California’s Water Challenges: Lessons from the Current Drought

Caitrin Chappelle, Associate Center Director

WELL Regional Workshop

Temecula, CA

October 24, 2015

Droughts and floods are a recurring feature of California’s variable climate

2

Average annual precipitation

SOURCE: Western Regional Climate Center

California is four years into a severe drought

3

SOURCE: California Department of Water Resources.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Jan-10 Jan-11 Jan-12 Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15

Pre

cip

itation (

inches)

Reserv

oir

sto

rage

Million a

cre

feet (M

AF

)

Precipitation Reservoir storage Lowest (Nov. 1977)

California is getting warmer, increasing risks to the economy and environment

4

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

19

31

19

40

19

50

19

60

19

70

19

80

19

90

20

00

20

10

20

14

Tem

pera

ture

(°F

)

Annual average temperature Historical average

SOURCE: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

This year’s snowpack is lower than predictions for late 21st century

5

Governor Brown’s Executive Order April 1, 2015

2070-2099, Medium Warming Scenario25% remaining

SOURCE: Cayan, Dan et al. (2009), CA Climate Adaptation Strategy

What about El Niño?

6

El Niño is an unreliable predictor

Multiple wet years needed to recover

Understanding likely impacts can help reduce harm

SOURCE: DWR and National Weather Service.

Droughts reveal strengths and deficiencies in water management

7

Good News:

– Limited urban problems (so far)

– Better performance thanks to planning, investments

Bad News:

– Painful agricultural reductions

– Supply emergencies in small communities

– Environmental water crisis (fish, birds)

We are meeting conservation targets in most regions

8

0.5%

3%

3%

9%

24%30% 28% 22%

35%

31%

28%

29% 27%

24%

26%

-25

25

75

125

175

225

275

325

375

North Coast SanFrancisco

Bay

CentralCoast

South Coast SacramentoRiver

San JoaquinRiver

Tulare Lake NorthLahontan

SouthLahontan

ColoradoRiver

Statewide

Coastal Central Valley Mountain and Desert Statewide

Conservation Target Exceeded Savings Savings Needed Savings Made

California’s major cities have become more resilient since the last major drought

9

So far…

– Investments paid off

– Regional cooperation

– Conservation working

– Cultural change

Looking forward…

– Supplies more constrained

– Pricing restrictions (Prop 218) and affordability issues

– Water quality investments needed

Large landscape

11%

Commercial14%

Industrial6%

Energy production

2%

Residential -interior

34%

Residential -exterior

33%

Urban Use8.5 million acre-feet

But smaller rural communities around the state say supply emergencies

10

So far…

– 2,000+ dry domestic wells, 100+ small systems in trouble

– Strong emergency response

– But time lags still too long

Looking forward…

– Increase in dry wells

– Worsening air quality

– Economic hardship

The drought motivated statewide progress on some fronts

11

Groundwater management

– SGMA

– Adjudication

Measuring and reporting of water use and leakage data

Small system consolidation

So, what’s next?

12

Photo courtesy of DWR

An “all of the above” approach to adapt to water scarcity

13

Diversify supplies

– Recycled water, stormwater capture, desal, etc.

Manage demand

– Behavior changes, efficiency advances, etc.

Expand water trading

Enhance water storage

Anaheim Lake, a groundwater recharge basin

Growing water quality challenges require innovative solutions

New and growing regulatory mandate to manage pollution, not just drainage

Costs are rising as regulations get stricter

Smaller systems face high burdens

Constitutional reforms make it hard to pay

14

The Los Angeles River watershed is expected to reach “zero-trash”

Integration is needed to improve performance of entire water system

California’s system is decentralized and siloed

Integration should be both geographic and functional

Funding needed to:– Jump-start collaborations

– Provide technical and scientific support

Hard to raise funds from participants (especially local stormwater agencies)

15

Green Streets are one exampleof functional integration

Need to go beyond bonds to close critical funding gaps

16

Broad and flexible mix of funding sources

Reforms that make it easier to:– Fill critical gaps

– Prepare for droughts and floods

– Adopt conservation-oriented and life-line water rates

…while maintaining transparency

Annual gap

($ millions)

One-time funds

from Prop 1

($ millions)

Safe drinking

water in small

rural systems

$30–$160$260*

Flood protection$800–

$1,000$395

Stormwater

management$500–$800 $200

Aquatic

ecosystem

management

$400–$700 $2,845**

Integrated

management$200–$300 $510

Critical funding gaps

SOURCE: California’s Water: Paying for Water (PPIC, 2015)

The public is paying attention: An opportunity for change?

17

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey: Californians and their Government

52%

20%

1%

39%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

March 2012 May 2015

Pe

rce

nt

of

all

ad

ult

s

What Californians see as the state’s top issue:Jobs, economy Water, drought

Interesting days lie ahead, hopefully with lots of clouds*

Photo: Jacob DeFlitch

*And not severe floods

Notes on these slides

These slides were created to accompany a presentation. They do not include full documentation of sources, data samples, methods, and interpretations. To avoid misinterpretations, please contact:

Caitrin Chappelle, 415-291-4435 (chappelle@ppic.org)

Thank you for your interest in this work.

19