Transcript Draft 2010 Integrated Water Resources Plan Update

The Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California
May 30, 2013
Regional Water Wholesaler to 6 counties
5,200 square miles
26 Member Agencies
~18 million residents
Regional economy: ~$1 trillion
Estimated Retail Demand:
4 million acre-feet
Provide about ½ of retail demands
Sierra Mountains
Bay/Delta
State Water
Project
LA Aqueduct
Colorado River
Aqueduct
Conservation
Local
Groundwater and
Recycling
Hub of California’s Water
Los Angeles
Aqueduct
State
Water
Project
Colorado River
Aqueduct
Local
5
In-Delta
Consumptive
Use
4%
Upstream
Consumptive
Use
31%
MWD
4%
Delta Exports
17%
Pacific Ocean
48%
Source: Governor’s Delta Vision Report (Estimated total annual runoff 32.85 maf)
6
25% Colorado River supplies
30% State Water Project
(flowing through the Delta)
45% Local Supplies
Los Angeles Aqueduct
Conservation
Recycling
Groundwater
Desalination
8
Blueprint for Adapting to Change
Water Use
Efficiency
• 20% Reduction in Per-Capita Water
Use
Local
Resources
• Develop Incentives and Partnerships
• Implement Foundational Actions
SWP
• Delta Improvements for Reliability
CRA
• Develop Dry-Year Supply Programs
Blueprint for Adapting to Change
Water Use
• 20% Reduction in Per-Capita Water
Use This Mean?
Efficiency What Does
Local
• Develop Incentives and Partnerships
•Stabilize
Imported
Supplies
•
Implement
Foundational Actions
Resources
•Increase Efficiency and Local Resources
SWP
• Delta Improvements for Reliability
CRA
• Develop Dry-Year Supply Programs
Dry Year Supplies
Storage &
Transfers
Cons
CRA
Local
Supplies
Storage & Conservation
Transfers
& WUE
CRA
SWP
Heavy dependence on
imported supply
and SWP Diversions
SWP
Local
Supplies
Emphasis on Conservation,
Local Supplies, and
Storage & Transfers
Central Valley/SWP Storage
San Luis Carryover
Semitropic
Arvin-Edison
Kern Delta
Mojave
CRA Storage
Advance Delivery
Lake Mead ICS
Local Storage
Diamond Valley
Lake Mathews
Lake Skinner
Conjunctive Use Groundwater
DWR State Project Reservoirs
6.0
Million Acre-Feet
5.0
14x Increase in Capacity
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
Reducing Reliance on Imports
Conservation:
900,000 af/yr
Recycling:
335,000 af/yr
Groundwater Recovery: 111,000 af/yr
Seawater:
46,000 af/yr (planned)
Conservation represents regional actions both active & passive
Recycling & groundwater represents total regional production 2012 (MWD & member agency)
Seawater represents 3 planned local projects
14
Metropolitan is committed to meeting future additional
water supply needs through local resources and conservation
$3,500
$1,400 3,500+/AF
Supply Cost ($/AF)
$3,000
$2,500
$1,600 3,500+/AF
$2,000
$940 2,500/AF
$1,500
Local Supply Avg. ~ $1,500/AF
$1,600 2,300/AF
$1,000
SWP Existing ($650/AF) + Delta Improvements ($200/AF) = ~ $850/AF
$500
$0
Stormwater
Revised: December 18, 2012
Groundwater
Recovery
Recycled
Desalination
15
SWP & CVP Reliability
Avg. SWP-CVP Exports (million AF)
South Exports Only
Metropolitan’s share ~ 25%
6
5
4
3
6.0
4.7
2
1
2.0 – 3.0
1.0 - 1.5
Potential Future
Fish Listings
Earthquake
Risk
0
Pre-Court
(D-1641)
Existing
(Bio Op)
Includes work completed by the BDCP Steering Committee effort
Exports will be
minimal for 1.5
to 3 years
following an
earthquake
17
Las Posas
Sylmar
East San Verdugo
Fernando Raymond
Six
Cucamonga
Basins
Main
San Gabriel
Chino
San Jacinto
Orange
County
Upper Elsinore
San Juan
Objectives
San Mateo &
San Onofre
Improve export quality to meet Public Health
standards & reduce treatment costs
Support actions to minimize salinity imports
Meet 500 mg/l blending goal
Warner Valley
Some Basin Plans have low TDS objectives
Could restrict extended recharge of high
salinity Colorado River water *
* Some of the highlighted basins do not currently receive MWD recharge supplies
18
Improvements
Capital
Annual O&M
Funding Source
Conveyance
$14 billion
$83 million
Water Contractors
Eco-Restoration &
Other Stressors
$3.6 billion
$46 million
Fed/State/Water
Contractors/Other
Users pay – new conveyance & associated mitigation
Beneficiaries pay – habitat conservation & other state-wide benefits
Average cost for Southern Californians ~ $5 - 6/month per household
Metropolitan’s share is approximately 25 percent
The $14 billion estimate per the Governor’s announcement (July 25, 2012)
Other cost information from Dec-2010 BDCP document
19
BDCP Delta Facilities
Cost
Population Served
Per Capita Cost
$14 billion
25 million
$560
(Per 7/25 Announcement)
(3 million acres of Ag)
San Francisco PUC Hetch Hetchy Project
Repairs to protect against future seismic events, and to meet current
building codes and drinking water regulations
Cost
$4.6 billion
Population Served
Per Capita Cost
2.5 million
$1,840
Contra Costa Water District’s Los Vaqueros Project
Improves water quality and provides emergency storage
Cost
$570 million
Population Served
Per Capita Cost
550,000
$1,036
BDCP Economic Benefits and Financial Strategies, SCWC/The PFM Group, February 2012
20
MWD share of BDCP Cost
Cost
$3.5 billion
Population Served
Per Capita Cost
19 million
$184
MWD Diamond Valley Reservoir/Inland Feeder projects
Primarily an emergency storage facility but also provides drought and
water quality benefits
Cost
$3.1 billion
Population Served
Per Capita Cost
18 million
$172
SDCWA Emergency Storage Project
Enhances reliability of the water supply of San Diego in the event of
seismic disruption
Cost
$1.5 billion
Population Served
Per Capita Cost
2.8 million
$536
BDCP Economic Benefits and Financial Strategies, SCWC/The PFM Group, February 2012
21
Delta is critical to California’s water supply
Southern California is committed to
conservation and local supplies for future
growth and diversification
1.1 MAF of conservation and local resources will
be developed to meet future needs
Storage has been developed to manage “big
gulp/little sip”
Stable imported supplies are needed for
reliability