<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 />
|