Laserfiche WebLink
<br />U .8. aims to wring <br />out storm clouds <br /> <br />~y, J.., 29, 1984 <br />First in a series <br /> <br />By Daniel C. Carson <br />Staff Writer <br /> <br />SACRAMENTO - In what sounds <br />like a plot for a science-fiction novel, <br />the Reagan administration is pushing <br />ahead with plans for massive cloud- <br />seeding operations in the Colorado <br />River basin that could ease or pre- <br />vent future water shortages in Cali- <br />fornia and six other Western states. <br />Some government officials and <br />scientific experts are skeptical about <br />man's ability to so dramatically <br />alter the weather, while other con- <br />cerns are being voiced about the <br />legal and environmental ramifica- <br />tions if the technology does indeed <br />work as claimed. <br />~onetheless, the U.S. Bureau of <br />Reclamation has launched an ag- <br />gressive effort to line up $88 million <br />to finance the eight-year experiment <br />'in weather modification. officially <br />dubbed the Colorado River Enhanced <br /> <br />Snowpack Test, or CREST. They <br />minimize the risks and say the <br />payoff in water and power in the <br />long run will be many times the ini- <br />tial investment. <br /> <br />California water and power agen- <br />cy representatives will be given a <br />briefing on the latest administration <br />proposals this week. The key issue i! <br />how the cost for the program will be <br />shared between the ~tates and the <br />federal government: ;J' . <br /> <br />The bureau pro~ to use air- <br />craft and ground stations to "seed" <br />moisture-laden cJou~ during winter <br />months to produce' heavier snowfall <br />than would o~ occur at two <br />Colorado mountaJD ranges. In the <br />spring, the theory goes, the melted <br />snow woul<f flO'iJ in~ tbe Colorado <br />River system 01 reservoirs to meet <br />the needs of Industry, agJ iculture <br />and fast-growing llrban areas of the <br />West. <br />"AcCOrding to bureau officials, <br />CREST could be prod,ucing an extra <br />410,000 acre-feet of water each year <br />begimdn. in November 1987. (An <br />ac:re-foot equals 326,000 gallons.) <br />..About 310,000 acre-feet of that <br />bu woaId flow into the Colorado' <br />River basin where, under the right <br />combination of circumstances, much <br />of it could be diverted into canals <br />Iel'Ving the Metropolitan WaterDI. <br />~ trict. of. Southern California (MWD) <br />: and other California water agencies. <br />: MWD is San Diego County's maiD <br />; water supplier. <br />; If tbe federal plan is successful,' <br />; the additional water would come at a <br />. feritical time for California. <br />:' Beginning In December 1985, a $S . <br />lri1I1on system of channels will begin <br />: diverting 100,000 to 400,000 more <br />acre-feet annually from the Colorado <br />. River to Arizona users. Because of a <br />1* U.s. Supreme Court decision, <br />Ca1ifornia'. legal apportionment of <br />Colorado River water will be re- <br />dueed by 700,000 acre-feet annually <br />to 4.4 million during the same Deriod. <br /> <br />Gov. DeukmejiaD bu been" trying <br />. to secure passage of legislation to di- <br />vert 630,000 acre-feet of additional <br />water from Northern California to <br />the southern part of the state to help <br />offset the elpected cutback. <br />: Dennis B. Underwood, executive <br />secretary of the Colorado River <br />Board of California, said the experi- <br />mental nature of CREST means it is <br />DOt a substitute for the governor's <br />through-Delta project. <br />However. Underwood, whose state <br />. agency hu passed a resolution en- <br />dorsing the weather-modification <br />project, said additional water pro- <br />duced by CREST "would be very <br />beneficial to the state during a criti- <br />cal time of supply and demand. It <br />: could be almost fully utilized by Cali. <br />fornia. " <br />California will be vulnerable to <br />shortages in the late 19808 as Arizona <br />starts to divert more water from the <br />river for its new project. Underwood <br />said. The state will remain vulnera- <br />ble, he indicated, until its own water <br />projects to transfer water southward <br />are completed. <br />During the Dear-term. California <br />may be the only state in a position to <br />take full advantage of the surplus <br />water created by CREST, said Und- <br />erwood. <br />The main focus of CREST is ob- <br />taining a greater long-range water <br />supply for the West. If CREST is pro- <br />ductive during its eight-year li. <br />fespan, say the bureau's experts, the <br />next logical step would be full-scale <br />cloud-seeding in as many as five <br />Western states. California would not <br />be one of the states. <br />Full-scale seeding, they predict, <br />(could mean production of an extra <br />L 2.26 million acre feet of runoff annu- <br />ally. Of that sum, about 1.73 million <br />,acre-feet would fiow into the Colora- <br />:00 River basin, possibly providing <br />'Surplus water for Southern Califor- <br />:Iilil but at the very least protecting <br />,MWD from being shorted on its legal <br />apportionmenL <br />Even after the Arizona-caused re- <br />~ducttOD in its Colorado River appor- _ <br />tioament, California and the MWD <br />are in danger of losing still more <br />water early iiI the 199Os, Underwood <br />said. This, be said, is primarily be- <br />cause other Sunbelt states OIl the Col- <br />orado River are growiDg IDd devel- <br />oping and will Deed more water In <br />the future. . <br />AgreemeIIts IDd treaties lOW. In <br />.. place will eventually ObligaW' tIie <br />- federal gOverDmeDt. to provide 17.5 <br />mil110D acre-feet of Colorado River <br />water eam ~ to i v.nous U.s. <br />states and also to Memo. TIle prob- <br />lem is tbat In normal years, the river <br />can be counted on to provide be- <br />tween 14 milliooand 15 mUllon acre- <br />feeL " . <br />. The effects of the shortage will not <br />be felt Immediately because the fed- <br />erally run system of dams and reser- <br />voin, bu a. storage capacity of 60 <br />millicm' at:re-feel The problem is <br />real, aceording to the bureau, be- <br />cause the river is the main source of <br />. water supply for half the population <br />.of 11 Western states. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />__ '"'l1Iat . tile loq-term problem <br />~tb the river," said Underwood. <br />"The apportionments to the states <br />are greater than the IODg-term annu- <br />al yield out of the river system." <br />Large-scale cloud-seeding efforts, <br />he said, "would shore up California's <br />basic apportionment. Otherwise. <br />we'd have a shortage problem and <br />draw down storage. Sooner or later, <br />you would have to start shorting <br />states." <br />Jerry K1azura, acting branch chief <br />in the bureau's Denver office that is <br />the headquarters for CREST, said <br />the experiment is expected to cost <br />$11 million a year. The payoff in <br />water and power during that eight- <br />year penod is valued at $11.9 million <br />a year by bureau economists - <br />meaning that the project would vir- <br />tually break even. <br />The expected next step, full-scale <br />cloud-seeding in the Colorado River <br />basin, would cost a bit more - be- <br />tween $12 million and $16 million a <br />year, according to the bureau. The <br />annual cost would be only slightly <br />greater than for CREST because de- <br />tailed scientific measurement and <br />study would no longer be necessary. <br />Klazura said the payoff from full- <br />scale weather modification, well be- <br />yond CREST, would be almost $140 <br />million annually. That cost-benefit <br />ratio compares highly favorably with <br />the alternatives. he said. Bareau offi- <br />cials assume that some agreement <br />will be worked out for dividing up <br />the additional water generated by <br />cloud-seeding, <br />The alternatives studied by the bu- <br />reau included channels to divert <br />water from either the Mississippi or <br />Columbia rivers and massive desa- <br />linization plants. All were found too <br />costly or too controversial. <br />CREST bu been in the planning <br />stages for four years. Lew Moore, <br />senior staff assistant in the bureau's <br />Washington, D.C., o(fice, confirmed <br />that the new initiative resulted from <br />a change of policy made possible by <br />the resignation of James Watt u sec- <br />retary of the Interior. <br />Watt, according to both Moore and <br />Underwood, had insisted duriDg his <br />tenure that CREST be funded entire- <br />ly by Western states benefiting from <br />the Colorado River system, without <br />any direct financial contribution <br />. <br />from the federal governmenL <br />State governments balked. insist- <br />ing the federal government should <br />bear at least some of the cost be- <br />cause it was the United States, not <br />I them, that guaranteed Mexico at <br />least 1.S million acre-feet each year <br />from the Colorado River in a 1944 <br />treaty. <br />Interest in CREST flagged until <br />after William P. Clark. a Californian. <br />took over as Interior secretary. <br /> <br />Moore said a Clark aide early this <br />year authorized bureau officials to <br />explore the idea of a cost-sharing <br />deal with the states. <br />Within just the last few weeks, the <br />bureau has commenced that negotia- <br />tion process with a proposal for a <br />roughly 50-50 split between federal <br />and state authorities. The exact split <br />among the states, and the mecba- <br />nism for raising the states' share. is <br />also being discussed. <br /> <br />TOMORROW: TIle costroversy over <br />cloud seediDg. <br />