Drinking Water of Almost a Million Californians Failed to Meet State Requirements

Almost 400 Water Systems in California Fail to Meet Safe Drinking Water Requirements

By Rachel Becker, Calmatters

Almost 400 water systems serving nearly a million Californians don’t meet state requirements for safe and reliable drinking water supplies — and fixing them would cost billions of dollars.

More than two-thirds of these failing water systems serve communities of color, and more than half are in places struggling with poverty and pollution, according to an annual assessment released today by the State Water Resources Control Board.

Water Systems Fail to Provide Safe Drinking Water

These water systems failed to provide water “which is at all times pure, wholesome, and potable,” as required. Some violated drinking water standards for chemicals, bacteria, taste or odor. Others rely on bottled water, or have failed to meet treatment, monitoring or other requirements.

About 913,000 people, as of Jan. 1, were served by the water systems that didn’t meet the requirements, dropping to about 771,000 as of today. Even more Californians, around 1.54 million, got their drinking water from hundreds of water systems considered at risk of failing, the report said — and it rose to more than 1.8 million as of today. Nearly 144,000 wells were threatened by encroaching contaminants and shortages.

Failing Water Systems Across the State

Failing water systems span the state — from tiny Del Norte County on the Oregon state line to San Diego and Imperial counties near the border with Mexico. They cluster densely in the Central Valley and along the Central Coast, where groundwater overuse, agricultural chemicals, and smaller, struggling water systems collide — particularly in lower income communities of color.

“It’s a moral outrage. It’s unconscionable in a state that has so many resources that we can’t ensure that everybody has access to the human right to water,” said Kyle Jones, policy and legal director with the Community Water Center. “Folks shouldn’t have to suffer health impacts or added cost to have access to something that most of us take for granted and can get daily.”

The Cost of Ensuring Safe Drinking Water

The price tag for ensuring safe, affordable and accessible water supplies for all Californians is staggering — an estimated $16 billion over the next five years — as the state grapples with a multibillion-dollar deficit.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

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

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production
• SDG 13: Climate Action

The article discusses the issue of failing water systems in California, which directly relates to SDG 6, which aims to ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all. The article also highlights the disproportionate impact on communities of color and those struggling with poverty and pollution, addressing SDG 10, which focuses on reducing inequalities. Additionally, the article mentions the challenges faced by rural communities, which connects to SDG 11’s goal of creating sustainable cities and communities. The cost of fixing the failing water systems and the need for responsible consumption and production are also mentioned, linking to SDG 12. Finally, the article mentions the impact of climate change on water systems, aligning with SDG 13’s goal of taking urgent action to combat climate change.

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

• Target 6.1: By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all.
• Target 6.2: By 2030, achieve access to adequate and equitable sanitation and hygiene for all and end open defecation, paying special attention to the needs of women and girls and those in vulnerable situations.
• Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion, or economic or other status.
• Target 11.1: By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe, and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade slums.
• Target 12.4: By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle, in accordance with agreed international frameworks, and significantly reduce their release to air, water, and soil to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment.
• Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries.

Based on the article’s content, the specific targets that can be identified are related to ensuring universal access to safe drinking water (Target 6.1), providing adequate sanitation and hygiene (Target 6.2), promoting social inclusion (Target 10.2), ensuring access to affordable housing and basic services (Target 11.1), managing chemicals and wastes responsibly (Target 12.4), and strengthening resilience to climate-related hazards (Target 13.1).

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

• Indicator 6.1.1: Proportion of population using safely managed drinking water services
• Indicator 6.2.1: Proportion of population using safely managed sanitation services, including a handwashing facility with soap and water
• Indicator 10.2.1: Proportion of people living below 50 percent of median income, disaggregated by sex, age, and persons with disabilities
• Indicator 11.1.1: Proportion of urban population living in slums, informal settlements, or inadequate housing
• Indicator 12.4.1: Number of parties to international multilateral environmental agreements on hazardous waste, including their compliance with the agreements and the extent of their implementation
• Indicator 13.1.1: Number of deaths, missing persons, and directly affected persons attributed to disasters per 100,000 population

The article does not explicitly mention specific indicators, but the identified targets can be measured using indicators such as the proportion of the population using safely managed drinking water services (Indicator 6.1.1), the proportion of the population using safely managed sanitation services (Indicator 6.2.1), the proportion of people living below 50 percent of median income (Indicator 10.2.1), the proportion of urban population living in slums or inadequate housing (Indicator 11.1.1), the number of parties to international multilateral environmental agreements on hazardous waste (Indicator 12.4.1), and the number of deaths, missing persons, and directly affected persons attributed to disasters (Indicator 13.1.1).

4. Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: edhat.com