TRANSITIONING INTO A SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MARKET Eastern Tule GSA Board Meeting May 3, 2018 Liz DaBramo, MS/MPP UC Berkeley
GSP POLICY POINTS • Share System • Safe Yield Allocation • Transitional Allocations and Period • Buffer Arrangements • Penalties for Overuse • Development Phase Recharge Activities • Allocation Decision-making • Allocation length
GSP POLICY POINTS • Share System • Safe Yield Allocation • Transitional Allocations and Period • Buffer Arrangements • Penalties for Overuse • Development Phase Recharge Activities • Allocation Decision-making • Allocation length
PROBLEM Groundwater Extraction 120,000 Gross Extraction of Groundwater in 100,000 ETGSA (acre-feet) 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 - Current Sustainable
TRANSITION OPTIONS Gross Extraction of Groundwater in 120,000 100,000 ETGSA (acre-feet) 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 - 0 5 10 15 20
TRANSITION COMPONENTS Length Rate Buffer Allocation
CRITERIA Stakeholder Groundwater Economic Domestic Water Acceptance Sustainability Impacts Availability
ROADMAP • Options • Criteria • Weigh the Tradeoffs • Rate • Groundwater sustainability • Questions • Length • Economic Impacts • Allocation • Domestic Water Availability • Buffer • Differential Impacts
TRANSITION RATE Curtailment Rate 100% Percentage of Initial Transitional Share 90% T otal Groundwater 80% Volume Over-extracted 70% 0 - 0 AF Allocation 60% 5 - 201,540 AF 50% 40% 10 - 422,027 AF 30% 15 - 630,113 AF 20% 20 - 808,225 AF 10% 0% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Years of Transition
• 85% of current • Curve is concave, groundwater use providing more water • 5 years of buffer to reach and flexibility upfront ROI and/or secure additional water supplies without reducing acreage 100% Percentage of Initial Transitional Share 90% 80% An adjustment • 70% period for a Allocation 60% potential change or 50% drop in the 40% sustainable yield. 0 30% 5 10 20% 15 10% 20 0% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Years of Transition
TRANSITION LENGTH GROUNDWATER LEVELS 325 320 Groundwater Head above Sea Level 315 Averaged in ETGSA (feet) Historic 0 310 5 10 305 15 20 300 295 290 285 280 1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035
TRANSITION LENGTH GROUNDWATER LEVELS Groundwater Levels in 2040 Compared to 2015 Groundwater Levels for Various Transition Lengths Difference in Groundwater Levels (feet) 6 5 4 3 2 1 -1 0 5 10 15 20 -2 -3
TRANSITION LENGTH ECONOMIC IMPACTS Total Agricultural Profit (2020-2040, in billions) 180 otal Agricultural Profit (Billion $) 160 $15.5 billion* 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 T *Depends significantly on 0 allocation method. Average 0 5 10 15 20 displayed. Length of Transition
TRANSITION LENGTH DOMESTIC WATER AVAILABILITY Maximum Groundwater Level Drop by Region (10-year transition) 25 20 15 (Feet) 10 5 0
TRANSITION LENGTH STAKEHOLDER ACCEPTANCE
ALLOCATION METHOD Proportional to historic use Equal by Equal by acre and district developed acre requirement
ALLOCATION GROUNDWATER LEVELS
ALLOCATION ECONOMIC IMPACTS Aggregate Profit (2020-2030) by Allocation Method (10-year transition, undiscounted) 80 otal profit 2020-2030 (Billion $) $77.7 70 $70.4 $68.3 60 50 40 30 20 10 T 0 Historical Use Equal by Developed Equal by Acre Acre
ALLOCATION ECONOMIC IMPACTS Aggregate Agricultural Profit (2020-2040) by Transition Length and Allocation Method 150 Aggregate Profit (Billion $) $150 $145 140 $143 130 120 110 100 Equal Equal Developed Historical 20 15 10
ALLOCATION DIFFERENTIAL IMPACTS Agricultural Profit Relative to Business-as-Usual by District and Allocation Method (2020-2030, undiscounted) Agricultural Profit Relative to 100% 80% Business as Usual 60% 40% 20% 0% Kern Tulare Porterville Saucilito Tea Pot Terra Bella Vandalia White Area Water Irrigation Irrigation Dome Water Irrigation Irrigation District District District District District District Historic Use Equal by Developed Acre Equal by Acre
ALLOCATION DIFFERENTIAL IMPACTS Relative Change in Profit Compared to Business-as-Usual by Crop Type and Allocation Method 140% Relative Change in Profit from 120% 100% Business as Usual 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Permanent Row Historic Use Equal by Developed Acre Equal by Acre
ALLOCATION DOMESTIC WATER AVAILABILITY G ALLONS PER Historic Use Equal by Minimum P ERSON UNDER Equal by Acre and District Developed Acre Allocation Requirement P ERMANENT S HARE 0.54 AF/acre 0.68 AF/ac 0.41-1.27 AF/ac 100 gallons/person/day A LLOCATIONS 52* 65* 131 1.05 Richgrove CSD Gallons/person/day Gallons/person/day Gallons/person/day AF/acre 208 262 158 0.26 Ducor CSD Gallons/person/day Gallons/person/day Gallons/person/day AF/acre 87* 110 196 0.62 City of Porterville Gallons/person/day Gallons/person/day Gallons/person/day AF/acre *Does not meet average water use of 100 gallons/person/day
BUFFER Percentage of Initial Transitional Share 120% 20-25% buffer 100% 80% Allocation 60% 40% 20% 0% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Years of Transition
WEIGH THE TRADEOFFS
Groundwater Economic Domestic Water Stakeholder Sustainability Impacts Availability Acceptance Equal by Acre 5 years Equal by Developed Acre Historic/District Equal by Acre 10 years Equal by Developed Acre Historic/District Equal by Acre 15 years Equal by Developed Acre Historic/District
Groundwater Economic Domestic Water Stakeholder Sustainability Impacts Availability Acceptance Equal by Acre 5 years Equal by Developed Acre Historic/District Equal by Acre 10 years Equal by Developed Acre Historic/District Equal by Acre 15 years Equal by Developed Acre Historic/District
QUESTIONS
Recommend
More recommend
