For political reasons, Texas' state water plan ignores climate change, but the reverse won't be true

[essentialsaltes]

Texas’ plan to provide water for a growing population virtually ignores climate change
Texas’ biggest single solution to providing enough water for its soaring population in the coming decades is using more surface water, including about two dozen new large reservoirs. But climate change has made damming rivers a riskier bet.

Climate change has brought higher temperatures that dry soil more quickly, enhancing the effects of drought and causing less rain to flow into Texas’ rivers and streams. At the same time, longer-lasting and more intense heat brought by climate change accelerates water evaporation from Texas’ reservoirs.

“It’s not going to go away,” Rathmell said. “Over the years, our area does seem to be getting drier. It seems like it rains less year after year.”

“And of course,” he added, “the demand for water just keeps increasing.”

“Surface water is one of, if not the most, susceptible [water] supplies to climate change,” said Robert Mace, the executive director and chief water policy officer for the Meadows Center for Water and the Environment at Texas State University.

But adding surface water is the centerpiece of Texas’ long-term water plan.

“Dams don’t make water,” said Samuel Sandoval Solís, a professor in water resources at the University of California Davis who has studied the Rio Grande Basin. “If it doesn’t rain, as suspected [with climate change], we are going to have monuments to stupidity built with taxpayer dollars.”

 

[timothyu]

Well perhaps the coming storm Thursday may alleviate some of that. Seasons come and seasons go, but divisiveness over a movement that is extremely profitable to it's instigators who ran out of industries to milk, may cause far more lasting damages.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Well perhaps the coming storm Thursday may alleviate some of that. Seasons come and seasons go

A storm on Thursday will be gone by next week.

 

[Valletta]

Texas’ plan to provide water for a growing population virtually ignores climate change
Texas’ biggest single solution to providing enough water for its soaring population in the coming decades is using more surface water, including about two dozen new large reservoirs. But climate change has made damming rivers a riskier bet.

Climate change has brought higher temperatures that dry soil more quickly, enhancing the effects of drought and causing less rain to flow into Texas’ rivers and streams. At the same time, longer-lasting and more intense heat brought by climate change accelerates water evaporation from Texas’ reservoirs.

“It’s not going to go away,” Rathmell said. “Over the years, our area does seem to be getting drier. It seems like it rains less year after year.”

“And of course,” he added, “the demand for water just keeps increasing.”

“Surface water is one of, if not the most, susceptible [water] supplies to climate change,” said Robert Mace, the executive director and chief water policy officer for the Meadows Center for Water and the Environment at Texas State University.

But adding surface water is the centerpiece of Texas’ long-term water plan.

“Dams don’t make water,” said Samuel Sandoval Solís, a professor in water resources at the University of California Davis who has studied the Rio Grande Basin. “If it doesn’t rain, as suspected [with climate change], we are going to have monuments to stupidity built with taxpayer dollars.”

I don't know that the climate changes more now than it has done in the past, I can tell you that Mr. Solis cannot accurately produce future rainfall. They should look at Malta. Malta uses some dams, perhaps they have finished their fourth desalination plant since last I was there. They save energy by using deep sea wells, that way water has already been partially purified by going through the bedrock. A national plan could be developed like Trump did with Operation Warp Speed. In the far north of the continental U.S. water runs north into Canada. Perhaps they could divert part of that to some of the U.S.

 

[Tuur]

Texas’ plan to provide water for a growing population virtually ignores climate change
Texas’ biggest single solution to providing enough water for its soaring population in the coming decades is using more surface water, including about two dozen new large reservoirs. But climate change has made damming rivers a riskier bet.

Climate change has brought higher temperatures that dry soil more quickly, enhancing the effects of drought and causing less rain to flow into Texas’ rivers and streams. At the same time, longer-lasting and more intense heat brought by climate change accelerates water evaporation from Texas’ reservoirs.

“It’s not going to go away,” Rathmell said. “Over the years, our area does seem to be getting drier. It seems like it rains less year after year.”

“And of course,” he added, “the demand for water just keeps increasing.”

“Surface water is one of, if not the most, susceptible [water] supplies to climate change,” said Robert Mace, the executive director and chief water policy officer for the Meadows Center for Water and the Environment at Texas State University.

But adding surface water is the centerpiece of Texas’ long-term water plan.

“Dams don’t make water,” said Samuel Sandoval Solís, a professor in water resources at the University of California Davis who has studied the Rio Grande Basin. “If it doesn’t rain, as suspected [with climate change], we are going to have monuments to stupidity built with taxpayer dollars.”

I've never taken possible climate change into account in doing projections for my employer, either, but the projections are only for a decade. In that length of time, any change due to climate will be outweighed by change due to economics. The question, then, is how far into the future do the Texas plans extend? Ten years? Twenty? And what would the cumulative effects of climate change be, if they occur? The headlines bemoan Texas not considering climate change, but it might not be an issue in the time period under consideration.

 

[essentialsaltes]

The question, then, is how far into the future do the Texas plans extend? Ten years? Twenty?

FTA: Almost two dozen new major reservoirs are proposed in the state by 2070

The water board's 2021 plan goes to 2070:

Texas Water Development Board

 

[SimplyMe]

I've never taken possible climate change into account in doing projections for my employer, either, but the projections are only for a decade. In that length of time, any change due to climate will be outweighed by change due to economics. The question, then, is how far into the future do the Texas plans extend? Ten years? Twenty? And what would the cumulative effects of climate change be, if they occur? The headlines bemoan Texas not considering climate change, but it might not be an issue in the time period under consideration.

The Texas water plan is a 50 year plan. It appears it will be at least 2050 before the first dams are completed -- assuming they can get the funding needed in time to build them on schedule.

 

[timothyu]

The Texas water plan is a 50 year plan. It appears it will be at least 2050 before the first dams are completed -- assuming they can get the funding needed in time to build them on schedule.

Shades of employment in building the interstate highway system 60 yrs ago

 

[essentialsaltes]

Here's a fascinating in-depth look at the situation in Corpus Christi.

Five years ago, when ExxonMobil came calling, city officials eagerly signed over a large portion of their water supply so the oil giant could build a $10 billion plant to make plastics out of methane gas.

A year later, they did the same for Steel Dynamics to build a rolled-steel factory.

Never mind that Corpus Christi, a mid-sized city on the semi-arid South Texas coast, had just raced through its 50-year water plan 13 years ahead of schedule. Planners believed they had a solution: large-scale seawater desalination.

According to the plan in 2019, the state’s first plant needed to be running by early 2023 to safely meet industrial water demands that were scheduled to come online. But Corpus Christi never got it done.

That hasn’t stopped the city and its port authority from pursuing broader plans to build out a next-generation industrial sector around Corpus Christi Bay and make this region a rival to Houston, home to the nation’s largest petrochemical complex, 200 miles up the Gulf Coast.

All that’s missing is the freshwater. Now the commitments city officials made over the past five years are coming due. Exxon’s plastic plant started operations this year and will eventually consume 25 million gallons of water per day, even as the region’s water plan foresees demand exceeding supplies in this decade.

--

Council member Mike Pusley, a retired petroleum geologist and former Exxon employee, was not impressed with the city’s progress. At a meeting in April 2021, he told the Corpus Christi water department its original plans, long delayed, were no longer sufficient.

“I can assure you that within the next five years, you’re going to have several Exxons here, and you’re not going to be ready with a plan. We’re not going to be ready. We’re not going to be ready at all with the water,” he said.

--

“This drought we’re in right now, there’s no solution for it but conservation,” said Corpus Christi manager Peter Zanoni, who moved to the city in 2019, to the council.

Conservation, however, only applies to residents in Corpus Christi. According to a 2018 city ordinance, high-volume industrial users can pay $0.25 per thousand gallons consumed for exemption from restrictions during drought. Most pay it. While citizens face fines for sprinkler use, large facilities continue consuming millions of gallons per day.

[Although the overall plan calls for desalination plants (which would make the bay even saltier as the removed salt is put back in the bay), the bay has already become much saltier as the freshwater rivers have been entirely consumed by the city's use so that none reaches the Gulf. Oysters died off in the 1930s and shrimp died off a few decades later.]

 

[Brihaha]

I sure hope Texas has a better contingency plan than Arizona. They seem to be suffering from their own modern day Watergate problem. Saudis have been given a sweet deal that has drained ground water from the southwest and threatens Americans and farmers throughout the southwest.

When Saudi Arabia comes to town and buys all your water - Responsible Statecraft

 

[Nithavela]

Here's a fascinating in-depth look at the situation in Corpus Christi.

Five years ago, when ExxonMobil came calling, city officials eagerly signed over a large portion of their water supply so the oil giant could build a $10 billion plant to make plastics out of methane gas.

A year later, they did the same for Steel Dynamics to build a rolled-steel factory.

Never mind that Corpus Christi, a mid-sized city on the semi-arid South Texas coast, had just raced through its 50-year water plan 13 years ahead of schedule. Planners believed they had a solution: large-scale seawater desalination.

According to the plan in 2019, the state’s first plant needed to be running by early 2023 to safely meet industrial water demands that were scheduled to come online. But Corpus Christi never got it done.

That hasn’t stopped the city and its port authority from pursuing broader plans to build out a next-generation industrial sector around Corpus Christi Bay and make this region a rival to Houston, home to the nation’s largest petrochemical complex, 200 miles up the Gulf Coast.

All that’s missing is the freshwater. Now the commitments city officials made over the past five years are coming due. Exxon’s plastic plant started operations this year and will eventually consume 25 million gallons of water per day, even as the region’s water plan foresees demand exceeding supplies in this decade.

--

Council member Mike Pusley, a retired petroleum geologist and former Exxon employee, was not impressed with the city’s progress. At a meeting in April 2021, he told the Corpus Christi water department its original plans, long delayed, were no longer sufficient.

“I can assure you that within the next five years, you’re going to have several Exxons here, and you’re not going to be ready with a plan. We’re not going to be ready. We’re not going to be ready at all with the water,” he said.

--

“This drought we’re in right now, there’s no solution for it but conservation,” said Corpus Christi manager Peter Zanoni, who moved to the city in 2019, to the council.

Conservation, however, only applies to residents in Corpus Christi. According to a 2018 city ordinance, high-volume industrial users can pay $0.25 per thousand gallons consumed for exemption from restrictions during drought. Most pay it. While citizens face fines for sprinkler use, large facilities continue consuming millions of gallons per day.

[Although the overall plan calls for desalination plants (which would make the bay even saltier as the removed salt is put back in the bay), the bay has already become much saltier as the freshwater rivers have been entirely consumed by the city's use so that none reaches the Gulf. Oysters died off in the 1930s and shrimp died off a few decades later.]

I approve. How dare those humans drink water that is put to better use in making more plastic?

 

[timothyu]

Drinking the by product will teflon coat our insides thus aiding in digestion and reducing constipation. Flatulence can reinforce the thinning on the polyester seated parts of clothing. Better living through chemistry.

 

[Fantine]

Between their power grid and water problems, it seems as if Texas won't be a pleasant place to live.
Companies will think twice about moving there, adding another problem for residents.

 

[FireDragon76]

Between their power grid and water problems, it seems as if Texas won't be a pleasant place to live.
Companies will think twice about moving there, adding another problem for residents.

Most of the sun belt is in for a world of hurt due to global warming. The real winner in the future will be states like Minnesota, as well as southern Canada, which will likely have far more temperate weather in the future.

 

[Tuur]

Most of the sun belt is in for a world of hurt due to global warming. The real winner in the future will be states like Minnesota, as well as southern Canada, which will likely have far more temperate weather in the future.

Um...even if we accept anthropomorphic global warming, I have my doubts. Once I took the temperature rise projections and ran how it would change temperatures (taking into account humidity), and compared it to heat indexes. It wasn't as great a change as some seem to think. I get the impression that some of global warming effects predicted are more off-the-cuff guesses than actually number crunching. Example: Those who claimed various places that would be underwater by now didn't seem to use the simple check of taking the elevation of these places and dividing by the expected annual rise in sea level.

 

[FireDragon76]

Um...even if we accept anthropomorphic global warming, I have my doubts. Once I took the temperature rise projections and ran how it would change temperatures (taking into account humidity), and compared it to heat indexes. It wasn't as great a change as some seem to think. I get the impression that some of global warming effects predicted are more off-the-cuff guesses than actually number crunching. Example: Those who claimed various places that would be underwater by now didn't seem to use the simple check of taking the elevation of these places and dividing by the expected annual rise in sea level.

It's not off the cuff. There's widespread consensus among climate scientists that the temperate zone will shift northward from latitudes of Virginia and Pennsylvania up into the upper Midwest. Parts of the southern US, particularly the southwest, may be so hot nobody will want to live there. Some regions in the southern US will become tropical in terms of the climate, with high heat and humidity throughout more of the year.

Redrawing the Map: How the World’s Climate Zones Are Shifting

New Climate Maps Show a Transformed United States

If the wet-bulb temperature exceeds 95 farenheit, it is not possible for humans to survive for any length of time without air conditioning, as the body loses its ability to cool itself - people in third world living conditions forced to live in intensely hot, humid climates typically live short, miserable lives. Even wet-bulb temperatures over 90 can be highly compromising for physical activity.

 

[rambot]

Well perhaps the coming storm Thursday may alleviate some of that. Seasons come and seasons go, but divisiveness over a movement that is extremely profitable to it's instigators who ran out of industries to milk, may cause far more lasting damages.

There's no divisiveness over the issue because that could leave the impression that all opinions are worthy of consideration.

There is correct and incorrect. There is plenty of evidence to indicate what is correct but some folks have problems accepting it; likely because to FULLY deal with the problem would be a massive, though ultimately beneficial for humanity, risk.

 

[timothyu]

There is plenty of evidence to indicate what is correct but some folks have problems accepting it;

Yes, industry and profit come first.

 

[rambot]

Yes, industry and profit come first.

Then how come they bothered to do things like this:
Back from the brink: how the world rapidly sealed a deal to save the ozone layer
Or what about this?
The bittersweet story of how we stopped acid rain

There are times when industry and profit should NOT come first. I'd argue, in fact, there are many, many, MANY times they shouldn't come first.

Do you think industry and profit should come before food production?

 

[timothyu]

Back in the days of acid rain and the like, air pollution, contaminated waterways, the cost of alleviating those problems fell on the industry polluters. Many complied, many left for other nations. Then the profiteers got the idea to profit from the very problem they created by starting the environmental movement where the taxpayers would foot the bill instead. It's always about profit.

As for food production, that industry is now controlled also, most farmers no longer allowed to be independent, and the concept of what passes as being called food completely changed from natural to processed comprised of sugar and starch, always considered the cheapest and least nutritional diet.