California’s Water: Energy and Water

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | October 1st, 2016

Energy and water use in the state are interconnected yet managed separately. This brief describes the synergies and tradeoffs between the two sectors and proposes way

Energy and water use in the state are interconnected yet managed separately. This brief describes the synergies and tradeoffs between the two sectors and proposes ways to increase the efficiency and sustainability of both. This publication is part of a briefing kit that summarizes a dozen of the state’s most pressing water management issues.

Carbon Footprint Planning: Quantifying Local and State Mitigation Opportunities for 700 California Cities

Urban Planning (Cogitatio) | April 17th, 2018

Consumption-based greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventories have emerged to describe full life cycle contributions of households to climate change at country, st

Consumption-based greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventories have emerged to describe full life cycle contributions of households to climate change at country, state and increasingly city scales. Using this approach, how much carbon foot- print abatement potential is within the control of local governments, and which policies hold the most potential to reduce emissions? This study quantifies the potential of local policies and programs to meet aggressive GHG reduction targets using a consumption-based, high geospatial resolution planning model for the state of California. We find that roughly 35% of all carbon footprint abatement potential statewide is from activities at least partially within the control of local governments. The study shows large variation in the size and composition of carbon footprints and abatement opportu- nities by ∼23,000 Census block groups (i.e., neighborhood-scale within cities), 717 cities and 58 counties across the state. These data and companion online tools can help cities better understand priorities to reduce GHGs from a comprehensive, consumption-based perspective, with potential application to the full United States and internationally.

Central Valley Basin: A Comprehensive Report on the Development of the Water and Related Resources of the Central Valley Basin for Irrigation, Power Production and Other Beneficial Uses in California, and Comments by the State of California and Federal Agencies

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | August 15th, 1949

Climate Action Plan Phase 1 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan Update 2023

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | March 22nd, 2024

DWR developed the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan Update 2023 (Update 2023) to review its GHG reductions since Update 2020 and to update strategies for further re

DWR developed the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan Update 2023 (Update 2023) to review its GHG reductions since Update 2020 and to update strategies for further reduction consistent with legislative changes, including the GHG emissions reduction targets established in SB 1020 (2022) and SB 1203 (2022). It also includes DWR’s new role in emergency energy generation. Since the 2012 Plan was adopted, California’s wholesale electricity market has also seen a significant increase in renewable resources. To reflect this change and to align with industry practice in emission reporting, Update 2023 incorporates updated emission factors to determine emissions from unspecified market resources.

Climate Action Plan Phase 1: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | May 18th, 2012

The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) in an effort to reduce its impact on the environment and lead by example, has developed this Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emiss

The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) in an effort to reduce its impact on the environment and lead by example, has developed this Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Reduction Plan to guide its project development and decision making with respect to energy use and GHG emissions. It is now clearly understood that these gases enhance the Earth’s ability to absorb and retain the heat radiated from the sun. Increased concentrations of GHGs in the atmosphere are the principal cause of anthropogenic climate change. As the connection between GHG emissions and climate change has strengthened and California has established GHG policies and reduction goals, DWR has focused on its own GHG emissions and developed strategies to reduce its contribution to the global problem of climate change consistent with those policies and goals. This GHG Emissions Reduction Plan (Plan) is the first Phase in DWR’s Climate Action Plan and considers GHG emissions from all DWR activities. In this Plan, DWR details its progress and future plans for reducing GHG emissions consistent with the GHG emissions reduction targets established in Assembly Bill (AB) 32, Executive Order S-3-05, and DWR’s own policies, the aggressive steps it will take to reduce its emissions by over 80% below 1990 levels, and the steps that it will take to monitor its progress toward achieving these reductions. DWR estimates that its total GHG emissions in 1990 were nearly 3.5 million metric tons, roughly the equivalent of a coal fired power plant or 680,000 passenger cars. Most of these emissions were released as a result of generation of electricity used to move water through the State Water Project (SWP), which DWR owns and operates. Since 1990, DWR’s GHG emissions have fluctuated due to hydrologic conditions, water demands, and energy resources. DWR GHG emissions peaked in 2003 at over 4.1 million metric tons per year. This Plan shows how DWR will make substantial reductions in its GHG emissions in the near-term (present to 2020) and how it will continue to reduce emissions beyond 2020 to achieve its long-term (2050) GHG emissions reduction goals.

Climate Change Effects on the High-Elevation Hydropower System with Consideration of Warming Impacts on Electricity Demand and Pricing

California Energy Commission (CEC) | July 31st, 2012

While only about 30 percent of California’s usable water storage capacity lies at higher elevations, high-elevation hydropower units generate, on average, 74 percent of

While only about 30 percent of California’s usable water storage capacity lies at higher elevations, high-elevation hydropower units generate, on average, 74 percent of California’s instate hydroelectricity. In general, high-elevation plants have small man-made reservoirs and rely mainly on snowpack. Their low built-in storage capacity is a concern with regard to climate warming. Snowmelt is expected to shift to earlier in the year, and the system may not be able to store sufficient water for release in high-demand periods. Previous studies have explored the climate warming effects on California’s high-elevation hydropower system by focusing on the supply side (exploring the effects of hydrological changes on generation and revenues) but they have ignored the warming effects on hydropower demand and pricing. This study extends the previous work by simultaneous consideration of climate change effects on high-elevation hydropower supply and demand in California. Artificial Neural Network models were developed as long-term price estimation tools, to investigate the impact of climate warming on energy prices. California’s Energy-Based Hydropower Optimization Model (EBHOM) was then applied, to estimate the adaptability of California’s high-elevation hydropower system to climate warming, considering the warming effects on hydropower supply and demand. The model was run for dry and wet warming scenarios, representing a range of hydrological changes under climate change. The model’s results relative to energy generation, energy spills, reservoir energy storage, and average shadow prices of energy generation and storage capacity expansion are examined and discussed. The modeling results are compared with previous studies to emphasize the need to consider climate change effects on hydroelectricity demand and pricing when exploring the effects of climate change on California’s hydropower system.

Climate change impacts on water resources and hydropower potential in the Upper Colorado River Basin

Journal of Hydrology (Elsevier) | April 23rd, 2015

Precipitation projections from climate models vary up to 16%; flow projections revealed greater differences, up to 50%. The climate models projected increase in t

Precipitation projections from climate models vary up to 16%; flow projections revealed greater differences, up to 50%. The climate models projected increase in temperature at low elevations with extreme seasonality at high elevations, although summer temperatures increased at all elevations. The models projected a 60% decline in precipitation at lower elevations and a 74% increase at high elevations, although precipitation declined during the summer months at all elevations. Using the A2 scenario an overall decrease in annual flow was predicted, attributed to a reduction in precipitation and increasing temperature trends; however, this was not consistent during the winter months, which showed an increase in precipitation at high elevations and a modest temperature increase during the winter and resulted in an increase in stream flow. The responses to climate change on reservoir levels varied basin-wide due to variability in precipitation, evapotranspiration, and stream flow. Simulations indicated that water levels in Blue Mesa Reservoir (the largest reservoir in the UCRB) would decline by more than 70% with increasing annual temperatures. Reservoirs with smaller surface areas to the volume ratio were not significantly impacted by evapotranspiration. Our results indicate that hydropower management strategies in the UCRB must adapt to potential climate change, but the required adaptations are dependent on several factors including reservoir size and location.

Curbing the Colorado

Scientific American | April 1st, 1922

Already, the electrical engineer has shown how the snows of the high Sierras can be transformed into energizing current distributable for hundreds of miles through a S

Already, the electrical engineer has shown how the snows of the high Sierras can be transformed into energizing current distributable for hundreds of miles through a State which i s notably deficient in deposits of power-producing coal. Similarly, this same technicist is busy planning ways by which the widely diversified flow of the second largest of our rivers, the Colorado, may be stabilized and utilized to operate a number of immense, hydroelectric stations. The Colorado River drains a watershed covering fully 250,000 square miles, and in the course of a twelvemonth its run-off  amounts to 16,000,000 acre-feet of water. The States affected by the movement of the Colorado are Nevada, Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, and California. Normally, the Colorado runs to extremes : in dry seasons it is low and its speed of travel comparatively sluggish, but when the melting snows and rains of the wet months pour their fullness into the far-flung basin the river becomes a raging, torrential stream capable of doing an enormous amount of damage. Uncontrolled, this great waterway is a continual menace to the lives and the property of dwellers in the Imperial Valley and in the adjacent lands, lying below the level of the sea and situated both in the United States and in Mexico.

Dams within Jurisdiction of the State of California

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | October 31st, 2023

Data from Exploratory Sampling of Groundwater in Selected Oil and Gas Areas of Coastal Los Angeles County and Kern and Kings Counties in Southern San Joaquin Valley, 2014–15

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | December 9th, 2016

Exploratory sampling of groundwater in coastal Los Angeles County and Kern and Kings Counties of the southern San Joaquin Valley was done by the U.S. Geological Survey fr

Exploratory sampling of groundwater in coastal Los Angeles County and Kern and Kings Counties of the southern San Joaquin Valley was done by the U.S. Geological Survey from September 2014 through January 2015 as part of the California State Water Resources Control Board’s Water Quality in Areas of Oil and Gas Production Regional Groundwater Monitoring Program. The Regional Groundwater Monitoring Program was established in response to the California Senate Bill 4 of 2013 mandating that the California State Water Resources Control Board design and implement a groundwater-monitoring program to assess potential effects of well-stimulation treatments on groundwater resources in California. The U.S. Geological Survey is in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board to collaboratively implement the Regional Groundwater Monitoring Program through the California Oil, Gas, and Groundwater Project. Many researchers have documented the utility of different suites of chemical tracers for evaluating the effects of oil and gas development on groundwater quality. The purpose of this exploratory sampling effort was to determine whether tracers reported in the literature could be used effectively in California. This reconnaissance effort was not designed to assess the effects of oil and gas on groundwater quality in the sampled areas. A suite of water-quality indicators and geochemical tracers were sampled at groundwater sites in selected areas that have extensive oil and gas development. Groundwater samples were collected from a total of 51 wells, including 37 monitoring wells at 17 multiple-well monitoring sites in coastal Los Angeles County and 5 monitoring wells and 9 water-production wells in southern San Joaquin Valley, primarily in Kern and Kings Counties. Groundwater samples were analyzed for field water-quality indicators; organic constituents, including volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds and dissolved organic carbon indicators; naturally present inorganic constituents, including trace elements, nutrients, major and minor ions, and iron species; naturally present stable and radioactive isotopes; dissolved noble gases; dissolved standard and hydrocarbon gases, ?13C of methane, ethane, and ?2H of methane. In total, 249 constituents and water-quality indicators were measured. Four types of quality-control samples (blanks, replicates, matrix spikes, and surrogates spiked in environmental and blank samples) were collected at approximately 10 percent of the wells. The quality-control data were used to determine whether the groundwater-sample data were of sufficient quality for the measured analytes to be used as potential indicators of oil and gas effects. The data from the 51 groundwater samples and from the quality-control samples are presented in this report.