Why It Matters: San Diego may rethink water recycling program – KPBS

Report on San Diego’s Pure Water Project and Sustainable Development Goal Alignment

Project Overview and Contribution to SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation)

The City of San Diego’s Pure Water project is a major infrastructure initiative designed to enhance regional water security and sustainability. The project’s core objective is to create a safe, locally controlled, and drought-proof water supply through advanced water purification technology. This initiative is in direct alignment with the principles of Sustainable Development Goal 6.

• Phase 1: This phase, which is nearing completion, is set to recycle 30 million gallons of wastewater per day.
• SDG 6 Alignment: The project directly contributes to key targets within SDG 6:
  • Target 6.3: By treating municipal wastewater and promoting water recycling, the project improves water quality and increases the safe reuse of water resources.
  • Target 6.4: It aims to substantially increase water-use efficiency and ensure a sustainable supply of fresh water, addressing water scarcity.

Economic and Governance Challenges Impacting SDG 11 and SDG 17

Despite its environmental benefits, the project faces significant economic and governance hurdles, particularly concerning the implementation of Phase 2. These challenges highlight complexities in achieving SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

1. Water Surplus and Financial Strain: San Diego currently has an abundance of water due to purchase agreements with agricultural suppliers and a desalination plant. This surplus complicates the financial viability of adding more recycled water to the system.
2. Inter-Agency Conflict: A dispute has arisen between the City of San Diego and the County Water Authority. The Authority warns that if the city produces more of its own water and buys less from the county, the Authority will be forced to raise rates on its remaining water sales to cover fixed costs. This lack of cohesive partnership undermines the collaborative spirit of SDG 17.
3. Consumer Impact: The financial model has resulted in a proposed compounded 32% water rate increase over two years, creating affordability concerns for residents and potentially hindering progress towards an equitable and sustainable city as envisioned in SDG 11.

Future Outlook and Policy Reconsiderations for SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production)

The ongoing debate has led officials to reconsider the scope and timing of Phase 2. The project’s future hinges on balancing long-term sustainability with immediate economic realities, a core tenet of SDG 12, which promotes sustainable consumption and production patterns.

• Re-evaluation of Phase 2: Officials, including the chairman of the County Water Authority, have indicated that the scale of Phase 2 is being rethought to better align with regional water needs and financial capacity.
• Policy Decisions: The city council approved a rate increase for only two years, instead of the four years originally requested, signaling a cautious approach.
• Path Forward: Achieving a sustainable outcome requires an integrated approach that aligns the goals of water independence (SDG 6), urban resilience (SDG 11), and responsible resource management (SDG 12) with effective multi-stakeholder partnerships (SDG 17) to ensure financial stability and public benefit.

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: This is the most central SDG, as the article’s main topic is the “Pure Water” project, which involves recycling sewage to create a new source of drinking water. It also touches upon water management, supply, and the cost of water services.
• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure: The article describes the “Pure Water” project as “one of the largest infrastructure projects ever undertaken in the region.” This directly relates to developing sustainable, resilient, and innovative infrastructure to manage essential resources like water.
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: The project is a municipal initiative by the City of San Diego aimed at securing its water supply. The debate over the project’s expansion and its impact on water rates for residents directly concerns the provision of basic services in an urban setting and their affordability.

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 directly addresses the affordability aspect of this target by discussing the “compounded 32% water rate increase over the next two years” and the concern that “water rates could get even worse” if Phase 2 proceeds, making it harder for consumers to afford water.
   • Target 6.3: “By 2030, improve water quality by… substantially increasing recycling and safe reuse globally.” The entire “Pure Water” project is an embodiment of this target. Phase 1 alone “will recycle 30 million gallons of sewage per day,” which is a direct action to increase water recycling and reuse.
2. Under SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure):
   • Target 9.1: “Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure… with a focus on affordable and equitable access for all.” The article highlights the development of large-scale, sustainable water infrastructure (the “Pure Water” project). However, it also brings into focus the challenge of ensuring “affordable and equitable access,” as the project’s cost is leading to significant rate hikes for consumers.
3. Under SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities):
   • Target 11.1: “By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services…” Water is a fundamental basic service for a city’s residents. The debate over rising water bills and the city’s decision to approve a “32% water rate increase” directly relates to the challenge of maintaining affordable access to this basic service.

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

• For Target 6.3 (Increasing Recycling): A clear quantitative indicator is mentioned for the scale of the water recycling effort. The article states that “Phase 1 will recycle 30 million gallons of sewage per day.” This figure can be used to measure the volume of wastewater being safely reused.
• For Target 6.1 and 11.1 (Affordability of Water): The article provides a direct indicator of the changing cost of water for consumers. The “compounded 32% water rate increase over the next two years” is a specific metric that reflects the challenge of maintaining water affordability.
• For Target 9.1 (Infrastructure Investment): The financial scale of the project is provided as an indicator of the investment in sustainable infrastructure. The article mentions that the project’s “Phase 1 nears completion” at a cost of “$1.5 billion.” This figure represents the capital investment in developing this resilient water source.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: kpbs.org