Got_Water_Cropped_Campana
Aquadoc
Aquadoc

Categories

September 2022

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30  

About

My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 12/2006

Favorite Blogs

  • Authentically Wired
    Water and a lot more from Paul F. Miller.
  • AWRA
    The water resources blog of the American Water Resources Association.
  • Blue Marble Earth
    An articulate Earth scientist with an MS in Geography from Oregon State University, Courtney van Stolk explores the 'whys' of this fantastic planet.
  • California Water Blog
    A biologist, economist, engineer and geologist walk onto a bar…From the Center for Watershed Sciences at UC-Davis.
  • Campanastan
    That's 'Campana-stan', or 'Place of Campana', formerly 'Aquablog'. Michael Campana's personal blog, promulgating his Weltanschauung.
  • Chance of Rain
    Journalist Emily Green's take on water and related issues.
  • Dr. Anne Jefferson's Watershed Hydrology Lab
    Anne blogs from Kent State University on a variety of earth science topics.
  • Great Lakes Law
    Noah Hall's blog about - what else - all things wet and legal in the Great Lakes region!
  • International Water Law Project
    Gabriel Eckstein, Professor of Law at Texas A&M University School of Law, comments on international and transboundary water law and policy.
  • John Fleck
    Former science writer @ Albuquerque Journal and current director of the Water Resources Program at U of NM. Topics: Colorado River basin, Western USA water, more!
  • Legal Planet: Environmental Law and Policy
    From the UC-Berkeley and UCLA law schools, it highlights the latest legal and policy initiatives and examines their implications.
  • Maven's Notebook
    A water, science, and environmental policy blog by Chris Austin, aka 'Maven'. Focus is on California.
  • On The Public Record
    A 'low level civil servant who reads a lot of government reports writes about California water and related topics.
  • Wettit - the water reddit
    Water blog with tons of news items, other blogs, etc.
  • Texas Agriculture Law Blog
    Don't let the name fool you - there are lots of water issues in agriculture and Tiffany Dowell of Texas A&M University does a fabulous job with this important Internet resource. Give it a read - I do every day!
  • The Water Blog
    From the Portland, OR, Water Bureau.
  • The Way of Water
    Dr. Jennifer Veilleux records her fieldwork, research, and thoughts about water resources development and management, indigenous rights, ethics, and a host of other issues.
  • Thirsty in Suburbia
    Gayle Leonard documents things from the world of water that make us smile: particularly funny, amusing and weird items on bottled water, water towers, water marketing, recycling, the art-water nexus and working.
  • This Day in Water History
    Michael J. 'Mike' McGuire, engineer extraordinaire, NAE member, and author of 'The Chlorine Revolution', blogs about historical happenings in the fields of drinking water and wastewater keyed to calendar dates.
  • WaSH Resources
    New publications, web sites and multi-media on water, sanitation and hygiene (WaSH).
  • Waste, Water, Whatever
    Elizabeth Royte's ('Bottlemania', 'Garbage Land') notes on waste, water, whatever.
  • Water Matters
    News from the Columbia University Water Center.
  • Watershed Moments: Thoughts from the Hydrosphere
    From Sarah Boon - rediscovering her writing and editing roots after 13 years, primarily as an environmental scientist. Her writing centres around creative non-fiction, specifically memoir and nature writing. The landscapes of western Canada are her main inspiration.
  • WaterWired
    All things freshwater: news, comment, publications and analysis from hydrogeologist Michael E. Campana, Professor at Oregon State University and Technical Director of the AWRA.

Policy, Planning, Governance, IWRM & Management

Thursday, 22 September 2022

Water-MDPI Volume 14, Issue 18 (September-2 2022) 167 Articles

Cover-water-v14-i18From MDPI: It's Water, Volume 14, Issue 18 (September-2 2022  167 Articles

Click here to read the abstracts.

Cover Story

Francisca Quevedo, Jorge Rojas Hernández and Ricardo O. Barra
Water 2022, 14(18), 2861; doi:10.3390/w14182861

 

 

Marco Cantonati, Kurt Lichtenwöhrer, Gabi Leonhardt, Linda Seifert, Andrea Mustoni, Ralf Hotzy, Eva Schubert, Lucas Blattner, Olena Bilous, Annette Lotz, Benjamin Poschlod and Reinhard Gerecke
Water 2022, 14(18), 2843; doi:10.3390/w14182843
Jie Li, Zhonghe Pang, Lijun Tian, Hongyi Zhao and Guoying Bai
Water 2022, 14(18), 2891; doi:10.3390/w14182891
Elena Egidio, Susanna Mancini, Domenico Antonio De Luca and Manuela Lasagna
Water 2022, 14(18), 2797; doi:10.3390/w14182797
Junyi Wang, Yifei Fan, Yu Yang, Luoqi Zhang, Yan Zhang, Shixiang Li and Yali Wei
Water 2022, 14(18), 2923; doi:10.3390/w14182923
Yi Su, Bin Guo, Yongzhi Lei, Dingming Zhang, Xianan Guo, Liang Suo, Yonghua Zhao and Yi Bian
Water 2022, 14(18), 2784; doi:10.3390/w14182784
Minghuan Lv, Shikun Zhu, Yunpeng Shi, Shangyi Shu, Ao Li and Bin Fan
Water 2022, 14(18), 2823; doi:10.3390/w14182823
Salma Gul, Mansha Kanwal, Raina Aman Qazi, Hajera Gul, Rozina Khattak, Muhammad Sufaid Khan, Fatima Khitab and Andrey E. Krauklis
Water 2022, 14(18), 2831; doi:10.3390/w14182831
Wenquan Sun, Zhiqiang Xiao, Yongjun Sun, Lei Ding and Jun Zhou
Water 2022, 14(18), 2881; doi:10.3390/w14182881
David D. J. Antia
Water 2022, 14(18), 2893; doi:10.3390/w14182893
Timoth Mkilima, Tursynkul Bazarbayeva, Kydyrbekova Assel, Nurmukhanbetova Nurgul Nurkenovna, Ostretsova Idiya Bolatovna, Khamitova Aina Sultanseitovna, Makhanova Saule and Sergazina Samal
Water 2022, 14(18), 2929; doi:10.3390/w14182929
Mohamed Farouk, Karim Kriaa and Mohamed Elgamal
Water 2022, 14(18), 2822; doi:10.3390/w14182822
Moldir Aubakirova, Elena Krupa, Igor Magda, Saule Zh. Assylbekova, Almat Abayev, Berdibek Abilov, Artur Tumenov, Kuanysh B. Isbekov and Zhanara Mazhibayeva
Water 2022, 14(18), 2818; doi:10.3390/w14182818
Marc Terradas-Fernández, Miguel Valverde-Urrea, Federico López-Moya and Yolanda Fernández-Torquemada
Water 2022, 14(18), 2909; doi:10.3390/w14182909
Shwan Seeyan, Haifa Akrawi, Mohammad Alobaidi, Karrar Mahdi, Michel Riksen and Coen Ritsema
Water 2022, 14(18), 2783; doi:10.3390/w14182783

Water and One Health

Shirish Singh, Florence Laker, Najib L. Bateganya, Allan G. Nkurunziza, Swaib Semiyaga and Damir Brdjanovic
Water 2022, 14(18), 2914; doi:10.3390/w14182914
 

Water-Energy Nexus

Arvind Yadav, Mohammad Kamrul Hasan, Devendra Joshi, Vinod Kumar, Azana Hafizah Mohd Aman, Hesham Alhumyani, Mohammed S. Alzaidi and Haripriya Mishra
Water 2022, 14(18), 2815; doi:10.3390/w14182815

New Sensors, New Technologies and Machine Learning in Water Sciences

Abdessamed Derdour, Antonio Jodar-Abellan, Miguel Ángel Pardo, Sherif S. M. Ghoneim and Enas E. Hussein
Water 2022, 14(18), 2801; doi:10.3390/w14182801
Xingyou Li, Fei Zhang, Ngai Weng Chan, Jinchao Shi, Changjiang Liu and Daosheng Chen
Water 2022, 14(18), 2809; doi:10.3390/w14182809
Wenxin Liu, Xiaoai Dai, Meilian Wang, Yan Lan, Ge Qu, Yunfeng Shan, Jiashun Ren, Weile Li, Shuneng Liang, Youlin Wang and Dongsheng Liu
Water 2022, 14(18), 2816; doi:10.3390/w14182816
Lechuan Jiang, Yoshimitsu Tajima and Lianhui Wu
Water 2022, 14(18), 2819; doi:10.3390/w14182819
Xia Wan, An-Bo Li, Kai-Liang Wang and Hao Chen
Water 2022, 14(18), 2820; doi:10.3390/w14182820
Rufeng Zhang, Liancong Luo, Min Pan, Feng He, Chunliang Luo, Di Meng, Huiyun Li, Jialong Li, Falu Gong, Guizhu Wu, Lan Chen, Jian Zhang and Ting Sun
Water 2022, 14(18), 2832; doi:10.3390/w14182832
Yi Xu, Manousos Valyrakis, Gordon Gilja, Panagiotis Michalis, Oral Yagci and Łukasz Przyborowski
Water 2022, 14(18), 2880; doi:10.3390/w14182880
Leonardo Bayas-Jiménez, F. Javier Martínez-Solano, Pedro L. Iglesias-Rey and Fulvio Boano
Water 2022, 14(18), 2901; doi:10.3390/w14182901

Hydrogeology

Tingting Li, Jian Lu, Jun Wu, Zhenhua Zhang and Liwei Chen
Water 2022, 14(18), 2836; doi:10.3390/w14182836
Maria Gabriella Forno, Franco Gianotti and Umberto Storti
Water 2022, 14(18), 2872; doi:10.3390/w14182872
Yuran Zhang, Anne E. Dekas, Adam J. Hawkins, John Carlo Primo, Oxana Gorbatenko and Roland N. Horne
Water 2022, 14(18), 2921; doi:10.3390/w14182921
Tiansheng Miao, He Huang, Jiayuan Guo, Guanghua Li, Yu Zhang and Naijia Chen
Water 2022, 14(18), 2933; doi:10.3390/w14182933

Soil and Water

Huiwen Tian, Liyuan Bo, Xiaomin Mao, Xinyu Liu, Yan Wang and Qingyang Hu
Water 2022, 14(18), 2791; doi:10.3390/w14182791
Katie M. Wagner, Tasios Karathanasis and Christopher J. Matocha
Water 2022, 14(18), 2796; doi:10.3390/w14182796
Wenping Xie, Jingsong Yang, Shan Gao, Rongjiang Yao and Xiangping Wang
Water 2022, 14(18), 2804; doi:10.3390/w14182804
A. M. S. N. Abeysinghe, M. M. T. Lakshani, U. D. H. N. Amarasinghe, Yuan Li, T. K. K. Chamindu Deepagoda, Wei Fu, Jun Fan, Ting Yang, Xiaoyi Ma, Tim Clough, Bo Elberling and Kathleen Smits
Water 2022, 14(18), 2900; doi:10.3390/w14182900

Water and Climate Change

Dariusz Wrzesiński, Andrzej A. Marsz, Leszek Sobkowiak and Anna Styszyńska
Water 2022, 14(18), 2780; doi:10.3390/w14182780
Jin-Hua Qi, Qiao-Shun Yan, Rafa Tasnim, Lan Zhang, Pei-Li Fu, Ze-Xin Fan and Yong-Jiang Zhang
Water 2022, 14(18), 2828; doi:10.3390/w14182828
Manh Van Doi and Jongho Kim
Water 2022, 14(18), 2926; doi:10.3390/w14182926
 

Ecohydrology

Qi Chen, Yuhua Xing, Dapeng Zhang, Haitao Sun and Pei Wang
Water 2022, 14(18), 2895; doi:10.3390/w14182895

Hydrology

Holger Maiwald, Jochen Schwarz, Christian Kaufmann, Tobias Langhammer, Sebastian Golz and Theresa Wehner
Water 2022, 14(18), 2793; doi:10.3390/w14182793
Jeerapong Laonamsai, Kimpei Ichiyanagi, Supapap Patsinghasanee, Kiattipong Kamdee and Nattapong Tomun
Water 2022, 14(18), 2803; doi:10.3390/w14182803
Angela M. Blanco-Coronas, Maria L. Calvache, Manuel López-Chicano, Crisanto Martín-Montañés, Jorge Jiménez-Sánchez and Carlos Duque
Water 2022, 14(18), 2807; doi:10.3390/w14182807
Lusheng Li, Lili Zhao, Jiankun Ge, Peiwen Yang and Feng Wu
Water 2022, 14(18), 2812; doi:10.3390/w14182812
Long Nguyen Thanh, Yao-Min Fang, Tien-Yin Chou, Thanh-Van Hoang, Quoc Dinh Nguyen, Chen-Yang Lee, Chin-Lun Wang, Hsiao-Yuan Yin and Yi-Chia Lin
Water 2022, 14(18), 2814; doi:10.3390/w14182814
Atsumu Ohmura and Maxi Boettcher
Water 2022, 14(18), 2821; doi:10.3390/w14182821
Laura E. Garza-Díaz and Samuel Sandoval-Solis
Water 2022, 14(18), 2835; doi:10.3390/w14182835
Rudy Rossetto, Alberto Cisotto, Nico Dalla Libera, Andrea Braidot, Luca Sebastiani, Laura Ercoli and Iacopo Borsi
Water 2022, 14(18), 2850; doi:10.3390/w14182850
Emilio Romero-Jiménez, Matilde García-Valdecasas Ojeda, Juan José Rosa-Cánovas, Patricio Yeste, Yolanda Castro-Díez, María Jesús Esteban-Parra and Sonia R. Gámiz-Fortis
Water 2022, 14(18), 2849; doi:10.3390/w14182849
Pietro Scala, Giuseppe Cipolla, Dario Treppiedi and Leonardo Valerio Noto
Water 2022, 14(18), 2848; doi:10.3390/w14182848
Mohd Khairul Idlan Muhammad, Shamsuddin Shahid, Mohammed Magdy Hamed, Sobri Harun, Tarmizi Ismail and Xiaojun Wang
Water 2022, 14(18), 2858; doi:10.3390/w14182858
Mirabela Marin, Ioan Clinciu, Nicu Constantin Tudose, Cezar Ungurean, Alin Lucian Mihalache, Nicoleta Emilia Martoiu and Oana Nicoleta Tudose
Water 2022, 14(18), 2860; doi:10.3390/w14182860
Cornel Ilinca and Cristian Gabriel Anghel
Water 2022, 14(18), 2884; doi:10.3390/w14182884
Gianni Vesuviano, Adam Griffin and Elizabeth Stewart
Water 2022, 14(18), 2887; doi:10.3390/w14182887
Ioannis Papailiou, Fotios Spyropoulos, Ioannis Trichakis and George P. Karatzas
Water 2022, 14(18), 2892; doi:10.3390/w14182892
Wandee Thaisiam, Warintra Saelo and Papis Wongchaisuwat
Water 2022, 14(18), 2898; doi:10.3390/w14182898
Shuai Xie, Wan Liu, Zhe Yuan, Hongyun Zhang, Hang Lin and Yongqiang Wang
Water 2022, 14(18), 2899; doi:10.3390/w14182899
Jeonghyeon Choi, Jeongeun Won, Suhyung Jang and Sangdan Kim
Water 2022, 14(18), 2910; doi:10.3390/w14182910
Yufu Zhang, Xinyi Jiao, Yinghuai Wei, Hao Wu, Zheqi Pan, Mei Liu, Julin Yuan, Meng Ni, Zhiming Zhou, Lingzao Zeng and Dingjiang Chen
Water 2022, 14(18), 2918; doi:10.3390/w14182918
Akhmetkal Medeu, Viktor Blagovechshenskiy, Tamara Gulyayeva, Vitaliy Zhdanov and Sandugash Ranova
Water 2022, 14(18), 2936; doi:10.3390/w14182936
Howri Mansurbeg
Water 2022, 14(18), 2915; doi:10.3390/w14182915
 

Wastewater Treatment and Reuse

Varney Kromah, Soehoe-Panhyonon Benedict Powoe and Charles Asumana
Water 2022, 14(18), 2829; doi:10.3390/w14182829
Zhixiong Liu, Wenlei Qin, Lei Sun, Huiyu Dong, Xiangjuan Yuan, Fei Pan and Dongsheng Xia
Water 2022, 14(18), 2811; doi:10.3390/w14182811
Thabang Maphanga, Benett S. Madonsela, Boredi S. Chidi, Karabo Shale, Lawrence Munjonji and Stanley Lekata
Water 2022, 14(18), 2802; doi:10.3390/w14182802
Martina Lobotková, Helena Hybská, Dagmar Samešová, Eszter Turčániová, Jana Barnová, Tamás Rétfalvi, Adam Krakovský and Filip Bad’o
Water 2022, 14(18), 2817; doi:10.3390/w14182817
Farhana Kayed, Sarik Salim, Jennifer J. Verduin and Navid R. Moheimani
Water 2022, 14(18), 2824; doi:10.3390/w14182824
Zhuzbay Kassymbekov, Yerzhan Kuldeev and Galymzhan Kassymbekov
Water 2022, 14(18), 2855; doi:10.3390/w14182855
Qiang Huang, Shuai Fu, Huijie Zhu, Huaihui Song, Zhe Yang, Xiuji Zhang, Junhong Bie, Jianhong Lu, Mingyan Shi and Bo Liu
Water 2022, 14(18), 2867; doi:10.3390/w14182867
Henry Wilde, William Bernard Perry, Owen Jones, Peter Kille, Andrew Weightman, Davey L. Jones, Gareth Cross and Isabelle Durance
Water 2022, 14(18), 2885; doi:10.3390/w14182885
Yujian Yan, Yuyi Ou, Boyi Yang, Yanyan Jia, Lianpeng Sun and Hui Lu
Water 2022, 14(18), 2896; doi:10.3390/w14182896
Margarethe Langer, Mohammad Umair Jamal, Amanda Conklin and Mathias Ernst
Water 2022, 14(18), 2903; doi:10.3390/w14182903
Angel Villabona-Ortíz, Rodrigo Ortega-Toro and Candelaria Tejada-Tovar
Water 2022, 14(18), 2906; doi:10.3390/w14182906
Zhiwei Lin, Chunhui Zhang, Peidong Su, Wenjing Lu, Zhao Zhang, Xinling Wang and Wanyue Hu
Water 2022, 14(18), 2913; doi:10.3390/w14182913
Júlio César Oliveira da Silva, Aline Maria Sales Solano, Inalmar D. Barbosa Segundo, Elisama Vieira dos Santos, Carlos A. Martínez-Huitle and Djalma Ribeiro da Silva
Water 2022, 14(18), 2911; doi:10.3390/w14182911
Isaac K. Mpanga, Herbert Sserunkuma, Russell Tronstad, Michael Pierce and Judith K. Brown
Water 2022, 14(18), 2922; doi:10.3390/w14182922

Water Resources Management, Policy and Governance

Jianmin Bian, Yihan Li, Yuxi Ma, Jialin Li, Yexiang Yu and Wenhao Sun
Water 2022, 14(18), 2770; doi:10.3390/w14182770
Rebecca Wehrle, Marcus Wiens, Fabian Neff and Frank Schultmann
Water 2022, 14(18), 2874; doi:10.3390/w14182874
Dan Wang, Shuanghu Zhang, Guoli Wang, Jingjing Gu, Hao Wang and Xiaoting Chen
Water 2022, 14(18), 2876; doi:10.3390/w14182876
Nitin Kaushal, Suresh Babu, Arjit Mishra, Rajesh Bajpai, Phanish Kumar Sinha, Rama Kant Arya, David Tickner and Conor Linstead
Water 2022, 14(18), 2894; doi:10.3390/w14182894
Thin Khaing and Thi Phuoc Lai Nguyen
Water 2022, 14(18), 2930; doi:10.3390/w14182930
Luis Miguel Silva-Novoa Sánchez, Lisa Bossenbroek, Janpeter Schilling and Elisabeth Berger
Water 2022, 14(18), 2932; doi:10.3390/w14182932
 

Water Quality and Contamination

Nguyen Thi Thanh Nhon, Nguyen Thao Nguyen, Ho Truong Nam Hai and To Thi Hien
Water 2022, 14(18), 2779; doi:10.3390/w14182779
Shan Jiang, Xuan Wu, Sichan Du, Qin Wang and Dawei Han
Water 2022, 14(18), 2813; doi:10.3390/w14182813
Xiaoqin Xiong, Qingchao Shi, Hao Liu, Qian Zhou, Huatao Li, Peng Hu, Zhengyong Wen, Jianwei Wang, Yuanchao Zou, Yu Zeng and Yaotong Hao
Water 2022, 14(18), 2825; doi:10.3390/w14182825
Katarzyna Kowalczewska-Madura, Renata Dondajewska-Pielka and Ryszard Gołdyn
Water 2022, 14(18), 2844; doi:10.3390/w14182844
Yu Qiu, Zengling Ma, Xiang Liu, Ranran Zheng, Yang Xiao and Min Wang
Water 2022, 14(18), 2871; doi:10.3390/w14182871
Jair J. Pineda-Pineda, Jesús Muñoz-Rojas, Y. Elizabeth Morales-García, Juan C. Hernández-Gómez and José M. Sigarreta
Water 2022, 14(18), 2902; doi:10.3390/w14182902
Frank S. Gilliam, Jacob W. Hardin, Jacob A. Williams and Rachel L. Lackaye
Water 2022, 14(18), 2916; doi:10.3390/w14182916
Bogumiła Winid, Robert Muszański and Jan Wilkosz
Water 2022, 14(18), 2924; doi:10.3390/w14182924

Urban Water Management

Jimin Lee, Jinsun Kim, Jong Mun Lee, Hee Seon Jang, Minji Park, Joong Hyuk Min and Eun Hye Na
Water 2022, 14(18), 2776; doi:10.3390/w14182776
Yinchao Hu, Huapeng Qin, Yiming Ouyang and Shaw-Lei Yu
Water 2022, 14(18), 2799; doi:10.3390/w14182799
Daisuke Komori, Kota Nakaguchi, Ryosuke Inomata, Yuika Oyatsu, Ryohei Tachikawa and So Kazama
Water 2022, 14(18), 2795; doi:10.3390/w14182795
Julian Mosbach, Moritz Krämer, Justus Ernst Fiedler, Alexander Sonnenburg and Wilhelm Urban
Water 2022, 14(18), 2805; doi:10.3390/w14182805
Yongxin Shen and Weiping Cheng
Water 2022, 14(18), 2833; doi:10.3390/w14182833
Drew Meyers, Qinmin Zheng, Fábio Duarte, Carlo Ratti, Harold F. Hemond, Marcel van der Blom, Alex W.C. van der Helm and Andrew J. Whittle
Water 2022, 14(18), 2834; doi:10.3390/w14182834
Gang Wei, Kanghao Tan, Tenglong Liang and Yinghong Qin
Water 2022, 14(18), 2846; doi:10.3390/w14182846
Jamilton Echeverri-Díaz, Óscar E. Coronado-Hernández, Gustavo Gatica, Rodrigo Linfati, Rafael D. Méndez-Anillo and Jairo R. Coronado-Hernández
Water 2022, 14(18), 2847; doi:10.3390/w14182847
Mariana Martínez-Castrejón, Enrique J. Flores-Munguía, Oscar Talavera-Mendoza, América L. Rodríguez-Herrera, Omar Solorza-Feria, Osbelia Alcaraz-Morales, Jazmin A. López-Díaz and Giovanni Hernández-Flores
Water 2022, 14(18), 2927; doi:10.3390/w14182927
Gints Dakša, Sandis Dejus and Jānis Rubulis
Water 2022, 14(18), 2870; doi:10.3390/w14182870
 

Hydraulics and Hydrodynamics

Francesca Ceccato, Stefano Malvestio and Paolo Simonini
Water 2022, 14(18), 2777; doi:10.3390/w14182777
Yue Wu, Yan-Zhi Li, Wei-Guo Qiao, Zhen-Wang Fan, Shuai Zhang, Kui Chen and Lei Zhang
Water 2022, 14(18), 2827; doi:10.3390/w14182827
Chuanliu Xie, Andong Feng, Tenglong Fu, Cheng Zhang, Tao Zhang and Fan Yang
Water 2022, 14(18), 2839; doi:10.3390/w14182839
Chuanliu Xie, Cheng Zhang, Tenglong Fu, Tao Zhang, Andong Feng and Yan Jin
Water 2022, 14(18), 2853; doi:10.3390/w14182853
André R. Koelewijn, Stephan J. H. Rikkert, Patrik Peeters, Davy Depreiter, Myron van Damme and Wouter Zomer
Water 2022, 14(18), 2859; doi:10.3390/w14182859
Miguel Á. Toledo and Rafael Moran
Water 2022, 14(18), 2826; doi:10.3390/w14182826

Biodiversity and Functionality of Aquatic Ecosystems

Konstantinos Stefanidis, Georgios Dimitrellos, Maria Sarika, Dionysios Tsoukalas and Eva Papastergiadou
Water 2022, 14(18), 2771; doi:10.3390/w14182771
Sunyoung Oh, Kyoung-Yeon Kim, Hyun-Joo Oh, Geunchang Park, Wooseok Oh and Kyounghoon Lee
Water 2022, 14(18), 2883; doi:10.3390/w14182883
Tiziana Di Lorenzo, Barbara Fiasca, Mattia Di Cicco, Ilaria Vaccarelli, Agostina Tabilio Di Camillo, Simone Crisante and Diana Maria Paola Galassi
Water 2022, 14(18), 2934; doi:10.3390/w14182934
Alexey A. Kotov and Kay Van Damme
Water 2022, 14(18), 2904; doi:10.3390/w14182904
 

Oceans and Coastal Zones

Monia Renzi, Cristiana Guerranti, Serena Anselmi, Francesca Provenza, Massimo Leone, Gabriele La Rocca and Andrea Cavallo
Water 2022, 14(18), 2856; doi:10.3390/w14182856
Olegário Nelson Azevedo Pereira, Maria Rosário Bastos, José Carlos Ferreira and João Alveirinho Dias
Water 2022, 14(18), 2886; doi:10.3390/w14182886

Water Erosion and Sediment Transport

Hilda Zepeda Mondragon, Juan Antonio Garcia Aragon, Humberto Salinas Tapia and Bommanna G. Krishnappan
Water 2022, 14(18), 2774; doi:10.3390/w14182774
Kirill Maltsev, Valentin Golosov, Oleg Yermolaev, Maxim Ivanov and Nelli Chizhikova
Water 2022, 14(18), 2781; doi:10.3390/w14182781

Water Use and Scarcity

Angelos Alamanos, Phoebe Koundouri, Lydia Papadaki, Tatiana Pliakou and Eleni Toli
Water 2022, 14(18), 2879; doi:10.3390/w14182879
Giacomo Butte, Yady Tatiana Solano-Correa, Maria Valasia Peppa, Diana Marcela Ruíz-Ordóñez, Rachael Maysels, Nasser Tuqan, Xanthe Polaine, Carolina Montoya-Pachongo, Claire Walsh and Thomas Curtis
Water 2022, 14(18), 2907; doi:10.3390/w14182907

Water, Agriculture and Aquaculture

Jude Ofei Quansah, Seung-Hee Hong, Chang-Gu Lee and Seong-Jik Park
Water 2022, 14(18), 2875; doi:10.3390/w14182875
Lei Zhang, Xin Zhao, Jiankun Ge, Jiaqi Zhang, Seydou Traore, Guy Fipps and Yufeng Luo
Water 2022, 14(18), 2888; doi:10.3390/w14182888
 

General

Sarbajit Mukherjee, Simon Wang, Daniella Hirschfeld, Joel Lisonbee and Robert Gillies
Water 2022, 14(18), 2773; doi:10.3390/w14182773
Sun-Young Park, Deuk-Kyun Oh, Sun-Yeong Lee, Kyung-Jin Yeum, Yong-Han Yoon and Jin-Hee Ju
Water 2022, 14(18), 2792; doi:10.3390/w14182792
Liqiang Deng, Ying Guo, Yongqing Qi, Yan-Jun Shen and Yanjun Shen
Water 2022, 14(18), 2798; doi:10.3390/w14182798
Xianghua Niu, Xikun Wei, Wei Tian, Guojie Wang and Wenhui Zhu
Water 2022, 14(18), 2800; doi:10.3390/w14182800
 

 

Special Issues Open for Submissions

Topical Collection (without Deadline)

Water Policy Collection

To access the full list of Topical Collections, please click here

Recent Special Issue Reprints

Long-Term Monitoring and Research in Forest Hydrology
Koichiro Kuraji (Ed.)
ISBN 978-3-0365-5208-8 (Hbk) ; ISBN 978-3-0365-5207-1 (PDF)
doi: 10.3390/books978-3-0365-5207-1

Advances in Ecohydrology for Water Resources Optimization in Arid and Semi-arid Areas
Mirko Castellini, Simone Di Prima, Ryan Stewart, Marcella Biddoccu, Mehdi Rahmati and Vincenzo Alagna (Eds.)
ISBN 978-3-0365-4747-3 (Hbk) ; ISBN 978-3-0365-4748-0 (PDF)
doi: 10.3390/books978-3-0365-4748-0

Feature Papers of Water Resources Management, Policy and Governance
Athanasios Loukas and Luis Garrote (Eds.)
ISBN 978-3-0365-4945-3 (Hbk) ; ISBN 978-3-0365-4946-0 (PDF)
doi: 10.3390/books978-3-0365-4946-0

Hydrological Extremes in a Warming Climate: Nonstationarity, Uncertainties and Impacts
Rajesh R. Shrestha and Mohammad Reza Najafi (Eds.)
ISBN 978-3-0365-4644-5 (Hbk) ; ISBN 978-3-0365-4643-8 (PDF)
doi: 10.3390/books978-3-0365-4643-8

Urban Runoff Control and Sponge City Construction
Haifeng Jia, Jiangyong Hu, Tianyin Huang, Albert S. Chen and Yukun Ma (Eds.)
ISBN 978-3-0365-4789-3 (Hbk) ; ISBN 978-3-0365-4790-9 (PDF)
doi: 10.3390/books978-3-0365-4790-9

To access the full list of books, please click here

 

"Of course 'later' actually means 'never' at this institution. Would it help if I translated it into Latin for you?" - @ass_deans

Posted on Thursday, 22 September 2022 at 08:31 PM in Climate Change, Climate & Meteorology, Groundwater and Hydrogeology, Land, Food & Water , Policy, Planning, Governance, IWRM & Management, WaSH, Water Quality, Health & Ecosystems, Wastewater, Stormwater & Infrastructure, Water Quantity & Availability, World Water | | Comments (0)

| | | |

Sunday, 18 September 2022

RRR New Study: 'Inequitable Patterns of U.S. Flood Risk in the Anthropocene'

This study was first published in Nature Climate Change and summarized in the Renewable Resources Report  on 28 February 2022. That is what has been reproduced below. The map graphic is from the Nature paper; emboldening is not mine.

Screen Shot 2022-09-18 at 11.29.25 AM

Flood risk in the United States is typically evaluated based on historical trends. Increasingly, these trends are no longer applicable to future flood conditions and risk. A new study in Nature Climate Change analyzes the changing flood risk landscape in the United States between now and 2050 and makes projections that could help inform decision-making and minimize future flood damage. It also assesses the social justice implications of which populations bear present and future flood risk. The study was produced by experts from the First Street Foundation, Wharton Risk Center at the University of Pennsylvania, Columbia University, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the University of Bristol.

Flood risk management requires long-term planning. This study indicates that the conditions of flood risk will change considerably between now and 2050. This makes forward-thinking analysis of changing flood hazard relevant even for a standard 30-year mortgage signed in 2022. Investors and mortgage lenders need to understand an asset’s flood risk through the lifetime of the investment, often decades into the future. An accurate understanding of the changing conditions of flood risk is necessary to sound decision-making today.

Existing efforts to model flood risk are largely insufficient to accomplish this. Currently, academic efforts to map flood hazard under climate change are in their infancy and are rarely used in commercial or regulatory applications. Local-scale studies tend to be the most accurate, of which FEMA’s flood mapping program is considered the gold standard. It is based on high-precision terrain data, fully surveyed river channels, local gauge information, and a full appraisal of local protection measures. However, these detailed analyses take considerable resources to carry out, and so their coverage has been relatively limited. Only one-third of U.S. rivers have been mapped by FEMA, and only one-quarter of those maps have been updated in the last five years. FEMA maps are also not required to account for climate change, a considerable oversight when assessing future risk.

The FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) is the de facto flood risk zone in the United States, made up of a patchwork of local FEMA flood maps. Areas within the SFHA are subject to various regulations on development. Those with a federally backed mortgage in these areas must purchase flood insurance. Properties located outside of the SFHA are commonly misconceived to be risk-free, but this is not the case. The study found that only 41% of the nation’s flood risk is located within the SFHA. Current flood risk is highly underestimated.

The study also found that flood losses in the U.S. are currently $32.1 billion per year on average. By 2050, climate change alone is expected to cause this number to increase to $40.6 billion. Across the term of a typical 30-year mortgage beginning today, this is a 26.4% increase in flood risk. This is a near-term climate impact that is essentially locked in – it will occur even if dramatic decarbonization were to happen immediately and should be accounted for in current decision-making. This climate-induced increase in flood risk is caused by intensifying rainfall and hurricanes, as well as sea level rise.

This increase in flood risk will not be felt equally across the nation. The study also examined the demographic components of flood risk across the U.S., focusing on race and poverty. It found that currently, poor and White communities are disproportionately likely to be subject to flood risk. However, projections up to 2050 show a different trend. In coming decades, flood risk is expected to increase disproportionately in predominately Black areas. These areas are highly concentrated in the Deep South in locations where climate change is expected to intensify risk.

Climate will not be the only factor that will impact changes to flood risk between now and 2050. As the U.S. population grows and development patterns change, demographic shifts are expected. The study also examined how much the flood-vulnerable population is expected to increase due to demographic shifts and climate change.

The researchers found that climate change alone, without population growth, would lead to an 18.6% increase in the number of people exposed to flood risk by 2050. Population growth in stable climate conditions would result in a much greater increase – 72.6%. This indicates that new development is expected to disproportionately occur in hazardous areas. In other words, as the population grows, an outsized number of people will move into floodplains. This leads to one of the most important takeaways from this report: without new policies to direct new development into safer areas, the contribution of population growth to flood risk will greatly exceed that of climate change.

Given this projection, the importance of improved flood risk management in the United States is clear. The authors of the study gave the following policy recommendations. More aggressive local land-use controls restricting new developments in the highest-risk areas, coupled with stronger building codes, could help lower the growth in flood losses. Such regulations on future development will need to be accompanied by investments in both relocation and retrofits for existing construction in areas where flood risk is high and/or growing. The federal government has several programs that currently fund such efforts, although not at the levels that will be required to fully adapt to increasing risk. Furthermore, several of these programs have been criticized for privileging more affluent and White communities. Equity-centered reform in light of climate change is needed for U.S. disaster policy – a call given greater emphasis by the demographic makeup of present and future bearers of U.S. flood risk shown in this study.

Nature CC png

The authors of the study noted that current flood risk is evidence that there is a dearth of flood resilience in the United States in the status quo of climate and population demographics. The climate crisis will make this critical problem even more serious. The impacts described in this study are so near-term that decarbonization is futile in preventing them. The lack of quality, publicly available flood risk information has meant that risky development has proliferated across the US. It is critical that information on changing risks be made widely available and transparent to fully inform housing and mortgage markets to guide capital away from the riskiest areas. The findings of this paper provide important insights for communities and the federal government in designing future flood risk management interventions and in allocating federal dollars more effectively.

Posted on Sunday, 18 September 2022 at 11:45 AM in Climate Change, Climate & Meteorology, Extremes: Droughts, Floods, etc., Policy, Planning, Governance, IWRM & Management, Readings, Journals, Videos, Films & Visuals | | Comments (0)

| | | |

Saturday, 17 September 2022

CRS InFocus Report: 'Bureau of Reclamation - FY2023 Budget and Appropriations'

Charles V. Stern produced this CRS InFocus report (15 September 2022): 'Bureau of Reclamation - FY2023 Budget and Appropriations'.

Download CRS_InFocus_Rpt_USBR_FY2023_Budget_Approp_15Sept2022

Click in the graphocs to enlarge them. The entire document is pasted below

Overview

The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), part of the Department of the Interior, is responsible for the construction and operation of hundreds of large dams and water diversion structures in the 17 western reclamation states designated in statute by Congress. These projects provide water to approximately 10 million acres of farmland and 31 million people. Reclamation is the largest wholesale supplier of water in these 17 states and the second-largest hydroelectric power producer in the nation. Reclamation’s mission areas and geographic scope are narrower than those of the other principal federal water resource agency, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Reclamation has evolved since its creation in 1902; its focus has shifted from construction of new water storage projects to operation and maintenance of existing projects. Reclamation also has expanded into new areas, such as funding for water projects on tribal lands and in rural areas. Congress also has authorized new Reclamation grants for nonfederal projects, including those for water reuse and recycling, desalination, conservation and efficiency, and restoration, among other purposes.

Reclamation’s Water and Related Resources account funds most agency activities, including construction, operation and maintenance, dam safety, ecosystem restoration, Indian water rights settlements, and most programmatic and grant authorities. Reclamation typically also receives funding for three smaller accounts: California Bay-Delta Restoration, the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund (which is offset by customer receipts), and Policy and Administration.

FY2023 Budget and Appropriations

The Administration request is usually less than the final enacted total for Reclamation. For FY2023, President Biden requested $1.41 billion in gross current budget authority (i.e., appropriations before offsets) for Reclamation. H.R. 8294, Division C, Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2023, as passed by the House on July 20, 2022, contained $1.89 billion for Reclamation. On July 28, 2022, the Chair of the Senate Committee on Appropriations released draft bill text and a draft accompanying explanatory statement with $1.92 billion contained for Reclamation. On the same day, this draft bill text was introduced as S. 4660. This In Focus continues to refer to the Senate Committee majority draft bill on which the draft explanatory statement is based. Figure 1 shows enacted appropriations levels for Reclamation’s accounts since FY2015.

In addition to regular appropriations, Congress has recently provided Reclamation with supplemental appropriations that may factor into FY2023 appropriations considerations.

First, in September 2021, Congress included $210 million in supplemental funding for Reclamation in the Disaster Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022 (P.L. 117- 43, Division B); these funds were provided to combat western drought and wildfire. Then, in October 2021 under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58), Congress enacted $8.30 billion in supplemental appropriations for various infrastructure-focused Reclamation expenditures. This funding is to be made available in equal installments from FY2022 to FY2026 (i.e., $1.66 billion per year). Finally, in P.L. 117-169 (popularly known as the Inflation Reduction Act), enacted in August 2022, Congress approved an additional $4 billion for Reclamation for western drought mitigation, with priority given to actions in the Colorado River Basin. All of this funding is “no year” funding, meaning it remains available until expended.

Screen Shot 2022-09-17 at 3.50.27 PM

Earmarks and Reclamation

Most of Reclamation’s budget goes to projects rather than programs, and the Water and Related Resources account consists largely of individual project funding lines. During the 112th-116th Congresses, Reclamation appropriations were subject to general “earmark moratoriums” that restricted Congress from funding geographically specific project line items not requested by the Administration. Instead, Congress included “additional funding” amounts for selected categories of Reclamation projects, typically in five categories: Rural Water, Water Conservation and Delivery, Environmental Restoration and Compliance, Fish Passage/Fish Screens, and Facilities Maintenance and Rehabilitation. The Administration recommended allocations of these funds for specific projects in spend plans made available several months after enactment of the appropriations bills. (Spend plans are available at http://www.usbr.gov/budget/.)

In FY2022, Congress included the first Member-requested “earmarks” since the 111th Congress. These funds were categorized as community project funding or congressionally directed spending in the House and Senate, respectively. For FY2023, the House Appropriations Committee’s report and the Senate Appropriations Committee majority draft explanatory statement included these funds in their recommendations (Figure 2).

Screen Shot 2022-09-17 at 3.53.28 PM

Reclamation Appropriations Issues

WIIN Act Section 4007 Funding
Section 4007 of the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act (WIIN Act; P.L. 114-322) authorized a new process for Reclamation to study and construct federal and nonfederal water storage projects. For projects to receive funding, first Congress must appropriate funds under this authority. Then, the Administration must recommend specific projects for funding and Congress must decide whether to approve the recommendations in enacted appropriations legislation.

From FY2017 through FY2022, Congress appropriated $720 million in regular appropriations for these projects (including $117 million in FY2022 under the aforementioned Additional Funding category). Reclamation has allocated and Congress has approved $510 million of this funding for 13 projects in 3 states: 10 in California, 2 in Washington, and 1 in Idaho. For FY2023 appropriations under H.R. 8294, the House recommended $134 million of Additional Funding amounts for these projects. The draft Senate Appropriations Committee majority recommendation proposed the same amount.

WaterSMART Program

Reclamation combines funding for six subprograms (many of them awarded as grants) that promote water conservation into one program—the WaterSMART program. The largest subprograms are WaterSMART Grants (i.e., water and energy efficiency grants) and Title XVI projects (i.e., water recycling and reuse projects). For FY2023, the Biden Administration requested $62 million for the WaterSMART program (Figure 3). In H.R. 8294, the House recommended $189 million for WaterSMART programs, while the draft Senate Appropriations Committee majority recommendation included $157 million for WaterSMART.

Screen Shot 2022-09-17 at 3.55.08 PM
 

Additional Reading
CRS Report R46303, Bureau of Reclamation: History, Authorities, and Issues for Congress.

CRS Report CRS Report R47032,Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58).

CRS In Focus IF10626, Reclamation Water Storage Projects: Section 4007 of the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act.

CRS Report R44148, Indian Water Rights Settlements.

Enjoy!

"Learn from the mistakes of others. You can never live long enough to make them all yourself." - Groucho Marx

Posted on Saturday, 17 September 2022 at 04:12 PM in CRS, FMSO & GAO Reports, Energy & Water, Pacific Northwest USA, Policy, Planning, Governance, IWRM & Management, Water Quantity & Availability, Western USA | | Comments (0)

| | | |

Wednesday, 14 September 2022

CRS InFocus Report: 'Pakistan’s 2022 Floods and Implications for U.S. Interests'

K. Alan Kronstadt and Rhoda Margesson authored this CRS InFocus report (12 September 2022): 'Pakistan’s 2022 Floods and Implications for U.S. Interests'

Download CRS_InFocus_Rpt_Pakistan’s_2022_Floods_and_US_Interests_12Sept2022

I have also pasted the entire report below.

Overview
In mid-June 2022, at the beginning of monsoon season, heavy rains began flooding areas of Pakistan. Estimates range from double to several times the normal monsoon rainfall. By late August, flooding had worsened to historic and catastrophic levels, reportedly affecting more than 33 million people, injuring at least 13,000 and killing more than 1,300. With more than one-third of the country reportedly submerged, agricultural losses appear to be extensive, affecting housing, infrastructure, and livelihoods. Pakistan’s government has estimated the cost of flood damage at $30 billion and cut its projected annual economic growth for this fiscal year from 5% to 3%.

Successive U.S. Administrations have described a stable, democratic, and prosperous Pakistan as critical to U.S. interests. This crisis may have U.S. security implications. Responding to this disaster is taxing a Pakistani government already struggling with political upheaval, worsening economic and debt crises, unsettled civil-military relations, and rising public discontent. Regional stability and efforts to counter militancy and terrorism are U.S. concerns; both may face negative impacts from the current crises. For example, following 2010 flooding, some banned Pakistani terrorist groups apparently were at the forefront of rural relief efforts and could gain popular support through such activities; Pakistan’s government denies that any banned groups are involved in flood relief in 2022. Congress may wish to consider whether or not U.S. assistance in response to the catastrophic floods would serve U.S. interests, including economic and security objectives.

Flood Damage—Initial Assessments
Pakistan’s National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) is the lead federal agency for disaster relief coordination, including relief operations supported by Pakistan’s army, navy, and air force. So far, the provinces of Sindh and Balochistan appear most affected (see Figure 1). As of September 9, 2022, the NDMA is reporting the following damage due to flooding since June 14, 2022:

  •   1,396 persons killed (39% Sindh, 20% Khyber Pakhtunkhwa or KP, 21% Balochistan, 14% Punjab) and 12,728 injured;

  •   Affected population: more than 33 million (44% Sindh, 28% Balochistan, 13% KP, 15% Punjab);

  •   Rescued population: 177,265 (43% Punjab, 39% KP);

  •   Population in official government of Pakistan

    displacement sites: 663,869 (87% Sindh);

  •   Livestock deaths: more than 750,000 (67% Balochistan, 27% Punjab);

 Damaged roads: more than 4,100 miles (39% Sindh, 24% KP, 23% Balochistan); damaged bridges: 269 (40% KP, 26% Gilgit-Baltistan, 23% Sindh).

Figure 1. Homes Damaged in Pakistan’s 2022 Flooding (as of September 1, 2022)

Screen Shot 2022-09-13 at 9.19.22 AM

Humanitarian Needs
Pakistan’s affected populations reportedly are in dire need of relief supplies, including shelter, food, and water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH). Experts say that floods are likely to exacerbate food availability across the country, particularly for those already experiencing food insecurity. More than 600,000 people have taken refuge in official Government of Pakistan displacement sites, but the number of people displaced without shelter is likely much higher. The United Nations (U.N.) reports that, of those displaced, many are staying as close to their homes and the affected areas as possible due to concerns that lack of land ownership documentation could prevent future returns. In many affected areas the humanitarian response has been hampered by damaged roads and bridges. Humanitarian organizations assert that maternal health and protection from gender-based violence are also of concern, as well as an increased risk of vector-borne disease (such as malaria) and water-borne disease (including diarrhea and cholera) along with threats from venomous wildlife such as poisonous snakes. The floods also may exacerbate preexisting outbreaks of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and other medical conditions, particularly as vaccine campaigns are suspended and access to care is limited.

National and International Responses
Government of Pakistan. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said he intends to set up a National Flood Response and Coordination Center to facilitate a multiagency response in coordination with the NDMA. So far, the government has established 147 camps for populations displaced by the floods. Pakistan is planning to provide cash assistance to those affected, while provincial governments may redirect development funds to flood relief. It also has verified several fund-raising agencies on the GoFundMe website.

International Responses. On August 30, 2022, the United Nations issued a Flash Humanitarian Appeal for $160 million to support an Islamabad-led “Pakistan 2022 Floods Response.” The appeal identifies 5.2 million people particularly in urgent need of humanitarian assistance, including “food, water, sanitation, emergency education, protection and health support.” On a recent visit to Pakistan, the U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres called for “massive” international support. International relief agencies have launched separate funding appeals. International financial institutions reportedly have pledged $500 million toward Pakistan disaster relief and development, with the vast majority coming from the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank.

U.S. Response
On August 12, 2022, U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Donald Blome issued a disaster declaration and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) released $100,000 in immediate humanitarian assistance. USAID also activated a Disaster Assistance Response Team in Pakistan to assess the impact of the floods and a Response Management Team (based in Washington, DC) to coordinate U.S. government flood response efforts. On August 30, USAID announced an additional $30 million in humanitarian assistance, stating that U.S. assistance would “prioritize urgently needed food support, safe water, sanitation and hygiene improvements, financial help, and shelter assistance.” From Islamabad on September 9, USAID Administrator Power announced a further $20 million in humanitarian assistance. Previously in FY2022, USAID also provided $3 million in Early Recovery, Risk Reduction, and Resilience funding. On September 8, the Department of Defense U.S. Central Command began air operations to transport USAID relief supplies from USAID’s Dubai warehouse to Pakistan to support USAID-led humanitarian response operations.

Bilateral U.S. development assistance to Pakistan— estimated at $71 million for FY2022, with $84 million requested for FY2023—is expected to continue, including over $1 million in grants and project support provided earlier in August, and with programs adapting, in part, to address the long-term impact of the 2022 floods.

Environmental and Governance Issues Pakistan suffers from multiple environmental and governance challenges that potentially worsen natural disasters, including flooding. A World Bank Vulnerability Assessment found that “Pakistan faces some of the highest disaster risk levels in the world, ranked 18 out of 191 countries by the 2019 Inform Risk Index.” The study estimates Pakistan’s average annual losses to flooding have been around $1 billion.

In the summer of 2010, the country experienced the most catastrophic flooding in its history until then, a disaster that officially killed more than 1,700 persons, affected more than 20% of the land area and 20 million people, and caused billions of dollars in damage. According to a Scientific American assessment later that year, the scale of Pakistan’s flooding that year was “made worse by a history of deforestation and land-use changes in the affected areas.” Analysts estimate that Pakistan’s tree cover has decreased by at least 80% since its 1947 independence. A 2022 studyon “recent global warming as a proximate cause of deforestation” found that Pakistan has the second-highest deforestation rate in Asia.

Poor governance and planning, and lack of political will, also might contribute to Pakistan’s vulnerability to floods. Inadequate water management likely played a role. Following the 2010 floods, the government reportedly failed to implement plans that would have reduced the consequences of future floods by preventing rebuilding in and repopulating of flood-prone areas. Laws barring construction too close to river banks apparently were widely violated.

Pakistan’s climate minister is among those positing a causal link between climate change and recent flooding. Some analyses see Pakistan as especially vulnerable to climate- related extreme weather events. A 2021 report by the World Bank Group and the Asian Development Bank identified as a major concern the uncertainty of a warming climate’s changes to glacial melt and extreme precipitation. A 2022 U.N. report on “Pathways to Adaptation and Resilience” projects that, in a “worst-case climate change scenario,” Pakistan could realize average annual economic losses equal to more than 9% of its GDP. Yale University’s 2022 Environmental Performance Index gave Pakistan an overall ranking of 176th of 180 countries, including 175th in “climate change mitigation” (mainly regarding reduction of greenhouse gas emissions).

Issues for Congress
For more than a decade, Congress has annually enacted security- and human rights-related conditions on bilateral aid to Pakistan, and security assistance was suspended in 2018. Congress may consider whether and if so, how to address the crisis in Pakistan through humanitarian or more strategic long-term assistance amid unprecedented global humanitarian need and competing priorities. Congress could consider whether the United States should provide humanitarian assistance through multilateral channels such as the United Nations or nongovernmental implementing partners, and also monitor how the executive branch allocates such assistance. Bilateral development activities could be aligned more closely with U.S. objectives in Pakistan and also channeled through the government. For all U.S. support, Congress could conduct oversight of the delivery challenges encountered, including access and security conditions in Pakistan, which could undermine the effectiveness of humanitarian operations and development aid; and/or assess the flood disaster responses of the Islamabad government and international donors so as to improve ongoing and future disaster preparedness and prevention activities, and to reduce the harm caused by future flood events.

Enjoy - and contribute to a humanitarian fund: International Rescue Committee and World Central Kitchen are two of my favorites.  

"The future is here, it's just unevenly distributed." - Unknown

Posted on Wednesday, 14 September 2022 at 12:43 AM in Climate Change, Climate & Meteorology, CRS, FMSO & GAO Reports, Extremes: Droughts, Floods, etc., People, Policy, Planning, Governance, IWRM & Management, Water Quantity & Availability, World Water | | Comments (0)

| | | |

Sunday, 11 September 2022

Brad Udall Speaks: RNRF Round Table - 'The Challenges of Allocating Colorado River Water – Hot 20-year Drought and Soaring Populations'

One could argue that we've heard enough about the Colorado River woes. But here's another one - this one from Brad Udall, one of the smartest kids on the block when it comes to Western water and climate - just check out his page.

I lifted this piece from the the Renewable Natural Resources Foundation:
RNRF Round Table: The Challenges of Allocating Colorado River Water - Hot 20 Year Drought and Soaring Populations.Here is the PDF of his PPT.He spoke in early March 2021.

The graphic is from his PPT.

 

Screen Shot 2022-09-11 at 11.17.35 AMBrad Udall, a Senior Water and Climate Research Scientist at Colorado State University, spoke at a virtual meeting of the RNRF Washington Round Table on Public Policy on March 9, 2021. He discussed the imbalance between water supply and demand in the Colorado River basin, how climate change is exacerbating the issue, and the ongoing renegotiation of the river’s management guidelines.

Introduction and Background
The Colorado River basin extends into seven states (Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, and California) as well as Mexico, along with the land of 29 Native American tribes. The American portion of the basin represents 8% of the area of the lower 48 states. Altogether, about 40 million people, including the populations of all major cities in the Southwestern U.S., rely on the Colorado for some portion of their water supply. The river is used heavily for municipalities as well as agriculture, with about 4.5 million acres of irrigated land in the basin.

The water supply in the river is often measured by the water levels in its two major reservoirs, Lake Mead and Lake Powell. These are the two biggest reservoirs in the U.S. In order to maintain sustainable levels in these two reservoirs over a long time period, withdrawals from the river must equal the supply being provided by the river’s flow. This was the case in 2000, when the combined contents of the reservoirs were over 90% full. Since then, their water level has dwindled to less than 50% due to a “structural deficit” – demand for the river’s water consistently outpacing supply. This is due in large part to the fact that over the past 20 years, the basin has been experiencing its worst drought on record. The flow of the river has decreased from ~14.75 million acre-feet (maf) to ~12.4 maf. Even before the drought began, water demand was high in the basin; since about 1990, it has not reliably reached the ocean.

While the current situation in the watershed is usually described as a drought, a lack of precipitation is really only half the story. Regional temperature increases, exacerbated by climate change, have also had a significant impact on the reduction of water availability. Udall noted that evaporative losses will only become more severe as climate change worsens. The Southwest is already one of the quickest-warming areas of the country, a trend that is expected to continue. The risk of multidecadal droughts will also continue to drastically increase in coming decades. The 2000-2018 period was the second-driest 19-year period in the basin since 800 AD. While this is partially attributed to natural variation, researchers have said that 50% of the decrease in soil moisture can be attributed to anthropogenic climate change. Climate change has turned what would likely be a moderate drought into an extreme, historic drying event. Aridification and heating, along with reduction in precipitation, are causing drastically drying conditions in a river basin that tens of millions of people rely on for their water.

Screen Shot 2022-09-11 at 11.31.59 AM

Historical Management of the River
In 1922, to fully allocate use of the river’s water, the basin states agreed to the Colorado River Compact. This agreement still serves as the basis for the Law of the River, which is the set of rules for the river’s allocation and management. In response to the “hot drought” happening since 2000, new modifications to the Law of the River have been necessary to prevent the reservoirs from becoming depleted. The first of these, called the Colorado River Interim Guidelines, went into effect in 2007. These guidelines set out a series of complicated rules for how Lakes Powell and Mead are operated, allowing different quantities of water to be released from them when they are at certain elevations. They constrain use of water when the reservoirs are low. One innovative structure used to accomplish this is “intentionally created surplus,” which allows parties in the lower basin to store their water in a sort of “bank account” in Lake Mead.

Around 2013, it was becoming clear that persistently dry and hot conditions were rendering the 2007 Interim Guidelines insufficient. A new agreement was necessary. As a result, two new “Drought Contingency Plans” (DCPs) for the Upper and Lower Basins were adopted in 2019. Early in 2021, for the first time, drought conditions in the river reached the point where the DCPs’ provisions were activated. Udall noted that these agreements made some progress toward making the river’s use more sustainable but were not a permanent solution.

Future Management of the River
Udall finished his presentation by discussing future prospects for sustainably managing the river in these drying conditions. In 2026, the 2007 Interim Guidelines and DCPs expire. The seven basin states, 29 tribes, Mexico, and the federal government have already begun the multi-year process of renegotiating a new set of guidelines which will be adopted in 2027. The following are some central considerations for a successful new agreement described by Udall.

The Upper Basin’s “Delivery” Obligation
Among the problems that stakeholders are aiming to resolve is the nature of the Upper Basin’s delivery obligations. There is a clause in the original Colorado River Compact that says that the Upper Basin shall not allow the flow of the river to decline below 75 maf every ten running years. However, it is not clear if this obligation is really a “delivery” obligation or if it is a “non-depletion” obligation. If it is a delivery obligation, that means that the entire reduction of flow coming from the Upper Basin due to climate change falls on the Upper Basin to solve. Clearly, this was not the intent of this clause in the original 1922 compact, and the Upper Basin states are making this argument.

Tribal Issues
Native American tribes are expected to have a much more significant role in the renegotiation of the Interim Guidelines than they have had in previous decision-making processes for management of the river. There are 29 tribes in the basin. Altogether, they have a right to control about 20% of the basin’s water. This right derives from a 1908 Supreme Court decision which issued the “Winters Doctrine.” This doctrine said that when the federal government creates a reservation of land for a tribe, implicit in that reservation is a water right.

However, tribal interests were still left out of the 1922 compact, and many of their rights remain unquantified. Even in the 21st century, the tribes in the basin were not invited to participate in the 2007 Interim Guidelines negotiations or the 2012 Basin Study. The 2019 DCPs were an important development in the inclusion of tribes in river management discussions after their needs and rights had been historically ignored. For the first time, these 29 distinct tribes were acting collectively and were included in the planning process. The DCPs were also the first time that a tribe agreed to accept a monetary payment in exchange for using less than their full water right. Inclusion of tribal interests in the renegotiation of the Interim Guidelines is expected, and will be essential to the new agreement’s success.

The Structural Deficit
Fundamental to the dilemma faced by basin stakeholders in this renegotiation process is the “structural deficit.” This is, quite simply, an imbalance between the supply of and demand for water in the basin. Since 2000, demand has outpaced supply. Demand reductions are challenging because once a water user has access to a supply of water, it is difficult to get them to relinquish it. The supply-side is more challenging to address. In the absence of cooler temperatures and more precipitation ­– conditions increasingly unlikely as climate changes — it is difficult to create more supply. It is easier to change consumption patterns than it is to change the hydrology of the river. Without demand reductions in the Upper and Lower Basins, there is a high probability that the amount of water in the reservoirs will continue to fall.

Udall referenced a recent study that found that the Upper Basin’s water demand is unsustainably high. Despite this finding, parts of the Upper Basin actually want to increase their demand, which in the face of declining flows is an issue that will need to be addressed in the negotiation process. Demand Management measures, by which water users can voluntarily accept money in exchange for reducing their water consumption, will likely be part of the solution in the Upper Basin but caps on demand may also be necessary to ensure that the delivery obligation is fulfilled.

In the Lower Basin, the Central Arizona Project diverts water from the Colorado River into Arizona, providing water for an area including the cities of Phoenix and Tucson. As a part of the original agreement that permitted this project, it was agreed that if there ever was a shortage of water in the basin, Arizona would bear the brunt of demand reductions. Demand reductions will likely be necessary in the Lower Basin but Udall noted that it would be difficult in practice to mandate that they all come from Arizona. Solving this dilemma will be a part of the new Interim Guidelines negotiations. One method that may be used is to begin charging evaporative losses to state water budgets in proportion to their use. Currently, evaporation is being charged to nobody, which is a part of the overuse problem.

Guidelines for Successful Renegotiation
Udall also identified other steps that can be taken by stakeholders to work toward a successful new set of interim guidelines. First, he emphasized the importance of good science. Realistic climate and hydrological modelling are necessary to inform the negotiations. Udall noted that many of the models being used by watershed states are overly optimistic with regard to future hydrology. Beginning the negotiations with inaccurate presumptions about the future of the watershed are setting the new agreement up for failure. While the renegotiation is a political process, it needs to be informed by most accurate scientific information possible.

Because the structural deficit is a basin-wide issue, Udall advocated for the use of a combined metric that adds the quantity of water in Lakes Mead and Powell. This would be a more accurate way to gauge water shortages because the water in the reservoirs individually is less important than the total quantity between them when informing the management of the entire river basin. He also said that using clear language in negotiations is critical. For instance, one should never inaccurately say that the Colorado River Compact itself is being renegotiated. It is only the Interim Guidelines that are being replaced; the Compact remains the foundation for the river’s allocation.

The renegotiation process is more than just a group of stakeholders sitting around a table, working out a plan for the river. It is a series of large and small meetings, some more formal than others. Since not everything is negotiated in official sessions, there is room for behind-the-scenes discussion while also maintaining transparency. During the round table’s Q&A session, Udall mentioned that river management issues under discussion will be reported by many talented journalists, who will bring transparency to the process for interested parties.

Ultimately, the process of renegotiating the Interim Guidelines requires a balancing of political, economic, environmental, and societal values. Climate change is the defining issue of our time, and it is at the center of these water issues in the American West. While one can easily become disillusioned by political processes, especially in the realm of climate and environmental issues, Udall ended on a note of optimism. While the solutions are not all clear, there are good relationships among stakeholders, which will form a solid foundation for successful negotiations.

– Stephen Yaeger, RNRF Program Manager

The PowerPoint Udall used during his presentation can be found here.

In his presentation, Udall referenced a series of studies about the climate and hydrological conditions of the Colorado River. They can be found at the following links:

Increasing influence of air temperature on upper Colorado River streamflow

The twenty‐first century Colorado River hot drought and implications for the future

On the Causes of Declining Colorado River Streamflows

Unprecedented 21st century drought risk in the American Southwest and Central Plains

Large contribution from anthropogenic warming to an emerging North American megadrought

Colorado River flow dwindles as warming-driven loss of reflective snow energizes evaporation

When is Drought not a Drought? Drought, Aridification, and the “New Normal”

Alternative Management Paradigms for the Future of the Colorado and Green Rivers

Enjoy!

"We made too many wrong mistakes." - Yogi Berra

Posted on Sunday, 11 September 2022 at 11:37 AM in Climate Change, Climate & Meteorology, Conflict, Cooperation, Vulnerability & Security, Energy & Water, Ethics, Gender,Water Rights, Culture & Religion, Extremes: Droughts, Floods, etc., Policy, Planning, Governance, IWRM & Management, Water Quantity & Availability, Western USA | | Comments (0)

| | | |

»

Translation


Visitors

  • Visitors
    Locations of visitors to this page
Top_50_water_blogs
Geology Site that Rocks!
Featured in Alltop
TheReefTank
proudly awards
this site as
Recommended Reading
Please vote for it
in the community!





Vote for us!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Subscribe to WaterWired

Find the best blogs at Blogs.com.

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

More...

Categories

Archives

More...

WWW sites