Water: the price is wrong

A nice presentation of some key facts about the role of agriculture in California's drought is over at the Daily Beast. People always notice when prices go up, but people don't pay attention to prices that are too low. The price of water in many locations, such as for most farmers even in drought-stricken California, is nearly zero: people using water don't pay the full cost of the water, and so they aren't as careful with it as they ought to be. The article argues that planting large numbers of water-guzzling trees in the middle of a desert is probably not the best idea, and it's tough to contest that.

California getting scary

For the past 65 years, the amount of snow on April 1 has averaged 65 inches, but this year there was zero. Nada. Since that snow becomes Nevada & California's water through the year, this situation is pretty dire, and the governor is imposing the most severe restrictions ever in California: a mandatory 25% cut pretty much everywhere. 2014 was California's warmest year on record, and this winter was the warmest winter on record. Add to that mix a near complete lack of precipitation and a history of heavily overdrawing groundwater resources, and we have serious trouble brewing.

Dairy & Crabs

Two quickies from today's Baltimore Sun, print edition (only one seems to be in their online edition, for whatever reason):

1) In upstate New York, the arrival of Chobani yogurt a few years ago has meant a large increase in the demand for milk. Dairy farmers there are thrilled, but say the locals refuse to work on the dairy farms. They want to hire immigrant workers from Central America (like Eastern Shore crab processors, by the way) but the government isn't being very supportive. It's not in the article, but it seems like the poor farmers may have to actually raise their willingness to pay for workers if they want to get a lot done.

2) More Maryland-y: tests by nonprofit group Oceana have revealed that 46% of crab cakes sold in Baltimore and advertised as containing crab from the Chesapeake do not, in fact, contain crab from the Chesapeake. Instead, some restaurant owners are using cheaper foreign substitutes. It is important to note, though, that sometimes it's not the restaurant's fault: they may pay a high price for something labelled as if it comes from here, but it might not actually be from the Bay. Seafood fraud!

What does it mean to "run out"?

Re: the California drought, from the Los Angeles Times:

"It is the economics of having to go deeper and deeper for groundwater that will ultimately force growers to retire land. It's not that the Central Valley's thick aquifer will run dry. Scientists estimate that it holds roughly 800 million acre-feet of water that seeped deep into the valley's sands and clays over millenniums from streams and rivers swollen with runoff from the neighboring Sierra Nevada and coastal ranges.

Farmers will instead run out of water they can afford to pump. As the groundwater table drops ever lower, wells become prohibitively expensive to drill, water quality deteriorates and it takes more energy, and thus money, to pull supplies from depths of 2,000 feet or more."

"To save our valley, we have to police ourselves," Pitigliano said, acknowledging that it won't be easy.

Food prices hit a low

We talked about food prices in the past slides, but I hadn't realized how well we are doing on that front. It turns out that last fall they were at their lowest level in four years, a development that was no doubt widely appreciated if not much remarked upon. Even so, though, Europe seems to be in an economic doldrums. I'm not a macroeconomist so I won't speculate on what might be keeping them down, but this would imply that the problem isn't just consumers with tight budgets....

Paris in the Smog

     Paris is currently the most polluted city on the planet in terms of air pollution. The smog (PM10 particles created by vehicles and industry) had been especially bad in March, which prompted city officials to put new temporary vehicle restrictions in place. The new measures allow only energy efficient cars, vehicles with odd-number plates, or cars carrying three or more passengers to be allowed to drive in the city. Vehicles were also restricted from exceeding 20kph. People violating these rules were fined €22. To ease the burden these measures place on potential commuters in the city, public transportation and residential parking were made available free of charge. The ban lasted five days and this is the third time since 1997 that such restrictions have been put in place. The ban was estimated to have resulted in a 40% reduction in traffic and a noticeable reduction in air pollution according to city residents. No official numbers have been published at this time. Some citizens and politicians have suggested that officials should instead try to find more sustainable solutions to the pollution problem.
I have to agree that officials should be doing more to curb the pollution problem. The current approach of these temporary bans does not seem sustainable. The smog will only get worse as time goes on, and more frequent temporary bans does not seem feasible. Free public transportation would be very costly, and once the ban is over the pollution simply comes back. What should be done is the implementation of new emissions regulations and incentives for people to ride bikes, carpool, drive cleaner cars, or use public transportation daily. Temporary bans could be effective while new legislation is in the works and before the new regulations start working to their full potential. These bans should not be used as a crutch against pollution.
--David Lanier

California Doubles Down on Renewable Energy

     According to this article California’s fourth term Governor, Jerry Brown has proposed to spend 59 billion dollars to fix infrastructure and raise the state’s renewable energy mandate to 50 percent by 2030. It is believed that his proposal will reboot California’s industrial-scale solar and wind industries and create another land grab in the Mojave Desert.
This isn’t the first time the Governor has set a benchmark for the state. Back in 2011 Governor Brown signed a law that would mandate 33 percent of the state’s energy be renewable by 2020. Since that time the state is not only on track to meeting that goal but will likely surpass it. Being on track of achieving the original goal has been a blessing and a curse for California.
     The good thing about achieving the goal is it led the country by example, showing large scale radical environmental policy can create long lasting change in energy use. The bad part about being on target to achieve the goal is the utility companies have lost interest in signing new contracts with large scale renewable energy firms, because there was no incentive to do so. Therefore many clean-energy developers don’t have the financing for large-scale projects. The clean-energy industry hope for the new benchmark is that it will renew interest in utility companies to contract large scale renewable energy developers.
There are several challenges associated with the new 50 percent standard. One is how the Governor will bring the 50 percent standard into law. Govern Brown could issue an executive order or ask the Legislature to craft a bill that will be likely to pass with the liberal state Senate. The other challenge is the limitation of renewable energy. Renewable energy is intermittent and the supply does not always meet the demand, therefore companies must find a way to balance and integrate renewable energy with non-renewable. Another challenge is the land use these large scale clean-energy companies will take up in the Mojave Desert.
     The Obama administration has set aside 22 million acres in California as Federal land for renewable energy endeavors. However, some of the construction that will take place on that land might negatively affect ecosystems and ancestral homelands of the Colorado River Indian Tribes. Last year the Colorado River Indian Tribes filed a lawsuit to stop construction of a solar energy plant that will span 4,000 acres in the Mojave Desert. In the lawsuit the Tribes claim the U.S Bureau of Land Management environmental impact statement for the project failed to take into account the damage that would incur to the ecosystem, culture, groundwater and the Colorado River.
     Even though there are many challenges setting the new standard, it is exciting to see a politician take such a bold stance on renewable energy. This article, showed how the environment, economics, law, and policy are interconnected and all must be taken into account when trying to bring long lasting change. The article also helped me to understand how economic incentives and policy can have an impact on the environment.
The article spoke of the utility companies that stopped contracting clean-energy developers once the incentive was gone. Because there was no push on businesses through economics or policy, progress in renewable energy became stagnant. However, while the incentive was there California achieved an environmental goal many thought couldn’t be accomplished, especially within a short 10 year period. This article has shown me that true environmental change has to start with changes in policy: if not businesses and individuals will be more inclined to do what is economically beneficial.

--Amanda Akins