Save the California Delta Alliance (STCDA)

Seattle’s “Big Dig” tunnel project shows another example of what a Delta Tunnel project will look like.

How does Seattle’s “Big Dig” compare to the planned Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) tunnels?

After the first 3 weeks of the beginning of boring the Seattle tunnel in 2013, they were already 2 weeks behind schedule. Currently the projected 14 month project which was planned to complete December 2014 is now projected to take until August 2016 or later (almost 3 times as long as original projections). They’ve only tunneled 1,000 feet of the 2 miles/9,200 feet (our tunnels are 30 miles long) and have already used 70 percent of the estimated total cost (do I hear huge overruns?) Seattle’s “Big Dig” is only 2 miles long yet the tunnel-boring machine has been stuck underneath Seattle for more than a year. The machine is stuck in soft ground which used to be underwater (sound like Delta ground?) Now they are having to dig a huge hole down to haul the behemoth tunneling machine out to repair it. The huge hole caused them to have to dewater surrounding ground water and is causing nearby buildings to sink and crack. What a mess!

Why isn’t this what we will be looking at in the Delta if the tunnel plan goes through? Huge delays, cost overruns and unforeseen damage surrounds Seattle’s “Big Dig” and it’s only 2 miles long versus the Delta tunnel 30 mile, dual tunnel project.

Going “under the Delta” sounded so much less pervasive and more environmentally correct than a peripheral canal. Easier to “market” and “sell” to the general populace. But it is what it is – a huge construction project through the heart of sensitive Delta wetlands and rich farmlands that will do endless amounts of economic and environmental damage to Northern California.

Read the December 30, 2014 Washington Post Article.

The Tehachapi-Cummings water district is currently debating whether to rejoin the BDCP. Previously they provided $400K funding but then dropped out. The district’s general manager, John Martin, recommended participating at the 100 percent level in order to receive more data (more reliable information about the project moving forward).

As reported in the Tehachapi News December 31, 2014:

“Historically, the district has never imported more than 45 percent of its water allocation from the State Water Project, or 8,000 acre-feet. It’s sold some of its water to other agencies from the remaining 55 percent.”

“That is expected to change.”

“With all the permanent crops that are being planted, we’ll be approaching 100 percent (demand) within the next five to seven years. With the agriculture demand increasing up here and the growth of the communities, the city and CSDs, we will need to bring up water in greater quantities in the future.”

Where’s the thinking? Most of that water increase, as we know, is the agriculture, not the communities. Permanent crops (aka almonds) are among the most thirsty year-round crops being planted.

There’s a lack of water. There will be less water in the future. Let’s plant more almonds!

Shouldn’t someone stop and say “We’re running out of water! Maybe we should switch some of this acreage back to line crops and stop expanding our footprint of crops in the desert.” ???

It’s the Holiday Season!

Wishing you a happy Holiday Season and a joyous New Year (without tunnels)!

Merry Christmas to the BDCP, the DSC and the NRA, et al.

Burt Wilson, Editor
bwilson5404@sbcglobal.net
12/22/14

Twas the night before Christmas at BDCP,
But their eggnogs were downed amidst much misery.
Their heads were hung low, their brows were all sweated,
‘Cause it looked like their tunnels wouldn’t be vetted.

Seven years or more they had worked through the night,
To make us believe the twin tunnels were right.
When pressed to explain things, they just hemmed and hawed,
Cause they knew all along what they planned was a fraud.

Then out on the Delta there arose such a clatter,
The people looked ’round to see what was the matter.
It was old Marc Cowin. He yelped like an otter:
“I promise we’ll never take any new water.”

The people yelled back, “We’ve heard that before.”
And the MWD says they want a lot more.
The co-equal goals will never pass muster.
And the fish screens have lost their original luster.

Read more…

On December 19, the BDCP released an announcement of refinements to the BDCP plan. Also more information was provided on the revisions to expect in 2015 to the EIR/EIS.

The Sacramento Bee reported in their front-page article, Pumps dropped from Delta Water Tunnel Plan, that there was a new “switch to gravity intakes meant to ease local concerns” and went on to say that the major design change was made aimed at appeasing local residents: The three intakes planned on the Sacramento River will no longer require pumps. Instead of giant electric pumps, the plan now calls for water to enter the three huge intakes by gravity flow. This, in turn, means most tall buildings can be eliminated at each intake. Thus the multi-story buildings at the site of the intakes that were going to be a major eyesore for the quaint delta towns of Clarksburg and Walnut Grove, were now going to be single-story. And there will be no need for permanent new high-voltage power lines.

That sounds like progress – right?

Wrong!

All along the BDCP claimed that they needed the larger 40 foot wide tunnels because the plan was to use gravity feed. Gravity feed required, they said, a wider diameter pipe than pumps. Their plan was to use gravity feed and save money.

The concern raised by Delta proponents was that 40 foot wide tunnels can siphon off 15,000 cubic feet/second (CFS) (the entire Sacramento River) instead of the proposed maximum 9K CFS but the BDCP said no, we are using these oversized tunnels because we are planning gravity feed to reduce pumping costs and electricity. We were all still worried because it wouldn’t cost that much additional to add pumps and electricity later to expand the amount of water extracted.

Note: Even 9K CFS is much more than the SWRCB/Bay Institute reported was available according to their 2008 Delta Flows report. In addition, this year’s scathing review of the BDCP by the EPA stated that the BDCP plan includes extracting much more water than is viable for a healthy Delta.

Now the BDCP is announcing this “new” plan and are saying they are removing the pumps and are going with gravity.

Huh?

Did the plan previously “sneak” in sufficient pumps and power to enable them to extract more? I had understood that to do that they would need more money to add the pumps later (and figured that would be their next ploy).

Or am I missing why these big pumps and power lines were there originally??? Because this all sounds like switch and bait to me. There’s not enough money to pay for the pumps now so they’ll wait and add those later.

Regardless, bottom line, these changes to the BDCP do nothing to eliminate the major objections to the Delta Tunnels. In fact, they only raise more questions.

Delta Levees once again prove the “Earthquake Bogey” argument of the BDCP to be what it is – just a scare tactic.

The scare tactic was thought up following the Katrina disaster and has been effectively used since to scare Southern California water users about risks to their water supply to try to get their buy in. Immediately after the Napa shaker, the civil engineering firm Kjeldsen Sinnock and Neudeck (KSN), the Stockton civil engineering company that maintains about half the levees in the delta, went out to inspect the levees.

Just as during the Loma Prieta earthquake, the levees were unaffected. Neudeck insists delta levees are now even wider, taller and stronger. He also said inspections are done constantly by the engineers hired by reclamation districts.

Read more on ABC News10 at http://www.news10.net/story/news/local/stockton/2014/08/26/delta-levee-earthquake-napa/14652749/

Good job everyone!

In case you haven’t heard, thanks to all the public comments that were submitted in protest to the Delta Tunnels, the plan has been delayed. “The comments revealed that certain areas of the plan need additional study, although she (Nancy Vogel, DWR spokesperson) could not yet say specifically what areas.”

Officials said the revised document will be re-released for public comment “in early 2015.” They originally intended to approve the current plan near the start of the new year. It also reports they will be out of money and will need to go back to the water contractors for more. All good news.

Read the story:

http://www.sacbee.com/2014/08/27/6658505/delta-water-tunnel-studies-delayed.html