rivers are dammed and diverted to the point that they no longer reach the sea. Groundwater is over pumped at rates faster than nature can replenish. And massive long-distance transfers of water from other watersheds are increasingly controversial because of high costs, environmental damages and political disagreements.

On top of this, the climate is no longer stable. It is changing because of human activities, and among the expected and observed impacts are changes to the frequency and intensity of extreme events, with impacts on both water supplies and demands.

There is evidence that the current drought in Cape Town shows the influence of climate change. Temperatures in the region have been rising in parallel with global temperatures, leading to higher evaporative losses from Cape Town’s reservoirs and soils. A new analysis of rainfall data in the Western Cape by Piotr Wolski, a researcher with the University of Cape Town’s Climate System Analysis Group concluded that the current drought is extremely severe. Historical records indicate that the region is experiencing long-term reductions in regional rainfall, suggesting climate change is already altering South Africa’s rainfall patterns. Such changes have been observed in other parts of the world as well.

The crisis in Cape Town has already taught us several crucial lessons. The first is that the impacts of water crises are not evenly distributed; they fall most heavily on poorer communities. Cape Town’s current restriction of 50 liters per person per day is the bare minimum safe requirement for drinking, cooking, washing and sanitation. Yet South Africa’s Western Cape features wealthy neighborhoods dotted with swimming pools and ornate gardens, and an agricultural sector that consumes a large fraction of the region’s water. When the taps are cut off, the disparities in water use ― and the ability of the wealthier communities to find and pay for alternative water sources, such as private wells and water deliveries ― will become glaringly apparent. Even now, richer homeowners, anticipating further restrictions, are filling pools, drilling wells and buying and building private tanks to store large volumes of water.

Another solution being pursued by the South African government is the construction of costly desalination plants. In a region where no new traditional water supplies are available, the dream of desalinating unlimited quantities of seawater is appealing. But the inevitable higher costs for water will raise the same issues of inequity, and other countries like Australia have built desalination plants during severe droughts only to mothball them when the rains returned.

South Africa has wrestled with inequitable access to water for many years. It pioneered a policy of providing a minimum amount of water to all residents for free. But as the Cape Town crisis worsens, new fault lines will open between the water haves and have-nots. How the city handles it will be instructive for the rest of the world, as we all approach our own Day Zero.

This op-ed was originally published in The Huffington Post.

Commentary: Cape Town Is Running out of Water. Could More Cities Be Next?

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Full Op-Ed

After more than three years of severe drought, Cape Town, a city of nearly 4 million people, is running out of water. “Day Zero”—the day city officials estimate the water system will be unable to provide drinking water for the taps—is less than three months away, and substantial rains are not expected before then.

In response, city managers have imposed a series of increasingly severe water-use restrictions to cut demand and are working to find emergency sources of supply, but it is difficult to see how a cutoff can be avoided. People will not die of thirst: Emergency water will be brought in for basic needs. But the social, economic, and political disruptions caused by a water cutoff will be unprecedented.

Cape Town is not alone. California, São Paulo, Australia, the eastern Mediterranean, and other regions have all recently suffered through severe droughts and water crises.

Short-term droughts and water shortages aren’t new. Under normal circumstances, cities can respond by temporarily cutting water waste. But circumstances aren’t normal anymore. More and more major cities will face their own Day Zero unless we fundamentally change the way water is managed and used.

The growing water crisis is the result of three factors. First, more and more regions of the world are reaching “peak water” limits, where all accessible, renewable water has been spoken for and no traditional new supplies are available. Second, urban populations and economies are expanding rapidly, putting additional pressures on limited water supplies and increasing competition with agricultural water users. And third, the very climate of the planet is changing because of human activities such as burning fossil fuels, affecting all aspects of our water systems, including the demand for water and the frequency and intensity of extreme events like floods and droughts.

Where these three factors combine, urban water crises explode.

The good news is that there are two key solutions to making our cities more resilient to water crises and disruptions: Reduce water demand and find new non-traditional sources of water supply.

Reducing demand means improving the efficiency of water use and changing water-using behaviors to reduce immediate needs. The first option includes installing efficient irrigation technology, replacing inefficient toilets, showerheads, washing machines, and dishwashers, and eliminating leaks. The second option includes cutting outdoor landscape water use and replacing water-intensive gardens, taking shorter showers, flushing toilets less often, and eliminating luxury water uses like private swimming pools.

The potential for these two approaches to reduce demand is enormous. During the severe drought in Australia from 2000 to 2009, urban water efficiency measures saved more water at lower cost and greater speed than traditional supply options, like tapping rivers and groundwater. During the drought, water demand dropped 60% in South East Queensland through a combination of investments in water efficiency programs and restrictions on outdoor water use. California urban water use was cut by over 25% during the 2012-2016 drought through similar indoor and outdoor efficiency programs, and there is much potential for even greater savings.

There are new supply options available too, even in regions where traditional sources are tapped out. South Africa has long pioneered the restoration of watersheds by removing invasive species like blue gum, wattles, and the vine kudzu, and increasing water flows in rivers. Artificially enhancing groundwater replenishment can increase the storage of water far more effectively than building new surface reservoirs. Wastewater treatment and reuse turns what used to be considered a liability into a valuable resource.

Cape Town currently only treats and reuses 5% of its wastewater—up until now they haven’t thought they had the need—and could greatly expand treatment and reuse. Just next door to South Africa in Namibia, the city of Windhoek has been reusing treated wastewater for decades. About 40% of Singapore’s total water demand is now being met with high-quality treated wastewater. California currently reuses about 15% of its wastewater and has the potential to greatly expand reuse in coming years. And when less costly options have been exhausted, seawater desalination offers a way to provide drought-proof supply.

It will rain again in Cape Town, and the emergency responses implemented over the next few months will be relaxed. But water problems are not going to disappear until we consistently and comprehensively change the way we think about and manage water. Peak water limits will be felt in more and more regions as traditional sources of water are tapped out. Urban areas will continue to expand. Global climate changes will accelerate and worsen, especially if we delay the transition to clean energy. The sooner we accept these facts, the sooner every city can move to manage water in a more sustainable fashion, postponing or even eliminating the risk of their own Day Zero.

This op-ed was originally published in Fortune.

Comment Letter on State Water Board Proposed Low-Income Rate Assistance Program

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

This comment letter to the California State Water Resources Control Board (Water Board) was sent in response to the proposed Low Income Rate Assistance (LIRA) program implementation scenarios prepared pursuant to AB 401 (Dodd, 2015). The comment letter addresses the series of questions posed to the public by the Water Board in Summer 2017, and makes a set of general recommendations to consider when finalizing the program proposal.

Corporate Engagement on Water Supply, Sanitation and Hygiene: Driving Progress on Sustainable Development Goal 6 (SDG6)

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

Sustainable Development Goal 6 advocates “ensuring availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.” In recognition of the need for successful corporate water stewardship to encompass sustainable access to water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) access for workers in company supply chains, this report offers steps for companies to take to help end the global water and sanitation crisis and protect against business risk. It shows that corporate action on WASH can drive improved access for vulnerable communities and improved economic and social development, while also mitigating companies’ socio-economic water risks. Furthermore, significant potential for progressive action on WASH through corporate supply chains exists.

This report recognizes the need for successful corporate water stewardship to encompass sustainable access to water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) for workers in company supply chains, and offers steps for companies to take to help end the global water and sanitation crisis.

Key Findings

The report outlines steps companies can take to improve WASH in their supply chains:

Sign and implement the WBCSD WASH at the workplace pledge ensuring that all employees in direct operations have access to safe WASH while at work.

Broaden and deepen employee and company understanding about WASH by providing them with the International Labour Organization’s WASH@Work Self-training handbook.

Update supplier codes; a draft set of criteria for optimal water, sanitation, and hygiene provision in supply chains is available for pilot testing by companies.

Contribute to strengthening the business case for WASH by offering opportunities for evidence-gathering from their operations and projects.

Learn about and engage in the WASH4Work initiative, working with a group of agencies, companies, and development partners to address the WASH challenge.

Resources

Case Study: Diageo
English Spanish Portuguese French

Case Study: Gap Inc.
English Spanish Portuguese French

Case Study: Nestle
English Spanish Portuguese French

Languages

Corporate Engagement on Water Supply, Sanitation and Hygiene: Driving Progress on Sustainable Development Goal 6 (SDG6) Through Supply-Chains and Voluntary Standards
Spanish Portuguese French

Op-Ed: Why Go for Desal When California has Cheaper Options?

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Op-Ed

While winter rains have refilled California reservoirs and dumped near-record snow on the mountains, communities across the state are wisely seeking ways reduce their vulnerability to future droughts. One option some are considering is seawater desalination.

Tapping the vast ocean seems like a promising solution, and proponents often tout Australia and Israel, which have adopted this technology.

We agree that California should look at experiences in other parts of the world. But we need to have all the facts and make the right decisions for our communities.

For example, Israel didn’t turn to desalination until it had first dramatically cut production of water-intensive crops such as cotton, invested in urban conservation and efficiency far beyond what California has achieved, and massively expanded wastewater treatment and reuse.

Household water use in Israel is 44 gallons per person per day, far below the 115 for an average California household. Israel reuses 94 percent of its wastewater, compared to a paltry 13 percent in California. Israeli farmers apply an average of 1.6 acre-feet of water per acre of land, while California farmers apply nearly twice as much.

In Australia, per person household water use averages 54 gallons a day. During a severe multiyear drought, Australia spent $10 billion to build six desalination plants, but closed four because the water is far too expensive compared to other options. Australia failed to pursue the cheaper options first, an important lesson we should heed.

California is reaching and in many cases has exceeded the physical, economic, ecological and social limits of traditional water-supply options. Rivers are over-allocated, and options for new surface reservoirs are expensive, controversial and offer only modest improvements.

The good news is that communities across California have plenty of other options. Recent research from the Pacific Institute, in collaboration with experts at the Natural Resources Defense Council and UC Santa Barbara, found that widely available conservation and efficiency measures could reduce annual water use in urban areas by as much as 57 percent.

Additionally, recycled water could produce 1.2 million acre-feet per year, nearly twice as much water as Los Angeles uses a year. Finally, capturing runoff in Southern California and the San Francisco Bay area could increase supplies by 420,000 to 630,000 acre-feet a year, while also reducing flooding and water pollution.

These alternatives are typically far less expensive than seawater desalination, which is estimated to cost $2,100 per acre-foot. Capturing and reusing storm water is the least expensive option, at $590 per acre-foot.

Indeed, some efficiency measures have a “negative cost,” meaning that the long-term non-water benefits, such as lower energy bills, exceed the cost.

Let’s tackle the cheaper, most cost-effective things first: improving water-use efficiency, expanding water reuse and capturing more storm water. If we do the right things in the right order, we can avoid spending billions on what ultimately could be an expensive white elephant.

Originally published in the Sacramento Bee.

Impacts of California’s Five-Year (2012-2016) Drought on Hydroelectricity Generation

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

The severe five-year drought afflicting California from 2012 to 2016 was the driest and hottest in the instrumental record. This report is a comprehensive assessment of the costs to California of lost hydroelectricity during the five years of drought from October 2011 to the end of September 2015 (the official California “water year” runs from October 1 to September 30).

Under normal conditions, electricity for the state’s millions of users is produced from a blend of many sources, with natural gas and hydropower being the top two. During the drought, reductions to state river flows that power hundreds of hydropower stations meant that natural gas became a more prominent energy source. This was an expensive change, leading to increases in electricity costs and carbon dioxide emissions.

Resources

Tool: California Drought Website

In this Series

Impacts of California’s Ongoing Drought: Agriculture

Impacts of California’s Ongoing Drought: Hydroelectricity Generation

Impacts of California’s Ongoing Drought: Hydroelectricity Generation 2015 Update

Exploring the Case for Corporate Context-Based Water Targets

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

As of 2017, more companies than ever before were setting water targets, yet global water stress continued to rise. How can companies ensure that their water targets align with meaningful outcomes? This report calls for a new approach for setting meaningful corporate water targets that take into account the unique local contexts of the basins in which companies operate.

Context-based metrics and targets recognize the particular challenges present in each basin, allowing for physical and social thresholds and tracking water use relative to basin thresholds and availability. The report makes the case that in order to be effective, context-based water metrics and targets should make the best use of available science, include input from local stakeholders, be informed by contextual social needs, and align with local and global public policy objectives.

Drinking Fountains and Public Health: Improving National Water Infrastructure to Rebuild Trust and Ensure Access

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

Concerns over drinking water quality and possible disease transmission, as well as widely-publicized water contamination incidents, have contributed to a decline in the number of publicly available water fountains. Yet many people rely on drinking fountains for cheap, accessible, and safe municipal water.

This report finds limited causal evidence linking illness and the use of drinking fountains. The risk of fountain water contamination can be reduced or eliminated altogether through improved maintenance and cleaning of water infrastructure, or updating and replacing old water infrastructure, among other measures outlined in this report.

State of the Salton Sea – A Science and Monitoring Meeting of Scientists for the Salton Sea

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

California’s Salton Sea is an ecosystem facing large systemic changes in the near future. Managers and stakeholders searching for solutions to the decline of the Salton Sea have turned to the scientific community for answers. In response, scientists gathered in Irvine, California in 2014 to review existing science, propose scientific studies, and determine monitoring needs for understanding how to retain the Salton Sea as a functional ecosystem. This document summarizes the proceedings of this gathering of approximately 50 scientists at a September 2014 workshop on the state of the Salton Sea.

Resources

Webpage: Salton Sea

Drought and Equity in California

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

California’s climate is prone to prolonged periods of drought that are exacerbated by the effects of climate change. The most severe drought on the instrumental record stretched from 2012-2016, and had far-reaching effects on the state’s economy, ecosystem, and citizens. Disadvantaged and cumulatively burdened communities were highly affected by water shortages, highlighting underlying inequities in how the state’s water resources are managed. Addressing the impacts of drought on disadvantaged and cumulatively burdened communities is all the more urgent as droughts become longer, more frequent, and more severe due to climate change.

Resources

Appendix 1A: Data Sources for Section 1: Drought and Domestic Water Shortages

Appendix 1B: Spreadsheet: Drought-Impacted Public Water Systems

Appendix 1C: Spreadsheet: State Reports of Household Outages, Aug 8 2016

Appendix 2A: Spreadsheet: Drought Charges

Appendix 2B: Spreadsheet: Affordability Analysis

Appendix 3A: Tribal Salmon Fishery Data

Tool: California Drought website

In this Series

Drought and Equity in the San Francisco Bay Area

Water Strategies for the Next Administration: New Major U.S. Water Policy Recommendations

Author: ()
Geography:
Level of Detail:

Availability:

Water Management Strategies:

Specific Benefits or Trade-offs:

Overview

This document identifies six major water-related challenges facing the United States and offers explicit recommendations for the new administration and Congress to pursue, domestically and internationally. It recommends strategies to pursue in each area of concern and suggests that water policy offers an opportunity for bipartisan agreement.