During Our Drought, Rancho Santa Fe Uses Water Like There's No Tomorrow

First off, apologies for the dearth of blogs from Environment in Context. Weekly, sometimes almost daily blog posts became infrequent, then nonexistent. Sorry. I imagine that I could give a number of excuses. What it boils down to mostly, if you ask anyone who blogs, is that blogging takes up way more time than what it might seem, and I just was feeling that I did not have enough time to write up good blogs. Sorry about the hiatus. I’ll try my best to send out at least a couple blogs a week. Now on to some serious blogging.

            Using data from 400 urban water agencies, State Water Resources Control Board issued a report on per capita water use for us folks here in California, as well as a conservation report. Both of these reports are requirements of the Emergency Water Conservation Regulation. The emergency regulation was adopted by the State Water Board in response to the severe drought that we are enduring here throughout the entire state.

            What emerges from the data on per capita water use is the incredible disparity in the amount of water that Californian’s use. At the lower end of per capita use are areas like East Los Angeles, where folks get by on about 48 gallons a day. This past May the municipality of Santa Cruz called for a 25 percent reduction in water use—or a limit of 60 gallons of water per person, per day. Santa Cruzans have been exceeding the limit, with each person using only 44.9 gallons per day.

            At the other extreme are the folks who live in the northern reaches of San Diego County, the Santa Fe Irrigation District, where folks use up 584.35 gallons of water a day, more than ten times the amount used by East Los Angelinos, Santa Cruzans, as well as the water use of people who live in Daly City, Palo Alto, Hayward, and a few other municipalities.

            Now it’s not that folks in East Los Angeles or Daly City don’t bath less frequently or that they aren’t as thirsty as other folks. Those differences are almost entirely from the differences in how much individuals water their landscaping. And the State Water Resources Control Board on its website where the data of this report can be found let us know that the use of water for landscaping will vary a lot because of things like climate and population density. People who live in places that are hot and dry will use more water for landscaping than people who live where it is cooler and rains more. High-density communities, where residents live in apartments or where real estate lot sizes are small, will use less water per person than where there are large estates. Water rates are a factor as well.

            But 584.35 gallons a day? That’s, well, a lot of water! Multiplying that out by the number of residents in the district, 19,386, that comes out to well over eleven million gallons of water a day. That’s enough to fill 17 Olympic swimming pools every day. These are folks who don’t live in a Palm Springs desert. Though dry, the climate of San Diego is mild. These folks just have large lots that they water a lot! Compare the bird’s eye view of Daly City and that of Rancho Santa Fe.

 

Daly City

Rancho Santa Fe, where they use lots and lots of water 

The houses in Daly City are tightly situated on streets, while the estates of Rancho Santa Fe sprawl over the landscape. And note how green those estates are. The Santa Fe Irrigation district also includes Solana Beach, a beach community of middle class houses and apartments. These residents, with their more modest water use, bring down the average of the Santa Fe Irrigation District. There must be some residents of Rancho Santa Fe who use A LOT more than 580 gallons a day.

            While this just seems so obviously wrong to me, the way this has been covered in the press also intrigues me. The story in the Los Angeles Times is pretty straightforward, giving readers the notable extremes of use, the factors involved in that water use, and overall water use trends. Two days ago, our local paper, the San Diego UT, had this to say about the disparity of usage, “The statistics ranged from a low of 85 gallons for the San Francisco Bay area to a high of 252 gallons for the Colorado River region.” This gives the reader the impression that the highest use was that of 252 gallons a day in the eastern part of our county. The article mentions that per capita use in parts of the county, Carlsbad and Olivenhain, ranged from 185 to 305 gallons a day, which is confusing when the reader has just read that the highest use was 252 gallons a day.  And nowhere in the article did it say that the folks here in Rancho Santa Fe district used about twice that amount of water.

            Now, two days later, the UT comes out with the rest of the story and the prodigal water use going on in our north county. I don’t know why it took them a couple extra days to get around to mentioning this. It’s important information. But having the two different articles could be confusing,  and before we go spending millions of dollars on projects to recycle water or on desalination plants, we need to know all the facts.

Nothing against the folks who live in Rancho Santa Fe, but perhaps the most affordable and easiest solution to our present problems presented to us by this long-standing drought is simply using water more equitably.

Trucking Water From West Virginia to Detroit

In an apparent show of solidarity, in an organized effort West Virginians are trucking in water to Detroit residents who have had their water shut off. West Virginia is of course where more than 16% of that state’s residents had their water poisoned by a coal industry related chemical spill.

            During West Virginia’s water crisis the Keeper of the Mountains Foundation delivered water to some of the 300,000 residents whose water was tainted by the toxic spill. Now they are trucking in water to thirsty Detroiters who have had their water cut off due to overdue bills.

            Activists in Detroit say that Detroit water bills have doubled in the last ten years, and about 50 percent of water accounts in what has been known as the Motor City are delinquent. Some complain that businesses such as golf courses with delinquent bills have not had their water shut off while residents have had their taps turned off. The crackdown on delinquent bills has been explained as part of Detroit’s efforts to get out of bankruptcy.

West Virginians ensure that Detroit's water glass is at least half full

Coal Miners Rally in Pittsburgh

Two days of public hearings began today in Pittsburgh on proposed rules by the EPA that would set more stringent standards for the emissions of CO2 from coal-burning power plants. These rules are being proposed to stave off global warming. Similar hearings were held earlier this week in Atlanta, Denver, and Washington, D.C., but these hearings in Pittsburgh, right in the middle of the coal-rich Appalachians, attracted a great deal of attention from the coal industry and its political supporters.

            Yesterday the coal industry held a rally. Called an affordable electricity and energy jobs rally, the gathering included Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett, West Virginia Governor Earl Ray Tomblin, and labor leaders. The rally was attended by hundreds of West Virginia coal miners.

            Tomblin, an unabashed supporter of the coal industry, spoke at the rally in support of the coal companies and against the proposed new power plant rules. Now, before going much further, let me give credit to Tomblin, who, as he spoke at this rally, did not deny the connection between burning coal and warming up the world. He did, however, have a pretty harsh critique of the Environmental Protection Agency. He described the proposed carbon rules as “unreasonable restrictions” and “ideological policies” that would eliminate jobs in the coal region. He also used a race-to-the-bottom argument that reducing the emissions of U.S. power plants would raise electricity rates and send manufacturers overseas to countries that don’t govern their power production so well or don’t govern it at all.

            I don’t claim that Tomblin or other politicians’ concern for jobs is insincere. It is nonetheless interesting to me how well their concern for the employment of their constituents dovetails with the concerns of industry.  Back when the auto industry and the steel industry decided to move operations overseas and allow America’s industrial belt to crumble and turn into the rust belt I don’t recall a great number of politicians pontificating on the concern to keep Detroiters or Pittsburghers in their jobs.

 

When did politicians hold rallies to keep jobs in Detroit and Pittsburgh?

As I said above, I give credit to Tomblin for not denying climate change. And I guess in a weird way I have to give credit to Nick Casey, the former chairman of West Virginia’s Democratic Party who is now running for Congress. He doesn’t deny climate change either. But in a meeting with some of West Virginia’s largest lobbying groups he said that global warming is not a problem to be addressed by West Virginians. “It’s not our problem,” he said, because global warming is an international issue.

            Excuse me, I hope the quality of my writing doesn’t suffer as I keep pounding at the keyboard, but right now my head is spinning. Nick Casey is saying global warming is not a West Virginia problem because the problem belongs to the whole world. Well, well, well. I’m not even sure where to start with this. It is true that as the seas rise and the oceans grow more and more acidic West Virginia will not be immediately affected. The amount of warming that the Mountain State experiences may not be as great as what is expected in other places. So Casey could be right that global warming may not be a big problem for West Virginia. But, as a state with a lot of coal and natural gas, it is, undeniably, their responsibility.

            And my head still spins.

            

Pulling the Plug on Mountaintop Removal Health Research

The saying goes that coal keeps the lights on, but in at least this case the lights are going out. Apparently without much fanfare, the Obama administration pulled the plug on a research project being conducted by the USGS that had been looking into the health effects from mountaintop removal.

            In February of last year the USGS Energy Resources Program discontinued the funding for a study of the air quality in Artie, West Virginia, a very small community that has the misfortune to be surrounded by mountaintop removal mines. You can see Artie pinpointed below in the Google map. The expansive blotches across the landscape are the mountaintop mines.

The study is in its second year and had already resulted in some better understanding of how these large mines hurt the air quality around them and subsequently hurt the health of nearby residents. Folks who live close to mountaintop mining have higher rates of respiratory diseases, including lung cancer.

            The team working on this research has been told that they will be investigating health concerns over fracking. As all agencies have to prioritize their activities around limited budgets, this shift might be seen as a wise move, as fracking, being widespread across the country, has the potential to affect a lot more people than those living in Appalachia around mountaintop removal operations.

            But some folks think that politics may have played a part in the scientific switcheroo, among them Michael Hendryx. Hendryx is a former West Virginia University researcher who has more than two dozen peer-reviewed papers published that establish a link between mountaintop removal and poor health.

            Is this politics or prioritizing? The USGS is continuing other research on MTR, so I really can’t say. I just know it’s a shame that funding gets pulled on needed research, no matter what the reason might be. On the other hand, the science that has been done so far shows mountaintop removal to be harmful to salamanders, fish, people, and other creatures that live in the mountains. We know enough already to see that it should go on no longer.

Testing the Waters in West Virginia

Well, well, well. Maybe I should figure better late than never, but that is small consolation when your drinking water has smelled like licorice and made you nauseated and gave you headaches for weeks.

            The National Institute of Health, specifically the National Toxicology Program at the NIH, announced that they will conduct extensive tests on the health effects of 4-methylcyclohexane methanol, the coal cleaning substance that spilled into the Elk River in West Virginia back in January and poisoned the drinking water for 300,000 residents.

            I’m glad that the NIH is doing its job, but it is unsettling that this announcement comes six months after the Elk River spill. It’s actually unsettling that MCHM, which has been used by the coal industry for decades, hadn’t been tested long ago.

The glass is half full and long overdue to be tested for toxicity

Matt Wasson Tells Washington About Mountaintop Removal, Science, and Ill Health

Today on Capitol Hill the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on Environment and the Economy held hearings. The hearing was titled “Modernizing the Business of Environmental Regulation and Protection.”

            Persons testifying at the included a number of state regulators who explained programs and efforts to hasten the pace of the regulatory process. Perhaps to shed some light on the reality that for folks living in Appalachia there exists scant regulation when it comes to mountaintop removal Representative John Yarmuth (D-KY) brought in Matt Wasson, the Director of Programs for Appalachian Voices, to testify as to the large body of science that links mountaintop mining to the poor health of Appalachians living in proximity to the mines. Here is a short video of Wasson’s testimony:

Yarmuth is the author of the Appalachian Communities Health Emergency Act (H.R. 526), which would halt mountaintop removal until it is determined to be safe by the Director of Health and Human Services. The science is there, but I doubt if there is any way his bill could get through Congress. If you want to see the whole hearing, it is here in a hyperlink sort of way.

Fasting and Frustrations In the Mountains of West Virginia

There’s been a lot going on in the hills of Appalachia in the last week or so. Unfortunately for me, I’ve been busy with other work and writing. So here is a brief rundown of what’s been happening in the mountains.

For the last two weeks, actually a bit longer, 16 days total now, Roland Micklem, a retired science teacher who is now 85 years old, has been conducting a fast at the West Virginia state capitol building to inspire awareness of climate change, which includes mountaintop removal mining. He has fought for the mountains and the people of Appalachia for some time. In 2009 he organized a walk of senior citizens in West Virginia to protest mountaintop mining. He says his environmental awareness goes back to the 1950s, when he noticed that some of his favorite birds and animals were disappearing from his native Virginia.

Micklem has been joined by two other activists, Vincent Eirene and Mike Roselle. Here is a short video of Micklem from a couple days ago as he explains his motivations:

You can keep up with Micklem’s efforts through a Facebook page that follows the fast.

And I thought this was very interesting. Over at Coal Tattoo, the excellent blog about all things coal, Ken Ward points out the blatant subservience Senator Joe Manchin has to all things coal, as he held a stakeholder meeting to discuss the EPA’s new rule on emissions from existing power plants and to “find a balance between economic and environmental concerns.” As Ward point out this “balance” is a sort of Fox News type of balance that only included the interests of the fossil fuel companies. No one from any environmental organization or agency was invited to this stakeholder meeting.

            For blog posts, I only rarely read any of the comments, but please read the comment from Bo Webb on this post. Webb is of course the man who, in hopes of finding a simple rural life, returned to West Virginia only to find his homeland ravaged and his neighbors sickened by mountaintop mining. The story of his growing awareness and activism makes up part of the documentary On Coal River. In his comment Webb recounts his absurd meeting with Manchin as an environmental stakeholder in the state of West Virginia. I don't believe that Manchin could have sent a clearer message to Webb that the Senator did not care one fig about Webb, his community, or his mountains.