The Burlingame Voice

Koonin - Part 1 "Unsettled" is Required Reading

I've just finished reading the most important climate change book available today.  Steven Koonin's Unsettled addresses "what climate science tells us, what it doesn't, and why it matters".  Koonin was a professor at CalTech for 30 years, provost for 10 of those years, chief scientist at BP focused on renewable energy technologies, Undersecretary for Science at the Department of Energy in the Obama Administration and is now a professor at NYU.

His book uses available data from many government and academic sources and applies his cross-functional knowledge in physics, computer modelling, statistics, climate science, etc to understand what the data tells us--and more importantly, what it doesn't tell us.  Over 14 chapters, his analysis is devastating to "The Science" that our politicians and climate activists claim is all settled.  By eliminating the cherry picking of data that occurs via selecting narrow windows of time or geography, adding the statistical confidence intervals to measurements that get headlines and noting the counterbalancing effects of some forms of emissions Koonin shows that the media (and some unscrupulous academics and government agencies) are misleading the public.

The book is technical as it must be, but he has written it for the general public so it's very readable if you have some basic knowledge of chemistry, physics and math--mostly statistics.  I've listed this post as Part 1 because I plan to serialize some parts of the book.  Here in B'game we have banned natural gas in new construction, begun worrying about sea level rise, promoted electric cars and issued warnings about all sorts of natural disasters supposedly related to climate change.  Before we get too far into these restrictions and expenses wouldn't it be good to know more about how human activity is really affecting the climate.

Water Security: Ignore the Elephant in the Room

Our new state senator, Josh Becker, hosted a webinar about water issues in the state on May 27th that reiterated some of the points made during the Burlingame study session I covered here.  Gary Kremen, Vice Chair of the Board of Directors of the Santa Clara Valley Water District sounded the alarm when he said "we're beyond concerned, we're a little scared".  That was the same day that Santa Clara implemented the latest water restrictions, but Kremen also said "Santa Clara County cannot make it on conservation".  He also noted that recycled water costs 4-5 times as much as water from the usual sources.

There were two speakers from academia, Dr. Newsha Ajami, Director of Urban Water Policy, Stanford's Water in the West Program and Felicia Marcus, Former Chair, State Water Resources Control Board, and fellow at Stanford's Water in the West Program.  Ajami pushed the need for future development to have a "zero water footprint" -- the "net-zero development" that was mentioned during the B'game session.  The idea revolves around recycling on-site (similar to "purple pipe" but on-site) and having developers go find water to buy on long-term contract.  That seems like a stretch to me especially if a developer would need to provide water for 25-40 years or more.  The bureaucratic overhead seems enormous and the costs would be impossible to predict.

Dr. Ajami also made a critical point about reservoir capacity that was news to me.  She said the state "has already built reservoirs where they work best" and that we should be transitioning to groundwater storage going forward.  Couple that with her assertion that desalinization is "not viable now" and you have a recipe for near term turmoil as we go into a serious drought.

The Q&A part of the webinar was the most concerning to me.  Right at the very end of the session, Sen. Becker read a question about adding housing in the face of this scary water scenario.  This is the elephant in the room--a pair of elephants actually--commercial and residential development.  Becker's 10 second "non-answer" was that he was working in Sacramento to get more money.  No mention of what that money would go towards; especially given all of the options mentioned during the session are outrageously expensive, hard to implement and/or so far in the future that they won't remotely help our situation anytime soon.  The little joke about "brown being the new green" referring to lawns did nothing to ease that concern.  When you couple the two sessions together you see we are in for a rough ride and nobody wants to look at the elephant.

B'game Water Security: The "Message is Alarming"

The City Council study session on Monday before the regular council meeting was an eye-opener for some people.  Public Works director Syed Murtuza summed it up by noting that "the message is alarming" and councilman Ricardo Ortiz followed by saying "there is lots to worry about here".  The CEO and General manager of BAWSCA, Nicole Sandkulla, along with consultant Anona Dutton from EKI led the discussion as part of the update to the B'game Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) that happens every five years.

The update is an attempt to forecast water supply and demand so we can see how secure or "reliable" our water will be.  It is more of a long-term analysis verses the short-term limits like voluntary or prescribed rationing.  One big issue is the fact that SFPUC has expressed serious doubts about the Tuolumne River ecosystem benefits of the State Water Board’s plan to keep rivers flowing enough for the salmon and now feels the need to file a lawsuit about it.  That could take years to resolve.

Here are some key points from the study session:

Total B'game water demands are projected to increase 35% from 2020 to 2045 even if we can manage to reduce per capita demand from 66 to 59 gallons per person per day.

If supplies were reduced by 45 percent, could the City meet this?  Possibly by elimination of outdoor watering and establishing reduced residential water budgets to approximately 40 gallons/person/day.  Outdoor watering is categorized as "discretionary usage", but councilwoman Emily Beach noted that our trees need watering that is far from "discretionary".  The city e-newsletter is already asking residents to water the street trees, especially the young ones.

The city could consider exploring “water-neutral” growth policies.  A "net-zero" or "water-neutral" policy would mean large-scale developments would have to go find/buy enough new water to supply their project and inject it into the system.

The bottom line (for me anyways) is that we do not have enough water right now to get through any serious run of dry years.  I was able to speak with CEO/GM Nicole Sandkulla after the meeting about overall demand for all 26 agencies in BAWSCA.  The current forecasts call for increases between .5% and 1.5% per year over the next 20 years, but do not include any future changes to land-use regulations.  And there in lies the rub.  Here is a chart from the presentation that highlights the possible shortfalls in Burlingame.

ECR: The Flooding Continues

I feel like a broken record about the flooding in the same exact spots on El Camino every single solitary time it rains.  These last two storms, although pretty modest in precipitation, were no different.  The news is that I happened to be driving by when two B'game Public Works guys were examining the problem so I got the situation straight from the experts.  For the flood zone shown below which looks a lot like the one from last year at this time, BPW has done everything they can to clear the drain, but the partial blockage is too far in from the drain to reach.  It's also not B'game's responsibility--BPW is just trying to do a good deed.

While we wait years for the massive rehab of the whole thoroughfare expected to cost umpteen millions, how about Caltrans gets its act together, bring in some equipment that we don't have--even if that means digging up the street?  It's not like it doesn't need repaving there anyway.  There are at least six other spots on ECR that are about as bad and just as predictable.  Heck they don't take the signs away until the rain stops for the Spring.  I suppose until someone get injured or killed and sues, nothing will happen.  Very sad.

 

Drought 2021: Here We Go Again

I'm still bothered by state Sen. Scott Weiner's naïve response to a water question he got during his visit to B'game almost two years ago.  When asked "where will the water come from to support all the new housing (and people) you are demanding?" his response landed squarely between "I don't know", "We should look at that" and "It's not my concern".  Two years have passed--both drought years -- and we are no closer to a state-wide plan than we were then.  There's always something "more important" getting in the way and yet the development addicts seem able to press on with their demands.

Here in B'game, the every five-year update to our Urban Water Management Plan is behind schedule.  Public works has been swamped (no pun intended) with parklets, paving projects, going green and adding traffic lights and signage.  The next update will be the first to comply with a new state mandate that it examine a five-year drought instead of only a three-year episode.  That should make for interesting reading when the first draft comes out--hopefully soon.

In the meantime, here we go again according to the Comicle

The state’s monthly snow survey on Tuesday will show only about 60% of average snowpack for this point in the year, the latest indication that water supplies are tightening. With the end of the stormy season approaching, forecasters don’t expect much more buildup of snow, a key component of the statewide supply that provides up to a third of California’s water.

Urban water agencies, meanwhile, are asking customers to think twice about long showers and outdoor watering. The calls for austerity will feel familiar to many Californians who less than five years ago faced mandatory water restrictions during the 2012-2016 drought.  More importantly, the northern Sierra’s 8-Station Index, which tracks rain in the region where California gets the bulk of its water, measured only 45% of average precipitation.  While March and April could still bring rain, the heart of the wet season is over. Much of the state is now poised to have a top-10 dry year.

As an avid skier, I can recall several Miracle Marches and even an Amazing April or two, but let's face it, the people who are trying to overbuild the Bay Area just don't care.  It's time some other leaders stepped in and called for a reset, a review, a plan and compliance.

Update:  Yesterday a huge branch fell off a street tree at Vernon and Clarendon hitting the nearby house.  The drought is stressing trees throughout the state, so expect more of this until we prioritize trees over condos and offices.

Update:  March 24.  In today's Comicle:  "It would have to be biblical to adjust a water allocation at this point," (Karla) Nemeth (director CDWR) said, referring to the end of the winter season.

Water Security: An Historical View

Just because I have not written on water issues lately doesn't mean I haven't stopped worrying about our water security.  The drumbeat for development has not diminished even as we hear of the Bay Area exodus continuing.  I have attended a couple of professional seminars on the topic recently and neither have given me any confidence that this long-running problem is being worked on.  How long running?  Here is an historical perspective from the Tahoe Weekly newspaper's local historian Mark McLaughlin:

In 1870s, Southern Pacific Railroad (SPRR) started taking rain (in 1871) and snowfall (in 1879) measurements at its train stations across the Central Sierra. A primary reason for the data collection was to help convince American farmers to buy acreage in the Central Valley that SPRR had acquired in land grants and was now selling. Farmers from the Midwest and East Coast were attracted by California’s long growing season, but skeptical that the 20 inches or less of annual precipitation in the valley was sufficient to nourish crops. The railroad used its weather data to illustrate that portions of the west slopes of the Sierra Range receive up to 80 inches of precipitation, with much of it falling as snow above 6,000 feet in elevation. The prodigious spring and summer snowmelt fed streams and rivers flowing into the valley, thus providing abundant irrigation water for crops and ranching.

The importance of snow runoff storage was apparent even 150 years ago.  In a piece in today's WSJ about the Bay Area exodus, it notes

Between 2005 and 2019 employment in the five counties that make of the bulk of the Bay Area grew by 29% adding 674,000 jobs, according to California's Employment Development Department.  Yet construction permits were issued for just 211,000 units, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.  Planners say the ratio of new jobs to new housing units should be around 1.5 to one.

So you see the problem.  "Just 211,000" units with many, many more in the pipeline and legislative threats to ramp up even further, but no new water storage in the SFPUC-run system.  What could go wrong?  Heckuva way to run a railroad.

The Ups and Downs of Downtown Parking

Just a couple of blocks separate the largest additions to downtown parking we have seen in more than a generation.  The public lot between Lorton and Highland, just south of Howard is rising briskly while the underground parking at the old Hower Auto lot at Bayswater and Myrtle and the one next to the Dairy Boy mural dive deep into subterranean B'game.  With parklets here to stay, the public lot should prove to be popular even if it is further from the Avenue than most people are accustomed to walking.  The two deep digs for new construction have me scratching my head a bit.  I thought the building code called for only going down as far as the water table, but it looks like that restriction has fallen quietly by the wayside.  It's probably a victim of the extreme pressure for more development- residential and commercial.  When this latest drought is over it will be interesting to see how downtown drainage is affected.

Cooling center in Burlingame

We live an an unsettling time where nothing is the way we expect. Yesterday and today we've broken temperature records for this time of year. In year's past however those of us who are not blessed with air conditioning or swimming holes could rely on cooling centers like the public library. ( Why our library could not be open as a cooling center even with today's challenges is a sore point with me, but I don't want to rant and rave today, it's simply too hot.) What I would rather do is remind everyone that there is a reliable cooling center in Burlingame that is always open and can easily accommodate social distancing. It's our extensive bay front. I took my lawn chair and a cooler and went there on both days. The cooling effect was not as great as a dip in a cold pool or not akin to being surrounded by cool air from the AC, but it was a respite of sorts and somehow looking at the water in the bay had the intended cooling effect. At some points along the bay front trail there were, like me, those who just wanted to enjoy the breeze and the view, others could be seen in the water and on the beach, yes a beach in Burlingame--not a particularly pretty one,(the scene reminded me of something from behind the iron curtain,) but yeah it was a beach and it was giving pleasure to a number of people. In short, in these strange times, we can rely on something, small as it is. Consider this a positive public service reminder that we who live in Burlingame can enjoy the bay anytime we want and it's right in our own backyards.  

El Camino Flooding: Where's Roto-Rooter?

Here's one more water-related post to follow the last two on sea-levels and drinking water.  We had two nice, moderately heavy storms over the weekend and into Monday.  We needed the rain everywhere except on El Camino.  Bad flooding in a dozen spots on our main thoroughfare has been a known issue for decades.  I just don't get why Caltrans won't do something simple to fix the known hot spots.  Yes, we have a multi-hundreds of millions of dollars upgrade in the works, but with the massive state shortfall from COVID-19 I'll bet roads drop down the priority list.

In the meantime, why can't Caltrans just get into some of the drains and clear them out?  We know the drains drain--just not fast enough.  I don't want to put it back on the city's Public Works who have already stepped up on ECR maintenance beyond their remit, but it might have to come to that.  "All plumbing is local" to paraphrase Tip O'Neill.  Here's the recurring flood at the end of my street.  There's a drain right there.  The drain on the other corner drains well enough if I keep it clear, which I do.  The flooded one drains after about a day--there had been no rain for more than 12 hours when I took this photo.  Where's Roto-Rooter?

Too Much Saltwater, Not Enough Fresh

While we are on the topic of water (see last post), we have some updates on the drinking water situation.  The Chronicle is reporting

Statewide snow pack measured 53% of average for the critical April 1 survey — the time when snow levels are typically at their peak, helping inform how much melt-off will pour into California’s many reservoirs. The figure is the 11th lowest in 71 years of record-keeping.  The problems, though, are somewhat muted by last winter’s big snowfall. The 40% of the state that is flirting with drought is a fraction of what it would be if there had been back-to-back dry years.

“For a dry year like this one, it’s nice that the preceding year was a wet one,” said Mike Anderson, state climatologist with the California Department of Water Resources, which conducts the snow surveys.  Snow typically provides nearly a third of the state’s water.  San Francisco’s Hetch Hetchy was at about 68% of capacity last week, slightly more than average for the time.

The question on Anderson’s mind, and the minds of other weather watchers in California, is whether this winter was a one-off or if it is the beginning of a multiyear drought, along the lines of what the state experienced between 2012 and 2017.

The city of B'game is in the midst of updating our Urban Water Management Plan, an every five year exercise, that will for the first time estimate the impact of a five-year drought.  Prior plans were only required to account for a three-year drought.  I'll be watching for the update especially regarding total consumption vis a vis all of the building that was going on before the pandemic.

I'm still enamored with Ben Franklin's writings--one of which says "When the well's dry we know the worth of water."

Update:  Here is the chart tracking just how dry this season has been and indicating how bad the fire season might be.  Only 1976-77 was drier year to date.