Texas’s Water Wars – The New Yorker

Report on the Texas Water Crisis and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

The state of Texas is confronting a severe water crisis, characterized by a growing imbalance between rapid population and industrial growth and diminishing freshwater supplies. This situation presents a significant challenge to achieving several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The conflict over water allocation pits industrial needs against residential and environmental requirements, undermining progress on SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation) and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities). Antiquated water governance policies, particularly the “rule of capture,” exacerbate the issue, creating obstacles to SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions). While recent legislative actions indicate a growing awareness and commitment to building resilient infrastructure in line with SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), the state faces a critical juncture in balancing economic ambitions with environmental stewardship and social equity.

Analysis of Water Scarcity and Competing Demands

The Corpus Christi Case Study: A Conflict of Development Goals

The situation in Corpus Christi, Texas’s eighth-largest city, exemplifies the statewide tension between industrial expansion and sustainable resource management. A plan to construct a desalination plant was initiated to supply water to new industrial facilities, including operations for ExxonMobil, Tesla, and Chemours, in pursuit of SDG 9. However, the project has stalled, leading to a direct conflict with other development priorities.

• Failure to Secure Water for Communities (SDG 6 & SDG 11): With the desalination plant unrealized and reservoirs at critically low levels due to drought, residents face water usage restrictions. In contrast, industrial operations have been largely exempt, highlighting an inequitable distribution of a vital resource and threatening the sustainability of the urban community.
• Environmental and Economic Risks (SDG 15 & SDG 8): Opposition to the plant centered on significant environmental concerns, including the disposal of saline byproduct, which poses a threat to marine ecosystems and the local fishing industry. This demonstrates a clash between industrial development and the protection of biodiversity (SDG 15: Life Below Water) and sustainable local economies (SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth).
• Infrastructure and Financial Viability: The project’s projected cost escalated from $140 million to over one billion dollars, leading the city council to withdraw funding and leaving the city’s long-term water supply strategy unresolved.

Statewide Water Stress and its Impact on Sustainable Development

The challenges in Corpus Christi are reflective of a broader, statewide crisis. The 2022 Texas Water Plan projects a population increase of over 70% by 2070, concurrent with an 18% decline in water supplies. This trend directly threatens the state’s long-term viability and its ability to meet key SDG targets.

1. Threats to Sustainable Cities (SDG 11): Major urban areas are already experiencing the consequences of groundwater depletion. In Houston and Dallas, land subsidence is causing damage to homes and infrastructure, compromising urban resilience.
2. Impact on Climate Action and Ecosystems (SDG 13 & SDG 15): The state is experiencing climate-related extremes, with severe droughts and major floods coexisting. This volatility, coupled with over-extraction, has led to the degradation of natural ecosystems, such as the drying of swimming holes in the Hill Country.
3. Economic and Agricultural Disruption (SDG 8 & SDG 2): Water scarcity is forcing agricultural operations to cease, as seen with the closure of the state’s last sugar mill and the fallowing of cotton fields. This impacts food security (SDG 2: Zero Hunger) and local economies.

Policy Frameworks and Institutional Challenges to SDG 6

The “Rule of Capture”: An Obstacle to Sustainable Water Management

A primary institutional barrier to achieving SDG 6 in Texas is its adherence to the “rule of capture” for groundwater. This legal doctrine allows landowners to pump unlimited amounts of water from beneath their property, regardless of the impact on neighbors or the aquifer system as a whole. This policy directly incentivizes unsustainable over-extraction and stands in contrast to the “reasonable use” doctrines adopted by every other Western state to manage shared water resources effectively.

The East Texas Conflict: A Case for Institutional Reform (SDG 16)

A recent proposal by hedge-fund manager Kyle Bass to extract and sell large volumes of groundwater from East Texas to Dallas suburbs has brought the inadequacy of the “rule of capture” into sharp focus. The plan, while legal under current law, generated significant public opposition from residents concerned about the depletion of their local aquifer. This conflict highlights the need for more effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions for water governance, a core tenet of SDG 16. The resulting public and legislative scrutiny may provide the impetus for modernizing Texas’s water laws to align with principles of sustainable and equitable management.

Legislative Response and Path Forward for Sustainable Development

Bipartisan Acknowledgment and Infrastructure Investment

There is growing bipartisan recognition of the water crisis, leading to significant legislative action. The state legislature has allocated $20 billion in sales-tax revenue for water infrastructure projects over the next two decades, a measure subsequently approved by voters via a constitutional amendment. This funding is a critical step toward building the resilient infrastructure required by SDG 9 and ensuring water security under SDG 6. The funds are intended for:

• Development of new water sources, including desalination plants.
• Creation of underground water storage facilities.
• Essential repairs to aging and leaky water pipes to improve efficiency.

Aligning Economic Growth with Environmental Stewardship

The successful passage of the funding amendment indicates a broad public understanding of the importance of water security. The ongoing challenge for Texas is to create a holistic policy framework that moves beyond crisis management. Achieving a sustainable future requires integrating the goals of economic growth (SDG 8) and industrial innovation (SDG 9) with the imperative to ensure clean water for all (SDG 6), build resilient communities (SDG 11), and protect vital ecosystems (SDG 15). This requires reforming outdated laws and fostering a statewide understanding that water resources are interconnected and finite.

Analysis of the Article in Relation to Sustainable Development Goals

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

1. SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation
   • The entire article revolves around the core themes of SDG 6, including water scarcity, access to drinking water, water quality, and the management of water resources. It discusses the conflict between residential and industrial water needs in Texas, the challenges of drought, and the search for new water sources like desalination and groundwater pumping.
2. SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
   • The article highlights the tension between industrial growth and sustainable infrastructure. It describes how Texas is attracting “thirsty industries” such as plastics plants, lithium refineries, and data centers, while the water infrastructure (like the stalled desalination plant and leaky pipes) is inadequate to support them sustainably. The proposed twenty-billion-dollar investment in water infrastructure directly relates to this goal.
3. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
   • The challenges faced by Texan cities like Corpus Christi, Houston, and Dallas are central to the article. Issues such as water shortages in Corpus Christi, subsidence (land sinkage) from groundwater depletion in Houston and Dallas, and the impacts of both drought and flooding demonstrate the struggle to make these urban areas resilient and sustainable.
4. SDG 13: Climate Action
   • The article explicitly connects the water crisis to climate-related hazards. It mentions that Texas is experiencing a “multiyear drought” and “historically low inflows to the reservoirs,” while also suffering from “heavy rains” and “major floods.” This coexistence of drought and flooding is presented as an increasing reality, highlighting the need for climate adaptation and resilience.
5. SDG 14: Life Below Water
   • The potential environmental consequences of the proposed desalination plant in Corpus Christi connect to this goal. The article notes concerns that disposing of the resulting “salty sludge” into the nearby bay “risks harming the ecosystem and destroying the fragile local fishing industry,” which is a direct threat to marine and coastal ecosystems.
6. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
   • The article discusses the role of governance and policy in the water crisis. It critiques Texas’s “antiquated approach to water policy,” specifically the “rule of capture,” which incentivizes over-pumping and creates conflict. The legislative debates, lawsuits over water rights, and community protests against water projects reflect the need for effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions to manage shared resources.

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

1. Under SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation
   • Target 6.1: By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all. The article highlights the threat to this target as “residents find that their drinking water has been promised to companies.”
   • Target 6.4: By 2030, substantially increase water-use efficiency across all sectors and ensure sustainable withdrawals and supply of freshwater to address water scarcity. This is the central conflict of the article, which details rising demand from a growing population and new industries against a backdrop of declining water supplies.
   • Target 6.5: By 2030, implement integrated water resources management at all levels. The critique of Texas’s “rule of capture” policy and the legislative efforts to create a more comprehensive state water plan are directly related to achieving better water management.
   • Target 6.b: Support and strengthen the participation of local communities in improving water and sanitation management. The article provides examples of this through the public opposition to the Corpus Christi desalination plant, where residents were arrested for protesting, and the community turnout against Kyle Bass’s groundwater pumping plan.
2. Under SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
   • Target 9.1: Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure… to support economic development and human well-being. The article discusses the need for new water infrastructure, including “desalination plants, underground storage, repairs for leaky pipes,” funded by a twenty-billion-dollar allocation.
   • Target 9.4: By 2030, upgrade infrastructure and retrofit industries to make them sustainable… with greater adoption of clean and environmentally sound technologies and industrial processes. The article shows a failure to meet this target, as new, water-intensive industries (ExxonMobil, Tesla, OpenAI) are moving in without the necessary sustainable water infrastructure in place.
3. Under SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
   • Target 11.5: By 2030, significantly reduce the number of deaths and the number of people affected… by disasters, including water-related disasters. The article mentions that “heavy rains this summer that killed more than a hundred people” and describes the dual threats of flooding and drought impacting communities.
4. Under SDG 13: Climate Action
   • Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries. The entire narrative of Texas grappling with “massive drought” and “major floods” and trying to secure its water future is an example of a region attempting to build resilience to climate impacts.
5. Under SDG 14: Life Below Water
   • Target 14.1: By 2030, prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities. The concern that the desalination plant’s salty sludge “risks harming the ecosystem” of the nearby bay directly addresses the prevention of marine pollution from industrial, land-based activities.

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

1. Indicators for Water Stress and Scarcity (related to Target 6.4)
   • The article provides several quantitative projections that serve as indicators of water stress. These include the state’s 2022 projection that “by 2070, the population is projected to increase by more than seventy per cent as water supplies decline by nearly eighteen per cent.” Another is the prediction of an “annual water deficit of up to twelve million acre-feet by 2050.”
2. Indicators for Disaster Impact (related to Target 11.5)
   • A direct indicator of disaster impact is mentioned: “heavy rains this summer that killed more than a hundred people.” This provides a specific mortality figure for a water-related disaster.
3. Indicators for Economic Impact (related to water scarcity)
   • The article implies economic indicators of water scarcity’s impact on agriculture and industry. These include the closure of “the state’s last sugar mill” and “cotton farmers are fallowing their fields.”
4. Indicators for Infrastructure Investment (related to Target 9.1)
   • A financial indicator for infrastructure development is explicitly stated: the legislature’s decision to “allocate twenty billion dollars of sales-tax revenue for water infrastructure” over the next two decades.
5. Indicators for Water Supply Emergency (related to Target 6.1)
   • The article mentions a specific threshold used by officials as an indicator: Corpus Christi might enter an “official water emergency—triggered when water demand is projected to exceed supply within six months.”

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: newyorker.com