water supply facts & options- SD

Posted in the San Diego Forum

james marple

San Diego, CA

#1 Dec 13, 2012
San Diego County's trillion gallons of rainfall - equivalent to a cubic mile+ of water and ten times its household needs, could be put to use if the public elected competent and conscientious officials. But the public does not know this and its "entrenched bureaucrats" work hard to keep it that way.

Capable public servants would have adopted the planning and design needed to save one gallon in ten of our rainwater a half-century ago and revised local ordinances-codes-policies to comply with the CA Water Code.(It ordered them to "guide all or any stormwaters into soils of the District"). But that planning did not suit the "Powers That Be", defined as the land developers who bought land cheap because it was flooded often, then sold it for many times as much after public funds built "flood control" features.

The Chief Engineers knew this planning was criminally inappropriate because it throws away precious rainwater, forcing the public to pay for hugely expensive water importation facilities like the San Vicente dam raising project.("This will be the largest raise of a concrete dam in the U.S. and the largest in the world using RCC.") It is an experimental dam that disregards the safety of downstream residents without informing them of the hazard.
But the jobs of public works and water district officials depend upon their ability to fool politicians into approving rainwater disposal planning and keep the public too "dumbed down" to realize that 95% of their rainwater is not being put to use.

Will the new crop of politicians regain control of our water districts and public works department to begin saving the 10% pf pir rainwater that would end our dependence on imported water and desalination schemes?

The current rush to appoint a new crop of IRWM-RAC members tells us that the new boards-councils will face stiff opposition if they try to apply common sense to the mangement of our bountiful rainfall.
james marple

San Diego, CA

#2 Dec 15, 2012
From federal statistics:

- San Diego County has 1 resident per acre and receives 500,000 gallons of rainfall per acre yearly.
- National average water use per person is 36,500 gallons yearly.

It appears our rainfall provides 13.7 times as much water as we need, yet our officials import 26,000 gallons per resident from hundreds of miles away, costing us each $1,760 yearly on average.

Are we losing five billion dollars a year to cunning extortion or do we really need all those thousands of public servants, contractors, engineers, lawyers and politicians we trust to manage our rainwater wisely?

Federal experts just laugh and say we are a "bunch of damn fools".
james marple

San Diego, CA

#3 Dec 18, 2012
10 false conventional wisdoms about San Diego County's water supply

1 We must import water because our rainfall is only 9.4 inches yearly.
2 US EPA stormwater quality regulations are unreasonable.
3 Saving our rainwater would be too expensive.
4 There is no cost-effective way to store our rainfall.
5 Environmental organizations are protecting public rights.
6 Professional Engineers must dictate rainwater management.
7 Droughts cause water shortages.
8 Street runoff is too polluted for public use.
9 Energy costs are a separate issue from water management.
10 Land development brings greater need for imported water.

Explanations of each statement will be provided as time permits.
james marple

San Diego, CA

#4 Dec 22, 2012
The State Water Project bringing water from northern California was pushed through even though Southern California receives 8 trillion gallons of rainfall, seven times as much as this massive waterscam pumps a mile high over the mountains to it. How could this enormously expensive project be justified? Who misled our public servants into throwing away 95% of our rainwater so that it would seem to be a necessary and proper plan?

San Diego County is particularly blessed, receiving more than a dozen times as much pure rainwater on its highlands as water districts pump in from the slimy Colorado River. Yet it has been locked into dependence on this source because its "flood control" managers forced landowners to make their rainfall run off to the ocean or be lost to evaporation.

These absurd situations exist only because facts and figures have been distorted-omitted-mirepresente d by the people we trusted to keep us fully and fairly informed. A dumbed-down public cannot help becoming a victim of con artists who gain control of its information sources. The collective wisdom of voters brings good planning only if they are well-informed.
james marple

San Diego, CA

#5 Jan 6, 2013
I find it of interest that someone bothers to post a low opinion of my comments yet does not offer any form of rebuttal.

Why would someone take pot shots at the messenger instead of providing facts and figures that would discredit the message?

Senior water district and public works officials would have good reason to do this, of course. Exposure of their failure to comply with CA law that orders them to store all stormwater for public use.would certainly push elected officials into replacing them.

The Professional Engineers who serve these officials would certainly want to discredit revelations of their false and misleading testimony to politicians and the Press.

Concerned citizens would welcome facts and figures from these persons.
james marple

San Diego, CA

#6 Feb 13, 2013
Fresno's engineers were smart enough to dig 120 basins throughout their city to hold ALL of their stormwater. Our engineers have not been able to save even 10% or our larger rainfall even though we have hundreds of canyons that need only small, cheap dirt dams to become reservoirs.

An example: Next time you drive by the Miramar air base notice the many empty canyons and picture small dams in them to store its 3 billion gallons of yearly runoff.(Enough for all the households in La Jolla)

Engineers of our USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service are the world's best for planning this form of rainwater conservation. Our new Mayor and Congressman could make this happen immediately, saving us from paying the billion-dollar bill for Carlsbad's Desalination plant.

They could also show the 3% of our homeowners who use more tnan a million gallons yearly, as much as the Desalinator will produce, how to catch all their rainfall to keep their landscape green so that the rest of us don't have to pay for that scam.
james marple

San Diego, CA

#7 Mar 20, 2013
The LA Times says the Carlsbad Desalinator will cost "$3 to 4" billion, NOT less than one billion as local news services told us. Seems our public servants kind of forgot or misplaced some decimal points.

Who will pay off this debt, the 102,000 customers it wil serve? That would cost them $1,800 each for twenty years, making investors in this scheme real happy.

But no way the people who use this water will stand that cost, so it will have to be paid by all of us, just so that pastures and lawns and golf courses won't be damaged by salty Colorado River water.

Not to worry, though, the clever SDCWA planners cooked up a deal to delay the increases for more than five years until they are safely pensioned out.
james marple

San Diego, CA

#10 May 10, 2013
Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 3:06 PM
Subject: CRWM Comment to RAC committee

    An abbreviated summary of comments by members 
    of Citizens for Responsible Watershed Management:

        ~~
- The process of formulating comprehensive watershed management plans for each river basin in San Diego and adjacent counties would provide a clear view of all planning options. This, then, would allow residents to understand land, water, energy and transit matters fully and therefore be able to participate effectively in this planning.

- The three California Resource Conservation Districts of this area were created and empowered for the specific purpose of managing land and water in the most equitable and cost-effective manner. RAC committee members could learn about this planning by accessing federal and state experts who would fully inform them and the general public of all costs and benefits. 

- Diligent application of the ordinary, low-tech land planning methods recommended by these experts would accomplish proper management of land and water resources at less cost and with more public benefits than ongoing planning. The Best Management Practices of the USDA and the Low Impact Development of the USEPA can be implemented immediately by revising policies of local agencies to bring compliance with the letter and spirit of State statutes.

- CRWM comments posted on the UT online forum and several local TOPIX forums discuss various aspects of land/water/energy management. These are intricately interconnected and must therefore be dealt with as a package of planning options rather than as  separate problems. The CRWM model comprehensive watershed management program for the Santa Margarita and other rivers was designed by federal and state experts with this feature a central focus. It may be viewed at the EMA-RCD office in Murrieta or in Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District files.

The problem most frequently cited in CRWM critiques of IRWM-RAC activity was the considerable size and  complexity of its "Planning Study Recommendations for San Diego IRWM Program" and "Strategic Plan for the Future of Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)". County and municipal employees pointed out that this "information overload" causes inattention that precludes thoughtful response. Put another way; Obviously excessive and/or irrelevant detail plus convoluted planning confuses and distracts RAC members so that critical issues get too little attention.

- Members of the RAC committee appear, collectively, deficient in levels of education and specialized training that would permit them to judge the matters in this list wisely by applying lessons of their life experience.  Formally trained planners speak this language, the general public that pays their wage does not. Less verbiage would help committee members interact and input more effectively. 

- The core element land/water resource planning advocated by USDA-NRCS experts is recognizing that rainwater managed from wherever it falls to its point of use becomes a valuable asset rather than a nuisance, a destructive force or a hazard. This "onsite retention" focus, explicitly prescribed by California Legislators in their original Water Code, is standard practice in major metropolitan areas, with the policies and practices that have been hugely successful in Fresno and Phoenix wholly applicable to our situation.

- The RAC committee cannot in good conscience contiue to ignore its obligation to present complete and accurate information to stakeholders so that they may make wise decisions in coming elections.  Only in this way can ongoing planning be steered in the proper direction to produce the most cost-effective and publicly beneficial planning of water resource management.  

James Marple for CRWM
james marple

San Diego, CA

#11 Dec 9, 2013
Its good to see that members of this forum have enough income
to not mind paying five times as much per gallon for water as the
10% of San Diego water customers who use 65% of our total supply.

A person in a small home with no lawn will commonly use less than
748 gallons per month and pay $3.00 per 100 gallons for it.
A person in an estate with luxuriant landscaping will commonly use
a million gallons yearly, and pay 61 cents per 100 gallons for it.

If the same rate applied to both then the estate owner
would pay $30,000 not just $6,000.

But our public servants have deceived and coerced us
into subsidizing preferred water customers who save
on average $24,000 yearly because we 'ordinary'
folks pay 80% of their bill.

This outrageously unfair rate system is ignored by 'liberal'
and 'conservative' politicians because both parties share in
the benefits of this practice. Most voters don't know about
it so keep on electing the professional politicians who use
government to support their life styles.

So 450,000 of us pay the $24,000 yearly on average that
luxury estate and golf course homeowners do not pay.
james marple

San Diego, CA

#12 Jan 5, 2014
An outraged public works employee demanded that we cease our
"slurs" on his agency.
We asked her to provide responses to our posts showing that its
website was presenting a false picture of our rainwater supply
and the costs of saving as much of it as we need.
After she simmered down she agreed to see if she could do this.
We look forward to a response from County officials.
But we don't expect to get one.
Even their best professional liars cannot effectively discredit
simple truths such as the amount of rainfall and the amount used.
james marple

San Diego, CA

#13 Feb 25, 2014
Does the following data tell us why we see only feeble interest from
San Diego males in protecting their family's health and welfare?
How much has a half-century of drinking and bathing-swImming in
imported Colorado River water affected the past two generations?

Lake Mead, the largest reservoir in the USA, is directly above where
MWD pumps its water to San Diego. In 2001 it turned green from
algae due to wastewater and synthetic chemicals from residential-
irrigation water runoff and sewage effluent from treatment plants.

The chemicals include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons,
polychlorinated biphenyls, organochlorine pesticides (DDT etc) and
contaminants such as fragrances/musks, flame retardants, triclosan
and its breakdown products,and pharmaceuticals.

Many of these interact with the endocrine system to cause reproductive
impacts in glands and tissues including the hypothalamus, pituitary,
thyroid, adrenal, thymus, pancreas, ovaries, testes and others. These
release hormones that control development, growth, reproduction and
behavior. In some species hormones determine whether individuals
become male or female during their early development.

Synthetic chemicals known to cause endocrine disruption include
diethylstilbestrol, ethynylestradiol, dioxins, PCBs, perchlorate, heavy
metals and others with estrogenic (feminizing) activity.
EDCs attack embryonic brain tissue and stunt growing brains.

fact sheet:[url]http://www.niehs.ni h.gov/oc/factsheets/pdf/endocr ine.pdf[/url]

The Colorado River water we buy is far more polluted than a North
Carolina river that suffered a coal ash spill proudly liberal reporters
are hyping in an effort to discredit the Republican majority.
That river's water is so clean that downstream residents have not
been dumbed down, were smart enough to recognize and throw out
the Democrats who have kept them inpoverished for over a century.
james marple

San Diego, CA

#14 May 11, 2014
A San Francisco resident upset about sewage effluent being mixed
with the pure mountain water supply of his city called to request a copy
of the CRWM North Coast Pipeline Plan. We suggested that he contact
impartial civil engineers from outside the state to discuss details of
this water supply option that CA planners buried from public sight.

I pointed out that the concept is simple: Take advantage of the fact
that as much rain runs off to the ocean from rivers and creeks along
the coast north of Frisco in a week each winter as S CA uses yearly.
We only need to design a system that will catch this as it flows out of
the many dozen rivers and creeks and feed it into a tube laid along
the shallow shoreline as a self-powered flow aided by wave action.

This would be a significant project, of course, but reinforced plastic
liners have been perfected for huge landfills so that capable engineers
could get it done quickly. Planners would hang a curtain to close off a
small part of San Francisco Bay to store part of the flow and a trillion
gallons would be pumped south to meet all S CA needs. The slimy
Sacramento River would then restore its Delta to health without us
having to contribute another $3,500 per home.

The North Coast receives 300,000 gallons more rain per acre than the
million per acre falling on the Mt Shasta watershed. This reveals the
poor quality of information provided by civil engineers to planners when
dams in that area were constructed. 10+ trillion gallons have been lost
each year because we elected fools and crooks.

California's water "problems" have been self-imposed, a result of false
and misleading testimony by civil engineers and journalists

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

San Diego Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Low-income residents to receive free Christmas ... (Nov '06) 21 hr xp3nd3ja951 239
The 10 Best Little Italy Hotspots Thu nikolas1 1
San Diego city council to approve De Anza Cove ... Dec 17 Shea 2
San Diego city council approves De Anza Cove se... Dec 17 BGT 1
Second Doctor Implicated In La Jolla Surgeon's ... (Apr '08) Dec 17 StayAway 41
Earthquake Prediction San Diego Louie Lujan Dec 16 Time Chaser 19
Need Black Dec 15 Black Pete 1

Beach Hazards Statement for San Diego County was issued at December 19 at 1:34PM PST

San Diego Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

San Diego People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

San Diego News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in San Diego

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 7:17 pm PST