Email to folks in the political and environmental communities. This email was sent on 4.10.09. The Master Water Sales Agreement must be signed by 6.30.09.
The RBOC will hear the MWSA as an agenda item in April and in May. The MWSA contract must be signed by June 30, 2009.Most members get an agenda item by just requesting it. I had to have a vote to get this item on the agenda. 3-2. Hope to see you on the 20th at the RBOC at 9.30AM. Check the website.
The MWSA assumes that SFPUC-HH system will produce 265 MGD (millions of gallons per day). Based on this number the proposed Master Water Sales Agreement between BAWSCA and SFPUC envisions SF getting 81 MGD and the Peninsula 184 MGD from current pristine sources.
History and hydrology do not support this number. I believe the current contract should be rewritten - "The peninsula will get all surplus HH system water after SF needs are met at current prices (rates)." Another way could be to apportion the estimated long-term system reliability of 239 MGD on the basis, relative to what SF used and what BAWSCA used between 1984 and 2008 (the current MWSA is between 1984 and 2009), This is a simple calculation (based on the average) Peninsula gets a minimum in contract of (163/251) * 239 = 155 MGD and SF gets a minimum in contract of (88/251)*239 = 84 MGD. Total 155+84 = 239. Wetter years both would get more. The 251 (TOT), 163 (BAWSCA), and 88 (SF) come from a longer series 1984 to 2008 to better approximate the use patterns during this MWSA period. I don't have TR extractions for the last three years that is why these numbers are not in the following figure. I know the TRT folks are interested in the extractions, etc. Thus I included them in the figure below.
I believe the Master Water Sales Agreement must be rewritten to reflect reality - now and in the future. If I had enough votes at the Revenue Bond Oversight Committee, I would press for a vote to suspend revenue bond funding until this MWSA contract correlates with reality and is throughly and openly reviewed by all with an interest. These dog and pony PPS shows are not that informative.
Below is a figure showing
* Tuolumne River extractions 1968-2005 (these are the only data I have)
* Deliveries to San Francisco
* Deliveries to the suburban customers
* Total HH deliveries to SF and BAWSCA
* A mythical line showing a constant 265 MGD
The above figure may be augmented by the following tables. The average delivery numbers are rounded. There is a lag between TR flows and changes in HH deliveries. This is a dynamic system. This analysis is quite static (for now). The BAWSCA (then BAWUA) and SFPUC in 2000 calculated that long term system reliability system is 239 MGD based on hydrologic history since 1921-1999 and system integrity. Most folks accepting Global Warming believe there will be less water in the TR than in prior years (putting downward pressure on the 239 MGD). Also the silting of Crystal Springs has been noted. Calaveras Dam is about 1/3rd its 1990s capacity. HH is a very reservoir dependent system. especially in that we only have constrained junior riparian rights on the Tuolumne River.
Summary Table of average deliveries from different historical sequences.
| Statistical Analysis from SFPUC Data | |||
| SF | Suburbs | HH System | |
| 1959/60 to 2007/08 | MGD | MGD | MGD |
| Mean | 92.9 | 145.0 | 237.9 |
| SDEV | 12.1 | 32.4 | 29.4 |
| 1970/71 to 2007/08 | |||
| Mean | 89.3 | 158.5 | 247.8 |
| SDEV | 11.4 | 18.1 | 21.2 |
| 1980/81 to 2007/08 | |||
| Mean | 85.4 | 164.7 | 250.0 |
| SDEV | 11.4 | 18.1 | 21.2 |
| MWSA 1984/85-2007/08 | |||
| Mean | 84.6 | 165.3 | 249.9 |
| SDEV | 6.5 | 16.1 | 21.5 |
| 2002 BAWUA/BAWSCA and SFPUC | |||
| System reliability | 239 | ||
| MWSA Commitment | 81 | 184 | 265 |
Brian Browne
brian@h2oecon.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment