As I briefly mentioned in my previous post, the City of Tucson is looking at setting up some policy guidance (pdf) to help them evaluate proposals to hook into a pipeline, jointly owned by the city and the Central Arizona Water Conservation District (the CAP), at the end of the CAP canal/pipeline south of Tucson. Nothing is set in stone yet - the Mayor and Council instructed staff to make some modifications to the criteria they considered, then bring it back for a vote sometime this summer. But there has been plenty of grandstanding about what is best for the city, what is best for our shared aquifer, and who is a good steward of our resources. I jumped into the fray myself last week by submitting a guest opinion that was published in the local paper.
Showing posts with label water sustainability. Show all posts
Showing posts with label water sustainability. Show all posts
Monday, May 27, 2013
Friday, August 3, 2012
New Website from Nature Conservancy
I received an email earlier this week announcing a new website that has been set up by the Nature Conservancy, called the Great Rivers Partnership. Here's what it is about according to their email:
Oh and there's a video you can check out too:
We’re excited to announce the launch of the The Nature Conservancy’s Great Rivers website http://greatriverspartnership.org/, a place where anyone whose life or livelihood is enriched by rivers can learn how we can all work together to protect these waterways. The Nature Conservancy’s Great River Partnership convenes scientists, industry leaders, government and non government agencies, and others to exchange resources and find shared, pragmatic solutions that will support sustainable management and development of whole river systems.
As you well know, when a large river is healthy a diverse community of plants, animals, people and their industries can thrive. Everything that happens in and around a river system affects us all and the positive benefits are many. These waterways ensure power to large cities, drinking water to millions and transportation of crucial goods. They support vital ecosystems that fuel fisheries, enrich the soil and provide natural flood management.Sounds like some good ideas we can all support. I'm a strong supporter of the model for conservation that the Nature Conservancy follows and I'm hopeful this website will prove to be a great resource for ideas that support that model. Check it out when you have a chance.
Oh and there's a video you can check out too:
Sunday, July 15, 2012
Putting on the promoter cap
It's that time again. Time for me to extoll the virtues of Watershed Management Group and put out the call for donations for our summer fundraising campaign. Full disclosure up front - I am the current vice-chair of the board of directors for WMG. I don't make any money doing this, but I derive great personal satisfaction from watching their success.
If you haven't heard my spiel before, WMG is a fabulous non-profit based here in Tucson, Arizona that does work, currently throughout Arizona, in Southern California, in Sonora, Mexico, and in India and more recently in Burkina Faso. Several of those locations are places where we have only begun working within the last two years, largely because of the strength of the individual donors who support the organization. WMG has been growing by leaps and bounds because there are many people who support the great work they do, but also because there is such a huge need out there for growth of community-based programs to give people the tools they need to become better stewards of their resources.
That need continues to grow and hopefully WMG will be able to continue to grow to satisfy that need. But they can only do it through the support of like-minded people. And I'm certain there are at least a few of those people who read this blog. And if you decide you like what the organization does and think there is a need for them to take on work in your community, send me a note or contact them through their website to see if there is an opportunity to expand there. Or you can participate in one of their great training programs and learn how to do this sort of work yourself and teach others the same skills.
Check out this link for info on how to support WMG. And if you are able to make a contribution this week a generous match from one of our donors will double your support. Please do what you can. Thanks.
If you haven't heard my spiel before, WMG is a fabulous non-profit based here in Tucson, Arizona that does work, currently throughout Arizona, in Southern California, in Sonora, Mexico, and in India and more recently in Burkina Faso. Several of those locations are places where we have only begun working within the last two years, largely because of the strength of the individual donors who support the organization. WMG has been growing by leaps and bounds because there are many people who support the great work they do, but also because there is such a huge need out there for growth of community-based programs to give people the tools they need to become better stewards of their resources.
That need continues to grow and hopefully WMG will be able to continue to grow to satisfy that need. But they can only do it through the support of like-minded people. And I'm certain there are at least a few of those people who read this blog. And if you decide you like what the organization does and think there is a need for them to take on work in your community, send me a note or contact them through their website to see if there is an opportunity to expand there. Or you can participate in one of their great training programs and learn how to do this sort of work yourself and teach others the same skills.
Check out this link for info on how to support WMG. And if you are able to make a contribution this week a generous match from one of our donors will double your support. Please do what you can. Thanks.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
on-going brouhaha over water policy in the Tucson area
Anyone who has followed this blog through most of its existence will be aware that I started it during the initial stages of a local water resources study initiated by the City of Tucson and Pima County - where I live. This was a 20 month, two-phase, multi-disciplinary, multi-agency effort to catalog our existing water resources, water and wastewater infrastructure, and existing policies for managing those resources; followed by a discussion of recommended policy changes that could help ensure sustainability of those resources as this area continues to grow. Those recommendations were contained in a Phase II report that was issued in December of last year.
On Jan. 12, the City Council and the County Board of Supervisors held a joint meeting where they considered a resolution to accept the Phase II report and commit to following through on its recommendations. At that time the county voted to endorse the report but the the city, expressing reservations about the content of the report and the process of its creation, voted to continue the comment period for another 30 days then revisit the resolution.
Last week the city council (the paper incorrectly reports that the council approved the study, but all they did was agree to reconsider the resolution next week) held a study session and a public hearing on the report, which were well attended by both proponents and opponents of the report findings. Some on the city council are very concerned about recent charges that city government is unresponsive to the needs of the business community and that posture is stifling economic growth in the city. They point to the current slump in the development industry as evidence of those charges and insist that loosening up some of the regulations on development would spur this industry and restore the sort of economic growth we experienced during the years immediately preceding this current slump. This argument is preposterous (in my opinion, but I think it's a well-supported opinion) because the city policies and regulations regarding development were pretty much the same during the go-go years as they are currently AND the city has been looking at suspending a number of fees during the current slow-down.
The development folks are also pointing to a current policy (as I discussed here) recently enacted by the city to deny extension of water service to areas outside the current service area of the water utility unless there is a legal obligation to serve that area. They claim that there are many developments that would be moving forward if only the city would agree to provide water service. This is purely a bluff. There are other water providers in the area noted that could potentially provide water service (although there may be greater infrastructure needs for those utilities) if these development really were "shovel-ready", but I doubt they actually are.
This is basically a situation where our political leaders have to make a choice between serving the short-term economic needs of the community or caring for the long-term sustainability of the region. If you understand politics like I do, you'll understand why I'm worried about the prospects for full approval of the report. But they may yet surprise me. I'm hopeful that they will, but prepared to be at least a little disappointed.
On Jan. 12, the City Council and the County Board of Supervisors held a joint meeting where they considered a resolution to accept the Phase II report and commit to following through on its recommendations. At that time the county voted to endorse the report but the the city, expressing reservations about the content of the report and the process of its creation, voted to continue the comment period for another 30 days then revisit the resolution.
Last week the city council (the paper incorrectly reports that the council approved the study, but all they did was agree to reconsider the resolution next week) held a study session and a public hearing on the report, which were well attended by both proponents and opponents of the report findings. Some on the city council are very concerned about recent charges that city government is unresponsive to the needs of the business community and that posture is stifling economic growth in the city. They point to the current slump in the development industry as evidence of those charges and insist that loosening up some of the regulations on development would spur this industry and restore the sort of economic growth we experienced during the years immediately preceding this current slump. This argument is preposterous (in my opinion, but I think it's a well-supported opinion) because the city policies and regulations regarding development were pretty much the same during the go-go years as they are currently AND the city has been looking at suspending a number of fees during the current slow-down.
The development folks are also pointing to a current policy (as I discussed here) recently enacted by the city to deny extension of water service to areas outside the current service area of the water utility unless there is a legal obligation to serve that area. They claim that there are many developments that would be moving forward if only the city would agree to provide water service. This is purely a bluff. There are other water providers in the area noted that could potentially provide water service (although there may be greater infrastructure needs for those utilities) if these development really were "shovel-ready", but I doubt they actually are.
This is basically a situation where our political leaders have to make a choice between serving the short-term economic needs of the community or caring for the long-term sustainability of the region. If you understand politics like I do, you'll understand why I'm worried about the prospects for full approval of the report. But they may yet surprise me. I'm hopeful that they will, but prepared to be at least a little disappointed.
Saturday, December 12, 2009
The Technical Feasibilty of Rainwater Harvesting for Domestic Water Supply
Getting back (finally) to my most recent topic I have some numbers to throw out, in order to assess whether relying on rainwater for a domestic water supply is technically feasibly in a semi-arid or arid climate. Tucson would be considered semi-arid because our average rainfall is roughly 12 inches per year (although this year we have only had about 6-7 inches, which makes us arid at this time), but we are classified as arid because of our high evapotranspiration rate.
There are many skeptics who say that rainwater cannot be relied on as a water source in places like this because rain is too unreliable. Our annual rainfall typically comes in two seasons - winter and summer. Our winter rains tend to be gentle, slow rains that might occur several times a month, amounting to about 5 inches on average during the period December to April. Our summer rains, on the other hand, are known as monsoon rains because they result from a seasonal wind shift in summer, and often come in torrents. We typically receive between 5 and 7 inches of rain in the summer and it's not uncommon for the bulk of that rain to arrive in 3 or 4 rainfall events during the months of July and August. In between those seasons we might typically go for 2 or 3 months with little or no rain.
With that type of rainfall pattern, obviously, the key elements of rainwater harvesting will be capture area and storage. If you have a sufficiently large surface area from which to capture water and sufficiently large storage to hold onto that water during long dry periods rainwater becomes a feasible water supply.
Here are a few basic calculations of available water:
10" of rain falling on 2000 sq. ft. of roof surface will yield roughly 12,500 gallons of water.
10" of rain falling on 3000 sq. ft. of roof surface will yield about 18,700 gallons of water.
12" of rain falling on 2000 sq. ft. of surface yields about 15,000 gallons, and
12" of rain falling on 3000 sq. ft. of surface yields about 22,400 gallons of water.
If you take those numbers and average them out over the course of the year you come up with a range between 34 and 61 gallons per day. Obviously you are not going to maintain a home, yard, and pool by collecting rainwater unless you have a very large surface from which to collect the water. But it's perfectly reasonable for two people to survive on 61 gallons of water per day for indoor uses such as cooking, cleaning, bathing, and drinking.
But how do you make rainwater suitable for drinking? That is the tricky part, some of which I will try to address in a post on the regulatory limitations on use of rainwater for water supply. But in a general sense, you must install a home water treatment system to make this water suitable for consumption. This ranges from selecting proper roofing material that won't leach chemicals into the water falling on it, to engineering the collection system so the first flush of water coming off the roof is bypassed (to limit the bird poop in your water supply), to a system of filters and treatment technologies that will ensure no harmful bacteria or other nasties in your water. This is the primary annual cost of this type of water supply - the energy and maintenance of the treatment system. Most of the other costs are upfront when the collection and storage are installed.
This site includes some helpful information on what is necessary for making rainwater suitable for potable uses.
Is this type of system suitable for the average homeowner? Clearly not. But there are people out there who are willing to invest the money, time, and effort to get off the grid, or off the pipes in this case, and whose lifestyle allows them to live on only the amount of water necessary for basic, indoor human needs, without all the extraneous uses of high-quality drinking water many of us find necessary for our quality of life.
More when I find the time, including the aforementioned regulatory analysis of rainwater harvesting.
There are many skeptics who say that rainwater cannot be relied on as a water source in places like this because rain is too unreliable. Our annual rainfall typically comes in two seasons - winter and summer. Our winter rains tend to be gentle, slow rains that might occur several times a month, amounting to about 5 inches on average during the period December to April. Our summer rains, on the other hand, are known as monsoon rains because they result from a seasonal wind shift in summer, and often come in torrents. We typically receive between 5 and 7 inches of rain in the summer and it's not uncommon for the bulk of that rain to arrive in 3 or 4 rainfall events during the months of July and August. In between those seasons we might typically go for 2 or 3 months with little or no rain.
With that type of rainfall pattern, obviously, the key elements of rainwater harvesting will be capture area and storage. If you have a sufficiently large surface area from which to capture water and sufficiently large storage to hold onto that water during long dry periods rainwater becomes a feasible water supply.
Here are a few basic calculations of available water:
10" of rain falling on 2000 sq. ft. of roof surface will yield roughly 12,500 gallons of water.
10" of rain falling on 3000 sq. ft. of roof surface will yield about 18,700 gallons of water.
12" of rain falling on 2000 sq. ft. of surface yields about 15,000 gallons, and
12" of rain falling on 3000 sq. ft. of surface yields about 22,400 gallons of water.
If you take those numbers and average them out over the course of the year you come up with a range between 34 and 61 gallons per day. Obviously you are not going to maintain a home, yard, and pool by collecting rainwater unless you have a very large surface from which to collect the water. But it's perfectly reasonable for two people to survive on 61 gallons of water per day for indoor uses such as cooking, cleaning, bathing, and drinking.
But how do you make rainwater suitable for drinking? That is the tricky part, some of which I will try to address in a post on the regulatory limitations on use of rainwater for water supply. But in a general sense, you must install a home water treatment system to make this water suitable for consumption. This ranges from selecting proper roofing material that won't leach chemicals into the water falling on it, to engineering the collection system so the first flush of water coming off the roof is bypassed (to limit the bird poop in your water supply), to a system of filters and treatment technologies that will ensure no harmful bacteria or other nasties in your water. This is the primary annual cost of this type of water supply - the energy and maintenance of the treatment system. Most of the other costs are upfront when the collection and storage are installed.
This site includes some helpful information on what is necessary for making rainwater suitable for potable uses.
Is this type of system suitable for the average homeowner? Clearly not. But there are people out there who are willing to invest the money, time, and effort to get off the grid, or off the pipes in this case, and whose lifestyle allows them to live on only the amount of water necessary for basic, indoor human needs, without all the extraneous uses of high-quality drinking water many of us find necessary for our quality of life.
More when I find the time, including the aforementioned regulatory analysis of rainwater harvesting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)