Governor Katie Hobbs Will Begin Her Administration With A Water (And Power) Crisis

Above: Glen Canyon Dam, Lake Powell.

For eight years, climate denier Gov. Doug Ducey and his climate denier GQP-controlled Arizona legislature did little to nothing to address the impending water crisis long predicted to result from an historic megadrought in the western U.S. Their response was always “mañana.”

Last July Gov. Ducey signed landmark $1.2 billion ‘water protection’ bill:

The legislation will put $1 billion in the new Water Infrastructure Finance Authority, allowing the state to buy and own new water sources, offer grants, and build sustainable infrastructure for importing water into Arizona.

Senate President Karen Fan said that $200 million would go toward conservation to look at short-term water goals such as irrigation through Arizona. Another $800 to $1 billion will go toward new water projects to cover future efforts and refill aquifers.

As Gov. Ducey signed the bill, he said, “Arizona’s water future is secure.”

It can take years to decades to build a desalination plant from permitting to completion of construction, and importing water from the Mississippi River, as some have suggested, is a “pipe dream.” Dr. Laurence C. Smith explains, Long Stretches of the Mississippi River Have Run Dry. What’s Next?:

Last month, record low water levels in the Mississippi River backed up nearly 3,000 barges — the equivalent of 210,000 container trucks — on America’s most important inland waterway.

[T]his critical river and its tributaries — responsible for transporting more than $17 billion worth of farm products and 60 percent of all U.S. corn and soybean exports annually — has been stricken by drought since September, amid a time of global grain shortage and soaring food prices. While water levels will recover modestly this week, thanks to some upstream rain and snow, the long-term forecast remains dry.

Conditions are even worse in the southwestern United States, where an ongoing 22-year drought — now the harshest in 1,200 years — has shriveled Colorado River reservoirs, straining water supplies for farms, cities and hydropower from the Hoover Dam.

[E]conomic powerhouse rivers like these are being sucked dry not only by climate change but by fast-growing cities and farming operations that need more water. Agriculture is the single largest consumer of freshwater, and global food demand is still rising.

There are no new rivers left to tap. We must learn to do more with less.

Mañana is now today, and our water crisis is here. The Washington Post reports, Officials fear ‘complete doomsday scenario’ for drought-stricken Colorado River:

The first sign of serious trouble for the drought-stricken American Southwest could be a whirlpool.

It could happen if the surface of Lake Powell, a man-made reservoir along the Colorado River that’s already a quarter of its former size, drops another 38 feet down the concrete face of the 710-foot Glen Canyon Dam here. At that point, the surface would be approaching the tops of eight underwater openings that allow river water to pass through the hydroelectric dam.

The normally placid Lake Powell, the nation’s second-largest reservoir, could suddenly transform into something resembling a funnel, with water circling the openings, the dam’s operators say. [Like “circling the drain.”]

If that happens, the massive turbines that generate electricity for 4.5 million people would have to shut down — after nearly 60 years of use —or risk destruction from air bubbles. The only outlet for Colorado River water from the dam would then be a set of smaller, deeper and rarely used bypass tubes with a far more limited ability to pass water downstream to the Grand Canyon and the cities and farms in Arizona, Nevada and California.

Such an outcome — known as a “minimum power pool” — was once unfathomable here. Now, the federal government projects that day could come as soon as July. [Around the time that the next legislative session will adjourn sine die.]

Worse, officials warn, is the remote possibility of an even more catastrophic event. That is if the water level falls all the way to the lowest holes, so only small amounts could pass through the dam. Such a scenario — called “dead pool” — would transform Glen Canyon Dam from something that regulates an artery of national importance into a hulking concrete plug corking the Colorado River.

Anxiety about such outcomes has worsened this year as a long-running drought has intensified in the Southwest. Reservoirs and groundwater supplies across the region have fallen dramatically, and states and cities have faced restrictions on water use amid dwindling supplies. The Colorado River, which serves roughly 1 in 10 Americans, is the region’s most important waterway.

The 1,450-mile river starts in the Colorado Rockies and ends in the Sea of Cortez in Mexico. There are more than a dozen dams along the river, creating major reservoirs such as Lake Powell and Lake Mead.

On the way to such dire outcomes at Lake Powell — which federal officials have begun both planning for and working aggressively to avoid — scientists and dam operators say water temperatures in the Grand Canyon would hit a roller coaster, going frigid overnight and then heating up again, throwing the iconic ecosystem into turmoil. Lake Powell’s surface has already fallen 170 feet.

Lucrative industries that attract visitors from around the world — the rainbow trout fishery above Lees Ferry, rafting trips through the Grand Canyon — would be threatened. And eventually the only water escaping to the Colorado River basin’s southern states and Mexico could be what flows into Lake Powell from the north and sloshes over the lip of the dam’s lowest holes.

“A complete doomsday scenario,” said Bob Martin, deputy power manager at Glen Canyon Dam, as he peered down at the shimmering blue of Lake Powell from the rim of the dam.

‘A catastrophe for the entire system’

In August, the Bureau of Reclamation announced it would support studies to find out if physical modifications could be made to Glen Canyon Dam to allow water to be released below critical elevations, including dead pool. That implies studying such costly and time-consuming construction projects as drilling tunnels through the Navajo sandstone at river level, said Jack Schmidt, a Colorado River expert at Utah State University.

“There was a time in my professional career that if anybody from Reclamation ever said that, they’d be fired on the spot,” said Schmidt, who served as the chief of the U.S. Geological Survey’s Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center during the Obama administration. Even raising that issue is “a huge sea change telling you how different the world is.”

This year, the Biden administration called on the seven states of the Colorado River basin to cut water consumption by 2 to 4 million acre-feet — up to a third of the river’s annual average flow — to protect power generation and avoid such dire outcomes. But negotiations have not produced an agreement. And the Interior Department has not yet mandated those cuts, even after an August deadline passed for states to propose voluntary reductions.

But these types of ominous scenarios are starting to be considered. With Lake Powell at one-quarter full, Reclamation has begun a feasibility study on the prospect of harnessing the deeper bypass tubes for power generation. The entity that markets Glen Canyon’s electricity — the Western Area Power Administration, known as WAPA and part of the Energy Department — is working with two national laboratories to assess what electricity would be available for purchase if Glen Canyon shut down.

And construction is also underway on a project to install deeper pipes to protect the city of Page, Ariz., and its 7,000 residents, from losing its supply of drinking water.

The chances of hitting minimum power pool (lake elevation 3,490 feet above sea level) within the next two years is part of Reclamation’s minimum probable forecast, and more likely scenarios have water levels staying above that threshold. But researchers including Schmidt have documented how Reclamation’s projections have been too optimistic in recent years amid the warming climate and historic drought that is wringing water out of the West on a grand scale.

See, New estimates show Colorado River levels falling faster than expected (Sept. 2021).

“The critical part about what’s been happening and what climate change is forcing us to do is: We have to look more at the extremes,” said Tom Buschatzke, director of Arizona’s Department of Water Resources, said in an interview. “We’ve got to plan for the low end.”

Gov. Ducey and his GQP-controlled legislature have been unwilling to face this new climate reality. There are no mandatory water conservation rules currently in force to reduce water consumption. If water supply is not going to increase for the foreseeable future, then demand must be reduced to match limited water supplies. Arizona may well have surpassed its maximum sustainable population, based upon foreseeable and sustainable water supplies. This means instead of bringing more people into Arizona – our economic model since 1948 – people will begin leaving Arizona as climate refugees in search of places to Iive with sustainable water supplies.

Reclamation said in a statement it now relies on a more recent 30-year climatology window — 1991 to 2020 — to make forecasts, which leaves out the wet years of the 1980s and incorporates more drought, which “will improve accuracy and remove some biases.”

Buschatzke has also been raising the alarm about Lake Powell reaching dead pool — an elevation 120 feet below the threshold for producing power.

“It is a possibility. I can’t tell you the probability,” he said. “But that’s an outcome that would be not only an ecological disaster, but the world would have its attention on such an outcome in a very negative way.”

If that happens, “you’re not going to have a river,” he added. “It would be a catastrophe for the entire system.”

‘Huge problems for the Grand Canyon’

In the 23rd year of the Western drought, Lake Powell’s once crowded boat ramps end in sand. Dirt bikes roar across newly exposed shores. Exquisite arches and rock formations, lost when the reservoir filled in the 1960s, are re-emerging.

As the water has receded, so has the ability to produce power at Glen Canyon, as less pressure from the lake pushes the turbines. The dam already generates about 40 percent less power than what has been committed to customers, which includes dozens of Native American tribes, nonprofit rural electric cooperatives, military bases, and small cities and towns across several southwestern states. These customers would be responsible for buying power on the open market in the event Glen Canyon could not generate, potentially driving up rates dramatically.

The standard rate paid for Glen Canyon’s low-cost power is $30 per megawatt hour. On the open market, these customers last summer faced prices as high as $1,000 per megawatt hour, said Leslie James, executive director of the Colorado River Energy Distributors Association.

“That will be very financially damaging,” said Bryan Hill, the utility manager for Page, one of the cities that relies on the dam’s low-cost hydropower for one-third to half of its electricity needs. “Huge, for everybody. For businesses. For single moms. It will be a financial hardship.”

Glen Canyon’s electricity is important for the nation in other ways. The dam is what’s known as a “black start” facility for the country’s largest nuclear plant, the Palo Verde Generating Station in Arizona. This means the dam could bring the nuclear plant back online if it shut down and needed to restart.

In September, Glen Canyon sent about 80 megawatts of power to California for three hours at the height of its record-breaking heat wave, helping the state narrowly avoid rolling blackouts. It was the second time in the past few years that the dam has been called on to ramp up during emergencies threatening the electric grid, said Adam Arellano, an executive with the Western Area Power Administration.

“Those emergencies would probably happen more frequently without Glen Canyon Dam just because there’s such a small margin of available electricity during those really hot days,” he said. “That’s a very big thing.”

When Martin began working at Glen Canyon eight years ago, the drought had already taken a toll on the lake, but he never envisioned a day when the turbines might stop spinning.

“Everybody that works here, your focus, your mission, is to keep these units either running or keep them available to run,” he said. “So if you came into a powerhouse and it was quiet, that would kind of go against everything you’ve dedicated your career to.”

Being forced to switch to the four smaller bypass tubes would instantly cut the dam’s capacity to release water by two-thirds. If water levels and pressure fell further, these pipes would quickly lose the ability to deliver the millions of acre-feet of water the lower basin states consume each year, the Glen Canyon Institute wrote in a report in August on low water scenarios.

“That dam is just not capable of delivering water at lower levels. It’s going to create huge problems for the Grand Canyon,” said Eric Balken, the institute’s executive director.

Martin and others are now planning ways to stay productive if lake levels reach power pool, even temporarily. They expect a surge in maintenance projects — far easier to complete when turbines aren’t spinning — and are lining up materials for the jobs. He compared it to a farmer in winter, whose work doesn’t stop.

“What would have been a maintenance nightmare to coordinate, now the equipment is off and you can dive right in there and get all kinds of work done,” he said. “So kind of, we’re making lemonade with the lemons, I guess.”

A disrupted ecosystem

Julie Fleuridas rested on a red rock in Waterholes Canyon, her face flushed in the afternoon sun. For six hours, the 56-year-old Trader Joe’s employee and her friends had been paddleboarding down the Colorado River — from Glen Canyon Dam down to Lees Ferry, a 16-mile stretch popular with kayakers, fishermen and flotillas of paddleboarders.

“How far to Lees Ferry from here?” she asked Ted Kennedy, a U.S. Geological Survey research ecologist who was passing by.

“If you stay in the current, it will be less than an hour,” he said.

“Last time I did this, like six years ago, it was much quicker,” she said. “It’s just the water level is so low that the water is just not running fast. So it’s a lot of paddling.”

There are few people more intimately aware of those flows — and their impact on the web of fish and insect life through the Grand Canyon — than Kennedy. Since 2002, he has worked at the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center in Flagstaff, Ariz., and he has watched this stretch of river throughout this historic drought.

With Lake Powell so diminished, water temperatures have risen dramatically — from the high 40s when he started, to a record high of near 70 degrees this summer — as water closer to the surface is now passing through the dam. Swimming, once for the hardiest, is now commonplace.

The habitat for fish has also transformed. Warming waters have helped recover populations of the humpback chub in the Grand Canyon — a species reclassified from endangered to threatened last year — as it became warm enough to spawn. But the fate of these and other native fish are now confronting fresh threats: the smallmouth bass, a voracious predator.

“This is basically the start of an invasion of a new species,” Kennedy said.

Dozens of these bass, including juveniles, have been caught this year in the first 15 miles below Lake Powell — as more of the surface swimmers get sucked through the turbines — prompting an aggressive effort to assess their numbers and block them from the Grand Canyon.

“I believe the smallmouth bass presents a clear and present danger to the humpback chub and other threatened native fish in the Grand Canyon,” Ed Keable, superintendent of Grand Canyon National Park, said in an interview. The record-high temperatures “could allow smallmouth bass to reproduce within the entire river system for the first time.”

The federal government has begun fighting back on several fronts — from poisoning tributaries to shocking the water with electricity. Some fishing guides worry these methods to eliminate bass will be both futile at stopping the predator and harmful to another important industry: the renowned rainbow trout fishery and the lodges that service it.

Water temperatures have already risen so high — and dissolved oxygen levels fallen so low — as to start harming the trout, according to fishermen and scientists. Dave Foster, a former USGS scientist who has been guiding fishermen for more than three decades, has turned away clients this year after catching weakened trout he can’t revive. He worries an expanded electro-fishing effort will be another major blow.

“There will be a negative impact on the trout population,” he said. “It’s really pretty disconcerting to me.”

The trout and the threatened chub could get a reprieve, at least temporarily, if lake levels continue to fall. If the dam drops below power pool, and switches to the deeper bypass tubes, water temperatures in the Grand Canyon would suddenly drop by as much as 15 degrees. This could limit the ability of smallmouth bass to reproduce.

“Going below power pool, initially, could be a good thing if your biggest concern is smallmouth bass,” Kennedy said. “But then if you get lower and lower, closer to the dead pool, you get back to that zone where both of those bad things are happening: You’re going to have water temperatures in the river that are conducive to their spawning and you’re going to be passing large numbers of them through.”

‘Less like a river, and more like an irrigation ditch’

Arguments against Lake Powell have been around as long as the lake. Its existence, to some, amounts to an ecological atrocity, the drowning of miles of intricate slick rock canyons. Some argue it is unnecessary for water storage, power generation or the tourist economy — despite having more than 3 million visitors last year.

“Everybody keeps running around saying how can we prevent this from happening,” said Dan Beard, who served as the Bureau of Reclamation’s commissioner from 1993 to 1995. He added that he wouldn’t be surprised to see dead pool in the next three years. “My question is: Why should we prevent it from happening?”

But the federal government has already taken unprecedented steps to protect Lake Powell from dropping to dangerous levels.

In May, Reclamation reduced the amount of water it planned to release from the dam from 7.48 million acre-feet to a record low 7 million, the first such midyear cut. It moved another 500,000 acre-feet into Lake Powell from an upstream reservoir. The ongoing negotiations to cut more Colorado River use, if successful, could significantly improve conditions for Lake Powell and Lake Mead, located in Nevada and Arizona.

In late October, the Interior Department signaled it may take further unilateral action by announcing it could revise the guidelines — set in 2007 and revised in 2019 — that regulate water use from Lake Powell and Lake Mead. Interior Secretary Deb Haaland said the administration is “committed to taking prompt and decisive action necessary to protect the Colorado River System and all those who depend on it.”

Some say the gravity of the threat is enough to spur the states and federal government to make the necessary cuts in water use.

“I’m actually very optimistic that we’re not going to go below power pool,” said Arellano, the WAPA executive. “This is the number one issue for pretty much everybody in the hydropower industry.”

But the reservoirs remain vulnerable. The most recent five-year hydrology projection estimates the chance at reaching minimum power pool (elev. 3,490) at 10 percent next year and 30 percent in 2024, as dry La Niña conditions are expected to continue. Reclamation predicts there is zero chance of reaching dead pool (elev. 3,370) at Lake Powell over the next five years.

“If there was a line in Vegas, and I was a betting man, I think I’d probably bet we’ll go below 3,490,” said Charles Yackulic, a research statistician with USGS who is part of a team that was tasked in August to study how power pool or dead pool would impact the Colorado River.

Below that threshold, as Glen Canyon dam is able to release less and less water — the change between how much water is flowing at night or during the day would also diminish. That would lessen the “tides” that now characterize life in the Grand Canyon, water flows that fluctuate based on demand for hydropower.

Ultimately, the Colorado River would “become less like a river,” Yackulic said, “and more like an irrigation ditch.”

The impending water crisis must be the top priority of the next legislature. Gov. Hobbs needs to propose a plan in her first state of the state address in January to address the water crisis.

1 thought on “Governor Katie Hobbs Will Begin Her Administration With A Water (And Power) Crisis”

  1. Robert Glennon and Brent M. Haddad write at The Republic, “Arizona thinks ocean desalination will bring it the water it needs. It won’t’,

    The allure of seawater desalination seems irresistible.

    All that ocean water just waiting to have the salt removed and be delivered to your tap. It can be done, but there are three hurdles:

    It’s costly.
    It’s energy intensive.
    And it creates a need to dispose of the leftover salt.

    Gov. Doug Ducey’s State of the State address in January, followed by enactment of Senate Bill 1740 in July, pledges more than $1 billion over three years to bring more water to Arizona.

    The cornerstone is a proposal to desalinate water from Mexico’s Sea of Cortez. Construction cost estimates for this project range from $3 to $4 billion. That’s a lot of money – more than Arizona contributed to funding the Central Arizona Project. Yet, the estimates woefully understate the state’s ultimate liabilities.

    There are other, much less expensive options that would provide a secure supply.

    Sea of Cortez plans just didn’t add up

    On Sept. 30, we completed our service to California’s Salton Sea Management Program’s Independent Review Panel to evaluate submissions to import water to the Salton Sea. Glennon was a member of the panel; Haddad the principal investigator. The state received 18 submissions to import water. The panel ultimately endorsed none of them.

    Several submissions proposed to build a desalination plant on the Sea of Cortez. The panel also investigated expanding on the Binational Desalination Project that is currently under consideration and would supply potable water to Arizona and potentially others. Its intake would be on a remote section of beach south of Puerto Peñasco, known better to Arizonans as Rocky Point.

    The energy needs of the plant would require construction of a power plant. The electricity to fuel the power plant would require building transmission lines from, well, a long way away. The project would also need to build a tunnel or canal with pumping stations to move the desalted water northwest to Mexico’s Morelos Dam near Yuma. Mexico would get the desalinated water and, in exchange, Arizona would get more Colorado River water.

    A top-flight water engineering team advised the Salton Sea panel and did extensive work on the economics, energy consumption and environmental implications of the submissions, all available online in the panel’s feasibility report.

    Construction is costly, not guaranteed

    We calculated in the report that building the binational project could cost more than $20 billion in capital costs and as much as $500 million in annual costs, which would be split in some unknown configuration among Arizona and other participating parties. Its operation could generate 300,000 tons of CO₂ per year. It likely wouldn’t be operational until the 2040s, assuming no permitting or other delays.

    Once the plant began running, the challenging task of disposing of the salty brine would begin. The northern Sea of Cortez contains habitats protected under Mexican law and endangered species, the most iconic being the severely endangered vaquita porpoise.

    It is by no means certain that Mexican regulators would grant the numerous permits the project would require. More certain is the likelihood of U.S.- and Mexico-based environmental groups challenging and extending the permitting process.

    Readers may be wondering what’s in this for Mexico? We wondered the same thing and concluded: not much.

    The project would simply offset the Colorado River water Mexico already receives. It could be expanded to net the nation additional water, but that would exacerbate costs and environmental challenges. Mexican workers would be paid to build the project and then to operate it.

    Is that enough? We have significant doubts that Mexico will sign on to the proposal.

    This would be a pay-first, benefit-later infrastructure project. Are Arizonans prepared to foot the bill for a multibillion-dollar project that may never deliver a drop of water?

    Here are 4 cheaper, more secure options

    There are other less expensive and more secure options.

    The alternatives start with conservation and reuse, which remain powerful options and the low-hanging fruit. We should not pursue a mirage when we can make better use of the water we already have.

    A third option is to use price signals to encourage water conservation. Today Arizonans enjoy a limitless amount of water from their taps for less than they pay for cable TV or cellphone service. We need a system of rates that assures service to those who are financially strapped, with a robust set of increasing block rates for everyone else.

    A fourth option, using market forces and incentives to reallocate water, is essential if Arizona wants a bright water future.

    Farmers consume approximately 80% of the state’s water. A 2017 U.S. Department of Agriculture Census of Agriculture found that Arizona farmers use flood irrigation on more than 837,000 acres, compared to using sprinklers, drip or micro-irrigation on approximately 233,000 acres.

    The transition away from flood irrigation is critical but expensive. Therefore, the State of Arizona should underwrite the costs. In that way, Arizona farmers can continue to grow the same amount of product but with slightly less water. The water saved can go to municipal and industrial users.

    These options offer a much better way for Arizona to proceed than with a dream of desalting the ocean in a project that will cost tens of billions of dollars and may never be built.

Comments are closed.