California Surface Water Costs Triple During Drought – UC Davis

Report on California’s Water Price Volatility and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Introduction: Climate Change and Water Scarcity

A recent economic study from the University of California, Davis, highlights the severe impact of climate change on California’s water resources, directly challenging the achievement of several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The state’s increasing oscillation between extreme drought and heavy precipitation, a clear manifestation of climate-related hazards, places significant pressure on water supplies. This volatility undermines progress towards SDG 13 (Climate Action) by demonstrating a lack of resilience to climate impacts and threatens water security, a cornerstone of SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation).

2.0 Economic Analysis of Water Pricing

The study, published in Nature Sustainability, analyzed water transaction data from 2010 to 2022. The findings reveal extreme price instability for surface water, which has profound implications for economic and social sustainability.

2.1 Key Findings

• Surface Water Price Volatility: During drought periods, the price of surface water from rivers and reservoirs increases by an average of $487 per acre-foot, more than tripling the cost compared to an average wet year. This instability directly impacts the affordability of water, a key target of SDG 6, and threatens the viability of agriculture, which is central to SDG 2 (Zero Hunger).
• Groundwater Price Stability: In contrast, groundwater prices remained consistently stable throughout the study period, irrespective of precipitation levels. This suggests groundwater basins are a more resilient resource for mitigating the economic shocks of climate change.

3.0 Integrated Water Management as a Sustainable Solution

The report advocates for the conjunctive management of surface and groundwater resources as a critical strategy for achieving water security and economic stability. This approach directly aligns with SDG 6.5, which calls for the implementation of integrated water resources management at all levels.

3.1 Benefits of an Integrated Approach

1. Price Stabilization: Coordinated management can buffer against extreme price swings, ensuring more predictable and affordable water access for agricultural and urban users, thereby supporting SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).
2. Enhanced Storage Capacity: Utilizing California’s vast groundwater basins for storing surplus surface water is a more sustainable alternative to constructing new reservoirs, which carry significant fiscal, social, and environmental costs that conflict with SDG 15 (Life on Land).
3. Climate Resilience: A unified water management system strengthens the state’s capacity to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change, a primary objective of SDG 13.

4.0 Policy and Governance Challenges

Achieving integrated water management faces significant legal and policy hurdles. California’s complex system of water rights and the nascent implementation of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) present challenges.

4.1 Policy Considerations for SDG Alignment

• Water Rights Modernization: The current seniority-based system for surface water and the lack of formal rights for most groundwater basins impede coordinated management.
• Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA): The SGMA is a critical policy instrument for advancing SDG 6. Its requirement for groundwater basins to achieve sustainability by 2040 necessitates an integrated approach to water resource planning and governance. Successful implementation will be crucial for building long-term water resilience.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

  The article’s core focus is on the management of water resources in California, specifically the challenges of managing surface water and groundwater amidst climate extremes. It discusses water availability, pricing, and storage, which are central to ensuring the sustainable management of water.

• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure

  The text discusses water storage infrastructure, including reservoirs, dams, and groundwater basins. It evaluates the potential and costs of building new infrastructure (“building new reservoirs, raising dams”) versus utilizing existing natural infrastructure like groundwater basins more effectively.

• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

  The article highlights how water price volatility and scarcity affect communities and farmers. The goal of stabilizing water prices through better management aims to make communities more resilient to the economic shocks caused by climate-driven events like droughts.

• SDG 13: Climate Action

  The article directly links the water supply challenges in California to climate change, stating, “As climate change drives more intense and frequent dry and wet cycles, pressure on California’s water supplies grows.” The entire discussion is framed as a response to the impacts of climate change, emphasizing the need for adaptation and resilience.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The article touches upon the legal and policy frameworks governing water in California. It mentions the “system of water rights,” the role of courts in adjudicating disputes, and the “Sustainable Groundwater Management Act,” which requires groundwater agencies to develop sustainable plans. This points to the need for effective and transparent institutions to manage shared resources.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• Target 6.5: By 2030, implement integrated water resources management at all levels, including through transboundary cooperation as appropriate.

  The article strongly advocates for this target by suggesting that “managing groundwater and surface water together could keep water prices steady.” The discussion of California’s separate management systems for surface and groundwater and the challenges posed by the water rights system highlights the need for a more integrated approach.

• Target 9.1: Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure… to support economic development and human well-being.

  This target is relevant to the discussion of water storage. The article points out that “California groundwater basins can store eight to 12 times more water than all the state’s reservoirs combined,” suggesting that leveraging this natural infrastructure is key to building resilience. It also weighs the high “fiscal, environmental and social costs” of building new reservoirs.

• Target 11.5: By 2030, significantly reduce… the number of people affected and substantially decrease the direct economic losses… caused by disasters, including water-related disasters.

  The article identifies drought as a recurring disaster whose economic impact is severe, causing surface water prices to “triple.” The study’s goal of finding ways to “keep water prices steady” is directly aimed at reducing the economic losses for communities and farmers affected by these climate-driven water shortages.

• Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries.

  The entire article is about adapting to the “climate extremes” of “powerful storms to punishing droughts” driven by climate change. The research proposes a strategy—joint management of surface and groundwater—to strengthen California’s resilience and help it “better weather future climate swings.”

• Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.

  This target is addressed through the mention of the “Sustainable Groundwater Management Act,” a policy that mandates local groundwater agencies to develop and implement plans to achieve sustainability by 2040. This represents an institutional effort to manage a critical resource effectively and transparently.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicator for Target 6.5: The price of water.

  The article provides a clear economic indicator of water stress and management inefficiency: the price of surface water. It states that drought pushes the price “up by $487 per acre-foot, more than triple the cost during an average wet year.” A reduction in this price volatility would indicate progress towards integrated and more efficient water management.

• Indicator for Target 9.1: Water storage capacity.

  The article provides a quantitative measure of infrastructure capacity by stating that “California groundwater basins can store eight to 12 times more water than all the state’s reservoirs combined.” Progress could be measured by the increased use of this groundwater storage capacity for surplus surface water, a practice the article suggests is not widely adopted.

• Indicator for Target 11.5/13.1: Economic losses from water-related disasters.

  The tripling of water costs during drought is a direct measure of economic loss. Tracking this cost over time would serve as an indicator of California’s resilience and adaptive capacity. A stabilization or decrease in price spikes during future droughts would signify increased resilience.

• Indicator for Target 16.6: Level of implementation of integrated water resource management plans.

  The article implies an indicator through its reference to the “Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.” Progress can be measured by the number of groundwater agencies complying with the act and the extent to which they meet the mandated “sustainability targets by 2040.”

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: miragenews.com