California State Senator Jerry McNerney (D-Pleasanton) represents the 5th Senate District, which includes Stockton and much of the Delta region. He is also co-chair of the California Legislative Delta Caucus and is the Legislature’s representative to the Delta Protection Commission. Sen. McNerney’s opinions are his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Stocktonia.
Millions of Californians rely on freshwater from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, and a half-million people who live in and around the Delta depend on the largest estuary on the West Coast for their livelihoods.
But the Delta region is at serious risk. Gov. Gavin Newsom is attempting to fast-track the construction of a massive, budget-busting water tunnel through the Delta to ship freshwater to Southern California and the Southern San Joaquin Valley.
The 45-mile-long, $20 billion-plus tunnel, which would take at least 15 years to complete, would inflict widespread environmental damage and destroy thousands of acres of prime farmland and historic cultural and tribal resources. The project is the latest version of the Peripheral Canal proposal that California voters rejected in 1982.
The governor and supporters of the Delta Tunnel Project contend that it is necessary to safeguard against climate change, sea level rise and earthquakes. But in this era of budget uncertainty and deep federal cuts, California should table the pricey tunnel project and instead pursue alternatives that are far more affordable, better for the environment, and will achieve superior results.
Namely, California should intensify efforts to expand water recycling, water efficiency, and groundwater storage. Taken together, these alternatives, which are all part of the governor’s Water Supply Strategy, can yield nearly double the amount of additional water as the tunnel project at only a fraction of the cost.
The state should also fortify the Delta’s aging levee system. These repairs must be completed regardless of whether the tunnel is built because a widespread collapse of the Delta’s 1,100 miles of levee would inundate the Delta with saltwater and spoil its freshwater supplies, while putting 500,000 residents of the region in extreme danger, including much of Stockton, and possibly rendering the tunnel inoperable.
In fact, if California builds the tunnel without shoring up the levees, and the levees fail, taxpayers not only may have wasted $20 billion-plus, but also would be on the hook for an additional $22 billion in flooding damage to the region.
Nonetheless, the governor continues to plow forward with the Delta Tunnel Project, recently renewing his call for the Legislature to approve his proposal to fast-track the project before the end of the Legislative session on Sept. 12.
Scientific estimates show that because of global warming and a drier climate, California could lose up to 10% of its water supply by 2040. That’s roughly equivalent to 4 million acre feet of water per year.
Increasing water recycling, water efficiency, and groundwater storage can make up for that projected water loss and more.
According to the independent Pacific Institute, expanding water efficiency, especially for outdoor water use, has the potential to save the state 2-3 million acre feet of water annually. In addition, the governor has called for an increase of 1 million acre feet of water recycling by 2040.
But the biggest opportunity for water supply is underground storage. According to a UC Merced study, California has the capacity to store 140 million acre feet of water in the ground — more than three times the state’s total annual water consumption. Gov. Newsom has called for a more conservative effort of expanding groundwater storage by 4 million acre feet a year.
Water efficiency, recycling, and underground storage can save California 7-8 million acre feet of water a year, roughly double the amount of additional water from the proposed tunnel.
And those pragmatic strategies, while perhaps not as flashy as a massive new infrastructure project, won’t cost anywhere near $20 billion-plus. Other alternatives include desalination and expanding surface storage.
The tunnel project, in short, is unaffordable and unnecessary. California can meet its water needs in a changing climate by pursuing commonsense and environmentally friendly alternatives that don’t waste billions we don’t have.
Stocktonia accepts commentary and opinion/editorial submissions from the community. Please contact info@stocktonia.org for further information.
Want more? Sign up to get Stocktonia delivered to your inbox three days a week.