Know Your H2O

Join us when we tour San Diego’s cutting-edge new IPR Demonstration Project.

2011-08-02T13:51:00.000-07:00

What is the IPR? Indirect Potable Reuse is wastewater treated to a level so pure, we can drink it. The process mimics what happens during our natural water cycle. They use this pure water in Orange County as part of their normal every day supply. San Diego is in the process of evaluating this pure water to see if it’s a fit for our water supplies. Surfrider Foundation fully endorses this supply channel, as it means less wastewater in our oceans, and healthier beaches and bays for our communities.

If you would like to join us on this tour, you must RSVP to water@surfridersd.org. Please include the number in your party. Directions and times are below.

From the city’s website:

“As part of the City’s water resource strategy, the Water Purification Demonstration Project is examining the use of advanced water purification technology to provide safe and reliable water for San Diego’s future. The Demonstration Project will determine the feasibility of a full-scale reservoir augmentation project, which would diversify San Diego’s water supply, reduce its dependence on imported water and provide a safe source of drinking water for residents.
In an effort to keep San Diegans informed about this important project, free public tours of the Advanced Water Purification Facility are available, as well as project presentations to all interested groups and opportunities to learn more about the project at community events throughout San Diego. For more information, please call (619) 533-7572 or email purewatersd@sandiego.gov.”

TOUR INFO:
Please join us on Saturday, September 10^th at 11:00 a.m. Meet us here at 10:45

Sydney finds that Desal is just too expensive!!

2011-05-20T14:37:00.000-07:00

Let's learn from Sydney's mistake, and not build a desal plant that is just too expensive!

Ocean Friendly Gardens Lawn Patrol this Sunday (the 22nd) in Encinitas!!

2011-05-20T11:26:00.000-07:00

Join us this Sunday the 22nd at 10am at Moonlight Beach in Encinitas for our next Lawn Patrol!!

We will visit our 3rd Street GAP installation, a parking strip that was converted from wasteful turf to a native garden and bioswale. We will take a quick walk up A street and check out some gardens that are mostly ocean friendly and some that are not so ocean friendly and talk about the difference.

Lawn Patrols are a great way to learn about what makes an Ocean Friendly Garden ocean friendly, the impacts that the choices we make in our gardens have on the health of our local environment, and what easy steps you can take to turn your garden into an OFG! We talk about soil health, plant choices, how to retain rainwater on-site, and how to use organic choices instead of chemical fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides!

Meet us at 10am in the turnaround lot where Encinitas Blvd ends at Moonlight Beach (at the end of 4th/BStreet).

Questions/Directions? e-mail morgan@surfridersd.org

Know Your H2O has Moved!

2011-04-27T10:11:00.000-07:00

The Surfrider Foundation has consolidated all of our issue-based blogs into one Coastal Blog. Come check it out at www.surfrider.org/coastal-blog

Moving Toward Water Self-Sufficiency

2011-03-29T17:01:00.000-07:00

Barry Nelson of NRDC just wrote a great article highlighting efforts by Santa Monica, Long Beach, San Diego and a couple of water districts in Los Angeles who have significantly reduced their amounts of imported water through a variety of strategies, including developing local groundwater supplies, conservation and wastewater recycling. Although there's a lot more to be done, it good to see that more and more cities and water/wastewater agencies are buying into Know Your H2O.

Sewage to Drinking Water in USA Today

2011-03-04T14:28:00.000-08:00

Yesterday USA Today carried a fairly lengthy article discussing the world-wide pressures on fresh water supplies and the response in several disparate communities, including Singapore; Orange County, CA; Fairfax, Virgina; and Namibia, of using advanced water treatment technology to create a sustainable local water supply that simultaneously addresses pollution problems.

Read More.

Sherri Lightner's Proposed Water Policy Statement: One Step Forward, Two Steps Back.

2011-02-23T13:31:00.000-08:00

In San Diego, we have major water issues. After all, we live in a desert, and water resources are precious.

Yesterday NPR reported on local city council member, Sheri Lightner’s recent memo which calls for “Developing a Comprehensive Policy for a Sustainable Water Supply.”

Overall we applaud Ms. Lightner for calling for such a policy. We agree that having 20-year old practices, inconsistent with the latest findings and studies in water science and management are bad for San Diego. And, overall we like her proposed ideas, especially calling for greater conservation, and using low impact development. There are, however, two proposals in her memo which are bad for the environment and for the taxpayers of a cash-strapped city that is drastically cutting back on services. These proposals we are wary of, are the implementation of Desalination Factories and Purple Pipe. Shouldn't we seriously address our wasteful water consumption habits first before turning to expensive new supply sources?

Desalination and Purple Pipe are two of the most expensive options, and are harmful to the environment.

Putting desalination factories in Mexico distresses us because it's likely an attempt to skirt the precious environmental laws that protect our state. And doing so, is not being a good neighbor. Added importation costs from across the border makes the desal option an even worse one. Will we really pay to push water from the playas of Mexico to the suburbs of Carmel Valley? Can you imagine what that costs? What about the energy used? Who is paying for all of this? You and me?

Purple pipe, (called that because of its color,) would require a redundant system of pipes to be erected all over the city. The City of San Diego isn't even properly replacing worn infrastructure, so having the funds for an entirely new pipe system is very unlikely and for what? To keep our lawns green? We say, kill your lawns in La Jolla, and go native! If there is money, it should be spent instead to re-contour our neighborhoods to capture more rainwater and add it to the ground-water supply or through individual gray water recycling both for indoor and outdoor uses. Another easy start would be to promote the idea of rain barrels.

If all of Ms. Lightner’s district implemented Surfrider’s Ocean Friendly Garden principals in their gardens, they would cut their water use by 50%. You read that right - FIFTY PERCENT!

Underlying "OFG" is CPR, which in this case stands for Conservation, Permeability and Retention. By rethinking their green spaces through using beautiful native plants and implementing proper drip irrigation, San Diegans can achieve great results. This is proper water management, and effective water policy for a sustainable future.

The City's Water Purification Demonstration Project is a good first step to eventual full scale potable reuse of water instead of dumping a precious resource into the ocean, (only to later pull it out via desalination!)

Council member Lightner, let’s start by getting your district to cut its water use in half, then let's go on to the rest of the City. By the time we have slashed water consumption in the city, the Water Purification Project will have concluded successfully and then a more fiscally robust City of San Diego can then chart a more sustainable water future.

This blog post was written by Johnny Pappas, and Belinda Smith for the local chapter of Surfrider Foundation, San Diego County. They work on Policy and the Know Your H2O campaign respectively.

Putting Green to Work: Economic recovery investments for clean and reliable water

2011-02-11T08:45:00.000-08:00

Putting Green to Work

Green Infrastructure On The Rise Nationwide

By Katherine Baer

From coast to coast, demand for green infrastructure is higher than ever. That's the finding of "Putting Green to Work: Economic recovery investments for clean and reliable water," a new report by American Rivers, detailing the $1.2 billion allotted to green infrastructure, water and energy efficiency, and environmental innovation through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

Among key findings in the report is the high demand for funding which far exceeded that authorized through the bill. According to the report, states moved more aggressively with green projects than previously indicated and some like Maryland and New York have emerged as leaders whose implementation strategies are a model for other states. The report also includes recommendations for actions at both the federal and state level to further advance green infrastructure.

An EPA Office of Water site visit to look at stormwater BMPs. Photo: Sean Foltz, Milwaukee, WI.

21st Century Solutions

Like much of the nation's infrastructure, U.S. water systems are crumbling. After several decades of inadequate investment and unmanaged sprawl, America's water and wastewater systems now receive the lowest grade, a D-, of all infrastructure rated by the American Society of Civil Engineers. The Environmental Protection Agency already estimates capital investment needs for clean water and drinking water infrastructure at more than $600 billion over 20 years. Forecasts for greater extremes due to climate change will make the problem worse, as more frequent and intense storms will increase flooding and produce corresponding sewer overflows and stormwater pollution. And more frequent and intense droughts will cause water shortages and higher concentrations of water pollution.

At the same time, we are in dire need of a new approach to investing in America's clean water and drinking water infrastructure. We are at a crossroads today in how we manage our water systems. Traditional water infrastructure will continue to play a role, but much of it is static, solves only a single problem, and requires a huge expense to build and maintain. We must move from old 19th century infrastructure to a combination of green and traditional infrastructure that will meet the needs of the 21st century. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act took a groundbreaking step in the right direction, dedicating 20 percent ($1.2 billion) of water infrastructure funding to programs for green infrastructure, water and energy efficiency, and environmental innovation (collectively called the Green Project Reserve).

This effort represented the first decisive step in a much needed shift away from solely "gray," inflexible water infrastructure towards innovative approaches that will bring water management into the 21st century. More communities are beginning to understand that economic vitality and resilience to climate change rest on adaptation strategies that provide multiple benefits for every public dollar invested. By dedicating 20 percent of water infrastructure funding for the Green Project Reserve, ARRA provided states with the resources to repair and rebuild their water and sewer systems to protect communities for a future marked by more frequent and more intense droughts and floods.

Green Projects

The term "green infrastructure" applies to solutions like rain gardens and green roofs that help slow and absorb polluted stormwater - a leading cause of pollution nationwide. Green infrastructure works with nature to create value for communities through cleaner water, reduced flooding, and energy savings. "Putting Green to Work" found that the need for funding for these projects is far greater than the 20 percent provided through ARRA. States have substantial lists of "shovel-ready" green projects that simply lack funding.

An ARRA funded Green Reserve green street in Ohiopyle, PA. Photo: Jessie Thomas-Blate.

Within the overall category of "green," American Rivers identified a group of "bright green" projects that provide a comprehensive set of environmental and economic benefits. For example, in Maryland, the state chose to provide additional subsidization to projects that received funding under the Green Project Reserve that ranged from wetland restoration to creating "living shorelines" to improving water efficiency through water appliance retrofit programs. The town of Edmonston, MD, received over $1 million to construct a 'green street' that will create or preserve 50 jobs. Thirty maple, elm, sycamore and oak trees will line the street, and energy-efficient streetlights will be powered by wind. Permeable concrete and moisture-loving plants will absorb and filter 90 percent of the polluted stormwater that typically flows into the Anacostia River to reduce flooding and pollution.

New York took a unique approach to the Green Project Reserve by using a significant portion of this funding to create a new program, the Green Innovation Grant Program. Under this program, New York was able to separately solicit and evaluate green projects, ultimately funding 57 projects for just under $45 million, with the balance of state Green Project Reserve funds used to integrate existing gray and green infrastructure. Projects included the Green City Homes project in Syracuse, a solution to housing needs and a demonstration of green homes that save water and energy and manage stormwater with green infrastructure solutions. Green City Homes will utilize pervious roadways and sidewalks to manage over one million gallons of stormwater that would otherwise contribute to combined sewer overflows.

Future investments should be targeted toward these bright green projects. Maryland and New York are clearly leaders when it comes to bright green solutions and should be used as models for other state programs.

Recommendations

American Rivers identified a number of key recommendations in "Putting Green to Work" to help advance green infrastructure at the federal and state levels. These recommendations include:

National

Federal water infrastructure funding should be continued and increased to support state demand for bright green projects. Congress should reauthorize the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds to include dedicated funding for bright green projects.
Federal water infrastructure funding should provide incentives for states to fund bright green projects such as waiving state match requirements.
EPA must continue to improve its funding guidance to states and provide additional technical assistance to ensure the best use of limited funds
Funding for water infrastructure and climate adaptation should be aligned to promote bright green approaches to create resilient communities.

States

States must act to remove statutes, regulations or policies that stand in the way of pursuing integrated approaches to bright green infrastructure.
Project evaluation criteria should be revised to reflect and prioritize multiple environmental benefits.
Vigorous outreach for new Green Reserve Projects to a range of traditional and nontraditional partners should be required in order to result in a wide range of strong projects.
States should promote loan-payback mechanisms for green projects to ensure that communities can integrate these approaches as part of regular financial planning for clean and safe water.

ARRA marked a step forward for our nation, but it was only a first step. Now we must continue to accelerate our progress toward 21st century bright green infrastructure to ensure long-term reliable clean water supplies. The challenge is to make today's bright green tomorrow's norm, and to constantly push the boundaries of environmental and economic sustainability.

Maywood Avenue green street project. Photo: Kathryn Swartz, Toledo, OH.

Read "Putting Green to Work" at www.americanrivers.org/greenfunding.

Virtual H2O

2011-02-09T12:15:00.000-08:00

Alliance Webcast: NYC & LA on Green Infrastructure

Clean Water America Alliance President Ben Grumbles will host a free webcast featuring two green infrastructure giants – NYC & LA - on February 22, at 12:30 pm Eastern as part of the VirtualH₂O Conference. From different Coasts, both metropolises will share how the green infrastructure strategy is enhancing and combining with grey infrastructure to deliver water sustainability. Carter Strickland, Deputy Commissioner for Sustainability, NYC Department of Environmental Protection, and Enrique Zaldivar, Director Bureau of Sanitation, City of Los Angeles will present highlights of their programs. The audience will have the opportunity to participate and ask questions via email. In addition, winners of the 2011 U.S. Water Prize Program will be announced.

Registration is now open and free. This webcast is part of VirtualH₂O, a WaterWorld produced virtual conference and exhibition, taking place on February 22, 2011. Click here to check out the rest of the agenda.

Urban developers must demonstrate there is an adequate, sustainable water supply.

2011-02-04T08:41:00.000-08:00

What a great day for Santa Cruz, and the great state of California! Finally, a community that understands urban planning must include consideration of a sustainable water supply when deciding on land use proposals. Santa Cruz officials are doing their best to move towards an environmentally sustainable future, and we applaud them, especially given the pressures of growth and development of our coastline. Looks like they are well on their way to balancing the needs of their city.

From the article:
The new policy requiring applicants "to demonstrate the availability of an adequate, reliable and sustainable supply of water" marks the first time natural resources have been included as a factor the Santa Cruz Local Agency Formation Commission will weigh in considering land use proposals. Supporters applauded the policy as a far-reaching step toward limiting growth, protecting over-taxed groundwater and surface water supplies, and reducing the toll on local fisheries.

Read the full article.

Between conservation, which includes proper planning, and potable reuse, (which is recycled water treated to drinking standards,) Santa Cruz can go a long way to solving their water needs.

Great work to all in Santa Cruz working hard to achieve environmental sustainability. Our oceans, waves, and beaches thank you, as do the rest of us in California who will cite you as the model!

Wastewater is a Terrible Thing to........Waste

2011-01-12T14:14:00.000-08:00

This article in Scientific American points out the considerable energy potential in the "biosolids" content of wastewater. Methane from anaerobic digestion of sewage sludge can be used directly as a fuel and can power fuel cells. Biosolids themselves can also be used as a supplemental fuel in processes such as cement kilns.

But we like to point out that there is also a lot of "embedded energy" in the treated wastewater. Here in southern California and in many other areas of the county, our water is pumped from hundreds of miles away, treated, used once and then pumped out into the ocean. Shouldn't we make use of that embedded energy AND increase our water independence AND reduce pollution AND save money (compared to building seawater desalination facilities) by adding just a little more treatment and reusing that valuable wastewater?

Greywater Report looks at wastewater potential

2010-12-02T15:44:00.000-08:00

About 50% of the water used inside U.S. homes can be reused to irrigate landscapes and flush toilets, according to a greywater report released by the Oakland-based Pacific Institute last week.

The report Overview of Greywater Reuse: the Potential of Greywater Systems to Aid Sustainable Water Management examined the application of greywater systems worldwide to determine how the wastewater generated from sinks, baths, showers and clothes washers could be reused to reduce demand for more costly, high-quality drinking water.

Full story: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2010/11/greywater-report.html

More info and the full report here: http://www.pacinst.org/reports/greywater_over/index.htm

Treat recycled water to drinking standards already!

2010-11-16T09:30:00.000-08:00

This editorial is good - it advocates for water to be re-used over and over again, which is key. However, at Surfrider, while we think it's great to use recycled water for agriculture, it would be even better if we went a step further and treated waste-water to drinking standards so we can drink it like they do in Orange County, CA and Scottsdale, AZ. The process of treating waste-water to drinking water for human consumption is growing in popularity and we need your help advocating for it. Not only would it go a long way to solving our water needs, but sending less polluted water out to the ocean would mean cleaner beaches. Watch our film to learn more.

Technology will enhance recycled water quality
San Jose Mercury News-11/10/10
by Richard Santos

In October, the Santa Clara Valley Water District and the San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant broke ground on a new water treatment facility that will produce up to 10 million gallons of highly purified water per day. The Advanced Water Treatment facility is designed to enhance the quality of recycled water used in San Jose, Santa Clara and Milpitas.

The water produced in this facility will help us meet Silicon Valley's future water demands. The facility has been designed so that it can be expanded in the future to four times its size. As we face significant challenges with our imported water supplies and potential impacts from global climate change, this local water source could be a major part of our future water supply portfolio.

The technology is impressive. Water that has undergone two levels of treatment at the adjacent wastewater treatment plant will undergo three additional advanced treatment stages: microfiltration, reverse osmosis and ultra-violet disinfection. This facility will be able to produce water that's as pure as or purer than most potable water sources.

The water that is produced will then be blended with recycled water produced for the South Bay Water Recycling program, which has been providing recycled water to San Jose, Milpitas and Santa Clara customers for more than 10 years. The enhanced blend of water will help industrial users reduce operating costs, and it can be used on a wider variety of landscapes, due to a much lower level of salinity. As a result, it is expected that more customers will tap into the recycled water system.
This will be the largest public facility of its kind in Northern California. The same technology is being used worldwide to produce highly purified water for drinking. Orange County is using the same technology to replenish groundwater. That project has been running successfully since 2008.

The Santa Clara Valley Water District will own and operate the new treatment facility while the city of San Jose will continue to operate the South Bay Water Recycling program, which distributes recycled water to more than 600 industrial, agricultural and landscape users.

In the works since 2006, the construction of the facility was kick-started by the success of California's congressional delegation to secure a share of federal stimulus funds. Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren, who spoke at the groundbreaking, was instrumental in securing $8.25 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 for the project. About 800 people will be put to work during the two years of construction.

The water district is providing more than $32 million of the project's total cost. In addition to the federal stimulus funding, the California Department of Water Resources is providing $3 million from Proposition 50 funds. The San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant, which is administered by the City of San Jose, is also a major partner, providing $11 million in support, and a lease for the facility lands. The cost of construction for the project is $42.4 million.

This is a great example of an infrastructure project that is stimulating our local economy today while leaving a lasting legacy for the future. When the next drought inevitably rolls around, we'll all be glad to have this local water source available.
Read the article.

2010-11-08T07:01:00.000-08:00

As you know, the Earth is a watery place. But just how much water exists on, in, and above our planet? The picture above shows the size of a sphere that would contain all of Earth's water in comparison to the size of the Earth. You're probably thinking I missed a decimal point when running my calculator since surely all the water on, in, and above the Earth would fill a ball a lot larger than that "tiny" blue sphere sitting on the United States, reaching from about Salt Lake City, Utah to Topeka, Kansas. But, no, this diagram is indeed correct.

About 70 percent of the Earth's surface is water-covered, and the oceans hold about 96.5 percent of all Earth's water. But water also exists in the air as water vapor, in rivers and lakes, in icecaps and glaciers, in the ground as soil moisture and aquifers, and even in you and your dog. Still, all that water would fit into that tiny ball.

Read more....

Greywater scores high marks

2010-10-29T14:48:00.000-07:00

After experimenting with solar panels, gray-water systems and chickens for two years, a budget-minded consumer takes stock of what worked and what didn't.

Read the full story in the LATimes

WORTH IT

Gray water, 1st place

Gray water is the waste generated from faucets, showers and laundry machines — water that accounts for 54.2% of all water used inside a home, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. With California deep into a drought, in August 2008 I retrofitted the plumbing on my laundry machine to send its gray water onto my landscape. Over the last two years, that simple switch has sent 9,720 gallons to passion fruit vines instead of the sewer, and it required only one change to my usual routine. I had to swap laundry detergents because my usual brand, like many, contained salt and other ingredients that kill plants.

When I first installed a gray-water system, it wasn't legal. Making it legal would have required a permit, extensive filtering apparatus and lots of cash. But in August 2009, these laundry-to-landscape systems were legalized in California, as long as homeowners followed 12 guidelines.

I've been so pleased with this low-cost, high-impact system that I hired a plumber to expand it in January, tying the wastewater from my bathtub, shower and bathroom sink into the same gravity-fed plumbing line that handles my laundry water. This so-called simple system also was legalized in California in 2009. Its legal status has since been rescinded, so once again I've gone rogue. I estimate my additional savings to be roughly 1,120 gallons per month.

Financially, this system is paying for itself, just slowly. The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power charges me less than half a penny per gallon, so technically, gray water has saved me only $95 in water costs so far. But it's also reduced my sewer charge by about one-third, saving me an extra $3.30 per month. In drought-prone Southern California, gray water feels like the right thing to do. It's been the easiest, most sensible, hassle-free, sustainable system I've put in place at my house.

Cost: $1,988 ($312 for the laundry-to-landscape plumbing, $1,676 for bathtub and bathroom sink tie-in)

Resources: Greywater Action, http://www.greywateraction.org; Oasis Design, oasisdesign.net

Arctic Report Card

2010-10-22T09:54:00.000-07:00

According to current research, return to previous Arctic conditions is unlikely

Record temperatures across Canadian Arctic and Greenland, a reduced summer sea ice cover, record snow cover decreases and links to some Northern Hemisphere weather support this conclusion

New York Times: Lake Mead Hits Record Low

2010-10-21T12:44:00.000-07:00

Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words and the photo from a recent New York Times blog article says everything about our water crisis.

The article begins:

"Sometime between 11 and noon on Sunday, the water level in Lake Mead, the massive reservoir whose water fills the taps of millions of people across the Southwest, fell lower than it ever has since it was filled 75 years ago."

Lake Mead is the largest resorvoir in the Unites States and while it is still 8 feet (a whole 8 feet!) above the levels where a shortage is officially declared, if the levels drop too low not only will our water supply be dangerously low but it could also effect the hydroelectric output of Hoover Dam.

Comments on the article range from blaming climate change and evaporation to blaming our wasteful building practices in the Southwest. Either way there is one obvious conclusion: we need to start getting serious about water conservation in the Southwest!

There are tons of tips for conserving water at home whether you own or rent and while conserving household water use is a huge help to our water supplies we should also remember that 70% of the average household's water use in the Southwest goes toward irrigating our landscapes (lawn and tropical gardens). In order to become truly sustainable we need to change the way we look at water use both inside and outside the home.

Rain Barrels Work!

2010-10-15T11:27:00.000-07:00

For a year, San Diego city officials collected storm water in 24 rain barrels in eight sites across the city to analyze their effectiveness in reducing runoff and harvesting water.

They found that the rain barrels significantly reduced the flow of pollutants to storm drains as they redirected rain to landscaped areas.

San Diego is in the early stages of studying programs like a successful rain barrel program in Los Angeles to learn best practices to reduce runoff to watersheds. San Diego also is looking at rain gardens and other methods of "rainwater redirection."

Read more and also read the rain barrel pilot study report.

San Diego Edges Closer to a Dependable Local Water Supply

2010-10-12T14:50:00.000-07:00

Yesterday the San Diego Union Tribune ran a feature Future wellspring? - New source of drinking water hinges on pilot project and City Council.

The article contains a great graphic showing the multiple levels of treatment that would be included in the project.

The process starts with wastewater that has already has been treated to levels deemed acceptable for use on landscaping. Then it’s pumped through a microfiltration process that removes bacteria, protozoa and suspended particles. The water then is them pumped reverse osmosis membranes to remove dissolved impurities. Finally, the twice-filtered water is exposed to UV light and hydrogen peroxide in a process known as "advanced oxidation." The pilot plant that will produce about 1 million gallons per day is expected to be in operation by April.

This is essentially the same process being used in Orange County to produce 70 million gallons per day of high quality drinking water - and reduce wastewater discharges to the ocean.

New York City Green Infrastructure Plan

2010-10-04T10:58:00.000-07:00

NYC's New Green Infrastructure Plan

Submitted by Richard Jarman on Thu, 2010-09-30 10:34.

In a boost to the City's harbor water quality Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, Environmental Protection Commissioner Cas Holloway and Office of Long Term Planning and Sustainability Director David Bragdon have unveiled the NYC Green Infrastructure Plan, which aims to capture and retain stormwater runoff before it enters the sewer system.

The current system discharges a mix of stormwater and sewage directly into New York Harbor during heavy storms due to its limited capacity. Traditional remedies which include upgrading holding tanks and tunnels are very expensive and have limited benefits.

Under the new proposals, which will require approval from the state and federal government, a mix of technologies and solutions will be implemented to not only reduce water contamination so that more waterways can be made available for recreation, but also green and cool the city and improve air quality.

Green infrastructure uses vegetation, soils, and other structural elements to mimic natural hydrologic cycles by slowing down, absorbing, and evaporating stormwater. The new plan is estimated to reduce the city's long-term sewer management costs by $2.4 billion over the next 20 years, helping to hold down future water bills.

"One of the most challenging environmental questions facing New York City is how best to clean up our waterways," said Marcia Bystryn, president of the New York League of Conservation Voters. "The NYC Green Infrastructure Plan is a comprehensive response that will reduce pollution, protect critical habitat and make investments where they will have the greatest impact. We applaud Mayor Bloomberg, Commissioner Holloway, Deputy Commissioner Strickland and everyone involved for this important step toward a more sustainable city."

NYC To Curb Water Runoff With Blue And Green Roofs

NYC.gov

Global Water Crisis

2010-10-04T09:01:00.000-07:00

A study in Nature reports that nearly 80 percent of the world’s population lives in areas where the fresh water supply isn’t secure. And while industrialized nations have made massive investments in infrastructure to keep the faucets flowing, those projects have taken a toll on the environment.

Fact Check: The Real Price of Purified Sewage

2010-09-16T15:45:00.000-07:00

First KUSI's John Coleman calls global warming 'a scam', now KUSI's Bob Kittle claims "That water (from purified sewage) is three to four times as expensive as anything else." Voice of San Diego to the rescue with their 'Fact Check' column!

"Determination: False

Analysis: There's no ignoring that creating water by purifying sewage (what Kittle called toilet-to-tap) isn't as cheap as importing water from the Colorado River or Sacramento Delta, our two main sources. But it's not as expensive as Kittle claimed....

Independent analyses have reinforced that purifying sewage is cheaper than desalination. Why? Because it takes more energy to strip salt out of seawater than crud out of sewage. That's why officials in Orange County chose purified sewage when they needed a new supply. They found it cheaper than seawater desalination."

Click Here for the full story from the Voice of San Diego.

California's Next Million Acre-Feet: Saving Water, Energy, and Money

2010-09-08T12:35:00.000-07:00

A new analysis from the Pacific Institute recommends specific actions that can annually save a million acre-feet of water quickly and at a lower economic and ecological cost than developing new supplies. The assessment notes that new actions are immediately needed to reduce the growing tensions over the state’s water resources and to address California’s persistent water supply challenges.

In the urban sector, the report identifies water savings from replacing old, inefficient water-using devices with high-efficiency models in our homes and businesses, as well as replacing some lawns with low-water-use plants. In the agricultural sector, best water management practices include weather-based irrigation scheduling, regulated deficit irrigation, and switching from gravity or flood irrigation to sprinkler or drip irrigation systems.

Read More

Water Recycling in San Francisco

2010-09-07T11:43:00.000-07:00

Today, San Francisco's water utility will unveil a proposal for the city's first large-scale water recycling project, an arc-shaped facility near Ocean Beach that would filter and disinfect 2 million gallons of sewer and storm water each day for use on 1,000 acres of San Francisco land.

The $152 million Westside Recycled Water Project would be used to water Golden Gate Park, the Presidio Golf Course and Lincoln Park.

As proposed, the Westside project would take treated wastewater from the Oceanside Water Pollution Control Plant near San Francisco Zoo, run it through fine membranes and ultraviolet-light systems, and spread it through the network of existing pipes and sprinklers snaking through the parks. The water could also serve to flush toilets at the California Academy of Sciences.

All told, San Francisco will attempt to save some 10 million gallons a day through both recycling and conservation. Peninsula and East Bay cities, represented by the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency, are attempting to save about 20 million gallons a day.

LA officials use green infrastructure to fight stormwater pollution

2010-09-03T11:01:00.000-07:00

Southern California Public Radio has continued its series of reports regarding the use of green infrastructure to address the problem of stormwater pollution. The first report was on Ventura County, and this one covers Los Angeles.

Read, listen and watch (there are links to a video clip and a slide show) as the application of green infrastructure and low impact development in the urban jungle of Los Angeles is explained and explored.

The report ties in well with Surfrider Foundation's Ocean Friendly Gardens program.

Green infrastructure could cut stormwater pollution in Ventura County

2010-09-02T11:32:00.000-07:00

State regulators are putting in place new rules to capture much of stormwater and dry season urban runoff before it pollutes coastal waters. In Ventura County, those rules calls for changes in the way gutters and culverts direct rainfall runoff.

Ventura County's new rules now promote low-impact development – ways to mimic natural pre-pavement conditions. Such rules change the shape of the pipe – or get rid of it entirely.

In other words: if it didn’t run off before people got here, it shouldn’t run off now. Read more.

Also see here.

County offers Half Price Rain Barrels!

2010-08-26T10:29:00.000-07:00

Finally rainwater catchment is catching on in San Diego!

San Diego County is offering HALF-PRICE RAIN BARRELS for County Unincorporated Residents this August 28 from 8 a.m. to 12 p.m. at the Water Conservation Garden, 12122 Cuyamaca College Drive West, in El Cajon.

It may seem like it never rains in San Diego but did you know that just 1 inch of rain falling on a 1,000 square foot roof will yield 600 gallons of water? Instead of letting all of that water run into the stormgutter, that's water that could be used for watering a veggie bed, potted plants, rinsing your wetsuit, or watering your native garden!

Check out the County's Rainbarrel Page for more info!

Venturans face higher water fees

2010-08-18T13:19:00.000-07:00

Venturans face higher water fees despite best conservation efforts

"Despite laudable water conservation efforts, Ventura residents and businesses can expect to pay more — including a possible “pass-through” fee — to cover mounting expenses for groundwater supplies and compliance with environmental regulations, the city’s public works director said..."

Read more: http://www.vcstar.com/news/2010/jul/27/venturans-face-higher-water-fees-despite-best/

What is your Landscape Water Use?

2010-08-17T10:08:00.000-07:00

Did you know that...?

...a 1,000 square foot lawn in San Diego (that's about a 50'x20' area) uses about 25,ooo gallons of water every year? (That's 400,000 8 ounce glasses of water or enough drinking water for one person to have 8 8oz glasses a day for the next 136 years.)

...60% of the water we put into the average landscape turns into runoff? In the above garden that's about 15,000 gallons of water annually that runs onto the street and into our gutters, picking up pollutants along the way and bringing them straight to the ocean.

...the average irrigation spray head has only a 55% efficiency rating (that means only half of the water that comes out of the head actually ends up on the landscape)!

...60% of all fertilizers and pesticides used in the garden end up in our groundwater and watersheds? (not to mention the pollution generated by traditional lawncare techniques and fossil fuels used to create and ship the fertilizers and pesticides)

Those are some pretty scary numbers and that's just the tip of the iceberg. But there are solutions to these problems!

We can reduce water use in our landscapes by over 70%.

We can eliminate landscape runoff from our landscaped areas or at the very least make sure that that water is cleaned of pollutants before it is allowed into our watersheds.

We can use organic methods to feed the soil and create a healthy living environment for plants eliminating the need for fertilizers and pesticides.

We can do all this and more while saving water, saving money, and saving our local heritage and environment.

These solutions are the focus of our Ocean Friendly Garden program and we invite you and your friends, neighbors, local nurserypeople, and many more to join us for our next workshop series which starts next Tuesday evening in Encinitas!

For more information and to sign up for the series please check out the Ocean Friendly Gardens Program webite and our San Diego Chapter OFG Blog

Huge Win for IPR!

2010-07-28T21:11:00.000-07:00

The IPR demo project is underway; which is a huge step in the right direction for San Diego's future water supply. Please check out this link to find out more.

Water supply in Dublin area on knife-edge | Irish Examiner

2010-07-26T10:04:00.000-07:00

There's an old joke that goes, " You know it's summer in Ireland when the rain gets warmer."

The joke is funny to anyone who knows Ireland, because it's a wet country, with seemingly endless rain. But, like the rest of the world, demand is outstripping supply. Or in other words, Mother Nature cannot replace it fast enough for society's use. What is the solution? Conservation.

"THE water supply to the country’s largest urban area is on a knife-edge, with senior managers warning that members of the public will have to conserve water to ensure there are no future shortages."

Water supply in Dublin area on knife-edge | Irish Examiner

San Diego NEEDS to Know Our H2O!

2010-07-22T09:57:00.000-07:00

We wrote an Op Ed piece calling for water management reform down here in San Diego today. Our local paper, the Union-Tribune ran it this morning.

A guest commenter by the name of Alan h, wrote:
"I couldn't agree more with this article.

20% of California's energy consumption is simply to move water around the state (mostly from North to South).

Its time to stop trying to solve today's problems with yesterday's ideas. Simply consuming more and more water is like building more and more freeways. That's not the answer.

Ask any 5th Grader and they can tell you the answer:

1. REDUCE our water consumption

2. REUSE our water multiple times

3. RECYCLE wastewater and stop discharging 185 million gallons a day into our coastline!"

Sounds like this guy has been watching our film, and Knows His H2O!

Green Infrastructure for Clean Water Act

2010-07-15T09:47:00.000-07:00

The Green Infrastructure for Clean Water Act (S. 3561) was just introduced into the Senate by Tom Udall (N.M.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.). This bill is nearly identical to the House bill of the same name (H.R. 4202) that was submitted in 2009. The House bill has since picked up 40 cosponsors.

By encouraging advances in America’s understanding and use of green infrastructure techniques, these bills will help to achieve environmental and economic benefits for communities across the country.

Stormwater runoff is a serious threat to the nation’s waterways and public health, costing Americans hundreds of millions of dollars each year in lost tourism revenue, increased drinking water treatment costs and loss of habitat. Fortunately, green infrastructure provides a cost-effective and environmentally sound approach to reducing stormwater and combined sewer overflow pollution. This strategy stops water pollution at its source by using trees, vegetation, and open spaces to capture and infiltrate rain where it falls – letting the environment manage water naturally, inexpensively, and effectively.

Because it decreases hard infrastructure costs while increasing property values and creating jobs, green infrastructure is an economically prudent water management technique. Moreover, it offers wide-ranging environmental and social benefits beyond reductions in polluted runoff: it improves air quality, mitigates the urban heat island effect, and provides better urban aesthetics. Studies have shown that green infrastructure improves health and saves energy used to heat and cool buildings. Green infrastructure techniques also minimize flooding and ensure more resilient water supplies by increasing groundwater recharge.

The Green Infrastructure for Clean Water Act promotes the use of these multi-beneficial methods by making green infrastructure a national priority. The bill establishes “Centers of Excellence” for green infrastructure that will provide critical research and information coordination services. It will establish a green infrastructure program within the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Water to promote the use of green infrastructure and provide technical assistance to states, local governments, and the private sector. Most importantly, the bill will provide communities with the resources they need to implement green infrastructure projects on the ground, improving the lives of their residents.

Participate in the Surfrider's action alert and send your Congressional leaders a letter urging them to co-sponsor the Green Infrastructure for Clean Water Act. Just click here.

To learn more about Green Infrastructure visit EPA's website, the Surfrider Foundations Coastal A-Z on Low Impact Development, or the previous blog posting on this bill.

LID in LA

2010-07-06T12:54:00.000-07:00

Got storm water? L.A. now has standardized plans for runoff infiltration

June 30, 2010 | 12:40 pm

During the rainy season, the city of L.A. sends 100 million gallons of untreated runoff into the Pacific Ocean.

Tuesday, the city's engineering department signed off on six standard plans that can be used to prevent some of the flow coming from parkways, highways, alleyways and cemented curb areas and divert it into the ground where it can recharge groundwater and prevent pollutants from reaching waterways. The plans give specific guidelines for installing swales, vegetation, permeable pavement and other systems to prevent storm water from flowing over nonporous surfaces into storm drains.

"What we're trying to do here is take storm water or urban runoff and infiltrate it in streets or alleys and make it consistent so that people aren't frustrated with trying to do something innovative," said Gary Moore, engineer for the city of L.A. "We've developed standard plans, we've done the details, we've done the engineering to enable the city or a developer to use the plans to implement the desired solution."

Developed in partnership with the city's Board of Public Works, Bureau of Sanitation and Bureau of Engineering, the standard plans have been in the works for six months and will be available for free online starting July 9 at http://www.eng.lacity.org.

"There are more than 6,500 miles of streets in Los Angeles," Moore said of the plans that will be used for street reconstruction, street widening, landscape medians and other projects. "There's a lot of potential."

-- Susan Carpenter

Photo: Don Kelsen / Los Angeles Times

San Diego's residents will pay more for water AND electricity if we use desal.

2010-06-29T19:33:00.000-07:00

There's a great article online in the Huffington Post about how desalination is not the answer for those of us responsible for water management planning. The author, Peter Hanlon, makes a great point about how much energy is used. In the case of San Diego, we'll use a lot more energy than our current practice which is to pump it out of the ground, and transport it thousands of miles for our use. Desalination means an increase in our water bills AND our electric bills.

He writes:
"The process of converting salt water to drinking water is highly energy-intensive. In San Diego it takes eight times more electricity to produce about 325,000 gallons of water through desalination than it takes to pump the same amount of groundwater. Because desalinated water is so energy-dependent, water customers are vulnerable to rises in energy costs.

This is where desalination stumbles its way into the "energy-water nexus." In short, generating electricity requires a lot of water, while treating and moving water requires a lot of electricity. Desalination does not help to ease the burden of these interconnected demands, in fact it makes the situation worse.

Consider the added demand from a new desalination plant on the electric grid -- a grid fed by power plants that also require a tremendous amount of water for cooling. In other words, we're creating drinking water for one water-starved location using massive amounts of electricity generated with massive amounts of water somewhere else. Such a scenario raises an obvious question -- Does this make good sense?"

At Surfrider Foundation we say, "No, Mr. Hanlon, it does not." In fact, to us it sounds a big circular scheme that ends up raising our bills, and making us dependent on a big-green-house-gas-spewing desalination plant, when we could conserve, or recycle.

Energy costs are predicted to sky-rocket in the coming decades too, so it does not make good financial sense to "invest" in something so expensive, when a major component of the water production has a cost that is only going up.

Here's a novel idea: how about we re-use what we already transported and PAID for? Doesn't that make the most sense? I mean, WE ALREADY OWN THE WATER. So why are we dumping it in the ocean, only to turn around and PAY to desalt it?

Poseidon Resources has lost their resources.

2010-06-22T14:16:00.000-07:00

Photo courtesy of OC Voice

From the latest in the financing debacle at Poseidon Resources:

“Poseidon has been claiming for years that they will be responsible for financing the desalination proposals in Carlsbad and Huntington Beach,” says Joe Geever, Policy Coordinator for the Surfrider Foundation. “This latest debacle in San Diego County just exposes what many have known all along — these proposals are almost completely reliant on public money.”

Poseidon did not respond to the Voice’s request for comment before press time.

Geever says that public water agencies should turn to other, proven, methods of water management.

“If we are going to spend public money on water projects, we should prioritize projects that are economically and environmentally superior — like expanding our local Groundwater Replenishment System and investing in conservation programs.”

Read the whole story.

And the Winner is..........

2010-06-21T17:29:00.000-07:00

The winner of the voiceofsandiego.org essay contest is:

Indirect Potable Reuse: The Solution to San Diego’s Water Crisis

The author is Amy Cao, a Junior at La Jolla High School. Congratulations Amy for helping to spread this important message!

Our film, The Cycle of Insanity: The Real Story of Water has been accepted into the BLUE Oceans Film Festival

2010-06-20T15:36:00.000-07:00

Drew and I, and the entire “Team Insanity” are stoked to report that the Surfrider Foundation film, Cycle of Insanity: The Real Story of Water has now been viewed over 8,000 times.

We have also submitted the film to several festivals to help spread the word even farther and faster.

The latest exciting news in that effort just came from the BLUE Oceans Film Festival organizers in Monterey, California:

Congratulations! Your film has been accepted into the BLUE Ocean Film Festival and will now be advanced to the next round of judging. All films ACCEPTED into the festival will be available for viewing in our video library throughout the events Aug 25-29. However, due to the number of films submitted we can only guarantee screenings for each category's finalists. The list of FINALISTS films will be announced in mid to late July.

Best of luck in the next phase of competition and please extend our acknowledgments to your entire production team. We hope you or a member of your team can join us in Monterey to honor your work along with all the great ocean films of the 2010 festival. Thank you for participating in BLUE. Kindest Regards, Debbie Kinder, Executive Director

This festival, in Monterey California on August 24 to 29, will bring worldwide attention to our vision of water management reform and how it could restore our coasts and oceans. Past Finalists have included renowned producers like BBC, Discovery Channel, National Geographic and a list of other extremely talented and creative filmmakers.

If you visit the BLUE Oceans Film Festival website you will see that this is an honor to be accepted in the competition with some of the world’s most prestigious film producers working on ocean issues.

Please visit their website to get a sense of why we feel so proud to be accepted to the film competition. We hope the film will make the Finalist list and be screened at the festival. But just being accepted for consideration in such a prestigious festival is reason enough for our excitement and our continued dedication to the Surfrider Foundation mission. We will let you know as soon as we hear back from the BLUE Oceans Film Festival’s judges.

No, I Guess They Don't

2010-06-17T12:24:00.000-07:00

I titled the post below "High School Students Get It - Do Public Officials?"

I guess the answer (at least for now) is -- No.

High School Students Get It - Do Public Officials?

2010-06-17T12:00:00.000-07:00

Voice of San Diego just published two essays by seniors at Patrick Henry High School. All Water is Wastewater by Kathryn Mogk points out that:

"The truth is that all water is wastewater. The earth is one large closed system which nothing can escape or enter; everything made of matter that we deal with is recycled. Physicists estimate that in every breath we take there is at least one molecule of air that was also in Julius Caesar’s last breath. If the air in our lungs has been breathed many times before, then, as little as we like to think about it, the water that we drink has also been drunk many times before it reaches us."

Toilet to Top of the Line Purification System to Tap by Taylor Winchell discusses the justification for and viability of an indirect potable reuse system in San Diego:

"The fact of the matter is that no matter the source from which the water comes, it is all purified under the same quality standards and it is all equally safe to drink. Not only is the indirect potable reuse system safe, but it would also be economically cheaper and more environmentally friendly than a desalination option.

What is preventing San Diego from adopting this indirect potable reuse system appears to be the social repercussions associated with drinking purified wastewater. With declining amounts of water coming from vital import sources, however, the time is now for San Diego to get serious about local freshwater sustainability."

These two essays are finalists in the 2010 voiceofsandiego.org essay contest.

Poseidon Resources’ Carlsbad desalination factory subsidies would be withheld as a result of proposed lawsuit.

2010-06-14T14:20:00.000-07:00

Water supply has always had a sordid, complicated history in So Cal. The latest in San Diego is no exception: the San Diego County Water Authority is suing the Metropolitan Water District (unless they can settle their dispute) over rates, which means that the much-needed subsidies to fund Poseidon Resources’ Carlsbad Desalination plant would be withheld as a result of the proposed lawsuit. This is good news for our coast and ocean. The proposed Carlsbad ocean desalination facility uses enormous amounts of energy and unless they change the seawater intake system, it will kill millions of fish in the process. More importantly, Surfrider Foundation is advocating improvements to our water management that will be both economically superior to the desal facility AND result in improvements to our coast and ocean environment. See our vision for water management reform.

The Poseidon Resources desalination project has never been economically viable — even with all the subsidies. (Poseidon themselves even admits it’s not feasible without the subsidies.) But what this news about the lawsuit means is that our San Diego County Water Authority will consider paying the subsidies that would have otherwise come from agencies all over southern California. It only seems fair that San Diego County pay its own way if they want to build a desalination factory for local agencies — even though it will mean higher prices to local ratepayers. But we don’t believe they should build this factory at all.

We would like our Surfrider members and volunteers to attend the County Water Authority’s Board meeting to ensure that NO MORE OF OUR MONEY is used to subsidize this ill-conceived project. We want to make it clear that they should spend our money on improved water conservation through efforts like our Ocean Friendly Gardens program -- and wastewater recycling like the Indirect Potable Reuse project. These efforts will dramatically reduce the energy we use transporting water, make our water supply local and reliable, and reduce pollution reaching our beaches — not kill fish and waste energy. It’s a win for the environment and a win for ratepayers.

We are also speaking out to ensure that Bud Lewis, Mayor of Carlsbad, and chair of the board, recuses himself from the debate and vote. Mayor Lewis has been an outspoken advocate for the Poseidon corporation and there is a clear conflict of interest if he is allowed to influence this vote.

Meeting details:
June 24
3:00 p.m. – Board of Director’s meeting
(either 10 a.m. or 1:00 p.m., Committee meeting to approve recommendation to full Board)

SDCWA
4677 Overland Avenue
San Diego CA 92123

Please shoot us an email at water@surfridersd.org if you can attend. We need as many people as there as possible to help us speak out.

BTW, George J. Janczyn has a great summary on his blog if you want to read all the stories related to this issue.

Water Hour Is Tonight at 8 p.m. Local Time

2010-06-11T14:50:00.000-07:00

Water Hour offers the opportunity to think about water for one hour tonight and get inspired or even come up with a plan of action. The web site provides ideas for conserving water as well as your favorite moments with water. Water keeps us alive but it also provides some good entertainment!

Brought to You by Water
Surfing, kayaking, canoeing, scuba diving, snorkeling, swimming, water polo, diving, waterskiing, wakeboarding, boating, jet skiing, kite surfing, windsurfing, sailing, rowing, skimboarding, rafting, water parks, whale watching, bodysurfing, slip‘n slide, dancing in the rain, snowboarding, skiing, snowmobiling, dogsledding, bobsled, ice skating, sledding, ice sculptures, snowcones, snowballs, snowmen, ice luge, ice cubes, clouds

What is your favorite moment with water? And maybe more importantly, how would it affect you if there wasn’t enough?

Water Recycling and Resource Recovery

2010-06-10T12:04:00.001-07:00

More and more, the water and wastewater worlds are starting to intersect, as engineers, managers, planners and public officials begin to realize that "wastewater" and its components can be valuable resources.

In the San Francisco Bay area, the Woods Institute for the Environment recently hosted a dialogue on resource recovery from wastewater - specifically, how systems for wastewater management and water reuse should be defined for the San Francisco Bay Area in the 2020s. The dialogue brought together consultants, researchers, water quality agencies and government and industry leaders to inform planning efforts and align research with those efforts.

The discussion focused on state-of-the-art technologies for water reuse and energy recovery from wastewater; and ideas for use of reclaimed water for ecosystem restoration and non-potable reuse applications, extraction of renewable energy, use of nutrients and financing and development of distributed and centralized wastewater treatment systems around the Bay. Workshop outcomes will help to promote investments to revitalize Bay Area water and wastewater infrastructure, improve the stability of Bay area ecosystems, increase the security and reliability of freshwater supplies, decrease dependence upon imported freshwater, and increase renewable energy generation. The expected solutions will convert current liabilities (e.g., energy required for wastewater treatment) into assets (e.g., energy from wastewater treatment). More

Another indication of a paradigm shift in the wastewater industry was a decision to rename the Golden Hills Sanitation Company in Tehachapi, CA as Brite Canyon Resource Recovery. The company is expanding their capacity from 25,000 gallons per day to 1 million gallons per day and will send their tertiary treated wastewater to Tom Sawyer lake, improving the water quality there.

Peak Water?

2010-06-04T12:48:00.000-07:00

National Geographic just published an article titled Passing the Point of "Peak Water" Means Paying More for H2O.

You might be thinking: How can we have passed the point of peak water? How can there be a "peak water" when water is never used up? The answer is that because all fresh water supply and use is essentially local, water in that local area can be transferred, extracted, used, misused and thoughtlessly discarded faster than natural forces can replace it. Consequently, the Colorado River or Lake Mead or [insert your local river, lake or reservoir] may be drying up. Not only does that create a drinking water shortage, it severely impacts the ecology in and around that water body.

What the localized "peak water" condition also causes (as is the case with all imbalances of supply and demand) is high prices. Many experts, including the late water guru Ron Linsky, have written extensively about the value of water. Specifically, they make the point that we have tremendously undervalued water, and thereby have over-stimulated demand and encouraged waste, which also creates pollution.

So, higher water prices are coming, and that's not altogether a bad thing from a resource protection perspective.

What we can do to help mitigate shortages, higher costs and pollution is to advocate for water conservation and reuse. Peak water is not inevitable if we "Know Our H2O" and implement practices that can make our water systems sustainable.

KYH2O and Basins of Relations

2010-05-28T00:07:00.000-07:00

Around 100 people showed up at Chaparral Auditorium in Ojai to see 'Cycle of Insanity' and hear Brock Dolman's talk about water and watersheds. Many thanks to the Ojai Valley Green Coalition for sponsoring this event!

The 'Know Your H2O' video was well received by the audience. Comments included the recommendation to get this out to the schools, and provide more information on agricultural solutions. We love this kind of feedback, as it helps fine tune the message. Remember that the video is streaming online at knowyourh2o.org

It was a real treat to have Brock Dolman visit the Ojai valley from the Occidental Arts and Ecology Center in Sonoma County. Brock delivers a unique message; as we enter the era of 'global weirding' on this planet 'water,' our watershed is our lifeboat. It is essential that we get our Basins of Relations in order...

Much more info here: http://www.oaec.org/water-institute

Know Your H2O and our film, The Cycle of Insanity, receives an award!

2010-05-19T11:36:00.000-07:00

Surfrider Foundation activists were recently recognized with an award from the Los Angeles League of Conservation Voters for our work on water issues. It is not only an honor to receive this award, it provided an opportunity to get our grassroots activism and public policy positions on the radar screen of important elected representatives.

According to the LALCV, the annual Smith-Weiss Environmental Champions Award event is held “...to recognize individuals in public service, as well as community activists whose efforts in protecting the environment shine.”

Woot Woot!

If you haven't seen our film, please set aside 20 minutes and see what everyone's talking about.

Poseidon Resources desalination plant will cost the taxpayers, ratepayers, and the environment.

2010-05-11T15:20:00.000-07:00

This is a great article because Senior Vice President of Poseidon Resources in Carlsbad, Mr. Peter MacLaggan, admits that for the first 12 years or so of a 30-year bond, there may not be any return on investment for Poseidon’s investors, and it may actually cost them more along the way.

And it’s REALLY big news that San Diego County Water Authority MAY have to come up with the $350 million in subsidies if there is some complication with MWD.

THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTY MILLION DOLLARS. What does that look like? Is that a football field full of money? Whose jobs will they cut at the water agencies if they have to pay up? Or will they just sell us more water to cover their costs?

Even the Taxpayers for Common Sense, a group which generally aligns with business interests is circumspect. From the article:
Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense in Washington, D.C. said he had no qualms with the company making a dollar on a badly needed commodity like drinking water in dry southern California, but he was wary of the tax-exempt financing, the subsidies, and the lack of access to detailed advance information about the company’s costs and profits.
“Our feeling is essentially the financing, the repayment of the costs of construction, all of that needs to be very transparent and very public,” said Ellis, “because otherwise you’re asking the ratepayers and (San Diego) county to buy a pig in a poke, they don’t really know what they’re getting and what the potential costs may be.”

I’m not sure how I personally feel about Big Business making a buck off me on something like drinking water, but I do know I’m sick of greedy companies taking advantage of average folks, our natural resources, and still asking our government agencies for subsidies.

Read the full article:

Poseidon's Desalinization Plant: Dream Water Supply or Draining the Pacific and Taxpayers?

And see the current timeline of this ill-conceived project.

Washington D.C. is Beginning to Know Their H20

2010-05-10T11:28:00.000-07:00

More trees, green roofs, rain gardens, pervious pavers and rain barrels.

Those are elements of the solution to reducing stormwater pollution in many of our urban areas around the country. These types of low impact development solutions have been widely implemented in progressive cities such as Portland, Oregon. But they are also catching on and being implemented in our nation's capital.

Although a massive underground tunnel project which can be thought of as a "giant underground rain barrel" won't begin construction until at least 2011, other green projects are well under way in Washington D.C.

Last spring, Mayor Adrian Fenty announced a goal to increase the District's tree canopy from 34.8 percent to 40 percent. This means adding 8,600 trees every year for the next 25 years and conserving the ones that exist.

The RiverSmart program, managed by the District's Department of the Environment, uses money as incentive. Property owners making stormwater improvements can receive up to $1,200 in assistance. Green roofs up to 4,000 square feet receive a subsidy if the project covers at least half of the available roof surface. Trees and rain barrels can be installed for a modest fee.

San Diego, we need to make something clear about our position on desalination.

2010-04-23T11:41:00.000-07:00

I guess we need to spell it out for San Diego: when we've exhausted conservation measures, when we've exhausted recycled water to drinking standards measures, when we've exhausted low impact development measures, then we can consider desalination. But until then, we are going to fight it.

And we will fight it whenever those alternatives are not on the table.

All of these options we suggest are alternatives to desalination which are much more sustainable, and provide just as many jobs to implement them. And guess what, they don't completely destroy the surrounding ecosystem like the project planned for Carlsbad.

And, if you are a big military base considering desalination, because you need to water lawns, maybe you should consider an Ocean Friendly Garden first. Studies show, that 50% of water can be saved by eliminating lawns. So we ask you Camp Pendleton, what steps are you taking to save water? Have you asked everyone on base to conserve yet? What exactly are you doing to preserve this precious resource?

A press release below announces our next lawsuit.

SURFRIDER FOUNDATION FILES SUIT AGAINST SAN DIEGO REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD

Lawsuit Challenges Poseidon Resources Permit

San Clemente, CA (April 23, 2010) – Surfrider Foundation filed a lawsuit yesterday against the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board challenging a permit allowing Poseidon Resources to withdraw 300 million gallons of seawater per day for the proposed Carlsbad ocean desalination plant. The complaint alleges that the proposed desalination facility must strictly comply with the California Water Code to minimize the intake and mortality of marine life.

As proposed, the desalination facility would kill countless marine organisms, with an illegal plan to replace these fish and other marine life through a restoration project somewhere else.

“When the law says you must ‘minimize the intake and mortality’ of marine life, that doesn’t mean you can kill millions of marine organisms and then try to replace them somehow,” said Joe Geever, Surfrider Foundation’s California Policy Coordinator. “The Regional Water Quality Control Board misinterpreted the law, and it’s unfortunate the project has progressed this far without a final decision on the type of intake and facility design that meets California’s law to protect our precious marine environment.”

Surfrider Foundation and San Diego Coastkeeper, as well as several State Attorney Generals and other environmental organizations, have been working with federal and state agencies for years to minimize marine life from the cooling water intake systems of coastal powerplants – like the one used at the Encina Power Station in Carlsbad. Numerous agencies, including the California Energy Commission, State Lands Commission, Ocean Protection Council and State Water Resources Control Board have found that the marine life mortality from these facilities creates a significant impact on healthy fish populations and marine ecological systems.

“Open ocean intake is 1940s technology that is being phased out around the nation because new cooling technology is more effective and avoids killing marine life,” said Geever.

California’s State Water Resources Control Board is currently finalizing a statewide policy on cooling intakes. The State Board has also promised to develop a policy on ocean desalination intakes, but that will come too late for this proposal.

In the meantime, the Encina Power Station will voluntarily demolish three of their five generators and replace them with high-efficiency units that do not require cooling water from the ocean. The remaining two units are projected to run on a limited basis and be demolished in the near future.

“It would be disappointing to see the powerplant do the right thing and make a major investment to abandon their open ocean intake, only to have Poseidon utilize the same system—killing more fish than the powerplant just saved,” said San Diego Coastkeeper Legal Director Gabriel Solmer. ”Coastkeeper supports Surfrider’s lawsuit to protect our marine life from Poseidon while we work together to pursue additional projects to help the region define a dependable water supply portfolio.”

The lawsuit could have importance beyond the Poseidon desalination facility planned for Carlsbad. There are approximately 20 desalination facilities proposed for California. Some are designed with sub-seafloor intakes that eliminate the marine life mortality, including one in Sand City that was permitted quickly and without much public opposition. Others, however, plan a similar use of abandoned powerplant intake structures and will have to amend their plans if the lawsuit is successful.

“It’s time to enforce the law to protect our ocean resources, not only for the environment but so that other ocean desalination project proponents know what the rules are,” says Geever. “Killing fish by the millions is not necessary or legal in the design of any ocean desalination facility.”

About Surfrider Foundation

The Surfrider Foundation is a non-profit grassroots organization dedicated to the protection and enjoyment of our world’s oceans, waves and beaches. Founded in 1984 by a handful of visionary surfers in Malibu, California, the Surfrider Foundation now maintains over 50,000 members and 90 chapters worldwide. For more information on the Surfrider Foundation, go to www.surfrider.org.

About San Diego Coastkeeper

Founded in 1995, San Diego Coastkeeper protects the region’s bays, beaches, watersheds and ocean for the people and wildlife that depend on them. We balance community outreach, education, and advocacy to promote stewardship of clean water and a healthy coastal ecosystem.

###

San Diegans Using Synthetic Grass To Conserve Water

2010-04-22T10:21:00.000-07:00

but it's not the best solution!

"Dylan Edwards manages the Ocean Friendly Gardens program for the Surfrider Foundation. He said artificial turf does help conserve water, but Surfrider is concerned about runoff.

"But underneath that synthetic turf you have this really unhealthy compacted soil," said Edwards. "And so the rainwater comes down, hits the synthetic turn, a chunk of it gets absorbed. But a vast majority of it runs off into the streets and into the gully's, the storm drains and ultimately into the oceans."

He also said the turf absorbs sunlight.

"It's a petroleum product and that has some CO2 emissions related to it," said Edwards. "It also absorbs a ton of the heat from the sunlight here in San Diego. What it's actually working to do is creating this little heat island around our city. And, of course, that contributes a little bit to the overall global warming picture, but also forces folks to run up their air conditioning a little bit more."

Edwards said drought-tolerant and climate-appropriate plants are a better option because they absorb carbon and release oxygen."

Nice work Dylan! Click Here for the full article and sound clip from KPBS in San Diego. Click Here for the video.

Learn More About Your Water Source

2010-04-17T19:28:00.000-07:00

National Geographic released a special issue titled "Water Our Thirsty World". This is a must read to learn more about the world's water crisis, our dwindling water resources, desalination, and more. Their is also a great story on the California's water supply titled "California Pipe Dreams".

Think about some of these quotes and follow the links to learn more. Quotes and images by National Geographic "Water Our Thirsty World".

"The amount of moisture on Earth has not changed. The water the dinosaurs drank millions of years ago is the same water that falls as rain today. But will there be enough for a more crowded world?"

"Americans use about 100 gallons of water at home each day. Millions of the World's Poorest subsist on fewer than five gallons. 46 Percent of people on earth do not have water piped to their homes. Women in developing countries walks an average of 3.7 miles to get water. In 15 years, 1.8 billion people will live in regions of severe water scarcity."

"Nearly 70 percent of the world's fresh water is locked in ice. Most of the rest is in aquifers that we're draining much more quickly than the natural recharge rate. Two-thirds of our water is used to grow food. With 83 million more people on earth each year, water demand will keep going up unless we change how we use it."

"Water our Thirsty World"

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2010/04/table-of-contents

"California Pipe Dreams"

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2010/04/plumbing-california/bourne-text

CA Water Plan Emphasizes Conservation and Recycling

2010-04-14T14:39:00.000-07:00

California's Department of Water Resources recently released Water Plan Update 2009. The Implementation Plan's 13 objectives include:

Use and Reuse Water More Efficiently

Expand Conjunctive Management of Multiple Supplies

Reduce Energy Consumption of Water Systems and Uses

Seattle's Natural Drainage System

2010-04-08T12:43:00.000-07:00

Seattle’s Natural Drainage System (NDS) consists of stormwater management projects that use low-impact development (LID) strategies to meet multiple goals within street rights of way (ROWs), which account for 25% of Seattle’s total land surface. The projects work by infiltrating stormwater runoff, slowing it temporarily or lessening its volume, filtering, or removing pollutants through the use of soils and native plants, replacing impervious surfaces with pervious, and adding native vegetation.

NDS projects are “green,” using natural elements to mimic the ways of nature that have been lost to urbanization. Its features include open spaces, vegetated swales, stormwater cascades, and small wetlands ponds. Along with the plants and trees, there must be deep, healthy amended soils to support their growth.

While NDS projects may be better for the environment than traditional stormwater management structures, in the long term, they are usually as cost effective or even cheaper than traditional hard infrastructure as well. They also offer the advantage of being more attractive to the public than utilitarian infrastructure.

Read more

Conservation is our Salvation!

2010-04-07T19:24:00.000-07:00

Here's another example of how conserving water not only saves water but can save energy and save the need for desal plants...

A controversial desalination plan could slip onto the back burner if officials determine that demand for water in the county will continue a downward trend.

The board is likely to direct water district staff to analyze water use for this year and determine if the declining use pattern will continue. The findings would be presented in early 2011 and then decisions would be made on water supply projects, including desalination.

"Right now it's a pause to see what is going on, but it's not a re-direction," said board member Jack Gibson. "We want to approach it carefully."

Until five years ago water use had been increasing in the county since the 1992 drought. It then went flat for three years, and the past two years it has dropped, officials said.

Until five years ago water use had been increasing in the county since the 1992 drought. It then went flat for three years, and the past two years it has dropped, officials said.

The water district had planned for a 5 percent reduction in water use due to conservation in the current fiscal year, but use dropped 8.5 percent instead.

The change in use has district officials taking a closer look at a desalination plant. The plant was meant to help Marin get past a record drought, like the one that occurred in 1976 and 1977. But with water usage down - if that trend holds - rationing would not be as dire as previously thought during a drought and a desalination plant might not be needed.

Water officials believe there may be various factors - cooler-than-normal weather and the economic downturn - that may have reduced water usage. But it also may be that people are conserving more water than ever.

"We have seen significantly lower demand for water in the last year and that has changed the calculation we use in determining when we move forward on desalination," said board president David Behar. "Have we conserved our way out of the need for desalination, or is it the weather and economy? It may be there is not a need for a desalination plant."

Check out the Marin Independant Journal for the full story...
http://www.marinij.com/marinnews/ci_14831890

Moving Beyond IPR

2010-04-07T11:47:00.000-07:00

Surfrider Foundation was an early and strong supporter of the Groundwater Replenishment System project in Orange County, California. We also are working to promote the evaluation and implementation of other Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR) projects in San Diego and in other locations.

Meanwhile, forward-thinking engineers, planners and regulators are noting the success of IPR projects and looking beyond that to Direct Potable Reuse.

The National Water Research Institute recently published a "white paper" titled Regulatory Aspects of Direct Potable Reuse in California. This is now downloadable from the NWRI website. The Executive Summary of the report states:

"...direct potable reuse may be a reasonable option to consider based upon significant advances in treatment technology and monitoring methodology in the last decade, health effects data from IPR projects and direct potable reuse demonstration facilities, and water quality and treatment performance data generated at operational IPR projects in the state that have advanced wastewater treatment."

Another Kind of Recycling

2010-04-06T14:26:00.000-07:00

On May 10, the city of Santa Rosa, California's Laguna Wastewater Treatment Plant will inaugurate a small pilot project that relies on native algae and marsh plants to purify sewage and produce methane. The gas will run a generator that charges a fleet of four electric maintenance vehicles.

Nationwide, there’s a rush to extract more energy from wastewater treatment, but Laguna boasts that it is the only operation in the U.S. harvesting algae for fuel. The city has published a coloring book about its “F.A.B” (Fuel from Aquatic Biomass) project, featuring Algae, a smiley, if scummy, little fellow.

Algae-to-fuel is a side operation at Laguna, but it has garnered top honors from the Association of California Water Agencies. In addition, Laguna has won state and federal awards for recycling and quality control. Ninety-nine percent of its biosolids — treated, nutrient-rich sewage sludge — are spread on the land, either as fertilizer on fodder or as compost on city parks and playgrounds. Only 1 percent is trucked to a landfill. Apart from the algae operation, 25 percent of the plant’s electrical bill is offset by methane from biosolids.

Last year, Ventura Regional Sanitation District, serving Ventura County, began converting biosolids into dried pellets for fuel. And in a pilot project, the city of Los Angeles started injecting some of its biosolids into wells a mile under the ocean floor at Terminal Island, where they will degrade into methane for fuel.

In northern San Diego County, the Encina Wastewater Authority now converts its biosolids into dried pellets for sale to a cement manufacturer in Victorville. The Encina treatment plant, like Laguna, is certified by the National Biosolids Partnership.

“We’ve gotten our ratepayers out of the game of paying millions of dollars to haul biosolids more than 200 miles to Yuma, Ariz.,” said Kevin Hardy, the general manager. “Instead of five trucks to Yuma, we’re sending one truck a day to Victorville. That’s half the distance. And we’re getting to beneficially use the product as fuel.”

Similarly, Los Angeles and Orange counties are hoping to recycle a third of their biosolids as pellets at the Rialto SlurryCarb Facility, which opened last June. The plant is designed to produce twice as much energy as it consumes.

The Start of a Wastewater Sea Change on the East Coast?

2010-04-05T15:08:00.000-07:00

Two articles came to my attention today.

First, in Maryland, officials in Howard County want reuse of wastewater to be the new standard for big projects, because of worries that tightening federal and state restrictions on nitrogen entering the bay could eventually outstrip the capacity of the county wastewater treatment plant on the Little Patuxent River in Savage.

"It's better for the environment, and it's a response to how we're going to grow effectively," said County Executive Ken Ulman. Officials are applying it now to two projects: the redevelopment of downtown Columbia and a 325-home community at historic Doughoregan Manor in Western Ellicott City that might get public water and sewer service.

This new policy in Maryland stands out in stark contrast to the situation in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, where officials seem poised to waste resources and pollute the ocean by constructing a new ocean outfall.

In Cape Cod, Massachusetts, towns are rightly discontinuing the use of polluting septic systems, but instead of a large centralized wastewater treatment system, they are being encouraged to consider the alternative of distributed wastewater treatment systems, utilizing current state-of-the-art package treatment plants. In addition to often being less expensive, decentralized treatment plants recharge the groundwater locally instead of removing it to another watershed. Decentralized treatment plants may also facilitate beneficial reuse of treated wastewater, which is often ruled out by the pumping and piping costs associated with re-distributing water from a centralized facility.

Green Streets and Storm Sewers a Tourist Attraction?

2010-03-31T10:49:00.001-07:00

Eco-friendly tourists flock to Portland, Oregon to understand how the city's innovative system of curbs, gutters, roofs and rain gardens sharply cuts water pollution.

So popular is the Green Streets program that the city publishes a map on its website directing tourists to the most exciting storm sewer sites.

USA Today article

April 7, Info Forum on Water Legislation

2010-03-30T14:27:00.000-07:00

The Association of California Water Agencies is holding an informational forum, on Water Legislation and the bond issue to be considered by the voters in November 2o10, at Balboa Park on April 7, 2010. See an excerpt of the official announcement below and register (you won't be able to register using the Safari browser).

Informational Forum on Water Legislation and Water Bond to be held April 7 in Balboa Park

The Association of California Water Agencies is hosting a series of statewide informational forums that will discuss the comprehensive package of water bills that was passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor in 2009. The package contains four policy bills along with an $11.14 billion general obligation bond proposal that voters will consider on the November 2010 ballot.

A forum will be held in San Diego on April 7 at the Balboa Park Club (2150 West Pan American Rd., 92101) from 8:30 a.m. to noon. The event is free and open to the public.

The forums are being coordinated to help build understanding for the many legislative aspects of the comprehensive water package. Speakers will include representatives from ACWA and other California water experts.

For additional locations and dates in Southern California, click here.

Please register online by clicking here.

Forum hosts include the Association of California Water Agencies, California Latino Water Coalition, and State of California.

For more information, please call (916) 503-1411 or emailbquintana@latinowater.com

You may also visit the sponsor websites www.latinowater.com orwww.acwa.com.

Waste(water)ing Away in California

2010-03-16T13:41:00.000-07:00

Coastal communities throughout California flush away more than a billion gallons of fresh water every day by discharging wastewater into the Pacific Ocean, according to a report released yesterday by local nonprofit Heal the Ocean.

Essentially a detailed survey of wastewater dumped into ocean waters along the entire coast of California, the report highlights concerns about untreated chemical contaminants and the need to move toward reclaimed wastewater.

“Wastewater really is a waste of water,” said Hillary Hauser, executive director of Heal the Ocean. “We’re using drinking water in a really bad way.”

By adapting treatment plants to focus on reclaiming water, Heal the Ocean officials believe the state could solve two problems: stop widespread pollution of the ocean and address the lack of potable water needed to sustain the state’s future.

More

Also see Down the Drain

Antiquated Water & Sewer Systems

2010-03-15T12:55:00.000-07:00

The latest article in a New York Times series on Toxic Water, discusses the current crisis with this country's overburdened and antiquated drinking water and wastewater infrastructure. It would take over $25 billion per year to fix our leaking pipes. The below article suggests water and sewage rate hikes to pay for these repairs, but there is a new bill that has been introduced to Congress that proposes to create a trust fund for this purpose. Support the Water Protection & Reinvestment Act of 2009 by clicking here.

TOXIC WATERS

Saving U.S. Water and Sewer Systems Would Be Costly

By CHARLES DUHIGG

Published: March 14, 2010

WASHINGTON — One recent morning, George S. Hawkins, a long-haired environmentalist who now leads one of the largest and most prominent water and sewer systems, trudged to a street corner here where water was gushing into the air.

Enlarge This Image

Nicole Bengiveno/The New York Times

As head of Washington's water department, George Hawkins, left, is on the scene every time a major sewer or water line breaks.

Toxic Waters

The Breaking Point

Articles in this series are examining the worsening pollution in America’s waters and regulators’ responses.

Previous Articles in the Series »

Enlarge This Image

Nicole Bengiveno/The New York Times

Mr. Hawkins's goal is to replace, within the next century, the pipes that were installed in Washington a hundred years ago.

Readers' Comments

"I am willing to pay higher rates if it is for upgrading our sewer/water system. American cities are decaying. Upkeep of the infrastructure has been put off too long."

Jim Harrington, San Diego, CA

A cold snap had ruptured a major pipe installed the same year the light bulb was invented. Homes near the fashionable Dupont Circle neighborhood were quickly going dry, and Mr. Hawkins, who had recentlytaken over the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority despite having no experience running a major utility, was responsible for fixing the problem.

As city employees searched for underground valves, a growing crowd started asking angry questions. Pipes were breaking across town, and fire hydrants weren’t working, they complained. Why couldn’t the city deliver water, one man yelled at Mr. Hawkins.

Such questions are becoming common across the nation as water and sewer systems break down. Today, a significant water line bursts on average every two minutes somewhere in the country, according to a New York Times analysis ofEnvironmental Protection Agency data.

In Washington alone there is a pipe break every day, on average, and this weekend’s intense rains overwhelmed the city’s system, causing untreated sewage to flow into the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers.

State and federal studies indicate that thousands of water and sewer systems may be too old to function properly.

For decades, these systems — some built around the time of the Civil War — have been ignored by politicians and residents accustomed to paying almost nothing for water delivery and sewage removal. And so each year, hundreds of thousands of ruptures damage streets and homes and cause dangerous pollutants to seep into drinking water supplies.

Mr. Hawkins’s answer to such problems will not please a lot of citizens. Like many of his counterparts in cities like Detroit, Cincinnati, Atlanta and elsewhere, his job is partly to persuade the public to accept higher water rates, so that the utility can replace more antiquated pipes.

“People pay more for their cellphones and cable television than for water,” said Mr. Hawkins, who before taking over Washington’s water system ran environmental groups and attended Princeton and Harvard, where he never thought he would end up running a sewer system.

“You can go a day without a phone or TV,” he added. “You can’t go a day without water.”

But in many cities, residents have protested loudly when asked to pay more for water and sewer services. In Los Angeles, Indianapolis, Sacramento — and before Mr. Hawkins arrived, Washington — proposed rate increases have been scaled back or canceled after virulent ratepayer dissent.

So when Mr. Hawkins confronted the upset crowd near Dupont Circle, he sensed an opportunity to explain why things needed to change. It was a snowy day, and while water from the broken pipe mixed with slush, he began cheerily explaining that the rupture was a symptom of a nationwide disease, according to people present.

Mr. Hawkins — who at 49 has the bubbling energy of a toddler and the physique of an aging professor — told the crowd that the average age of the city’s water pipes was 76, nearly four times that of the oldest city bus. With a smile, he described how old pipes have spilled untreated sewage into rivers near homes.

“I don’t care why these pipes aren’t working!” one of the residents yelled. “I pay $60 a month for water! I just want my toilet to flush! Why do I need to know how it works?”

Mr. Hawkins smiled, quit the lecture, and retreated back to watching his crew.

On Capitol Hill, the plight of Mr. Hawkins and other utility managers has become a hot topic. In the last year, federal lawmakers have allocated more than $10 billion for water infrastructure programs, one of the largest such commitments in history.

But Mr. Hawkins and others say that even those outlays are almost insignificant compared with the problems they are supposed to fix. An E.P.A. study last year estimated that $335 billion would be needed simply to maintain the nation’s tap water systems in coming decades. In states like New York, officials estimate that $36 billion is needed in the next 20 years just for municipal wastewater systems.

As these discussions unfold, particular attention is being paid to Mr. Hawkins. Washington’s water and sewer system serves the White House, many members of Congress, and two million other residents, and so it surprised some when Mr. Hawkins was hired to head the agency last September, since he did not have an engineering background or the résumé of a utility chief.

In fact, after he had graduated from Harvard Law School in 1987, he spent a few years helping companies apply for permits to pollute rivers and lakes. (At night — without his firm’s knowledge — he had a second career as a professional break dancer. He met his wife, a nurse, when he fell off a platform at a dance club and landed on his head.)

Enlarge This Image

Nicole Bengiveno/The New York Times

The District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority can monitor flow from a pump station.

Toxic Waters

The Breaking Point

Articles in this series are examining the worsening pollution in America’s waters and regulators’ responses.

Previous Articles in the Series »

Readers' Comments

"I am willing to pay higher rates if it is for upgrading our sewer/water system. American cities are decaying. Upkeep of the infrastructure has been put off too long."

Jim Harrington, San Diego, CA

But he quickly became disenchanted with corporate law. He moved to the E.P.A., where he fought polluters, and then the White House, and eventually relocated his family to a farm in New Jersey where they shoveled the manure of 35 sheep and kept watch over 175 chickens, and Mr. Hawkins began running a series of environmental groups.

The mayor of Washington, Adrian M. Fenty, asked Mr. Hawkins to move to the city in 2007 to lead the Department of the Environment. He quickly became a prominent figure, admired for his ability to communicate with residents and lawmakers. When the Water and Sewer Authority needed a new leader, board members wanted someone familiar with public relations campaigns. Mr. Hawkins’s mandate was to persuade residents to pay for updating the city’s antiquated pipes.

At a meeting with board members last month, Mr. Hawkins pitched his radical solution. Clad in an agency uniform — his name on the breast and creases indicating it had been recently unfolded for the first time — Mr. Hawkins suggested raising water rates for the average resident by almost 17 percent, to about $60 a month per household. Over the coming six years, that rate would rise above $100.

With that additional money, Mr. Hawkins argued, the city could replace all of its pipes in 100 years. The previous budget would have replaced them in three centuries.

The board questioned him for hours. Others have attacked him for playing on false fears.

“This rate hike is outrageous,” said Jim Graham, a member of the city council. “Subway systems need repairs, and so do roads, but you don’t see fares or tolls skyrocketing. Providing inexpensive, reliable water is a fundamental obligation of government. If they can’t do that, they need to reform themselves, instead of just charging more.”

Similar battles have occurred around the nation. In Philadelphia, officials are set to start collecting $1.6 billion for programs to prevent rain water from overwhelming the sewer system, amid loud complaints. Communities surrounding Cleveland threatened to sue when the regional utility proposed charging homeowners for the water pollution running off their property. In central Florida, a $1.8 billion proposal to build a network of drinking water pipes has drawn organized protests.

“We’re relying on water systems built by our great-grandparents, and no one wants to pay for the decades we’ve spent ignoring them,” said Jeffrey K. Griffiths, a professor at Tufts University and a member of the E.P.A.’s National Drinking Water Advisory Council.

“There’s a lot of evidence that people are getting sick,” he added. “But because everything is out of sight, no one really understands how bad things have become.”

To bring those lapses into the light, Mr. Hawkins has become a cheerleader for rate increases. He has begun a media assault highlighting the city’s water woes. He has created a blog and aFacebook page that explain why pipes break. He regularly appears on newscasts and radio shows, and has filled a personal Web site with video clips of his appearances.

It’s an all-consuming job. Mr. Hawkins tries to show up at every major pipe break, no matter the hour. He often works late into the night, and for three years he has not lived with his wife and two teenage children, who remained in New Jersey.

“The kids really miss their father,” said his wife, Tamara. “When we take him to the train station after a visit, my daughter in particular will sometimes cry. He’s missing out on his kids’ childhoods.”

And even if Mr. Hawkins succeeds, the public might not realize it, or particularly care. Last month, the utility’s board approved Mr. Hawkins’s budget and started the process for raising rates. But even if the bigger budget reduces the frequency of water pipe breaks by half — a major accomplishment — many residents probably won’t notice. People tend to pay attention to water and sewer systems only when things go wrong.

“But this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity,” Mr. Hawkins said recently, in between a meeting with local environmentalists and rushing home to do paperwork in his small, spartan apartment, near a place where he was once mugged at gunpoint.

“This is the fight of our lifetimes,” he added. “Water is tied into everything we should care about. Someday, people are going to talk about our sewers with a real sense of pride.”

The Future of Indirect Potable Reuse

2010-03-11T20:27:00.000-08:00

Bruce Reznik, Executive Director of San Diego Coastkeeper, recently wrote a great article explaining the advantages of "indirect potable reuse" (IPR) and why this system makes so much sense for San Diego. It's the "recycle" part of the reduce, reuse, recycle mantra. The article also has a 4 minute video of Bruce talking about how IPR fits into a portfolio of strategies that will make us more water independent and reduce pollution.

To learn more about how we can better use (and re-use) our water resources, come to the premiere of our new movie The Cycle of Insanity on World Water Day, March 22 at The Loft at UCSD.

Reuse Champs: Eastern Municipal Water District

2010-03-10T11:06:00.000-08:00

Hats off to Eastern Municipal Water District!

WateReuse California presented Eastern Municipal Water District with the Recycled Water Agency of the Year award Monday at their annual conference in San Diego. EMWD reuses approximately 70 percent of the wastewater that is treated and has more than 2 billion gallons of recycled water storage.

Click Here for the full press release.

EMWD is the freshwater, wastewater service and recycled water provider to a 542-square mile area from Moreno Valley southward along the I-215 corridor to Temecula and eastward to Hemet and San Jacinto. Approximately 687,000 people live and work in this area. In addition to its own water customers, EMWD supplements water to eight local water agencies and municipalities that have their own water departments. EMWD operates four water reclamation facilities and treats some 46 million gallons of wastewater daily. More information can be found at EMWD’s website www.emwd.org

The Water Protection & Reinvestment Act, HR 3202

2010-03-03T11:18:00.000-08:00

The health and safety of our nation’s communities depend on the infrastructure that provides clean drinking water and wastewater disposal. Many of these critical facilities, however, are aging and in dire need of replacement or repair. If we are to protect our nation’s public health and environment, we’ll need to ensure that our drinking water and wastewater pipelines and treatment facilities meet the demands of the 21^st century.

The Need for Legislation:

The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) has given our nation’s drinking water and wastewater infrastructure a grade of “D-” in their 2009 report card. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s most recent Clean Water and Drinking Water Infrastructure Gap Analysis estimates a $534 billion gap between current investment and projected needs over the next 20 years. Last year alone, American communities suffered more than 240,000 water main breaks and saw billions of gallons of overflowing combined sewer systems, causing contamination, property damage, disruptions in the water supply, and massive traffic jams. According to ASCE, an average of six billion gallons of potable water is lost per day in the US because of leaky pipes. This is enough to fill nearly 9,091 Olympic-sized swimming pools!

Learn more about this critical issue by watching the trailer for Liquid Assets, a documentary that tells the story of America's aging water infrastructure, go to the Water Environment Federation's Water is Life website, or read the NY Times coverage of this issue, As Sewers Fill, Waste Poisons Waterways.

The Trust Fund:

Our nation’s water infrastructure needs have grown while federal funding for clean water has declined. While the needs are estimated to be over $25 billion a year, appropriations for water infrastructure have averaged just over $2.3 billion a year since 2000. This pushes more and more costs on local governments and ratepayers, whose rates have grown at twice the rate of inflation in recent years. We need new sources of revenue to meet our communities’ water infrastructure and environmental restoration needs. A Water Protection and Reinvestment Trust Fund, funded by polluters and those who use our water systems for product disposal, will provide a deficit-neutral, consistent and protected source of revenue to help states replace, repair, and rehabilitate critical drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities.

How it Would Work:

The Water Protection and Reinvestment Act would assess new taxes, or user fees, on: water-based beverages; items disposed of in wastewater (such as toothpaste and toilet paper); pharmaceuticals; and corporate income. These new revenue sources would raise approximately $10 billion a year. Most of the funding would be distributed as grants and loans through the existing Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Funds, giving states the authority to set project priorities and deliver funds directly to municipalities. The remaining funding would support new programs for research and development, green infrastructure, small water systems, combined sewer overflow reduction, global warming, and other state and local priorities.

The Water Protection and Reinvestment Act Will:

· Protect public health by providing the funding communities need to provide safe drinking water and sewer service.

· Restore the environment by providing incentives for green infrastructure that reduces energy use and withstands the impacts of global warming.

· Create jobs by investing in projects to repair and replace aging systems. A $10 billion investment would create between 200,000 and 267,000 new jobs in engineering, construction and other industries.

· Reduce pollution by decreasing the number and severity of combined sewer overflows, discouraging the over-use of pesticides and fertilizers, and reducing the amount of pharmaceuticals in our water supply.

You're Invited to Our Premiere Event

2010-03-01T12:09:00.000-08:00

Well, it looks like we're finally close to launching our new film about the broken water cycle. We blogged about the process some time ago when we went up to LA to record the narration with actress Zuleikha Robinson who plays Illana on Lost.

So, we are pleased to invite you to come see it. The Cycle of Insanity: The Real Story of Water will open on March 22, 2010. To help ensure that all of those interested have a chance to see the film, we are showing it at 4pm (press), 6pm, and 7:30pm.

Watch the trailer!

The event is free and open to all. Seating is available on a first come, first served basis, so please RSVP with number of people in your party and the Showing you plan to attend. The event will be held at The Loft on campus at UCSD, inside Price Center. Happy Hour specials will be served all evening.

Parking is plentiful as school is on Spring Break. $1/45 min or purchase a $3.00 night permit and park in S, B or A spots after 4:30.

RSVP to water@surfriderSD.org

The Enigma of a San Diego Apartment's Water Use

2010-02-25T14:38:00.001-08:00

Councilwoman Marti Emerald has pushed a new law forward that would require almost every new apartment built in the city to include individual sub-meters to measure water use.

It would apply to the more than 80,000 new apartments and condos expected to be built in San Diego between now and 2030, according to projections from the San Diego Association of Governments.

Read the whole article at Voiceofsandiego.org

Photo and text courtesy of voiceofsandiego.org

Closing the Loop in Santa Clara County

2010-02-23T13:03:00.000-08:00

The Santa Clara Valley Water District will vote on a plan today to build a new $52 million recycled water facility at the San Jose-Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant in Alviso that will convert sewage water to high-quality water, producing up to 8 million gallons a day.

"This will help us meet future water demand," said Keith Whitman, water supply manager for the Santa Clara Valley Water District. "Recycled water is local, it is nearly independent of climate change and drought, and it doesn't have some of the uncertainties of taking water from the delta."

Currently, sewage water at the San Jose plant is treated to the highest levels in the U.S. — tertiary treatment — in which sewage is settled, broken down with bacteria, then filtered and disinfected with chlorine. Most of the water then is released into San Francisco Bay. The new plant would go further, taking the treated effluent and cleaning it with ultraviolet light, microfiltration and reverse osmosis, to kill any bacteria and remove microscopic contaminants. At that point, it is essentially cleaner than most drinking water in taps or bottles.

Potable Reuse of Wastewater Being Considered in Florida

2010-02-19T09:20:00.000-08:00

A workshop on wastewater reuse was held at the University of South Florida on February 15. At the workshop, Mehul Patel of California's Orange County Water District explained operation of the Groundwater Replenishment System, which produces about 70 million gallons per day of high quality potable water. Orange County's system takes wastewater which has gone through primary and secondary treatment, then further treats the water using microfiltration, reverse osmosis and advanced oxidation to produce water which is purer than existing imported water. The treatment process uses half the energy required to pipe water from Northern California, and much less energy than proposed sewater desalination plants.

Some Tampa Bay City Council members are proponents of augmenting the city's water supply with some of the 55 million gallons of highly treated wastewater the city now dumps into Tampa Bay each day. Tampa Bay Online has editorialized in favor of this concept, and an article in the St. Petersburg Times also covered the workshop and discussed the issue. Although online comments to the St. Petersburg Times article indicate that a lot of public education and outreach will be necessary to garner public support, it is encouraging that more and more communities in the United States are considering potable reuse of wastewater and the dual benefits (dependable local water supply and reduced wastewater discharges) that this approach entails.

Clean Water Costs Money. Dirty Water Costs More.

2010-02-16T12:22:00.000-08:00

I have been receiving some feedback and concerns regarding the $350 million per year of federal funding that the Green Infrastructure for Clean Water Act is proposing to authorize. This breaks down, theoretically, into $300 million to be applied to the green infrastructure grants program, $25 million to establish and run the Centers of Excellence, and $25 million for the new Green Infrastructure Program housed within the EPA’s Office of Water.

Now I say theoretically, because authorized does not, and as is often the case with environmental programs, will likely not, result in the entire amount being awarded in any given budget year. The authorized level of $350 million is just a cap. Congress still needs to go through the budget process and decide every year the exact appropriation, or how much money the program will really receive.

For a few years now, Surfrider has been trying to build support for increased appropriations for the BEACH Act. This bill funds EPA beach grants that pass through to state and local governments to pay for beach monitoring programs. Although, the BEACH Act is authorized at $30 million per year, Congress has never actually appropriated more than $10 million since its passage in 2000.

So whether we are talking about $350 million or even just $100 million, at first glance it seems like a whole lot of money. If you break it down though, we’re only really talking about $1 per person in the US. Are clean water and clean beaches worth $1 to you? They are to me.

Also, in comparison to the total federal budget, 3.52 trillion in 2009 (yes I said TRILLION), this proposed bill would only make up 0.002% -0.01%.

Another figure that is way beyond the scale of $350 million, is $200 billion, and that is a conservative estimate of the value of coastal tourism and fishing economies in this country, according to “Oceans Under the Gun: Living Seas or Drilling Seas?”, a report released by Environment America. Polluted stormwater threatens both of these industries. For many years running, stormwater has caused more beach closures and swimming advisories than any other source. If we continue to conduct business as usual, our problems with stormwater runoff will worsen as we continue to pave and develop our coastal watersheds. Our beaches will become even more polluted, affecting both our quality of life and our wallets.

Low impact development and green infrastructure use cost effective, best management techniques to stop rainwater before it runs off a property and becomes a problem. These natural solutions restore the water cycle by allowing rain to soak back into the ground.

Local governments are slowly beginning to be aware of the benefits of low impact development and the ‘greening’ of neighborhoods, but in order for this to really catch on in a way that will really change the way we treat our land, a serious federal investment is needed.

Is $350 million a lot of money? Yes. Are our beaches worth it? Absolutely.

Coastal Commission Hearing on February 10 in Oceanside: Poseidon-Carlsbad Ocean desalination proposal

2010-02-09T09:24:00.000-08:00

Please join us at the Coastal Commission hearing in Oceanside and support the efforts of Surfrider Foundation, San Diego Coastkeeper, Coastal Environmental Rights Foundation, and a host of other environmental groups who are working to ensure the proposed Poseidon-Carlsbad ocean desalination project does not result in exacerbating climate change and all the adverse impacts it will cause to our coast and ocean.

The permit issued by the Coastal Commission required this project to be carbon neutral. However, the calculations used to ensure this energy-intensive project did not add greenhouse gases to the environment were based on false information and assumptions - during a time when California is actively trying to reduce these emissions.

The true facts about Poseidon’s proposed greenhouse gas mitigation were not made available to the Commission until long after the permit was approved. This means the permit must either be voluntarily amended by Poseidon or revoked by the Commission.

Either way is fine with us. We just want the error in the permit corrected.

Please add your voice to our efforts with a simple statement to the Coastal Commission: “We want Poseidon to fully comply with the condition in their permit that assures the project will actually be carbon neutral.”

We hope to see you at the hearing!

WHEN: The issue is first on the agenda, so please show up by 9am.
WHERE: Oceanside City Council Chambers, 300 N Coast Hwy, Oceanside, 92054

Desalination Plants Like Poseidon Resources Suck Up Millions Of Fish Eggs.

2010-02-04T12:12:00.000-08:00

Here's a great clip of Marco Gonzalez of CERF, explaining why one aspect of the planned desalination project in Carlsbad is a nightmare. We've covered this aspect of sub-floor intakes before and there are pics here to see what these massive pipes look like.

Our favorite part is when Mr. ~~Maloni~~ Baloney explains that sub-floor intakes to protect the surrounding marine environment are just not possible in Carlsbad. It's another example of how Mr. Maloni and his Big Business friends at the ill-conceived desalination project spin the truth because right up the street, our friends in Orange County are using "slant wall technology, to avoid affecting the marine environment".

There are successful sub-seafloor pilots at both Dana Point and in Long Beach Harbor. Surfrider Foundation has supported these projects. And if they can do it — so can Poseidon.

If you can't see the video, click here.

The Intersection Between Water Rates and Water Supply.

2010-02-03T16:03:00.000-08:00

A lot of people complain about their water bills being too high. The Wall Street Journal has a great article on how subsidizing the cost of our water actually hurts us. Low costs lead to over-use, and wasteful practices. And less water revenues for municipalities means less infrastructure investments, which means more sewage spills, and more environmental degradation. Know Your h2o! The full article appears below.

2030 Water Resources Group

Liquid Asset

Pricing water is politically sensitive. But realizing the true value of mankind's most precious resource might be the best way of ensuring the world doesn't run dry.

By BEN WRIGHT

As the World Economic Forum was drawing to a close on Saturday, local police used a water cannon against around 100 anti-capitalism protesters who had gathered at the Swiss ski resort of Davos. It was no doubt effective as a means of crowd control but it could hardly be described as "on message."

The incident came just days after a panel, including United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, told delegates that the issue of water scarcity now poses one of the greatest threats to health, safety, economic growth, human rights and national security.

Water scarcity is the result of various factors: Population growth, increased levels of consumption and climate change all play a part. But, according to Piet Klop, senior fellow at the World Resources Institute, a Washington D.C., think tank, there is another problem that is often overlooked: Water is just way too cheap.

Waiting for rain

He says: "The price of water is a very contentious issue. But the lack of a fair value for this precious commodity is the chief problem in tackling water scarcity." Mr. Klop argues that in most of the world, the price of water is a far cry from what its scarcity value suggests it should be. Implicit and explicit government subsidies mean that the price of water often doesn't even cover the cost of treating it and pumping it to people's houses. This encourages wastefulness and means there is not enough revenue to invest in water infrastructure, Mr. Klop says.

There is plenty of water in the world, but 97.5% of it is salt water. We depend on the remaining 2.5%—much of which is locked away beyond practical use in the polar caps and glaciers—for a vast array of purposes: From drinking, washing and growing food to managing waste, cooling power stations and as a raw material for industrial processes.

Greg Koch, director of global water stewardship at Coca-Cola, says: "There is a lot of water in the world and it is a fixed amount that is infinitely renewable. The issues surrounding its scarcity are temporal: Where is it now, how can I get it, how clean is it? Using water is, in and of itself, not a bad thing. But using it inefficiently can be."

Demand for water is growing. Goldman Sachs estimates that global water consumption is doubling every 20 years. In November, the Water Resources Group, which comprises the World Bank and companies such as SABMiller and Coca-Cola, claimed one-third of the world's population could have access to only half the water they need by 2030.

Dr. Mark Giordano, director of water and society research at the International Water Management Institute based in Colombo, Sri Lanka, believes the "green revolution," developments in agriculture that led to huge increases in crop yields making food more plentiful in many parts of the developing world, has increased the strain on water supplies. It is becoming a difficult trade-off for governments to manage. Agriculture accounts for around 70% of global water usage.

Dr. Giordano says: "It is a very touchy issue. The truth is that it is politically almost impossible to price water for agricultural use in many parts of the world." However, he argues that it is important to try and think creatively to get as close to a free-market pricing mechanism as possible.

The state of Gujarat in northwest India, for example, used to charge farmers only a small flat rate for water. It also charged a flat rate for electricity to pump that water out of the ground. Low costs led to overuse of both. Suggestions that farmers install meters on their wells and pay for the power they used were greeted with howls of protest.

Tushaar Shah, who works with Dr. Giordano at the International Water Management Institute, came up with an alternative solution. He suggested the Gujarati government rewire the countryside, separating power lines for farmers' wells from lines supplying nonfarm users and ration power for agricultural use. The farmers are happy with the new arrangement because they have access to more reliable power. And by rationing the electricity the state has effectively rationed the ground-water supplies, which means farmers use what they do pump far more efficiently.

"It seems to be working," says Dr. Giordano. "Lots of other Indian states are looking at it. You are never going to get fully transparent pricing of water for agricultural use. It is hard politically and expensive to monitor. But you can come up with systems that approach a market solution."

Mr. Koch says good governance is crucial to solving the problem of water scarcity. The issue needs to be tackled in the round and depoliticized with innovative revenue generation. South Africa has introduced a policy that entitles households to 6,000 liters of free water a month. Beyond this amount, they must pay a fee.

Yet in developed nations like the U.K., which—inexplicably to much of its population—is often subjected to hosepipe bans, prices are actually going down. Last July, U.K. water regulator Ofwat demanded a 4% cut in average household water bills over the next five years.

Jacob Tompkins, managing director of Waterwise, a U.K.-based non-governmental organization, says: "Politicians, commentators and independent reports to government are now calling for the true value of water to be reflected in the regulatory system. [We] would like to see a new regulatory settlement with the value of water at its core."

— Mr. Wright is executive editor of Journal Reports in Europe. He can be reached at ben.wright@wsj.com.

Proposed Stormwater Ordinance in LA Adopts Low Impact Development Techniques

2010-02-02T10:54:00.000-08:00

Los Angeles might require rainwater capture

Proposed law would apply to new home-building, larger developments and some redevelopment projects to prevent runoff from reaching the ocean. A builders group has voiced some objections.

By Susan Carpenter

February 1, 2010

A proposed law would require new homes, larger developments and some redevelopments in Los Angeles to capture and reuse runoff generated in rainstorms.

The ordinance approved in January by the Department of Public Works would require such projects to capture, reuse or infiltrate 100% of runoff generated in a 3/4 -inch rainstorm or to pay a storm water pollution mitigation fee that would help fund off-site, low-impact public developments.

The fairly new approach to managing storm water and urban runoff is designed to mitigate the negative effects of urbanization by controlling runoff at its source with small, cost-effective natural systems instead of treatment facilities. Reducing runoff improves water quality and recharges groundwater.

Board of Public Works Commissioner Paula Daniels, who drafted the ordinance last July, said the new requirements would prevent 104 million gallons of polluted urban runoff from ending up in the ocean.

Under the ordinance, builders would be required to use rainwater storage tanks, permeable pavement, infiltration swales or curb bump-outs to manage the water where it falls. Builders unable to manage 100% of a project's runoff on site would be required to pay a penalty of $13 a gallon of runoff not handled there -- a requirement the Building Industry Assn. has been fighting.

"The Building Industry Assn. is supportive of the concept of low-impact development and has invested a lot of time and energy in educating our members on those techniques and advancing those technologies," said Holly Schroeder, executive officer of the L.A.-Ventura County chapter of the association.

"But when we now start talking about using LIDs as a regulatory tool, we need to make sure we devise a regulation that can be implemented successfully."

Schroeder said that some building projects, such as those in downtown L.A. or areas where the soil is high in clay, would have difficulty with the 100% retention rule and that the $13-a-gallon mitigation fee is too high. A one-acre building on ground where runoff could not be managed on site, Schroeder said, could pay a fee as high as $238,000.

"We're seeking flexibility to reflect the site circumstance," she said.

At the urging of business groups opposed to an earlier draft, the Board of Public Works has acquiesced on some points.

"We worked out something with the business community that they can release the runoff if they first run the water over a high-efficiency bio-filtration system," Daniels said. "In other words, they have to clean it first."

The board also decreased the per-gallon mitigation fee from $20 to $13. The mitigation fees would fund public low-impact developments, such as the Oval Street project planned for Mar Vista, where 24,000 linear feet of parkway will be retrofitted with porous pavement, bio-retention basins and other water infiltration strategies designed to capture 2 million gallons of storm water that would otherwise flow to the ocean.

The ordinance next moves to the Energy and the Environment and the Planning and Land Use Management committees of the City Council, before going to a council vote and the mayor.

Daniels said she hoped the ordinance would be approved in the next six months and go into effect by 2011.

"I don't want to waste another rainy season," she said.

susan.carpenter@latimes.com

Poseidon Resources' Bond Rating: BBB-

2010-02-01T16:03:00.000-08:00

Poseidon Resources proposed desalination project has a BBB- bond rating. Our California Policy Coordinator, Joe Geever uncovered this recently, and penned a piece for San Diego News Network.

The article starts:

"On Wednesday state officials voted to allow Poseidon Resources to sell $530 million in tax-exempt bonds for the proposed Carlsbad desalination plant despite a low bond rating and continuing legal and financial uncertainty surrounding the project. This decision is premature.

Poseidon Resources’ proposal to build the nation’s largest desalination plant in Carlsbad is a risky investment for the state, water agencies, and private investors. Details of the project finances remain unclear and public opposition continues to grow among consumer, labor, and environmental organizations. As the details of the project undergo more scrutiny by state agencies, more problems with the project continue to surface.

Documents disclosed through this tax-exemption process have revealed Standard & Poor’s bond rating for Poseidon’s proposed Carlsbad desalination project is “BBB-,” the greatest risk of any investment-grade bond. This rating, however, is generous given the unresolved legal challenges and state policy changes that could make the desalination plant’s design obsolete in the near future."

There are some great comments at the bottom of the article, including one by someone who asks why San Diego is entertaining desalination when we haven't yet exhausted conservation methods?

Desalination is so expensive. Conservation is cheap!

Poseidon Lies: The Truth about Poseidon Resources' “Carbon Neutrality”, Part 3.

2010-02-01T08:38:00.000-08:00

In an earlier post, we gave you the extensive background on how Poseidon Resources calculated their carbon neutrality which we think is a bunch of baloney. And then we outlined our proof.

The Coastal Commission staff also believes there were errors in the GHG mitigation plan that was a condition of approving the permit. They have requested that Poseidon Resources amend their permit to correct the errors. To date, Poseidon has refused to make the corrections – and the Commission cannot force them to do that.

Our Request: (with an action-alert link at the bottom)

If Poseidon Resources would agree to work with CCC staff to amend the permit to correct the erroneous GHG mitigation calculation, we would be willing to hold our Revocation Request in abeyance. We understand Commissioners’ reluctance to completely revoke already approved permits, and that revoking the entire permit may be somewhat heavy handed. But, Poseidon’s unwillingness to work with the staff to correct the error leaves the Commission, and the public, no other avenue to ensure the conditions of the permit are corrected and enforceable.

So we suggest the Commission first determine whether Poseidon is willing to voluntarily correct the error through an amendment to the permit. If not, we believe it will leave the Commission no other choice than to revoke the permit and reconsider it with all the relevant information in the record before re-issuing the permit. T ell them you agree with us, and take action!

Poseidon Lies: The Truth about Poseidon Resources' “Carbon Neutrality”, Part 2

2010-01-30T15:59:00.000-08:00

Yesterday, we gave you the background on how Poseidon Resources calculated their carbon neutrality which we think is a bunch of baloney.

Today we continue with our Burden of Proof. We have to prove that Poseidon Resources:

gave the Commission inaccurate or erroneous information;
they did it intentionally; and
if the Commission had the accurate information, they would have changed the permit.

We think the 2005 subsidy contract language provides all the answers for the Commission to find these elements.

Elements
1.    Inaccurate and erroneous information?
In effect, Poseidon Resources admits that they can’t guarantee the water they produce will replace Delta water imported to the region – even though that is the assumption in the GHG mitigation calculation. What they argue instead is that the MWD contract ensures that their water replaces imported water to the 9 customer agencies Poseidon will serve.
They then argue that, even though the net calculation is in fact erroneous and inaccurate, it makes sense to do it this way because the other agencies in the region that will get the excess water made available by their project should have to pay for the GHG mitigation.

There’s several problems with that argument:
a)    the record of the approval of this permit refers to, “replacing water to the region,” repeatedly (even though it also refers to replacing water to the 9 agencies repeatedly too). The condition of approval (the GHG mitigation plan,) assumes a complete subtraction of the energy to move the water to southern California from the Delta. A reasonable person could only conclude that the Commission thought they were replacing that imported water (and eliminating the embedded energy in the imported water). The contract clearly shows that is wrong!
b)    Poseidon then says that the agencies who receive the excess water, (remember, the contract requires that the water augment current supplies,) should be responsible for mitigating the additional GHG emissions Poseidon caused – not Poseidon. According to them, to do otherwise would be double counting the GHG emissions and the costs of mitigation. BUT – the Commission shouldn’t forget that the contract between MWD and SDCWA on Poseidon’s behalf is PAYING for the water to be produced. If there is any double counting here it is that Poseidon gets water agencies all over southern California to subsidize their production costs (including the GHG mitigation,) and then turns around and tells those agencies that already contributed to the cost of production (including the GHG mitigation costs) that they will have to pay again to mitigate the GHG emissions because Poseidon refused to do it. REALLY? Would a reasonable person believe that the member agencies of MWD agreed to pay for GHG mitigation from this project if they get the excess water the project makes available? Or did they think that their contribution ALREADY paid to make that water available to them at the price they currently pay?
Also, because the supply from the Delta is not “new” and MWD already has rights to import that water, it is not a reasonable assumption that the agencies who would receive this water would ever be required to mitigate the GHG emissions from pumping it all that way. If it’s not a new action by MWD, there would be no review of the environmental impacts.
c)    We think it’s clear in the terms of the contract that the REAL net GHG emissions will never be mitigated. We also believe it is clear that the agencies contributing to the rebate contemplated in the 2005 draft contract would not have agreed to it if they thought it meant they would have to pay for GHG mitigation when they received the benefits of contributing to the subsidy. That’s just common sense – what any reasonable person would conclude.

2.    Intentionally submitted?
Of course Poseidon intentionally withheld the draft MWD contract. It would have drawn much more scrutiny, if not completely undermined, their proposed GHG net mitigation assumptions and calculations. They even promised to submit a copy of it to the Commission staff at one point – and then changed their mind and promised only a letter from MWD summarizing that the water would replace current supplies.
The issue about the GHG emissions, and the proper mitigation, was rigorously debated. The 2005 draft contract would have been an important part of that debate had Poseidon made it available to the Commission and the public. They didn’t. And any reasonable person would have to conclude they withheld this relevant information because, as we know now, it undermines their argument. Or, if you think of it another way, why would Poseidon decide (after promising to give the Commission the draft subsidy contract) to withhold this information if it wasn’t to their disadvantage?

3.    Change to the permit?
This one is easy. The withheld information created an erroneous and inaccurate net GHG mitigation plan. Had the Commissioners known that a majority of the net mitigation was actually just marginal replacement of occasional transfers, they surely would have required a more thorough calculation. And had they known that Poseidon’s argument was that the real mitigation would fall on unsuspecting water agencies throughout southern California (agencies that aren’t required to mitigate the harm) – they surely would have conditioned the permit with some assurances that mandatory mitigation would actually come to fruition.

There's more to come. Stay tuned for our request which we'll post on Monday....

- Update: here is the final in this series.

IPR Discussion at the SurfriderSD January Chapter Meeting

2010-01-30T08:59:00.000-08:00

Surfrider welcomed Marsi Steirer, Deputy Director of the City of San Diego Public Utilities Department, to talk about the Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR) Demonstration Project. The City is undertaking the pilot project in the hopes of reducing our dependence on imported water and decreasing the treated wastewater that is offloaded in the ocean. The SurfriderSD Chapter Meeting was held on January 20th at Forum Hall in UTC. Click Here for the next SurfriderSD Chapter Meeting.

SurfriderSD January Chapter Meeting from Surfrider Foundation San Diego C on Vimeo.

Poseidon Lies: The Truth about Poseidon Resources' “Carbon Neutrality” Part 1

2010-01-29T15:54:00.000-08:00

Our coast and oceans are threatened by global warming. Ocean acidification and sea level rise are ALREADY impacting the bounty of marine life, eroding our beaches, and threatening our local water supplies from seawater intrusion – among a host of other threats. California has committed to reverse this trend – and we should be proud of our State for stepping up and doing the right thing. But talk is cheap. Actually addressing the cause of global warming and all the adverse impacts it will have on a healthy environment and sustainable economy takes action. NOW IS THE TIME!

Background
Poseidon Resources is proposing to build the largest ocean desalination plant in the Western Hemisphere in Carlsbad, California. This facility will require an enormous amount of energy to operate. So, as part of the State’s approval of the project, they are required to ensure the project is “carbon neutral” – Poseidon is required to mitigate the greenhouse gases the plant will create through the enormous energy demand. They aren’t living up to that requirement.

We are arguing that Poseidon intentionally withheld information that resulted in an erroneous greenhouse gas mitigation condition in their Coastal Development Permit that was issued in 2007. That information was contained in a draft contract between San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) and the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) that was available to Poseidon in 2005.

As part of the permit, the Coastal Commission required Poseidon to offset the greenhouse gases that would result from such an energy intensive project. In response, Poseidon calculated their “net” emissions by arguing that the water they produced would “replace” water being imported to the San Diego region from the Sacramento Delta. Poseidon then calculated the energy demand from their ocean desal facility, and subtracted the energy it would take to pump water all the way from the Delta – their proposed “net” energy demand. Then they took that energy demand (the total energy demand of the facility, minus the energy to pump the water that was arguably being “replaced”) and calculated how much “net” greenhouse gasses would be emitted to produce the water.

We discovered after the permit was issued (2007) that SDCWA had entered into a draft contract in 2005 to get subsidy funding from MWD to offset some of the costs of this project. That subsidy comes from a pool of money contributed to MWD by water supply agencies all over the southern California region.
The contract made it clear that the Poseidon project WOULD NOT replace water being pumped from the Delta. The draft contract specifically said the water had to “augment” MWD’s total supply portfolio (not “replace” part of it). It was also explicit in the terms of the draft contract that MWD would retain all it’s rights to the Delta water – and use them.

Since we filed the Request for Revocation, the CCC has received a letter from SDCWA and MWD explaining that MWD will occasionally enter into agreements to “transfer” water rights – and the water Poseidon produces may replace the need to do that. Ironically, this just bolsters our argument that Poseidon’s product water will not “replace” regional supplies delivered from the Delta to southern California. Consequently, their “net” GHG calculation is wrong.

Poseidon argues that, even if the water only “replaces” demand from the 9 water agencies that will buy it, and the rest goes to other agencies in the region – the other agencies should have to mitigate the greenhouse gases the project creates. Poseidon argues that this mitigation by the other agencies (they don’t say who they are or how we would ever know they got the “extra” water) are mandated by CEQA to mitigate the GHG emissions – so making Poseidon do it now would result in “double counting.” We disagree.

Here's our proof.

Wastewater Recycling (IPR) Study is a Go in San Diego!

2010-01-27T10:15:00.000-08:00

Last night the City Council listened to the public attending a hearing to vote on moving forward on efforts to eventually provide a safe and reliable source of water to San Diego — what is called Indirect Potable Re-Use or IPR.

Surfrider Foundation members were there to support funding a study that is necessary before the City can implement IPR. A special thanks to Dillon Miner and the students at UCSD for coming out to support it also!

We fully support the City’s efforts to recycle wastewater that is currently dumped into the ocean. We think that the City would be wise to implement IPR as soon as possible. It will not only provide a safe and inexpensive new supply of water, but it can eventually eliminate the discharge from Point Loma Sewage Treatment facility — and the inevitable cost of upgrading that plant to modern standards.

There is no doubt that IPR can be done safely and cheaply. All we need to do is look to our neighboring county to the north. The Orange County Water District, in partnership with the Orange County Sanitation District, is currently recycling wastewater that would have otherwise been dumped in the ocean. They are saving energy, they are reducing pollution and they are providing residents drinking water that is more purified than the water we currently import from far away places. And it’s cheaper than any other water supply alternative available.

This Orange County project, called the Groundwater Replenishment System, is winning awards for innovative water management from around the world. It’s time for San Diego to aggressively follow their lead with our own “Reservoir Augmentation Project.” We applaud the City Council for taking this first step, and look forward to the following steps to modernize our out-dated water management system.

Interactive Watershed Website

2010-01-25T12:06:00.000-08:00

Check out this cool interactive watershed page from the Nature Conservancy. It's a great prelude to Surfrider's Know your H2O - The Cycle of Insanity video that's coming this Spring.

5/12 Update: our film came out. The Cycle of Insanity is here! Please feel free to use show it to your friends, family, students, etc.

http://www.nature.org/initiatives/freshwater/features/watershed.html

Green Infrastructure for Clean Water Act

2010-01-22T12:29:00.000-08:00

The Green Infrastructure for Clean Water Act (HR 4202) has been introduced by Representatives Edwards (MD), Carnagan (MO) and Driehaus (OH) into the House of Representatives. By funding and promoting both research and on-the-ground green projects, this bill will help protect and restore our water resources while providing Americans with thousands of green jobs, energy savings and better health and well-being.

Many of the current pollution problems we have with surface water quality are the direct result of too much pavement. Stormwater that runs off of our driveways, streets and parking lots carries all sorts of pollutants into our rivers, streams & eventually into the ocean. For many years running, polluted stormwater runoff has been the number one culprit behind beach closures and swimming advisories.

Low Impact Development (LID) and the use of Green Infrastructure, is a relatively new approach to urban planning that aims to maintain and restore the water cycle in developed watersheds. Green Infrastructure Best Management Practices (BMPs) are designed to infiltrate, filter, store and treat stormwater close to its source. Examples of green BMPs include natural buffer areas, green streets, green roofs, permeable pavements and various rainwater capturing technologies.

The Green Infrastructure for Clean Water Act proposes to establish Centers of Excellence for Green Infrastructure whose purposed will be to conduct research and to provide technical assistance to state and local governments. This bill will also establish a federal grant program to fund planning, construction & monitoring of Green Infrastructure projects. Special consideration for these grants will be given to low-income and communities with combined sewer systems. Additionally, this bill will establish a Green Infrastructure Program housed within the EPA's Office of Water. The full text of this bill can be read here.

Participate in the Surfrider's action alert and send your Representative a letter urging them to co-sponsor the Green Infrastructure for Clean Water Act. Just click here.

To learn more about Green Infrastructure visit EPA's website or the Surfrider Foundations Coastal A-Z on Low Impact Development.

Special request to show support for IPR in San Diego

2010-01-21T09:00:00.000-08:00

Request: We have an opportunity next Tuesday night to support the efforts of this important project by showing up to the City Council meeting at 6pm.

Having a few folks with Surfrider caps and t-shirts would show council members we really want IPR as part of our local water supply. We can also comment publicly at the beginning of the meeting in support of this. All you have to do is fill out a speaker request, and say that you are from xyz neighborhood, and you support the IPR study. Super easy.

When: Next Tues, 1/26, 6pm

Where: City Council Meeting

202 C Street. Item number is 334.

There are two agenda items at this meeting – this is the second one

Here is a map.

Please let us know if you can make it, and thank you!

A New Ocean Outfall at Rehoboth Beach, Delaware

2010-01-18T12:48:00.000-08:00

Despite the Delaware Chapter's best efforts the City of Rehoboth Beach, DE recently chose to pursue building a new ocean outfall to dispose of its wastewater. Meanwhile, the Chapter is continuing their campaign to build support for Land Based Application (LBA) of the wastewater instead. LBA would allow the water to be recaptured and used primarily on agricultural fields through spray irrigation.

Local media coverage of this issue follows. For more info on the Chapter's campaign, visit their website.

Delaware beaches: Ocean sewage plan stirs questions

Critics say Rehoboth outfall could affect water, deter tourists

By MOLLY MURRAY
The News Journal
When Jean Miller heard that Rehoboth Beach officials had decided to send their treated wastewater through a pipe into the ocean, it took her back to Puerto Escondido, Mexico.
Miller, of Wilmington, recalled standing on a resort balcony on Mexico's south Pacific coast. She looked out at the water and saw a yellow line, several yards off the beach, which she learned was the area's sewage being discharged on the outgoing tide.
For Rehoboth, she had one question: "I wonder what the cost is going to be ultimately?"
Each summer, the weekend population of Rehoboth Beach swells from 1,495 to 20,000, most drawn to the city's reputation for soft sand and clean water. Delaware typically scores high marks on ocean water quality from national environmental organizations and rarely are there advisories against swimming at any of the state's resort communities.
That's why some folks are questioning the city commissioners' unanimous decision to pipe treated waste into the ocean, replacing a system that has contributed to pollution problems in Rehoboth Bay.
Sen. George Bunting, D-Bethany Beach, said he was surprised the city would risk the possible impact on tourism to save on future sewerage rates.
"We've worked all these years to get them out of the bay," he said. "The issue is more about money than the science of it."
The long-term impact is impossible to gauge, said Russ Merritt, whose group -- the Delaware Chapter of the Surfriders -- opposed the plan.
"It may be a decision we don't know to regret yet," he said.
Dozens of municipalities safely use ocean outfalls along the Atlantic Coast and more often than not, they operate without problems. The wastewater is heavily treated, with solids removed and the liquid heavily disinfected before discharge -- often a mile or more off the coast, a scenario that is far different from what Miller witnessed in Mexico.
In New Jersey, there are 14 ocean outfalls from Sandy Hook south to Wildwood. Sussex County operates an ocean outfall at the south end of Bethany Beach, and Ocean City, Md., has an ocean outfall.
All operate with pollution discharge permits and must meet standards for the water that flows out the end of the pipe.
And on the West Coast, ocean outfalls have been a way of life for decades. Los Angeles, for instance, started dumping its waste into the Santa Monica Bay in the late 1800s and continued to dump the untreated waste through the 1920s until area residents began complaining about it.
Still, some places are beginning to rethink the old adage that "the solution to pollution is dilution."
In June 2008, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist signed into law legislation to ban new ocean outfalls and expansions of the existing ones in South Florida. The concern: the impact excessive nutrients have on marine life and a growing need to reuse water in the heavily populated region.
The six existing south Florida ocean sewer outfalls have until 2018 to significantly reduce nutrients coming from their pipes and must eliminate the outfalls entirely by 2025. Some 60 percent of the flow -- all told, 300 million gallons a day -- must be redirected to beneficial reuse.
In Massachusetts, officials with the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority spent more than a decade in court to win permits for a new outfall that discharges through a 9 1/2-mile tunnel into 100 feet of water in Massachusetts Bay. Authority officials are required to do special monitoring as part of their permit to make sure the discharge doesn't impact endangered northern right whales, which are found seasonally in an area 16 miles away.
Any sewer system that discharges to a waterway is problematic, said Thomas P. Fote, with the Jersey Coast Anglers Association.
Industrial dischargers pretreat their waste to remove harmful chemicals, but that doesn't happen with the waste from homes, he said. People flush old prescription medications and household cleaners -- all substances that can cause significant problems in the aquatic environment -- and they linger.
"It's what's coming out of our homes," Fote said. "The drugs we take, the cleaners we use."
Estrogen in some medications is one example.
"We know it's affecting the sex lives of fish," he said.
Rehoboth's proposed outfall would be close to Hen & Chicken Shoals -- an essential fish habitat.
"That's where they are most vulnerable," he said of the area's fisheries.
But the bottom line, Fote said, is "no matter where you put it, it's going to have an impact. ... It's not an easy solution."
Still, Rehoboth officials believe the outfall can be operated safely and is the most cost-effective option. It also will allow the city to have control over future fees and rates. The area is so rich with groundwater that reuse really isn't an issue, according to Mayor Samuel Cooper. Besides, he said, state environmental officials haven't come up with a method or system that allows for beneficial reuse.
City Commissioner Dennis Barbour said his decision was prompted by the environment, the interests of the larger community outside Rehoboth, public perception and the fiscal impact on the citizens of Rehoboth.
Barbour said the other option -- to apply the treated waste to the land -- "does little, if anything, to address long-term environmental concerns about the health of the bay. I am convinced that wastewater disposed of in the ground will simply make its way back to the bay in due time, along with its harmful elements.
"On the other hand," he said, "I am equally convinced that current technologies ensure that ocean outfall will not have any significant, measurable negative environmental impact. I have expressed concern that science might one day identify harmful pathogens in wastewater, now unknown or unmeasurable, that may force us to abandon ocean outfall."
But, Barbour said, in the end he was satisfied that this concern was speculative.
At a hearing in November, the majority of city residents on hand supported the proposed ocean outfall as a less-costly alternative and one that gave city officials control over future costs and operations.
Much of the citizen opposition came from people who lived outside the city limits -- folks who worried about the potential for water quality problems both short- and long-range. Among the most vocal opponents: the local chapter of the Surfriders. More than 500 of their members nationwide sent e-mails to the city opposing the outfall plan.
In addition, the Rehoboth Beach-Dewey Beach Chamber of Commerce favored sending the wastewater inland, to be sprayed on land, rather than out to the ocean.
"It had nothing to do with safety or water quality," said Carol Everhart, president of the chamber. "It had everything to do with perception ... and a concern that it could lead to a loss of visitation."
Everhart said now that the decision has been made, chamber officials will work with the city to make sure the public is well-informed about the safety of the proposed outfall.
"That's our job now," she said. "If anything were to wash up on the beach ... you have to be prepared."
Rates will rise
The average city homeowner pays $325 a year in sewer fees. Under any of the alternatives city officials considered, sewer rates would rise. The range of price for the ocean outfall is $550 to $630 annually. The land application price range was $1,010 to $1,420.
Rehoboth is under a court order to alter its wastewater discharge. The city currently discharges into the Lewes & Rehoboth Canal a few hundred yards from Rehoboth Bay.
The city's treatment plant is considered a major source of the nutrients, nitrogen and phosphorus that fuel algae growth in the bays. As the aquatic plants die and decompose, oxygen levels drop. When oxygen gets too low, fish die. The decomposition can also cause bad odors and a thick mat of seaweed. Some of the microorganisms can be toxic in high numbers. Under the court order, the city must stop discharging treated waste into the canal by December 2014.
Over the years, state environmental regulators have pressured the city to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus levels in the discharge, but environmental problems -- ranging from fish kills to algae blooms -- continue in the Inland Bays and their tributaries. And as Sussex County has worked to remove hundreds of failing septic systems from Dewey Beach and the north and west sides of Rehoboth Bay, and area farmers have taken steps to reduce their nitrogen and phosphorus runoffs, pressure has mounted on Rehoboth Beach.
With the ocean outfall option, it is likely the city could continue to use its current treatment plant. The city is routinely in compliance on bacteria standards, according to monitoring reports that the city files with the state.
Ironically, ocean outfalls are easier to permit under federal Clean Water Act standards than other wastewater treatment options, said James May, a professor of law and graduate engineering at Widener University.
May said that while the permits may be more difficult to obtain politically, they need only meet primary treatment standards -- technologies that date to the 1920s.
The idea is that the ocean is so big, any pollution is rapidly mixed in the ocean water column, he said.
Rehoboth has struggled with nitrogen and phosphorus at its current plant. But Sussex County's South Coastal Regional Treatment Plant -- which has an ocean outfall south of Bethany -- doesn't have a limit for nitrogen and phosphorus in its permit.
The idea, said Heather Sheridan, director of environmental services for Sussex County, is that there is so much mixing once the treated wastewater reaches the ocean, there is little need to worry about nitrogen and phosphorus levels.
A federal Environmental Protection Agency study that looked at environmental impacts of ocean sewer outfalls found there was no impact on fish. The scientists found that the "benthic community," the animals that live on the sea floor, had a dual impact from outfalls. During the winter, the population stayed the same. But in the summer, diversity in the community decreased while the number of remaining animals went up.
They found there was no difference in the water quality or the bottom sediments.
State's decision
It will be up to the state to decide whether to allow the discharge and what pollution limits it will impose on Rehoboth, May said.
"We'll be looking at national standards, our own water quality standards," said Kathy Bunting Howarth, state director of water resources. "It's not just a state permitting process. It's got to be federal as well."
The permitting likely will include the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the Army Corps of Engineers, among others.
City officials plan to request funding next month for the project through the state's Clean Water Advisory Council.
Robert Stickels, the former Sussex County administrator who serves as Sussex County's representative on the state's infrastructure funding council, said he believes the city likely will qualify for a low-interest loan.
With the outfall, Rehoboth "is really making a long-term commitment," Stickels said.
Stickels, a former town manager in Georgetown, recalled his permit struggles as that town tried to get a discharge permit for a local tax ditch.
He said that although the county has a stellar operating record with its ocean outfall, the county has moved toward land-based treatment with the facilities it has built over the last 20 years. Rehoboth's steps, he noted, will be closely watched.
"Rehoboth's a financial jewel for Delaware," he said. "This decision is greater than the boundaries of their town limits."
Gerard Esposito, executive vice president of Tidewater Utilities and a former state director of water resources, said he is concerned that the costs of the options haven't been fully vetted and city leaders may find out that ocean outfall is more expensive than they think.
The cost estimates are based on historic information because "hardly anybody is building ocean outfalls anymore," said Esposito, whose company had proposed a public-private land-treatment option.
And the potential for delays -- if the city is challenged in court or runs into permitting issues, could make the cost rise as well, he said.
Rehoboth's consulting engineers, Stearns & Wheler LLC, say the highly treated effluent won't be a health or environmental problem.
They suggest that even in a worst-case scenario -- a situation in which there would be a power failure -- the outfall would be environmentally sound because with no power, pumps would fail to send wastewater to the outfall.
Dagsboro businessman and charter boat captain Paul Henninger said he couldn't see a down side to the resort city's decision on using an ocean outfall.
"Actually, I think it'll benefit the fishermen," Henninger said. "There's already a wastewater pipeline off Bethany. I have the coordinates. I fish there already, and sometimes the fishing is pretty good right there."
Henninger, who has sailed the 33-foot Amethyst on fishing runs from Indian River Inlet for 26 years, said nutrients from the pipe may make food chains in nearby waters slightly more productive and interesting to fish of all kinds.
Harry Haon, vice chairman of the state Sierra Club's Southern Delaware Group, said the environmental organization took no position on the issue, but also had not encountered widespread or strong opposition.
"We had concerns about the spray irrigation approach, and if we'd taken a vote, it probably would have been for ocean outfall, but we were never very active on that," Haon said.
Discharges to the ocean will be controlled by state and federal limits on pollutant concentrations in the pipeline, Haon said. Those same pollutants already have been discharged for years into the far more confined and vulnerable upper Rehoboth Bay.
"There's a long track record on ocean outfall being done successfully not only in Delaware, but in Maryland, Florida and elsewhere," Haon said.
While Rehoboth prepares to run the permitting gantlet, Gov. Jack Markell and his environmental secretary, Collin O'Mara, remain circumspect.
"We anticipate receiving a permit application and look forward to working with the city," O'Mara said, "so that our Inland Bays will benefit from reduced amounts of nitrogen and phosphorus and a new system meets our standards to protect public health and the environment."

Poseidon Resources’ Carlsbad Ocean Desalination Proposal: The Truth – and Nothing But the Truth

2010-01-18T11:33:00.000-08:00

Here is the first of a series of blog posts to help the tax-payers, water agencies, policy makers, and interested parties understand one of the most ill-conceived projects in the history of Southern California: The Carlsbad Desalination Project, by Poseidon Resources.

We hope you post comments, and ask questions so we can clarify and articulate our position as needed. Thank you!

Poseidon Resources’ Carlsbad Ocean Desalination Proposal: The Truth – and Nothing But the Truth!

Poseidon Resources is a capital venture-type of corporation proposing to construct and operate the largest ocean desalination facility in the Western Hemisphere. This proposal has been under consideration for many years and the corporation has made numerous public relations claims over that period that, to date, have been misleading if not utterly false.

It is critical to the decisions of our elected representatives, government agencies with permitting authorities and duties, communities expecting to receive this product water, and communities affected by the facility itself that the truth be known.

We will be posting a series of reports into the claims Poseidon Resources has made to the public and scrutinizing them for their factual accuracy – or lack thereof.

The Truths discussed will include:

•    the project DOES NOT have final approval of the entitlements and permits;

•    the project IS NOT environmentally benign as Poseidon claims;
            - update: their claim of carbon neutrality is baloney

•    the proposal IS NOT completely privately financed and DOES NOT offer the public benefits Poseidon claims;
- update: the subsides they need from the Metropolitan Water District are in jeopardy 6/22/201

•    the assumption that diversity is beneficial in a water supply portfolio IS NOT an argument in favor of THIS project;

•    this proposed project IS NOT necessary. There are preferred alternatives to this project that offer multiple benefits and, if fully implemented, would alleviate the need for this expensive and unreliable proposal altogether;

•    the project WILL NOT lower water costs, despite all the subsidies and tax-exemptions, (there is no such thing as a free lunch);
- update: finally we are seeing this "investment" for what it is: a bad deal for rate-payers/tax-payers.

•    this project comes with a huge Buyer Beware sign for not only the water agencies and customers, but for any potential investor.

We will conclude the series with a summary of the dramatic shifts in the lack of truth Poseidon Resources has employed in their public relations and lobbying efforts over time – as well as an interesting correlated shift in growing opposition to the proposal. We will also compare ocean desalination proposals in California that have had relatively easy times getting approval, as well as support from public-interest groups – in stark contract to the Poseidon proposals in Carlsbad and Huntington Beach.

Check back repeatedly, or subscribe on the top right, as we attempt to clear away all the fog Poseidon Resources has created and let the light of Truth shine on this proposal.

Surfrider’ s response to Poseidon Resources lackey, Ted Owen.

2010-01-18T10:04:00.000-08:00

Here is our response to the editorial "written" by Mr. Ted Owen in the NC Times.

By JOE GEEVER -- Surfrider Foundation

The Perspective article, "Enough is enough with desalination lawsuits," written by Ted Owens and published in your paper Jan. 10 contains enough offensive inaccuracies that it demands a response. It is unfortunate that Mr. Owen, rather than focusing his comments on what he sees as merits of the Poseidon proposal, or the actual reasons why the project continues to be scrutinized and challenged by our state regulatory agencies, instead resorts to personal attacks.

It is completely inaccurate to characterize the scope of opposition to the project as "two fringe environmental groups." Surfrider Foundation and San Diego Coastkeeper are local grassroots organizations that have taken a lead in challenging this proposal. But there is a growing coalition of organizations opposed to this poorly designed facility ---- ranging from water management policy institutions to organizations representing the fishing community to groups protecting public health to environmental organizations like ours. The scope of concerns over this project, and the organizations opposing it can hardly be described as "fringe".

Mr. Owen also characterizes us as "obstructionists" who are the cause of delays in the project's final approval.

First, we are opposed to this project for sound public policy reasons. But we are also advocates for meeting our local water needs through alternatives that are cheaper for ratepayers, reduce reliance on imported water and are sustainable from both an economical and environmental perspective ---- including advanced recycling and conservation.

These alternatives reduce pollution, costs and energy demand while ensuring a local and reliable future source of freshwater. This in stark contrast to ocean desalination which requires more energy than the current most energy-intensive water supply option in Southern California (pumping water from Northern California).

More to the point, the delays in final approval of the project are the result of Poseidon withholding information that was critical to a thorough analysis of the project prior to issuing the permits. Ironically, it is Poseidon's pattern of secrecy that has resulted in the latest round of re-consideration of the project's permits.

As new facts are revealed, it mandates reconsideration of prior approvals to ensure the integrity of the approval process.

Surfrider Foundation has attempted to bring facts and sound science to the deliberation of this project from the beginning. We will continue this effort until the public and our decision-makers have all the facts right so that the laws protecting our coast and ocean are fully enforced.

Mr. Owen is wrong that the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions is simply a voluntary commitment by Poseidon out of the goodness of its heart. Global warming, sea levels rising and ocean acidification are all threats to our coast and ocean, and the California Coastal Commission and State Lands Commission are mandated by law to protect against these threats.

Mr. Owen ventures into pure imagination and fantasy when he states, "... Surfrider abandoned its legal strategy when it determined that a significant number of its members did not agree with its position. ..."

We are a grassroots organization with local chapters nationwide. Our San Diego chapter has not "abandoned" anything. We continue to oppose this project, and we're simultaneously continuing our advocacy for preferred water management alternatives that meet our mission of restoring and protecting our coast and ocean.

Finally, Mr. Owen asserts that our efforts are aimed at undermining Poseidon's efforts to get government subsidies and finance the project through the sale of corporate bonds. Nothing could be further from the truth. Investors and the communities planning on this new supply of water should know that none of the permits or entitlements is final. Investments in the financial markets come with risks. We will leave it to individual investors to decide whether a project with so many outstanding "clouds" on the project entitlements is a wise use of their money.

Like Mr. Owen, we "look forward to getting on with the business of creating high-paying jobs and providing a reliable water supply."

We respectfully disagree that Southern California's water supply portfolio demands this project, and we will continue advocating for sound alternatives that provide multiple benefits like reducing wasted energy, pollution prevention and protection of marine life and healthy coasts and oceans. We also look forward to getting on with the state's efforts to restore and protect our precious marine life and reduce the multiple threats of climate change.

We hope Mr. Owen will join the Surfrider Foundation, San Diego Coastkeeper and more than 40 other statewide groups to ensure we meet this critical goal.

JOE GEEVER is the California policy coordinator for the Surfrider Foundation based in San Clemente.

Poseidon desal’s spin machine has been working overtime!

2010-01-15T10:37:00.000-08:00

We’re not sure if everyone caught it, but SDNN ran an editorial by Mr. Ted Owen at the Carslbad Chamber of Commerce basically attacking Surfrider and our friends at Coastkeeper on Sunday. One of the comments at the bottom pointed out that Poseidon paid for the letter. We haven’t seen a hard copy of the letter, but if that’s the case, the Poseidon spin machine is working overtime as usual.

Our friends at Coastkeeper responded today with the truth about the Poseidon Desalination project, and our chapter agrees with every point in it. Cheers, Coastkeeper!

And while we’re at it, we would just like to point out that we fully support our friends at CERF too. Mr. Owen speculates that our former attorney, founder of CERF, and Surfrider Foundation member, Mr. Gonzalez, is a ‘lonewolf’ and, “his legal conduct are why we parted ways with him”. This is simply nonsense and nothing more than a figment of Mr. Owen’s imagination. We respect the work of Mr. Gonzalez and Coastkeeper and remain committed partners in a growing coalition of organizations that have objections to the design and location of this proposed facility. As previously stated, we are committed to fighting this ill-conceived desalination project, and Mr. Gonzalez and his team are our colleagues and partners in this effort. We look forward to many joint projects in the future with CERF.

When we have time, we’ll take apart all of Mr. Owen’s speculations and misrepresentations to help him understand why the project he so desperately endorses is not a fit for San Diegans.

In short, not only is the protection of our coast and ocean important to the environment and the quality of life in our community – it is an equally important asset to local businesses. It seems ironic that the business community attracted to our region because of our beautiful coast and ocean would go to such extraordinary lengths to support a project that adversely impacts the very reason we live and work here. Our suspicion and hope is that Mr. Owen’s inflammatory and simply false personal attacks are not reflective of the larger business community.

We have engaged in a respectful debate about the merits of the project, and suggested superior alternatives for meeting the water needs of San Diegans. We will maintain that level of civility and refuse to be “baited” into personal attacks that distract from legitimate concerns about Poseidon’s proposed ocean desalination factory.

Surfrider San Diego is committed to fighting bad desalination projects like Poseidon

2010-01-12T14:40:00.000-08:00

Recently the Surfrider Foundation removed ourselves from the State Lands Commission lawsuit regarding the Carlsbad desalination plant but we remain committed to the desalination campaign and feel our efforts can be better utilized elsewhere. Removing ourselves from the lawsuit is in no way an abandonment of the campaign or our partnership with San Diego Coastkeeper. We are simply reallocating resources to where they can do the most good. We, along with Coastkeeper are planning to divide the work on this important issue so we can be most effective in fighting against this desalination plant. Surfrider Foundation will continue advocating to improve marine life protection and fighting harmful desalination projects along the California coastline.

Instead of desalination, Surfrider advocates conservation efforts and recycling water to drinking standards. These two important steps should be taken before we go down the path to building desalination factories that cost the taxpayer more money, and contribute to climate change.

Desal and “Carbon”ated Water: Coastal Commission Should Make the Carlsbad Project Offset All of Its Carbon Impacts

2010-01-11T13:05:00.000-08:00

Another great article that points out why Poseidon's proposed desalination factory is not the answer to San Diego's water supply needs. The important parts are in bold for your reading pleasure!

Coastal Commissioners: are you paying attention?

By Jonas Minton
Planning and Conservation League

Carbon emissions and water supply are two sides of the same coin. In California nearly 20 percent of our electrical energy is used to move water around the State, treat it for use and then treat it again for disposal.

All of that energy generation emits huge amounts of carbon to our atmosphere. So when Poseidon Corporation claims that its proposed desalination plant in Carlsbad will have a “zero carbon footprint” it may sound too good to be true. Well, that’s because it is.

In February the Coastal Commission will be reviewing the accuracy of information submitted by Poseidon for its permit to build the largest desalination facility in the Western Hemisphere in Carlsbad, California. The issue is Poseidon’s claimed CO2 offsets.

Ocean desalination is the most energy/carbon intensive way to provide water - even more than pumping water more than 400 miles all the way from Northern California, up over the Tehachapi Mountains and on to San Diego. Poseidon’s proposed ocean desalination plant would require 30 megawatts of generation. Producing this much energy would emit an additional 120,000 to 154,000 tons of carbon dioxide per year into our atmosphere.

Poseidon’s claim of carbon neutrality is a critical piece of their project for the Coastal Commission, which is charged with ensuring protection of California’s precious coast and marine environment from the multiple threats of climate change.

Now, the Coastal Commission staff and several public interest groups have uncovered evidence that the company’s carbon-neutral claim contradicts Poseidon’s agreement with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Poseidon’s promise of a carbon neutral project, it turns out, is based on misrepresentations and Wall Street style math that just doesn’t add up.

In its permit application, Poseidon claimed that the desalted water they produce will “replace” water that would otherwise be delivered to the region from Northern California. By promising that its project would replace water pumped from the north, Poseidon was able to claim a large reduction in the plant’s “net” carbon footprint.

What the company withheld was that their financing contract with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California specifically disallows this replacement. Poseidon, it turns out, is claiming it can trade something it doesn’t have.

Metropolitan alone decides how much water it will pump from the north and it is protective of this right – so protective that it specified that the contract is void if Poseidon interferes with Metropolitan’s water rights or water deliveries from the north.

Metropolitan has stated publicly that it will pump as much water from Northern California as state and federal regulations allow. It is not going to reduce the amount of water that it is bringing down from Northern California based on what Poseidon produces or how much energy it uses. So Poseidon is using phony accounting to claim they will reduce their project’s greenhouse gas impact by “replacing” water that would otherwise be imported to the region.

The article appeared on California Progress Report, and can be viewed here.

Barrels!!!

2010-01-10T13:35:00.000-08:00

No not that type... rain barrels! It's hard to think much about rain with the lovely spring-like weather we've been having lately, but eventually it will rain again and when it does we'll have the usual runoff, dirty water, bacteria, etc.

While we think of runoff coming mostly from our streets and parking lots, there's another impermeable surface out there that collectively accounts for hundreds of thousands of gallons of runoff water each year: rooftops. Every time it rains water runs off our roofs, down the gutters, into the street, and down our stormdrains collecting oil, bacteria, and other contaminants along the way.

There is an easy and attractive solution that not only reduces runoff pollution but stores that water for later use in the garden when things dry out again.

While an online search for rain barrels usually comes up with an array of industrial plastic barrels (usually blue), there are many materials that can be bought and/or customized to collect and save the water for future use. Recycled oak whiskey and wine barrels, glazed ceramic pottery, and hand painted recycled metal oil barrels are just a few ideas that are not only useful but make great focal points in the garden. Drill a few holes, add a spigot and a leaf screen and you can turn any of these containers into a working rain barrel.

For an even less industrial look, rather than hooking your rain barrel directly to a downspout, copper rain chains can be fixed to the roofline gutters to direct water into the barrel and give an even more decorative look to your water collection system.

For those wanting to get really serious about rainwater storage, you might consider installing a cistern (the underground type are least visually invasive) which uses a pump to distribute water and can save hundreds of gallons of rainwater at a time.

Check out http://www.harvesth2o.com/ for more resources and great information about rainwater harvesting and graywater around the country.