Treading Political Water

By Brian T. Peterson, Birdland

Couldn't agree more Brian. As soon as someone figures out how to actually change the "politics" then San Diego may have a chance. Obviously simply voting for "candidates" is not the answer because they don't always win the election. And they change their stances once in office. Money versus environmental longevity.

Posted by nelson | reply to this comment
May 13, 2009 12:25 pm

It's hard not to feel hopeless about the politicians ever making the difficult political solutions to the impending water crisis. Sticking their heads in the sand won't get us more water. You are right the real solution will be for them to limit or halt new development but of course there are other significant solutions to look at. Why not limit or stop the government from subsidizing water going to alfalfa, rice and other water intensive crops being grown in the desert. Or why there is still no recycled water in San Diego? Or why the price of water is still being kept so low. What about swimming pools and golf courses - they must constitute a significant percentage of water use yet they remain off the table. The list is long on ways to get significant water from conservation yet rarely get the attention needed.

Posted by Larry Groff | reply to this comment
May 13, 2009 12:29 pm

Larry G. wrote: "why is there still no recycled water in San Diego?" But, there is! SD has 2 reclamation plants with capability of purification using reverse osmosis, the same as used for desalination. The reason the reclaimed water is less used is the immense cost of putting in "purple pipe" to everywhere it could be used for irrigation or industrial purposes. Yet, recycled water for drinking, the most cost-effective reuse (and reuse and reuse), by a process already used in many places in the U.S. and abroad, is loudly opposed by a few people who refuse to believe the science. Instead, millions of gallons are dumped into the Pacific Ocean every day. Potable reclamation also saves energy costs because the methane produced by the sewage sludge can power the energy-intensive RO. This is incredibly wasteful of water and the ratepayers' money.

Posted by JSwink | reply to this comment
May 20, 2009 2:50 pm

Don't blame your elected officials, blame the appointees on the boards of the County Water Authority and the dozen or so local water agencies in the county. And blame the Metropolitan Water District. When SoCal was forced to stop taking more than its share of Colorado River water around 2002, MWD went to the director of the state Water Resources Dept and convinced him to crank up the delta pumps. Before 2002 the pumps were sending about 1.5 million acre feet south to the central valley and Southern California. By 2006 they were pumping 6 million acre feet and the delta's ecosystems began to be destroyed. A federal judge finally stepped in and cut the pumping back to around 2002 levels to save the whole delta. We can't deal logically with growing water shortages as long as our regional population keeps growing and creates more demand.

Posted by Watcher | reply to this comment
May 13, 2009 6:36 pm

Political problems in our city are due to the huge egos in charge. Our education system in San Diego and our city council are two such examples. Those in charge do not care about the citizens. They care about the good press coverage. Sign me up to "be the change we wish to see in the world."

Posted by the secretary | reply to this comment
May 13, 2009 7:51 pm

A vision of the future that celebrates a high density growth strategy without accounting for the natural resources to sustain it seems about as "Smart" as business practices of AIG and the Lehman Brothers on Wall Street in the past few years. For those of us living in Southern California for the past 40 or 50 years we can well remember previous water shortages. Mandates to stop taking showers, take only baths with no more than 3 inches of water. Don't flush the toilet every time. Give up your gardens or go "zero scape." No car washing. The population then wasn't nearly as big as it is now. And certainly pales in comparison with the dense population planners and developers want to attract. Economic growth based only on density boom won't work if the resources aren't here to sustain it. Smart Growth needs to be smarter.

Posted by Dan Soderberg | reply to this comment
May 14, 2009 6:49 am

As a longtime resident and homeowner, I give up over this question of water-- and energy. No more building permits. Take my white flag and shut housing down. That in turn will drive the cost of housing sky high. Monterey does it, as does Santa Barbara. Why not San Diego? It won't take long to see prices soar. That way, I'll sell, exit and let the PaleoEnvironmentalis have Mother Earth Festivals and dance around the vernal pools every equinox.

Posted by BlkJK | reply to this comment
May 14, 2009 7:32 am

How do you propose providing water for development? The cheapest source is conservation, but I don't see a lot of willingness unless people are forced. Northern California and other states are likely to provide less water in the future. Oregon has no interest in sending water here. Desal is an expensive source of water. Have you taken out your grass and put in plants with low water requirements? Have your kids? If not, I can't believe you are serious about solving this problem. My experience is that most people want others to make changes, but don't want to make changes themselves. For the record, I have no grass and my yard is beautiful year round with almost no irrigation.

Posted by janet | reply to this comment
May 14, 2009 9:57 am

Janet, why give up a lawn? Why water rationing? There are avenues that will make life better for all of us. Throughout the history of mankind, from the invention of fire, to vaccines which help us all, solutions to problems have been found. We can build a delsalinatization plant, we can craft tax programs that will virtually put solar panels on our houses and commercial building to stiff energy crisies-- and hardly pay a cent. Janet, I don't suffer lightly. And no one else should either. Something is wrong, let's do something about it...

Posted by BlkJK | reply to this comment
May 16, 2009 8:43 am

Correction: link

Posted by Linda J. Wilson | reply to this comment
May 14, 2009 7:46 am

Global warming may not be man-made, but San Diego’s water shortage is. The first thing to do is halt all this "infill" that none of the communities want. The last thing this region needs in infill. All infill projects should be halted regardless of their size. We actually have a couple of elected officials who do the right thing and aren't slaves to the unions or developers, but we need more. We can change the face of politics around here by voting for individuals with a proven track record instead of by blind party allegiance. You can fight back by supporting the lawsuit of link signing on to link and supporting the Neighborhood Leaders Alliance (NLA). San Diego needs political candidates that are the "the real deal" instead of "posers". We need people to step up who care about San Diego as a whole and not blinded by their greed or lust for power.

Posted by Linda J. Wilson | reply to this comment
May 14, 2009 7:47 am

If you moved here after 1980 - LEAVE... Go back to your snow belt, rust belt, bible belt, or whatever other belt you came from. SD is at the end of the line for Water, Food and Gas. We are the furthest city from Sacramento - they don't care about us. SD can't support the population we have allowed to settle here. Come here during the summer - enjoy our beaches - spend your money - have some fun... THEN LEAVE!!!

Posted by 3rdGenSDNative | reply to this comment
May 14, 2009 7:58 am

how about 1960? the beaches were empty then.

Posted by lee | reply to this comment
May 14, 2009 5:02 pm

Over Development in Housing is the Real Culprit. Look at Santa Barbara! Maybe the City can be forced to 'reduced their overhead' at the Develop(er)ment Service Dept., who makes their entire budget from 'new permit fees', dissolving it back into 'Planning and Review'-a department made to follows the LAW, as in 'over 500 units needs a 20-yr. reliable water supply?' Then reigning in the CCDC & SEDC into RE Assets would help the City's budget, while gaining control of overbuilding. A moratorium on building until the water is here is mandatory. Building 5,000, then 8,000 plus New Units is FOOLISH until such is done. Channel 6 noted the approval of a water desal plant that will process a mere"50 gallons a day?" I hope it was a misstatement!

Posted by wake up san diego | reply to this comment
May 14, 2009 8:33 am

Dr. Brian Peterson once again tells the truth. Are our "leaders" listening? Keep up the good work. I just made an online contribution to the Grantville Action Group. Keep fighting for us Brian! Click here: link

Posted by Fred Williams | reply to this comment
May 15, 2009 5:42 am

Ha... I love the righteous indignation of these posts. Very Californian, no more development because I am already here and I don't want to pay $1 more for my already subsidized water! Unless you built your own house and tapped your own groundwater supply you are the beneficiary of both federal and statewide taxpayer subsidies to create a vast (and expensive) water transportation system that, almost miraculously, delivers water hundreds of miles to your doorstep. You never paid the full freight for this system and have always been subsidized. Any new development (which, if not approved in San Diego would just be pushed out to furter areas of the county and use the same amount of water) has such a low marginal impact on the amount of water imported that banning new development would hardly impact your water bill at all 9as the biggest user is the government)...cont.

Posted by El Cajonian | reply to this comment
May 15, 2009 9:17 am

The real solution is to have the water authorities charge the full amount that covers the entire costs of running the water system to the end users (inclusive of all residents, businesses and government at the same price per gallon/acre-foot). Prices will go up, as they should, because San Deigo does not currently pay enough to cover the full costs of the system... tough. Once prices go up you'll start to see real convservation as it will make economic sense. Turning San Diego into another Santa Barbara or Monterey is about as stupid as stupid gets... that suggestion is basically and middle finger to all the kids who grow up here and would like to settle here, as all but the wealthiest would ahve to move elsewhere just to enjoy the same sstandard of living you all currently enjoy. Stop the Subsisdies, Pay Full Freight.

Posted by El Cajonian | reply to this comment
May 15, 2009 9:25 am

On Kauai, almost two centuries ago the residents figured out that the north side of a 25 mile island included the wettest place on earth, and the south side was a desert with blazing sun. They figured out quickly that if they wanted to plant sugar, it was easier to channel water through the hand-dug sluices to the south than try to send sunlight to the north. Now, my question is: Are our �water districts� looking for new and more sources, or are they just in the business of rationing existing supplies? Ice bergs? Trans-continental water tubes?

Posted by Akamai | reply to this comment
May 15, 2009 11:04 am

• Users may post more than one comment, but should not pose as multiple users. Multiple posts from the same IP address but with a different user name on each will be reviewed to determine whether abuse has occurred.
• Posts with overly personal attacks or unsubstantiated allegations may be edited or deleted.
• Please be patient with the posts -- there may be a delay before they appear on the site -- and make sure to enter the code in the "image verification" box.