PRESENTATION TITLE. Orange County Water and Beyond!

Transcription

1 Orange County Water and Beyond! PRESENTATION TITLE Karl W. Seckel, P.E. Assistant General Manager Municipal Water District of Orange County April 3, 2018

2 Topics for Presentation Water Basics Water Conservation Climate Change Colorado River Over Allocation The Drought and how we survived Bay-Delta, California WaterFix History Being Made! Carson Regional Indirect Potable Supply (Carson IPR) OC Water Reliability Study Parting Thoughts 2

3 Drinking Water Cognition 24/

4 Who we are and where our supplies originate 4

5 OC has 30 Retail and 2 Wholesale Water Agencies serving 3.1 million residents 5

6 Where OC Gets Its Water ~50% Import ~50% Local Bay Delta Area 25% State Water Project Entitlement (1972) Transfers & Storage 25% Colorado River Aqueduct (1941) Local Supplies Groundwater & Recycling Ocean Desalination (future) 50% Conservation (Water Use Efficiency) 6

7 How Much Water Do We Use? Southern California = 3.6 Million Acre Feet (MAF) Southern California Imported = 1.8 MAF Orange County Total = 0.5 MAF Indoor usage = 50 gallons per person per day Outdoor usage = depends on size of yard, type of planting, type of irrigation, # of residents, but somewhere around 100 gallons per person per day average 1 Acre-Foot = 1 Football Field 1 foot deep (also 326,000 Gallons) 7

8 Wholesale Water Club Metropolitan Water District Of Southern California (MET) (MWD) (Metropolitan) (Imported Regional) (MWDOC) Municipal Water District of Orange County (Imported Orange County) Orange County Water District (OCWD) (Groundwater Orange County) Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) (Wastewater North Orange County) 8 South Orange County Wastewater Authority (SOCWA) South Orange County 8

9 OC Study Areas based on Local Resources 90% Local Water 1. Brea/La Habra 2. OCWD 3. Non-OCWD South County 75% Local Water =Total OC 5-10% Local Water 9

10 MWDOC has 7 Directors elected by divisions 10 10

11 MWDOC what we do MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY (MWDOC) We are part of Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MET) - we appoint 4 of 37 directors to the MET Board 19 million residents within 26 MET Member Agencies 11

12 MWDOC what we do PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITIES Imported Water Supply Water Supply Development Water Reliability Emergency Response Water Use Efficiency School Program Public Information and Water Education Legislative Advocacy 12

13 Water Conservation 13

14 O.C. Water Conservation Mandates how have we done? Subject Introduction 14

15 Percent of AF Savings O.C. Water Savings Reported to SWRCB 30% 25% Average Monthly Water Savings for Orange County Compared to CY % 25.12% 23.47% Cumulative Savings for O.C % 22.56% 22.55% 22.31% 22.90% 20% 15% 15.58% 17.67% 18.00% 18.59% 10% 9.11% 5% 0% Orange County Voluntary Savings Goal 10% Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 15

16 Water Conservation Reduce Over-Watering Too much water applied! System inefficiencies! Too much runoff! Lack of maintenance! Lack of management! Lack of communication! 16

17 Water Conservation The Solution 17

18 Comparison of Plant Water Needs Inches of Water / Year * % Water Savings Cool Season Turf Warm Season Turf High Water Use Plants Medimum Water Use Plants Low Water Use Plants - California Friendly California Native Plants Average Orange County Rainfall 18

19 onservation Tips 1. Understand how much water is being applied and adjust appropriately (typically, we over-water) 2. Modify the irrigation system to use MP rotator nozzles or drip irrigation & separate out plant hydrozones 3. Reduce turf areas and add California Friendly plantings. Provide the appropriate type of irrigation system for the California Friendly plants 4. You may need to hire an irrigation/landscape specialist 19

20 Key Websites for WUE

21

22 Climate Change 22

23 Climate Change Basics Climate change occurs when the factors that influence it changes. Changing climate on a global scale can only occur when the amount of heat in the Earth s system changes by either being added or released. Climate change is happening and has always happened. Currently, our Earth is warming. Earth's average temperature has risen by 1.5 F over the past century, and is projected to rise another 0.5 to 8.6 F over the next hundred years. Small changes in the average temperature of the planet can translate to large shifts in climate and weather. To some extent, global warming is a natural event. On the scale of thousands, hundreds of thousands of years, or millions of years the climate has gone through many changes. What makes this so complex is that everything is connected in some way. 23

24 Earth s Temperature Changes Following are a series of graphics indicating the variation of temperature over many periods of time: 24

25 1 o C 25

26 1 o C 26

27 1 o C 27

28 1 o C 28

29 1 o C 29

30 Sea Level Rise 30

31 Global Temperature Increases 31

32 Climate vs Weather Weather = state of the atmosphere at a given time and place Climate = patterns of weather over a decade or more Which is more difficult to predict? Typically, climate change is not an absolute prediction of the future, but a plausible implication or trend of what might occur. 32

33 Climate Influences vs Range of Outcomes Sun & radiative output Earth s orbit, tilt & wobble Surface reflectivity (albedo) Human induced changes in greenhouse gases Atmospheric aerosols (volcanic sulfates, industrial output) Oceans, sea level & currents Ice caps growing and melting Various Cycles 100k, 41k, 23k, 11k, etc. Which influences come first and which follow? 33

34 Why Do So Many Reasonable People Doubt Science We face risks we can t easily analyze We have to decide what to believe o We have built in naïve beliefs, personal experience and anecdotes o Confirmation bias look for what we believe o Never left High School; we belong to a tribe and our beliefs come from the tribe, made up of the believers we trust o Some believe because they fear the outcome government interference, taxes, fees o Science is rational but our beliefs are emotional Science (and truth) will prevail in the end Genetically modified organisms Fluoridation Vaccines Evolution Diet claims Fake News ETC 34

35 Gallup Polling Is it happening and is it important?

36 Cape Town Reservoir 1 in 400 year drought 36

37 Climate or Weather or Both? Atmospheric Rivers Hit California Mega storms about every 200 years Smaller storms can bring 30 to 50% of California s water supply in 8 to 10 storms >8 over 3 days = Cat 1 >12 over 3 days = Cat 2 Etc. Prediction capabilities are improving 37

38 Water Planning & Climate Change Fundamental Questions: 1. Where will the water be? 2. When are we going to get it? 3. How much are we going to get? 4. How much do we need? 5. Where do we need it? 6. What is the quality? 7. What will it cost? Key is estimating the inputs & outputs Rainfall/runoff Water demand Desired water quality 38

39 Water Demands Utilities faced w/ large range of future climate projections & how to address uncertainties in planning. Traditional water planning methods fail to treat uncertainties, emerging methods being developed 39

40 Basis of Projections into the Future Units Intentionally Eliminated Source: USEPA, 40

41 Climate Implications for Water in California Warmer more evaporation, sublimation and higher demands Runoff occurs earlier California loses the effective storage of snow in the mountains of somewhere between 10 and 20 million acre-feet (maf) California now has approximately 1,400 regulated reservoirs, with a total storage capacity of about 42 maf The largest 10% of these reservoirs have 95% of this capacity; Oroville has a capacity of about 3.5 maf Depending on the watershed, precipitation may be about the same, a little bit less or a little bit more 41

42 Water Demands Plan for contingency demand (difficult for the environmental community & SWRCB) Demand management strategies Implement indoor and outdoor conservation measures Reduce unaccounted for water Reduce urban heat retaining surfaces Modify/test modeling assumptions Conduct Scenario Planning Minimize impacts of uncertainties Climate models do not provide absolute predictions our take-away is what trends could occur and to what degree! 42

43 Water Supplies Diversify supply mix = recycling, water transfers, underground storage, desalination, storm water capture, groundwater cleanup Build in supply buffers Build storage to manage lean years Educate/communicate w/ the public they are the ones funding the investments! Synergize efforts w/ others (wastewater is our new supply) Consider & mitigate effects on rates (rates will continue increasing) Monitor trends Expand groundwater spreading capability to capture higher flows Minimize impacts of uncertainties 43

44 The Colorado River as an Example 44

45 Colorado River Supplies 45

46 Colorado River Supplies The period , which was used to estimate water production allocated under the Colorado River Compact, had the highest long-term annual flow volume in the 20th century, averaging 16.1 MAF at Lee s Ferry. The time series of flow indicates the average annual volume was 12.4 million acre-feet (MAF) from 1895 through

47 Colorado River Supplies for 1255 Years 9 droughts lasting years 4 droughts lasting >20 years Year 762 Today 47

48 Colorado River Supplies Over allocated basic apportionment system - 20 th Century was very wet Tree Ring studies show long periods of droughts Temperature studies indicate that Colorado River snowpack will be heavily influenced as temperatures increase water flow yield will be reduced! 7 States depend on the water from the Colorado Heavy Duty Negotiations! 48

49 Colorado River Apportionments (Million acre-feet) Upper Basin States Lower Basin States Apportionments Mexico 49

50 1922 Colorado River Compact and 1944 Treaty Allocations Upper Basin Lower Basin Mexico Total 7.5 mafy 7.5 mafy mafy 1.5 mafy 17.5 mafy 50

51 Lake Mead Normal Water Budget Lake Mead Imbalance Upper Basin Compact Release Tributary Flows Total Inflow Lower Basin Water Use Mexico Delivery Lake Mead Evap/River Losses Total Outflow Imbalance 8.25 MAF 2.75 MAF 11.0 MAF -9.5 MAF -1.5 MAF -1.2 MAF MAF -1.2 MAF 51

52 x 1000 acre-feet 23,000 22,000 21,000 20,000 19,000 18,000 17,000 16,000 15,000 14,000 13,000 12,000 11,000 10,000 9,000 8,000 Lake Mead Storage , Actual and Projected Shortage Surplus Elevation 1145 Elevation

53 Thousand Acre-feet Proposed Total State Reductions Under Discussion 1,200 1, California Reduction Nevada Reduction Arizona Reduction Nevada Shortage Arizona Shortage ,090 1,075 1,050 1,045 1,040 1,035 1,030 <1,025 Lake Mead Elevation (feet) 53

54 Colorado River Look for Multi- State Settlement for a Drought Contingency Plan An era of hope - communication, cooperation, and collaboration 54

55 The Great Drought and How We Survived

56 The Great (?) Drought 5 years? 11 years? 17 years? The New Normal? Lake Mead has dropped over 120 feet 56

57 Rainfall (Inches) Santa Ana Precipitation Santa Ana Precipitation of last 19 years below average Average Rainfall years, 28 of deficit - largest deficit in Local precipitation since records began in

58 Upper Colorado River Runoff Santa Ana Precipitation Runoff (MAF) of last 19 years below average Lake Powell Unregulated Historical Inflow MAF Runoff MAF Average

59 Northern California Runoff Santa Ana Precipitation Runoff (MAF) of last 19 years below average 4 River Index Historical Runoff MAF Runoff MAF Average

60 Million Acre Feet MWD 2018 Estimated Water Storage 3.0 MWD Historical Demand VS Supplies Almost 2 million acrefeet of storage used in recent drought Preliminary Estimate Total MWD EOY Storage Total MWD Supplies Total MWD Sales

61 The Great California Drought How did Southern California withstand the Drought? 1. Prior Investments 2. Demand Management (Conservation) 3. Supply Management (Projects) 61

62 Supplies & Demands in OC Population Growth 1990 to to , ,000 31% 10% MET Purchases MET or Future Projects Surface Water Non-OCWD GW Recycled GWRS Groundwater 62

63 Past Water Supply was an Essential Component 63

64 Past Water Supply was an Essential Component Population (Millions) LA AQUEDUCT $24.5 Million LA-City LA-County

65 Past Water Supply was an Essential Component Population (Millions) COLORADO RIVER AQUEDUCT $220 Million LA-City LA-County

66 Past Water Supply was an Essential Component Population (Millions) STATE WATER PROJECT $1.75 Billion LA-City LA-County

67 Population (Millions) Past Water Supply was an Essential Component DIAMOND VALLEY LAKE $1.9 Billion LA-City LA-County

68 ontinuous Proactive Investment 15 Billion over 20 Years Population (Millions) Water Use Efficiency Local Projects Treatment Upgrades Colorado River Supplies LA-City LA-County

69 MET Storage Investments Increased Capacity for WET year Storage to be used during DRY Years: Diamond Valley Reservoir State Water Project Storage in Southern California Central Valley Groundwater Storage Lake Mead Storage of Colorado River Water 1991 = Major Drought DVL Completed = 800,000 AF 69

70 MET s Storage Programs Central Valley/SWP Storage San Luis Carryover Semitropic Arvin-Edison Kern Delta Mojave Local Storage Diamond Valley Lake Mathews Lake Skinner Conjunctive Use Programs DWR State Project Reservoirs CRA Storage DWCV Advance Delivery Lake Mead ICS 70

71 Use of MET Storage (Living Off Past Investments) Almost 2 million acrefeet of storage used in recent drought More storage than we had 20 years ago 71

72 California WaterFix History Being Made! 72

73 Many Related Names Peripheral Canal Calfed BDCP Bay Delta Conservation Plan WaterFix Twin Tunnels EcoRestore Habitat Conservation Plan Natural Communities Conservation Plan State Water Project Entitlement (1972) 25% Local Supplies Groundwater & Recycling Ocean Desalination (future) Bay Delta Area Transfers & Storage 25% Colorado River Aqueduct (1941) Conservation (Water Use Efficiency) Co-Equal Goals 73 50%

74 State s New Proposal Announced April 2015 Protects State s water supplies through Delta system upgrades Mitigation Includes ~15,600 acres of habitat Water contractor funded Twin tunnel facilities and mitigation Supports long-term health of native fish and wildlife Habitat restoration ~ 30,000 acres in 5 years Includes broader public funding 74

75 San Francisco Bay Bay Delta RELIABILITY - $17 Billion Sacramento River Additional Intakes Tunnels Habitat Restoration SWP Pumps CVP Pumps San Joaquin River 75

76 76

77 EcoRestore 48 of Sea Level Rise Sustainable Delta (PPIC) 77 77

78 SWP-CVP Exports (million AF) California WaterFix Impact SoCal Loss of 440,000 Acre Feet without the project Existing Regulations (No Action) MAF Less BDCP Regulations without Tunnels 1.5 Earthquake Scenario NEW BDCP/CA Water Fix 78

79 40 diameter Water History How many Tunnels? How much MET participation? 4,500 to 6,000 cfs each Options under Discussion 1 = MET share in Two Tunnels 2 = MET larger share in 1 Tunnel 3 = MET larger share in 2 Tunnel Capital Cost (billions) $4.3 $5.3 $10.8 NEW Supply (thousands of AF) Cost of NEW Supply (per AF treated in So. Calif.) $840 $840 $840 Household Cost per month $1.90 $2.40 $

80 Carson Regional Recycling Project by MET Similar to Orange County Water District s Groundwater Replenishment Project 80

81 Carson Regional Recycling Project by MET MGD 0-11 MGD 15 MGD MGD 0-4 MGD 81

82 Carson IPR Project The Next Proactive Investment NEW local supply to groundwater basins in Southern California helps stretch other MET supplies Source Adds is treated another wastewater component from to LA MET s County Initial phase Water = Supply 100 mgd; Program ultimate up to 150 mgd of NEW drought 1. proof-supplies Colorado River On-line State to Water 2027 Project 3. Transfers and Exchanges Estimated Cost ~$2-3 billion 4. Support of Local Supplies by Others Costs to 5. be Local spread Supplies across by the MET MET service area 82

83 Orange County Water Reliability Study 83

84 STATE ORANGE COUNTY MET/ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 84 END USERS Homeowner Business Water Bills Local Agency 84

85 Planning + Investment = Reliability Iterative Collaboration & Exchange at Many Levels: Information Data Analyses Tools/Modeling Results/Spin-offs Funding opportunities Project Implementation 85 85

86 Ingredients for the OC Water Reliability Study 2016 Demands - including population & job growth to historical hydrologies each for the State Water Project, Colorado River & Local Influence of climate change Local Projects all over Southern California Future Projects by MET Future Projects within OC With and Without the California WaterFix Competition for water Regulatory Actions impacting supplies Water Conservation/Water Use Efficiency Consumer Expectations Earthquakes Adaptive management! 86

87 Potential Projects to Eliminate Shortages MET Projects California WaterFix MET Carson Recycled Water Transfers & Exchanges Direct Potable Reuse Water Use Efficiency OC Projects OCWD basin storage/met purchases Water transfers and banking Additional Recycling Direct Potable Reuse Emergency Needs Supply of Emergency Water following Earthquakes Which of these are part of our NEXT investments and WHEN are they needed? Over versus Under Investment 87

88 OC Water Reliability Study Goal To develop common information regarding existing and future water demands, supplies, costs and potential risks to regional and Orange County water supply reliability under a wide range of possible scenarios and ultimately to improve OC s reliability Supply Reliability System Reliability (for emergencies) 88 88

89 Major Earthquake Faults in So. Cal. SWP East Branch West Branch Sierra Madre Cucamonga Fault San Andreas Fault Santa Susana Fault Whittier Fault Elsinore Fault San Jacinto Fault 89

90 Balancing of Issues Under Performing Over Investing 90 90

91 Two South County Projects Doheny Desal Led by South Coast Water District Ocean desalination using a slantwell intake facility at Doheny State Beach Phasing of project between 4 mgd and 15 mgd being considered. 91

92 Two South County Projects Led by Santa Margarita Water District The initial project involves rubber dams to capture low flows Expansion projects will add recycled recharge at the dams to increase groundwater in storage San Juan Watershed Project 92

93 What did OC learn? Our future reliability is not entirely under our control; it depends on: Metropolitan s Integrated Resources Plan MET water supplies & water use efficiency; this includes the State Water Project & Colorado River Supplies MET Member Agency water supplies & water use efficiency What we do in OC 2. Without any NEW investments, water shortages will occur in 8 of 10 years by One single investment, the California WaterFix can cut shortages down to 3 in 10 years by 2030 Model GAPS Alternatives Evaluations Decisio 93

94 What did OC learn? 4. South Orange County needs to develop NEW supplies to improve supply (drought) and system (emergency) reliability NEW local projects will cost more than imported water, but overall melded costs to agencies remain competitive 5. Remaining water shortages in Brea/La Habra and OCWD Basin areas were manageable 6. Adaptive Management is key to ensure that OC maintains acceptable supply reliability without overinvesting at the local level 94 94

95 OC Water Reliability Study Process Highly collaborative process Plausible planning scenarios were analyzed Growth Climate/hydrologic conditions Demands synthesized to drought decline plus bounce back MET & MET Member Agency IRP projects considered State Water Project supplies with and without the California WaterFix Colorado River Supplies & use of MET storage accounts Decision-making left to local agencies 95 95

96 Carson IPR 100,000 AF 168,000 AF Local Projects 162,000 AF 300,000 AF 96 Remaining Shortages Reliability Supplies

97 MET Reliability Under Different Portfolios 2040 Shortage (AFY) 1,800,000 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000, , , ,000 Existing Port A Port B Port C Port F Port E Port D Portfolios D, E & F are Fully Reliable & are plotted on the bottom line Direction of MORE NEW Projects 200,000 Direction of Climate Impacts 97 Portfolio B - Selected for OC Modeling 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Probability of Shortage 97

98 2018 Update for Year 2040 for MET Service Area DRAFT Without NEW Investments 98

99 Upcoming High Impact Issues to Reliability California WaterFix & Governor Brown s Remaining Term 2. MET s Carson IPR Project, Go/No go 3. MET Member Agency Projects, Go/No go 4. What happens if/when we reach the Lake Mead Trigger Elevation? 5. Policy issues at MET (water rates, LRP funding, groundwater replenishment, avoid stranding assets) 6. Revised or updated biological opinions on various specifies of fish could result in significant supply reductions, primarily on the SWP. High Impact Issues 99

100 Adaptive Management is Recommended Next several years are key Prepare as if WaterFix will NOT happen Monitor the high impact issues May require a change in course or redirection depending on outcome Adaptive Management is key

101 Outcomes from the Study Effort Currently monitoring High Impact or Uncertainty Issues 2. Key OC projects: a. IRWD & four agencies - $100 M, 30 MGD Baker Treatment Plant b. OCWD proposed expansion of the Groundwater Replenishment System from 100 to 130 MGD c. Under Evaluation Doheny Ocean Desal Project Poseidon Ocean Desal Project San Juan Watershed Project Emergency supplies to South Orange County 101

102 Parting Water Observations We survived very tough years due to investments made - but the drought will be back! There are several paths to reliability California Water Fix & other MET investments Local Investments, including Direct Potable Reuse Demand management use less water for landscapes All of the above (diversification) Rates will increase to fund reliability investments Need to understand and educate consumer EXPECTATIONS Need support in the Governor s office Stay tuned and support the California WaterFix Reliability Resilience Sustainability 102

103 Observations for Southern Calif. Update and strengthen the Integrated Resources Planning process it provides a path to reliability The need for investments will continue No single silver bullet diversify supplies and use water efficiently Southern California has always done a good job at making the hard decisions we expect to continue this track record

104 Observations for OC OCWD has a well managed basin Doheny Desal and the San Juan Watershed Projects are key local projects being considered in SOC; these provide both supply and system improvements. Continuing WUE and recycling investments is also key. An increase of the Emergency Services Program, which moves groundwater from the OCWD basin to SOC, is critical for SOC to deal with emergency outages of the MET system for up to 60 days

105 What you can do! Engage in water policy discussions Support the Bay-Delta WaterFix Support water use efficiency measures and new supply development efforts in your community Stress the value of water, not the price! Reliable water underpins our economy and way of life for you and future generations 105

106 Contact Us or Your Local Water Provider address Ward Street, Fountain Valley CA Karl W. Seckel Assistant Manager/District Engineer website main office (714)