A bold vision for western water and a way to finance it

National Infrastructure Bank can pay to move water from Louisiana

Regarding the Sept. 27 Journal editorial “NM needs leaders who will tackle real water solutions now,” the Editorial Board acknowledges the impending severity of New Mexico’s water problem but suggests we should spend federal drought money to study feasibility solutions further. That’s already been done. What’s missing is a bold vision to bring in new water supplies to the populationgrowing, food-producing Southwest, and a new institution to finance that vision.

The National Infrastructure Bank (NIB) set out in HR 3339 would provide $5 trillion in low-cost loans for a broad range of public infrastructure projects — including massive water systems — without the need for increasing taxes or any deficit budget spending. One proposal for such a project — described in a Desert Sun op-ed — would divert water from the Atchafalaya River through Louisiana, Texas, New Mexico, and on up to the Colorado River to restore Lake Powell and Lake Mead. That would relieve the need for water cutoffs now ordered for the drought-stricken Colorado River system, which provides water and electric power to 40 million people and farms in seven western states. If pipelines or canals were designed properly, some of the water could be dropped off at especially dry areas along the way, like the San Juan River now connecting to northwest New Mexico via a new pipeline.

In this proposal, no water whatsoever would be taken from the main channel of the Mississippi River, nor from any location above Louisiana. Only 5%, 100,000 gals/sec, of the 2 million gal/sec flow in the Atchafalaya would be diverted. This would fill Lake Powell in one year and nine months. The project would save on construction costs by using an existing facility — the Old River Control Complex just south of Vidalia, Louisiana, where the Army Corps of Engineers already diverts 30% of the downflow of the Mississippi to prevent flooding in New Orleans.

Then, all you would need is a 1,400-mile concrete-lined ditch or a series of pipelines, canals, tunnels and pumping stations along the way — similar to the California and Arizona aqueducts. It could be built in a year, possibly along interstate highways, using canal trenchers like those employed in Holland. There is historical precedent for building massive systems like this with deliberate speed. Between 1942 and 1943, the Reconstruction Finance Corporation financed and built two pipelines of similar length in less than a year, to carry crude oil and gasoline from Texas to the East Coast, to support the Normandy invasion during WWII.

Today, a water pipeline might cost on the order of $14 billion to $23 billion. It’s a small price to pay, compared to cutting off water supplies to farmers and ranchers in seven states and Texas that produce $39 billion worth of our nation’s food per year. Without new water sources, food prices will surely skyrocket, and our nation will become food insecure. Yes, we are living in a 1,000-year drought due to climate change. Yes, water fixes will take time, and be costly to implement. Yes, we must do something more than just conserve, to provide adequate water for our growing populations and to grow our food. A well-thought-out mega project for a seven-state water solution is doable, and we can utilize a national infrastructure bank to mobilize and finance it.