What if it never rains again?

Maslow's hierarchy of needs

California is experiencing one of the most feared circumstances human's can experience: A drought that no one can predict when they will emerge. There is a reason that almost all of our major cities have developed near large sources of fresh water, or over large and plentiful underground aquifers. As highlighted in Maslow's hierarchy of needs, we need water to survive...more immediately than anything else besides air. Next in line is food, which takes water to produce as well. We cannot access water sources or food, and support the populations to which we have grown in our cities, without energy to extract, transport, reclaim, and process the water and food on which our survival depends.

I have written previously on this "food/energy/water nexus": The idea that in our pursuit of our basic needs, none of them exists independent of the other. Our hope for maintaining our existence lies in having as detailed an understanding of this balance as possible, then making decisions that lead us in the direction of minimizing usage of water and avoiding a path that leads us in an out-of-control spiral where we cannot control our use of the basic resource. This issue is coming to a head in California, even as we speak.

Jan 2011

Aug 2014

Since 2011, California has gone from a state with a small area of minimal drought risk to a state of emergency with almost the entire state in some level of drought and many areas in severe drought conditions. Obviously, weather plays a large role in this as California has had only sporadic rain over the last year or so, but such a quick change in the status of the state comes from short-sighted management of resources. In addition to direct human water use for health, and our ongoing insane obsession with water-thirsty manicured lawns and decorative landscape, California also taps all available resources to maintain the largest agricultural economy in the country. With the large expansion of fracking over the past decade, California has jumped on the bandwagon to get its share of the pie, at the expense of its water resources. To add insult to injury, California hold the distinction of being one of the most densely developed areas of bottled water extraction in the country. (See this piece for a more detailed examination of why bottled water in everyday life is not only stupid but dangerous.)

To make matters worse, what we see today may only be the beginning of a long-term - potentially as long as 50 year - drought condition for this area of the country. Climate change and shifting weather patterns may severely limit the rain patterns that replenish the water sources for the region. Already, the Colorado River and Lake Mead, two of the main water sources in the southern part of California, have hit record lows with little signs of bouncing back. Recent research (see here and here) has placed the chances of a decade long drought at 50/50 and a half-century long one at a non-trivial 5-10%. We could see a major threat to the lives of 1/10th of the nations population...and a mass movement of those people to areas that have ample water to survive. Managing this challenge will define the future of our country.

A major shift in weather patterns that restores rainfall to California and mitigates the threat to life would obviously be welcome, but we should not hope for that, nor if it comes, allow it to divert us from taking action. We need a strong, national energy policy, and one that recognizes the overlap in our food, energy, and water industries. We need to seriously rethink some of the uses of water currently in our economy - such as landscape irrigation and non-emergency bottled water - and develop long-term (like 150-200 year) water use plans that apply conservative principles to ensure that we have the water we need to maintain our existence.

The combination of a lack of foresight on water use with the effects of climate change has put California especially in a dire predicament. If we do not learn our lesson, we could lose more than we could ever imagine.

Friday Five(s): March 7, 2014...Cabin Fever Edition

Through a combination of cabin-fever-inspired restlessness, and a measurable uptick in environmental news this week, I cannot bring my brain to choose only five, so I am going with a double-dose...including shorter intros by me.


This should scare the livin' bejeezus out of everyone. (And note, 'bejeezus' is recognized as a word by my autocorrect.)
Chevron launches "news" site
"Ritchie said the site also offers a new model for the future of journalism — one that is funded directly by corporations. 'We believe the website has the potential to blaze the trail for a new model of corporate-sponsored, community-generated news,' the website reads."

The market has changed, and large energy companies - and especially investor-owned utilities - face extinction if they do not find new models.
Schadenfreude about RWE unwarranted
"What should RWE do? ... Maybe we need to be open to the idea that large power corporations were needed for central-station power plants, but that their role in a renewable future will be much smaller. At the moment, even the proposal to have them leverage their size to set up an enabling infrastructure – such as charging stations for electric cars – seems unlikely. The firms don't even have the liquidity anymore."

I forgive the inappropriate use of 'global warming' in the headline because the article discusses an industry I love. I am inspired to act.
Slope & change: The ski industry struggles to get its act together on global warming
"So what, you might ask, does the ski industry lobby for in Washington, if not for climate action? In the past, it has pushed for looser immigration rules (who’ll wash all those restaurant dishes and change the hotel sheets?) and to make sure that we can continue to import cheap shred threads from China (because, you know, we’ve gotta look good out there)."

In principle, I do not have an issue with natural gas as a bridging fuel if it is employed in retrofit of existing plants, and if carbon capture is required...but until the methane leakage issue is 100% solved, natural gas is as bad as coal...period.
How to make natural gas more climate-friendly
"It doesn’t have to be this way. The technology already exists to dramatically reduce methane leakage for a reasonable price. Environmental groups have put out reports outlining how. They could serve as a template for the oil and gas industry to follow voluntarily, or for the EPA to require under the Clean Air Act."

Good consequence, incentives for industry to capture, sequester, and even mine CO2...unintended consequence without regulation, continue depleting fossil fuels as source of "high quality CO2".
Don't waste CO2, turn it into bottles and glue
"If humanity is to avoid dangerous climate change, we need to capture hundreds of billions of tonnes of carbon dioxide. But what to do with it all? There is no shortage of places to bury it, but we can at least put some of it to good use. A few start-up companies view CO2 as a resource rather than a waste product. They are using CO2 as the raw material for making products including superglue and fertilizer."

It's said that collapsing societies burned their last tree to boil their last pot of water to eat their last meal...if we are to avoid that fate, we need to examine our priorities. Maybe cultural icons will help awaken minds.
Syndey Opera House and Statue of Liberty 'will be lost to sea level rise'
"Marzeion said that in Europe, particularly vulnerable sites included the leaning tower of Pisa, which is not directly on the coast but would be affected by sea level rises as a result of even a low temperature increase because it is very low-lying. He also cited Venice, which 'in a sense you can say is being impacted right now' and Hanseatic League cities including Hamburg, Lübeck and Bremen in Germany."

If the loss of Lady Liberty doesn't move us, how about the loss of large sections of a state?
Louisiana's coastline is disappearing too quickly for mappers to keep up
"Each year, this part of the coastline loses around 16 square miles of land, according to David Muth, the state director of the National Wildlife Federation’s Mississippi River Delta Restoration Project. And until quite recently, even the most advanced maps of the area did little to reflect the changing environmental reality. But in the last few years, renewed mapping efforts from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have begun to catalog these changes. These new maps show water where there was once marshy land, and bays where there were once small inlets."

Speaking of water, unless you live in CA or SD, you may not know how tentative our life is under "feast and famine" deluge-drought cycles.
Americans have no idea how much water we use - or how to conserve it
"Perhaps most troubling, Americans overwhelmingly believe that changing their habits, as opposed to improving the efficiency of their plumbing, is the most effective way to cut down on water consumption. Seventy-six percent of those surveyed said curtailment methods, such as flushing less frequently, are the best way to reduce water use. Only 10 percent chose more preventative measures, such as installing new toilets that use just 1.6 gallons per flush in lieu of old toilets that use five to six gallons."

Of course there is hope if we listen to free market economists and make rational decisions that are in our best economic self-interest. (Hint: That means divesting from fossil fuels and investing in clean energy & energy efficiency solutions.)
Energy efficiency creates 387% return on investment for US Southeast
"A wide range of economic benefits contributed to the overall $78.3 million in regional economic output created by SEEA’s energy efficiency upgrades. $55.7 million in economic output and 240 jobs were created through direct effects from program spending, while $22.2 million in economic output and 106 jobs were created via direct effects like efficiency goods and services. Induced effects from households or workers spending newfound money on consumer goods or services created an additional $366,471 in economic impacts."

And maybe there is something with tapping into the "keeping up with the Jones'" zeitgeist. Whatever it takes to give my grandkids a high quality of life.
With energy reports, it's game on
"But research has shown that neighbor comparisons are the most effective way to get people to conserve energy, he said. More people respond to hearing what their neighbors are doing than to the prospect of helping the environment or saving money. The comparisons work, he said; the first group of ComEd customers to get the reports, in 2009, reduced their electricity use by 2 percent."

Happy Friday!