California’s water saving brings bonus effects
Water-saving measures in California have also led to substantial reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and electricity consumption in the state.
That is the conclusion of new research from the University of California, Davis, published in the journal Environmental Research Letters, sciencedaily.com wrote.
Measures to cut water use by 25 percent across California were implemented in 2015, following a four-year drought in the state that caused the fallowing of 542,000 acres of land, total economic costs of $2.74 billion, and the loss of approximately 21,000 jobs.
The UC Davis researchers found that, while the 25 percent target had not quite been reached over the one-year period — with 524,000 million gallons of water saved — the measures’ impact had positive knock-on effects for other environmental objectives.
In California, the water and energy utility sectors are closely interdependent. The energy used by the conveyance systems that move water from the wetter North to the drier and more heavily populated South — combined with utility energy use for treatment and distribution, end-user water consumption for heating, and additional pumping and treatment — accounts for 19 percent of total electricity demand and 32 percent of total non-power plant natural gas demand state-wide.
Lead author Dr. Edward Spang, from UC Davis, said: “Due to this close interdependence, we estimated that the decrease in water usage translated into a signi¿cant electricity saving of 1,830 gigawatt hours (GWH). Interestingly, those savings were around 11 percent greater than those achieved by investor-owned electricity utilities’ ef¿ciency programs over the same period.
“In turn, we calculated that the GHG emissions saved as a direct result of the reduction in electricity consumption are also signi¿cant — in the region of 524,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2E). That is the equivalent of taking 111,000 cars off the road for a year.”
To estimate the water, energy, and GHG savings achieved for the duration of the urban water conservation order, the researchers collected and consolidated a range of publicly available data. They sequentially estimated total water savings for each water agency reporting to the California State Water Resources Control Board; the associated energy savings, via spatially resolved estimates of the energy intensity of water supplies by hydrologic region; and ¿nally, the linked GHG emissions reduction, using the emissions factor for the California electricity mix (including both in-state generation and imports).
Finally, they compared of the cost of securing these savings through water conservation to the costs of existing programs that speci¿cally target electricity or GHG savings.
Coauthor Professor Frank Loge said: “The scale of these integrated water-energyghg savings, achieved over such a short period, is remarkable. Even more interesting is that the cost of achieving these savings through water conservation was competitive with existing programs that speci¿cally target electricity or GHG reductions.
“Our results provide strong support for including direct water conservation in the portfolio of program and technology options for reducing energy consumption and GHG emissions. It’s particularly pertinent given that our analysis was based only on pursuing the individual goals of either electricity savings or greenhouse gas reductions, and not the combined bene¿ts of water, electricity, and GHG savings.”
He added: “Taking these three bene¿ts into consideration together would substantially increase the cost-effectiveness of water-focused conservation programs across all scenarios of varying program and technology persistence. There is a strong incentive for water and energy utilities to form partnerships, and identify opportunities to secure these combined resource savings bene¿ts at a shared cost. There would also be a bene¿t in the associated regulatory agencies supporting these partnerships through aligned policy measures, and targeted funding initiatives.” Poland will comply with an EU court order to stop cutting trees in Białowieża Forest, except where public safety has to be ensured, its new environment minister said — words certain to disappoint campaigners who want logging to end there.
A UNESCO World Heritage site, Białowieża, which straddles the border with Belarus, is one of Europe’s last primeval forests and home to its largest herd of European bison as well as unique birds and insects, Reuters reported.
Earlier this month, Henryk Kowalczyk replaced Jan Szyszko in a government reshufàe, raising environmentalists’ hopes this would bring a policy change on the logging issue.
Szyszko approved a tripling of the quota of wood that can be harvested in one of three administrative areas of the Białowieża Forest in March 2016 to stop a beetle outbreak.
The move triggered environmentalists’ protests, divided Polish society and has become a bone of contention between Poland and the European Commission.
Last year the Commission sued Poland in the European Court of Justice and the court issued an interim decision in which it ordered Warsaw to stop logging immediately.
“The interim measure has been implemented, except for cutting to guarantee safety. The Tribunal allows for that. We will attempt to prove that if there is any logging it is only due to people’s safety,” Kowalczyk told public radio.