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.
Recent Comments