WATER

PROCEEDINGS:  HYDROFORCE "WATERWHEEL" WORKSHOP, September 13, 2006, Fusselman Hall, College of Marin, Kentfield

BACKGROUND.     On September 13, 2006, College of Marin hosted "Hydroforce", an interactive "waterwheel" workshop exploring water, energy and points where they connect.  The title "Hydroforce" implies new vigor towards conservation in the "wheel" of our energy and water systems. The workshop explored fresh ideas about scaling up ways to save water and energy while creating new local jobs and businesses, increasing energy reliability and holding down costs to ratepayers.  Main focus was on new opportunities and technologies.  Themes were energy/water reliability, realizing untapped savings, levering new technologies, removing legacy barriers, and the potential of community choice electricity aggregation for water and wastewater agencies.

SPONSORS:   College of Marin, Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD), Sustainable Marin, Sustainable San Rafael, Sustainable Novato, Marin Group Sierra Club, Sierra Club California, Women's Energy Matters, Local Power, Environmental Forum of Marin, DescomStudios.com

Link to printable PDF of complete Hydroforce Workshop Proceedings.

SPEAKERS AND DISCUSSION LEADERS:   FRANCES L. WHITE, Superintendant/President, College of Marin.  LORETTA LYNCH, former Chair, California Public Utilities Commission; energy conservation chief for Governor Davis; energy policy professor, University of California, Berkeley.  DAVID KELLER, former Petaluma City Council Member; Director, Friends of the Eel River.  PAUL FENN, CEO Local Power and author of AB117, California Community Choice law, San Francisco H-Bond Authority and Community Choice Plan.  JOHN ROSENBLUM, engineering consultant for energy efficiency in water and wastewater systems.  DAN CARNEY, Conservation Manager, Marin Municipal Water District.  KEN SMOKOSKA, energy-climate leader, Sierra Club California.  FERNANDO AGUDELO SILVA, biology professor, water-nutrient systems expert.  DAVID WECKLER, Environmental Forum of Marin.  College of Marin Outreach:  NANDA SCHORSKE.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:   Hydroforce Workshop was held against a backdrop of likely future challenges to sufficiency and reliability of Marin's water and energy supplies.  Concern is growing that global warming may cause extended periodic droughts, intensified summer heat waves, reduction in Sierra snow pack, interruption of traditional seasonal patterns, population migration and other impacts on water supply in California.  Simultaneously, traditional forms of energy supply may become more expensive and problematic, owing to heightened pressures to cut back carbon emissions and face global peaking of global oil and gas reserves and production.

The workshop discussed means to significantly scale up renewable power, water and energy efficiency and conservation beyond what is conventionally projected.  Past MMWD efforts at water conservation were recognized and appreciated, but there was consensus that much more must now be done if solutions are to be fully commensurate with the scale of the problem.  There was sentiment for an "all-hands-on-deck" approach that would put renewable power and conservation front and center, not only as a strategy co-equal with new back-up capacity but as the leading avenue to avert system risk.

The workshop examined the advantages of community choice electricity aggregation (CCA), now under study by County of Marin, and how MMWD's mission and needs might benefit from a relationship with and involvement in any future CCA JPA.  There was considerable discussion of the need for greater strategic cooperation and collaboration across jurisdictional, bureaucratic and regulatory boundaries and barriers in order to optimize the existing technological and operational potential of conservation and efficiency.

WORKSHOP OUTCOMES.  Some of the positive benefits of the Workshop were:  1) stimulating and legitimizing more attention in Marin to the interrelatedness of water, wastewater and energy in Marin; 2) promoting more networking about these interconnections as well as open discussion about possibilities for integrating, incentivizing and extending strategies and programs to cope with coming unprecedented challenges; 3) looking at CCA's possibilities as a potentially creative framework to help water agencies realize their missions, whether as a partner, consumer, tenant, or enterprise agency;  4)  catalyzing similar workshops elsewhere where the Workshop's flyer stirred interest; 5) talking about conservation as a full partner in respect to other facets of water and energy supply; 6) open discussion of making watershed restoration a legitimate strategic goal in watershed management; 7) a look at ways to mobilize publics behind good ideas and help decision makers articulate them; 8) new ideas for interactive webcasting, pod casting and new coalitions to make it easier, quicker and cheaper to bridge existing barriers dividing policymakers/ratepayers, electeds/citizens and water/energy conservation advocacy groups.

FEATURED SPEAKERS.  Ms. Lynch challenged water and energy agencies to break down barriers among them and talk to each other both strategically and operationally.  As water agencies are large energy users, dollars put into energy efficiency are the cheapest route to savings.  The challenge is how to assess what works best for customers and ratepayers and integrate, embed and incentivize that into the infrastructure.  Environmental considerations should permeate all decisions. Ms. Lynch pointed out that money and incentives have traditionally been channeledinto capacity building, but Oregon and Vermont, for example, now combine energy and water in one bundle to maximize conservation funding.  CCA could bring energy efficiency funding more directly to the local level and leverage energy efficiency in combined community control of energy and water.

Mr. Keller advocated framing water and energy policy in a much longer time horizon than currently.  Once infrastructure is built, its life is 100 years or more.  So instead of short-term planning horizons, a 150-year horizon should be minimum.  Rather than drift into disputes, shortages, "water wars" and aquifer over-drafting (as in Sonoma County), leading to scarcity-driven system demise, we need to correct the current regional and state trajectory.  A core premise should be, "clean up your own mess", local self-reliance.  All decisions should be made in light of externalized costs, which are starting to impair the system.  Ways must be found to better incentivize conservation, "mine the waste", return conserved water to impaired rivers and streams rather than enabling more sprawl, and make watershed restoration a priority water agency mission.

COMMUNITY CHOICE (CCA).  CCA is an authority granted by California law (AB117, Migden) that allows cities and counties to take charge of their own energy future.  Under CCA, local governments can serve as a virtual "electricity buyer's cooperative" for local residents, businesses and government agencies.  Unlike ordinary cooperatives, however, the day-to-day management for securing electricity supplies is managed by a qualified and experienced third party, an "electricity service provider", while local government plays the role of a strategic planner and overseer.  Benefits include choosing cost-effective, clean renewable energy sources over fossil fuels, creating longer-term price stability through less dependence on volatile fossil fuels, and promoting locally owned clean, distributed generation facilities.

CCA’s Potential Benefits.  Consultants have told County of Marin that CCA could gradually increase the percentage of renewable power in Marin to 51 percent of supply or more in 10 years, far greater than PG&E's currently negligible percentage, while creating long-term cost savings, development of local energy efficiency programs, energy portfolios that provide structured rates that are more predictable, protect from energy price shocks, "green" economic development and a reduced County "ecological footprint".  One Workshop participant said "CCA shows the way to make a large dent in greenhouse gas emissions, kick-start the renewable energy industry, provide green, local jobs and generate sustainable secure energy for entire populations, not merely solar panels on wealthy homes and businesses".

Workshop groups discussed how MMWD might advantageously fit into a future Marin County energy JPA made up of CCA cities and the County.  State law does NOT permit MMWD or other water agencies to "form" or "manage" a JPA,  be a CCA "administrator" or "be" a CCA.  It can however JOIN a CCA, be a member agency taking part in a CCA arrangement on terms that MMWD would negotiate with other JPA participants in its own interest.  There is precedent:  the Imperial Irrigation District, for example, participates in the Southern California Public Power Agency (SCPPA), a JPA.

CCA Participation Models.  There are three possible forms of MMWD participation in a Marin CCA:

1) As an "anchor tenant," that is, the largest purchaser of the clean, increasingly renewable energy provided through CCA.  Indeed, the sheer bulk of MMWD's electricity purchases would be crucial to making a Marin CCA viable.

2) As a "resource platform".  MMWD has land, water and infrastructure resources and facilities that could be used to generate energy to be sold to the CCA (some are discussed below, see LOCAL ENERGY RESOURCES).  MMWD-located or -generated energy could be sold even outside its nominal water jurisdiction and could become a significant revenue enhancement to compensate for any water "not sold" as a result of greater water conservation successes.

3) As a bonding authority:  MMWD, a "public enterprise agency" has revenue bond power that it might voluntarily choose to use, in cooperation with with JPA H-Bond cities, to achieve shared energy and water goals with city and county within the JPA, which itself could have "H-Bond" authority like San Francisco's.

One Workshop participant noted that MMWD has natural attributes and knowledge to provide CCA-related moral, political and intellectual leadership.  As a "public enterprise agency" (cities are not), MMWD, already long familiar with  revenue bond-financed infrastructure, is experienced in engineering and infrastructure management, negotiates long-term contracts on the part of rate payers, and as a utility manages customer accounts.  Therefore, during the  County's coming Phase Two (Implementation Plan) study, MMWD might simply tell the County that it is interested in negotiating "anchor tenant" energy-purchasing status with any future JPA and would be open to studying and negotiating "resource platform" possibilities, as well as negotiating future cooperation and collaboration within the broad context of a future JPA.  Participants suggested that by making encouraging statements early in the process, such as "if a JPA is set up, we'd look at joining it," MMWD could bring positive impetus on behalf of a Marin CCA.

CCA was seen by presenters as a way to achieve very large regional greenhouse gas emissions reductions, noting that end-use GHG/gallon is four times water delivery GHG/gal).  Reductions can be built into negotiated contracts with CCA renewable-energy providers.  One presenter suggested Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA), for example, could set up a CCA to (a) capitalize more water efficiency under a robust water conservation regime and (b) purchase more local renewables.  SCWA is currently governed by Sonoma County’s Board of Supervisors, but could be separated with an independently elected board that could issue bonds and initiate CCA supported by water services (not only water sales) revenue.  Other participants also suggested that MMWD could be a driver of a Marin CCA with its large infrastructure/use (MMWD Independent Agency, bonding authority can only partner with government for CCA).

Ideas for promoting CCA in Marin included formation of CCA citizens advisory committees at both county and city levels; keeping the messaging "simple";  mobilizing not only sustainability groups but business and professional interest groups; making the economic and financial case for cleaner, more reliable, distributed power;  contrasting the risks of taking action with the risks of doing nothing; and CCA as an economic opportunity for Marin.LOCAL ENERGY RESOURCES.   Several discussants suggested it would be very useful for MMWD to explore the potential of local energy resources within their jurisdiction and share this information with those working on Marin CCA.

• MMWD several years ago reportedly performed a study on small hydroelectric potential in the water district property. MMWD officials said  they had concluded that the power was too expensive to sell to PG&E, and would only be available in winter. CCA and new energy prices may make this a different proposition today. It would be useful to pull out the study and see how it could be integrated into a larger energy plan using local resources.

• New desalination technology, developed since the original planning for the desalination plant, could potentially greatly reduce environmental impact of desalination, and either reduce energy requirements or actually generate electric power. There is also potential to use on-site or nearby renewable generation that could be examined if this has not already been done.

• MMWD has considerable land resources where renewable generation facilities could be located. It would be useful to have an inventory of such land and see what, if any resources (wind, solar, biofuel, tidal, cogeneration, pumped storage, etc.) might be developed there.

• There is considerable interface between energy and water usage, with water consuming 20% of the state's electricity. There is some potential to use the water system as a demand-response reserve, pumped energy storage, and as a hydroelctric power resource. California Energy Commission's (CEC) recent policy report, particularly its chapter on the interface between water and energy, has a great overview and blueprint for how to appoach this complex issue.  It is suggested MMWD study this report and brief its Board on applicability to local circumstances.

See 2005 Integrated Energy Policy Report, chapter 8: http://energy.ca.gov/2005publications/CEC-100-2005-007/CEC-100-2005-007-CMF.PDF

 WATER CONSERVATION.  Participants voiced support for making water conservation a full partner with other MMWD missions.  Some suggested that the current Environmental Impact Review (EIR) of MMWD's desalination project be used to thoroughly explore new conservation options and alternatives, as well as considering new desalination technology, more recent than that MMWD has favored, is studied and assessed with due diligence.  One participant expressed concern that it would be unfortunate if MMWD committed large, long-term expenditures on outmoded desal technology that better alternatives had surpassed.  The Workshop discussed changes in water rate structure to enable scaled-up conservation and how public acceptance and understanding of such changes could be achieved through better communication.  Another chronic problem to be overcome was an institutional bias among professional water engineers favoring added capacity instead of conserving more water, and the inherent conflict of interest between selling more water (and maintaining agency revenues) and selling less water (conserving) while reducing revenues and shrinking agency payrolls and expertise. Some asked, if we were to achieve a water "surplus", what would we do with it -- sell it or return it to stream health, restoration and environmental upkeep?  Some noted that Marin is an excellent test for new water policy since there is relatively small population growth.  Workshop groups urged more financial support, public activism and political backing for water conservation.  Specific actions to promote restoration and conservation were discussed at length, among them being green infrastructure to address stormwater management, special rating for buildings based on sustainability, policies to promote water-efficient landscaping, more education in water use, develop rate structures for water use, protect and restore riparian buffers, reduce permeable surfaces, reduce chemical fertilizer use, reduce pesticides, and adopt cleaner fuels.

CONSERVATION’S ADVANTAGES.  Data presented from studies at Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) pointed to compelling advantages of water conservation options over expensive new capacity-boosting infrastructure projections.

According to efficiency engineer John Rosenblum, SCWA reportedly projects a 39% increase in water needs in 15 years and a current response to fill that need priced at $100 million of supply infrastructure plus another $300 million for Eel/Russian River watershed restoration.  The infrastructure outlay would bring with it a 63% increase in greenhouse gas emissions.  Supply shortages would be expected, and contracts would include “emergency cutbacks”.

In contrast, the water conservation alternative could reduce water use by 11% below 2005, according to Pacific Institute.  Robust conservation would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 44%. (Participants noted scientific opinion that greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced globally by 70 percent from 1990 levels by 2050 in order to avoid irreparable damage to the earth's ecosystems. This target, if implemented by conservation within SCWA, would reduce water use to 29% below 2005, but would require reclaimed wastewater and end-used validation of economic feasibility.)

In other words, SCWA water supply plans will increase GHGs, but water efficiency combined with energy efficiency can reduce greenhouse gas emissions, with very much larger GHG reductions coming as customers use less hot water and with more purchases of local renewable energy.

The Workshop discussed how MMWD might avoid incurring burdensome capital expenditures for new capacity as well as life-cycle operating costs by investing relatively small sums of money now in gathering and interpreting hard data, already available in MMWD's system, that would show public and professionals alike how large-scale conservation is the cheapest long-term way to meet consumers' needs.

 
FUNDING NEW TECHNOLOGIES.  Also reported were new water conservation technologies and an innovative implementation system.  For indoor residential usage, the largest of MMWD’s end uses, proven technologies include toilets (one gl/flush or less), premium clothes washers, and for hot water, an on-demand circulation system and smart plumbing design.  Indoor usage may be reduced by more than 40% in an average existing home while saving money.  An implementation system called Pay As You Save® (Resource Performance Partners, Petaluma) now makes it easy for customers -including owners, tenants, and developers - to enjoy such savings.  Customers would face no initial cost, would be assured of savings, and would pay over time until the item is paid off, they move, or it stops working and cannot be repaired.  Up-front costs are reimbursed through a portion of utility savings - no need for customers to provide cash, incur debt, or execute a lien.  The system requires only a capital provider, qualified vendors, a certification agent, and a service fee on the water bill of served customers.  This could dramatically scale up water conservation in Marin with minimal need for rebates. 

Furthermore, in response to the long-term context set for Hydroforce Workshop, proven but seldom employed innovations indicate a bright future for the “soft path” in water.  On-site wastewater treatment – sized after all efficiency measures are installed - can reduce water supply needs ten-fold compared to today’s usage when water is reused first indoors, then outdoors.  This could suddenly advance onsite rainwater harvesting and storage into feasibility as a general strategy, thereby softening many of the negative impacts now associated with municipal water, wastewater, stormwater, and related energy infrastructure.

 WORKSHOP FOLLOW-UP.  Workshop participants urged that these data be presented to MMWD's Board of Directors and professional staff for follow-up assessment and implementation.

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 For comment or clarification on the above Hydroforce Workshop "Proceedings", contact Dan Carney, Conservation Manager, Marin Municipal Water District,  415-945-1522,  dcarney@marinwater.org, or Ed Mainland, Secretary, Sustainable Marin, 415-902-6365, email Ed Mainland

Return to Top

FEATURED EVENTS
…………………………….

Click Here to View the Complete Events Calendar

Home | About | Sustainability Agenda | Support + Volunteer | Sustainable Cities | Links | Contact