California Water Tunnel Will Cost $20 Billion, State Officials Say Benefits Will Be Worth It

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration said Thursday it will now cost more than $20 billion to build a giant tunnel aimed at capturing more water when it rains and storing it for better use. prepare for longer droughts caused by climate change.

State regulators have been trying to build some version of a water tunnel system for decades. The latest form championed by the Democratic governor is a single giant tunnel, derived from the two tunnels proposed by his predecessor, Jerry Brown. Newsom’s administration says the state can capture more water from the Sacramento River during major storms and send it south for storage.

The latest cost estimate, from 2020, puts the price of a single tunnel project at $16 billion. The new analysis says the tunnel will cost $20.1 billion, an increase they attribute almost entirely to inflation, which skyrocketed after the pandemic.

The project would be financed by 29 local public water agencies, which receive their money from customers.

The analysis, conducted by the Berkeley Research Group but funded by the state, says the tunnel would bring in $38 billion in benefits, mainly due to an increased water supply that would be better protected from natural disasters like earthquakes. earth.

“The benefits clearly justify the costs,” said David Sunding, a professor emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley, who led the analysis.

Despite these optimistic prospects, the tunnel remains one of the most controversial projects in recent memory. Environmental groups say its construction would have devastating impacts on the already endangered ecosystem of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the largest estuary on the West Coast that is home to species of salmon and other fish in Endangered.

The analysis released Thursday notes that environmental impacts include loss of agricultural land, reduced water quality in the delta, and impacts on air quality, transportation and noise.

“Instead of imposing the costs of this boondoggle on Californians, the state should invest in sustainable water solutions that promise to restore the Delta ecosystem, not destroy it,” said Barbara Barrigan -Parilla, executive director of the environmental advocacy group Restore the Delta. .

State officials note that the plan now includes $200 million in grants to fund local projects in areas affected by construction.

Beyond environmental concerns, the project has become a political minefield among Central Valley farming communities, where it is seen as yet another attempt by Southern California to steal their water. While most of California’s population lives in the southern part of the state, most of the state’s water comes from the north. In the state Legislature, lawmakers have blocked any effort to benefit or speed up construction of the tunnel.

“This new analysis recognizes what we’ve known all along: The Delta Tunnel is supposed to benefit Beverly Hills and leave Delta communities in the lurch,” said U.S. Rep. Josh Harder, a Democrat whose district includes Central Valley communities like Stockton. Lodi and Galt. “I’m tired of Sacramento politicians ignoring the voices of our valley and I will do everything in my power to stop them from stealing our water.”

The tunnel would be part of the State Water Project – a complex system of reservoirs, dams and canals that provides water to 27 million people while irrigating 750,000 acres (303,515 hectares) of farmland.

Climate change threatens this supply. A recent drought saw the three driest years on record, dropping reservoirs across the state to dangerously low levels and leading to mandatory rationing and even causing the closure of some hydroelectric plants. State officials predict that by 2070, deliveries from the State Water Project will decline by 22 percent due to climate change.

The proposed tunnel would be approximately 45 miles long and 35 feet wide, large enough to transport more than 161 million gallons of water per hour. State officials say the tunnel would allow the state to capture more water when the state is hit by “atmospheric rivers” – large storms that can flood the state for weeks during the rain season. rains.

The analysis released Thursday said the tunnel would increase water deliveries by about 17 percent, nearly the expected decline due to climate change.

“Doing nothing has a very real cost. It is much more effective and economical to avoid a decline in supplies,” said Karla Nemeth, director of the California Department of Water Resources. “Water shortages, mandatory restrictions, fallowing and job losses are all impacting our national and local economy.”