California Water

Oct 8, 2017. I just spent an hour reading about California’s water problems and plans and it's "WaterFix" solution, a.k.a. "Alternative 4A".

I’m no expert, but the state needs to provide better information. So I wrote the below letter to the county and the one below that to the state.

Dear Santa Clara County Water Board,
CC: Lisa Lien-Mager (CA water press contact) and Info@WaterFix.com

Please oppose the governor’s WaterFix proposal.

The only cost/benefit for WaterFix I’ve seen is this one by U of Pacific's Center for Business and Policy Research which outlines that is costs far exceed its benefits, plus has huge risks to the delta.

While the assertions on the California Waterfix site are interesting, the site contains no information about how these will be achieved nor why the WaterFix pipes are crucial to achieving them. The site references 3 op-eds saying we need a solution and pointing to WaterFix, but they contain only hope and hype.

Meanwhile, these 2 MercuryNews opposition articles ( one and two ) seem to have valid objections. They say:
There’s no state economic or financial analysis
There’s no governance structure proposed
The NRDC opposes the plan.
There’s no guarantee against over-pumping to protect the delta from salt-water incursion

It’d be nice to see a real state analysis, including what's happening now, estimated gallons to be pumped, how the tunnels will cause the desired goals to be achieved, and what alternative options are proposed.

Similarly, it'd be nice to see Santa Clara's plan. While I found links to the county's 2015 plan and 2012 master plan on this page, I don't see the 2017 updates (yet). It'd be nice to have the information on the site, rather than buried in a pdf. And it'd be nice to have the numbers updated annually, instead of waiting 3-5 years for a whole new report.

I’m no expert on this, but without good information, and having the state follow its own rules for projects, we shouldn’t support this plan.

Sincerely,
Rand Strauss, Mountain View

Separate letter to California, Oct 8, 2017
Dear Lisa Lien-Mager, Ca water press contact and Info@WaterFix.com,

Please provide better information about WaterFix.

The assertions on the California Waterfix site are interesting, but the site contains no information about how these will be achieved nor why the WaterFix pipes are crucial to achieving them. The site references 3 op-eds saying we need a solution and pointing to WaterFix, but they contain only hope and hype.

There are interesting graphics, but no links to more information.

There are 4 columns about "the problem." The first one is about our aging system and it's problems. How will WaterFix address these? The second one is about wasting water. How will WaterFix waste less? The 4th is about the current pumps and their problems. How will the new pumps cause fewer problems?

There's another section about "State fo the art solution."

Below that are 5 columns with clever icons and titles. Why can't I click them to find out the details of WaterFix in these 5 areas?

Clicking on "CLICK HERE FOR MORE DETAILS" opens up some more simple graphics, but again, I can't click on them to discover how WaterFix creates these improvements.

Finally, it says WaterFix is estimated to cost $14.9 billion, or $5/month per water user. Over how many years? And some water districts are opting in, and some are opting out. Is that $5/month only if all opt in?

It'd be nice to see a California analysis of all of our water options. For instance, this Scientific American article says, fresh-water from desalinated ocean-water in Israel lets the average Israeli household pay half of what Los Angeles citizens pay. But this Water Supply Options in California document says the cost of California desalination water is almost 3x the cost of Israel's per gallon. It'd be nice to know what California believes.

California has this state-resources site. While I can easily find pages about accomplishments, I see no overview of water demands, supplies and options.

Thanks,
Randy Strauss, Mountain View