Monday, September 19, 2016

WATER, WATER, MAYBE GRAY WATER TOO

WATER FOR PROFIT

The arguments have been made by both parties:  the City of Claremont for eminent domain takeover of our water system from Golden State Water Company, owned by an even larger conglomerate.

The latest from The Flow:  
"Aug 16, 2016:  The City and GSW rested their cases on July 15. Closing arguments took place on August 10. Judge Fruin has 90 days to render his decision about Claremont's right to take over the water system by eminent domain. If the decision is in our favor, the cost will then be determined by a jury. GSW attacked La Verne's ability to administer the water system--see La Verne's response in the blog.

"You can get some information on the current state and the history of the effort.

"For a short summary of past events and future steps, see the January 5, 2015 blog post titled "City of Claremont Water Acquisition Process".     

[La Verne is a neighbor city comparable to Claremont, but whose water rates have been much lower.]

* * *
Refreshing your memory as to what I refer, here's a slightly edited version of what I wrote about the water situation in my city, "Water - Matters of Import 2013", 02/01/13

Water continues to be a volatile local issue with citizens in my city --  reaching an explosive level from residents long simmering anger over outrageous water rates.  Our rates have been significantly higher than the surrounding cities served by this for-profit water company owned by an even larger conglomerate.  There is also anger with the California Public Utilities Commission and their Division of Ratepayer Advocates for failing to meet their mandate to obtain the “lowest possible rate for service consistent with reliable and safe service levels.”  There are legal reasons why this has been allowed to occur.

Studies are being made as the city moves closer toward a goal of taking over our water for the future generations to come who will most benefit from any savings.  The water company has refused to sell us our water rights.   Our city officials are exploring other options including acquiring ownership through eminent domain.  The company probably fears the latter and has recruited groups outside our city to make this a greater issue than just about citizens wanting fair, just and reasonable water rates instead of our lining the pockets of a far-removed corporation focused on excessive profit.  There are many facts that have bearing including residents responding positively to significant reduction in water usage for several years while the company profits increased as they sought even greater rate increases i.e. they want over 25% increase in 2013.

Years ago I recall reading that water would be the oil of the future.  Also then, PBS broadcast a special documenting that large water corporations were quietly buying up water rights all over the world.  If we think paying outrageous amounts for gas, or not being able to afford to operate our cars is a calamity, at least car makers have finally begun offering us vehicles that use alternative energy.  Somehow, I think our bodies will be less inclined to tolerating major water cutbacks - if we want to continue living - than our vehicles having less gas.  So far, I don't know of any sufficient alternative water substitute.

Here's a link to 10 videos about the world water situation.   You may be well-advised to explore your local water source, who owns it and what is projected for your water cost future.

For many years we’ve been conditioned, with erroneous information in many instances, to believe we should purchase bottled drinking water.  So, we are being slowly moved toward even more water commercialization.  An expectation of raiding what may seem now like an endless water source with desalinization of our oceans may need to be limited in centuries to come.

Many of our fresh water streams, rivers, lakes and even our oceans are all too frequently under assault from pollution. Mining of various sorts, including coal, have contributed to this situation as have the deepest of underground penetrations such as with fracking.  We already have seen the devastation of oil pollution in Alaska and the Gulf accidents from which neither area has recovered.  Still some were  prepared to run an oil pipeline from Canada through a major water acquifer area. Water acquifers must be protected across this nation, just as ours here in my town need to be which this current water company wants to continue controlling.  

* * *
Since I wrote the above we've had the Flint, Michigan water crisis where lead was found in the drinking water with devastating consequences, especially for infants and young children.   This event, coupled with stories of water issues elsewhere,  lends support to consideration of  buying and using bottled drinking water -- but how pure is that water? -- or installing individual water purification systems in residences.   Then there is gray water/grey water -- recycled waste water.

Presently North Dakota with other American Indian tribes and environmentalists are protesting plans to run oil pipelines under the Missouri River, the source of drinking water for some.  Concern focuses on other issues as well as the potential for water contamination should accidental oil pipeline leakage or accidental spillages occur.   21 st Century oil spills are noted  on Wikipedia though the list is incomplete.

Meanwhile, in Claremont, we patiently await the Judge's ruling on our lawsuit to establish eminent domain over our water system.  Then will be the determination of  how much we will have to pay for the system.   Our monthly water bills may well not be lower in my lifetime, but water system acquisition supporters believe their children, grandchildren and other future residents will benefit.    

14 comments:

  1. Up until Flint happened, people here in Michigan didn't think much about water. We are a state surrounded by water with inland lakes within a 8-7 mile drive. They say our intro-structure is so bad across the country that Flint is just the canary in the coal mine.

    I don't trust bottle water to necessarily be any safer than tape water. Those companies don't have the same oversights in place. Water should all be publicly owned!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We take so much for granted in our country in addition to assuming the purity of our water supply and sources. I think there have been other communities noting a variety of different issues affecting their water, so it's wise for us to be alert to the care being taken where each of us live.

      Delete
  2. The water in our East coast shore town occasionally is temporarily bad due to flooding, rains, and/or aged infrastructure problems. Need new infrastructure, no one wants to pay for it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Infrastructure all over our country for water, bridges and a multitude of other things likely need refurbishing, or replacing -- especially if they've only been minimally kept up due to budget cutting, or whatever. How it is going to be paid for seems to be the rub -- locally, federally, a combination of both -- work for the unemployed -- more taxes/bonds, re-budgeting of existing funds, increasing debt??? Who's even seriously talking about rectifying these issues besides us, here?

      Delete
  3. Water situations worldwide are grim and getting worst.Like Jean R., as a Michigan resident the horrible situation in Flint has called the whole subject to my attention. People need to learn more and demand action.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Seems to take a situation like Flint, or the different but most recent oil leakage in Alabama to attract news media attention, but then those unaffected soon forget. Most don't seem to be concerned to pursue action until, or unless, they, or those they know, are directly affected. Basic water availability and costs will also become an increasing concern as our city has experienced.

      Delete
  4. In the late 1990s, our city's privately-owned water company petitioned the state for increased water rights. The water-levels in their wells had fallen over the years leading to a concentration of natural contaminants. The state denied that petition; so, the city (under 25,000 people) bought the company and by 2004 all of our city's water was purchased from Wichita's municipal water works. (Wichita sells water to several of its suburbs.) Good news: Wichita draws most of its water from surface resource so the water is much softer. Bad news: Rising prices driven by drought conditions. Coastal municipalities may depend upon de-salination of sea water, if required. No such resource for land-locked states. As you wrote, though, there is really no adequate substitute for water.
    P.S. The small-city water company was founded in 1953, so we don't have the problem with ancient water conduits that some cities face. Reports on periodic water analyses are published to the city's website.
    Cop Car

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting to learn about your city's water situation. The Flow -- a group of Claremont citizens supporting our city purchase the water system (also recommended by League of Women Voters) with this information as to where our water will come from:

      "Our wells, along with others, feed the local aquifer. The Six Basins Watermaster (a board, not a person) determines each year how much water can be safely removed from the aquifer. Each of the companies or cities that are part of this organization will be authorized to withdraw a certain percent of the water. This "right to pump" will come to Claremont if the city owns the system.

      If we own the pumping rights, we can also take steps to capture more rainwater and reclaim used water and send them into the aquifer. The more water it has, the more we will be allowed to use.

      Currently, our wells provide about 60% of Claremont's water. If we owned the system, we would buy the rest that we need from providers such as Three Valleys Municipal Water District, just like GSW does."

      The Flow's response to questions about the condition of the system:

      "Our neighboring cities also have to maintain their own underground infrastructure, yet their cost to consumers is still much lower than here in Claremont. GSW has not been forthcoming with information about the condition, but they recently spent money on repairs, and consultants have said the condition is currently good. We already pay GSW for repairs and maintenance through our water rates. If we own the system, there would be no change. In addition, government programs that would help pay for maintenance are available to cities."

      Delete
  5. We each have a right to clean drinking water. Governments need to get their act together.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Aye, and that's the rub -- "Governments needing to get their act together."

      Delete
  6. We are having a lot of problems with water here too and here is an example - http://www.newindianexpress.com/opinion/Cauvery-interstate-water-dispute-high-on-emotions-but-low-on-potential/2016/09/12/article3618929.ece

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This 100 year Cauvery dispute, with no end in sight, decline in bodies of water through the years, drought conditions, increasing population and businesses expanding presents a real challenge in India as that opinion piece describes. Water availability is truly a world-wide issue that is only going to become more serious.

      Delete
  7. And in a recent storm on the Big Island of Hawaii, literally billions of gallons of freshwater ran into the ocean. As someone put it, we are the Saudi Arabia of water. Maybe some day we will capture some of this runoff, and big tankers will carry Hawaiian water to the Mainland!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, and states experiencing flooding will somehow direct water to drought areas here, and other countries will be able to do the same in their nations.

      But.....if we capture all this water that would normally go to our oceans -- then what happens to our oceans, eventually -- or, all nations begin to use oceans waters with desalinization plants as you have on the Big Island? Already we're busy polluting our oceans news accounts are reporting, so unless we curtail that, or clean up the junk that already exists on the waters surfaces and ocean floor, future generations will reap the consequences. We won't be around but our descendants will.

      Delete