Tag Archives: sacramento

What is your town’s risk of wildfire? New media tool lets you see for yourself

by EmmanueV06 Posted on April 11, 2019

Which California town might be the next to burn? That’s the driving question behind Destined to Burn, the brand new media package produced via a partnership between the AP, Gannet, McClatchy, and others. The project examines how California can prevent wildfire devastation.

Wildfires have always been a risk in drought-prone California. But due to climate change’s drying effects on the soil and vegetation, burns are getting bigger, deadlier, and more expensive for the Golden State. Just last year, the Camp Fire killed almost 90 people and completely leveled the town of Paradise in Northern California. The climate-induced tragedy was 2018’s most expensive natural disaster.

Since then, many communities throughout California have been grappling with how to adapt to this type of threat.

And they may be right to worry. One in 12 homes in the state of California is at high risk from wildfires. Using data from the U.S. Census Bureau and Cal Fire Maps, the Sacramento Bee recently released a search tool, which Californians can use to find out how much of their towns might be in the danger zone.

Based on their analysis, there are more than 75 California towns and cities in which at least 90 percent of residents live in “very high fire hazard severity zones,” as designated by Cal Fire. As part of the Destined to Burn package, The Sacramento Bee highlighted 10 California communities from that list: Shingletown, Nevada City, Colfax, Kings Beach, Pollock Pines, Arnold, Wofford Heights, La Cañada Flintridge, Rancho Palos Verdes, and Harbison Canyon.

In 6 out of these 10 communities, 100 percent of residents live in very high fire hazard zones — at least, according to 2010 census info. In Nevada City, the hometown of Grist’s very own Nathanael Johnson, 3,064 out of 3,068 residents live in high hazard areas. (A number that may leave some wondering: What’s the deal with those four lucky people?)

But aside from their exceptionally high wildfire risk, there isn’t that much that unites the communities on the Bee’s list. Residents of the affluent Rancho Palos Verdes (the most populated city on the list), for instance, don’t seem to be sweating too hard about wildfires. Scott Hale, an assistant fire chief for Los Angeles County, told the Sacramento Bee: “This being a coastal community, we don’t get the type of brush and that kind of fire behavior that you might get in somewhere like Paradise.”

Kings Beach, on the north shore of Lake Tahoe, is a popular tourist destination. Because so many of the homes there are vacation rentals, it could be harder to mobilize the local community to push for more fire prevention measures.

In contrast, Nevada City is taking its fire prevention measures seriously. The city launched a Goat Fund Me campaign in December, hoping to raise enough funds to rent brush-clearing ruminants to maintain the city’s lands, a method that has caught on throughout California and beyond. Residents have also taken fire prevention into their own hands, creating citizen-led controlled burn squads and even helping out neighbors who may have trouble clearing dry brush near their homes.

The list isn’t exactly intended to predict the next “Paradise.” The data has its limitations — age being one of them. A new census is approaching in 2020, and Cal Fire is currently at work on a new set of fire hazard maps, which will incorporate wind patterns and other important factors. Instead, the tools put together by Gannett, McClatchy, Media News, and the Associated Press, are designed to be used as a resource as communities figure out how to prepare for their unique wildfire risks.

“Our goal with this collaboration is to put a spotlight on policy issues that can and should be raised in the halls of the state Capitol and by local communities,” wrote McClatchy Regional Editor Lauren Gustus of the project. “This is a wicked problem with no easy answers. And the more information we can share about where and how we’re falling short, the quicker we can come together on potential solutions.”

Link:

What is your town’s risk of wildfire? New media tool lets you see for yourself

Posted in Accent, alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Paradise, Pines, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on What is your town’s risk of wildfire? New media tool lets you see for yourself

Holocaust Survivor Slams Top Immigration Official: "History Is Not on Your Side"

by deqc16rl Posted on March 29, 2017

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Monday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions made a surprise appearance at a White House press briefing to announce that the Justice Department would begin cracking down on so-called sanctuary cities that fail to comply with federal immigration laws. If local governments refuse to cooperate with federal efforts to detain undocumented immigrants, Sessions said, as much as $4 billion in grants across the country could be withheld.

Despite the stark warning this week, many residents opposing Trump’s anti-immigration policies don’t appear to be deterred. In the case of Sacramento County, where Immigration and Customs Enforcement Acting Director Thomas Homan was invited to speak at a town-hall style meeting Tuesday, hundreds of people turned out to blast the ongoing sweeps targeting undocumented immigrants in the state. The most powerful moment arrived when an 87-year-old Holocaust survivor named Bernard Marks took to the mic to warn Homan and Sheriff Scott Jones that “history was not on their side.”

The remarks, as noted by CBS Sacramento, below:

When I was a little boy in Poland, for no other reason but for being Jewish, I was hauled off by the Nazis. And for no other reason I was picked up and separated from my family, who was exterminated in Auschwitz. And I am a survivor of Auschwitz and Dachau.

I spent five and a half years in concentration camps, for one reason and one reason only—because we picked on people, and you as the sheriff, who we elected as sheriff of this county—we did not elect you for sheriff of Washington, DC. It’s about time you side with the people here. And when this gentleman stands up there and says he doesn’t go after people, he should read today’s Bee. Because in today’s Bee, the Supreme Court Justice of California objected to ICE coming in and taking people away from the courts. Don’t tell me that this is a lie.

You stand up here Mr. Jones. Don’t forget—history is not on your side.

The remarks were met with loud cheers from the audience. Homan responded to the speech by saying his agency will continue to arrest undocumented immigrants inside courthouses.

Excerpt from:

Holocaust Survivor Slams Top Immigration Official: "History Is Not on Your Side"

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Holocaust Survivor Slams Top Immigration Official: "History Is Not on Your Side"

Buying a Home Is Nearly Impossible for Teachers in These Cities

by Lenore55Fuug Posted on February 4, 2017

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Lauren Paquette dreams of owning a home with a pool. But the 34-year-old fifth-grade science teacher knows it’s a pipe dream: She recently had to find a roommate to help with the monthly rent of $1,425 on her three-bedroom house in Houston. Although that’s relatively cheap compared with rents across the country, it’s tough on a teacher’s salary. Saving up for a down payment is out of the question, said Paquette, a single mother.

“It’s not like I went into this job thinking I’d make a bunch of money, but I expected to be able to make ends meet,” Paquette said. Finances have been easier since she left North Carolina for Texas (North Carolina ranks in the lower tenth of states for teacher pay), but Paquette’s struggles aren’t unique.

As housing prices have soared in all the usual major metropolitan areas—as well as in cites like Las Vegas, Sacramento, Atlanta, and Minneapolis—teachers’ wages haven’t kept pace. And with school districts already struggling to recruit and retain educators, this rising gap is just another barrier to keeping teachers in the profession.

Redfin, a real estate brokerage firm, compared listed home prices in more than 30 cities with average teachers’ salaries to gauge what percentage of available homes teachers could afford. (Administrators, principals, and special-education teachers were not included in the data, and New York City was not studied.) The number of homes within reach for a single teacher has declined in some places by more than 25 percent since 2012.

That’s no surprise in San Francisco, where just 14 out of the 2,244 listed houses were within reach on the average teacher salary of $71,000. But the dearth of affordable options has worsened in Las Vegas, Sacramento, Chicago, and Dallas, where in each city less than 25 percent of listed houses are affordable for teachers.

Of course, home ownership—traditionally an economic engine of the middle class—isn’t out of reach for just teachers. High housing prices are pushing middle-class workers out of many cities. Redfin chief economist Nela Richardson said the notion that civil servants live in the communities they serve is becoming a thing of the past: “These are middle-class salaries, but middle-class people can’t afford to buy homes.”

Rental prices mirror the housing market, so teachers who rent are also getting pushed out of the cities in which they teach. Meanwhile, attempts to fix the crisis in Los Angeles have backfired, and other novel solutions—like Sen. Corey Booker’s eight-building Teacher Village in Newark, New Jersey, or plans for teacher-only residential units in the San Francisco Bay Area—either just opened or are still years away. Despite creative housing solutions for our cities’ educators, many critics of these plans argue that the real solution is simply paying teachers higher salaries.

David Fisher, the vice president of the Sacramento City Teachers Association, lived in a studio apartment with his wife and son for 15 years before he could afford a house in Sacramento. “These aren’t McMansions in the suburbs,” Fisher said. “These are modest houses is modest neighborhoods.” Besides, he said, most teachers are concerned with paying off student loan debt before even considering buying a home.

There are a few cities where it’s not so bad. In Philadelphia, where teachers’ salaries saw a 15 percent increase since 2012, more than 35 percent of houses for sale are affordable for teachers. Like most civil servants, teachers have more options anywhere the housing supply is larger.

Paquette, the science teacher, figures that she may be able to buy a house in 10 years—and says she’ll stay in Houston as long as she can afford it. Whether she’ll stay in education is another question. “I get that itch quite often,” she said, “to leave the classroom.”

Original link – 

Buying a Home Is Nearly Impossible for Teachers in These Cities

Posted in Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Buying a Home Is Nearly Impossible for Teachers in These Cities

Donald Trump Ups His Game, Moves From Lying to Meta-Lying

by LucianaProvan29 Posted on June 6, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Here is the start of a Jake Tapper question to Donald Trump this morning. Trump has just gotten done lying yet again—and at length—about his support for the Iraq War, and Tapper finally decides to move on:

TAPPER: At a rally in Sacramento, you accused Hillary Clinton of lying about your foreign policy as it relates to expressingsupport for Japan being able to get nuclear weapons.

TRUMP: A hundred percent.

TAPPER: Well, let me just read from you….This is from an April 3 interview with Chris Wallace of Fox News. You said: “North Korea has nukes, Japan has a problem with that. I mean, they have a big problem with that. Maybe they would in fact be better off if they defend themselves from North Korea.“

And Chris Wallace says, “With nukes?”

And you say, “Including with nukes, yes, including with nukes.”

So…

This is followed by nearly a thousand words over the course of three minutes of Tapper vainly trying to get Trump to address his question at all. It’s not that Trump tap dances or makes excuses or pretends he really meant something different. He just flatly insists on talking about something else and bowls over Tapper whenever he tries to get him back on track. Finally Tapper gives up and moves on again.

This is not a criticism of Tapper, who has been more aggressive than most about trying to hold Trump accountable for the things he says. But what can you do? Trump very plainly has expressed support for Japan getting nukes. It’s on tape. He’s been explicit on multiple occasions that we should withdraw our military presence from Japan unless they’re willing to pay us a lot more money. That’s on tape too.

Hillary Clinton responded with this: “It’s no small thing when he suggests that America should withdraw our military support for Japan, encourage them to get nuclear weapons.” That’s 100 percent accurate. It’s not even slightly exaggerated. And yet Trump blithely insists that she’s lying and then refuses to answer questions about it. Eventually exhaustion sets in and everyone just lets it go.

How do you handle someone like that?

Original link: 

Donald Trump Ups His Game, Moves From Lying to Meta-Lying

Posted in Casio, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Donald Trump Ups His Game, Moves From Lying to Meta-Lying

Worried About the Planet? These Condoms Are Your Ticket to Guilt-Free Sex

by AletheaClibborn Posted on November 29, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Twenty years ago, when the eco-home products company Seventh Generation was in its heyday, co-founder and then-CEO Jeffrey Hollender trademarked the name Rainforest Rubbers, assuming that, as with cleaning and parenting products, people would be into sustainably-produced condoms. Nothing came of that idea, until Hollender’s millennial-aged and business-school-educated daughter, angered by how so few women her age wanted to buy condoms and frustrated by the dearth of sex products with natural ingredients, decided to get involved.

So decades after its conception, the father-daughter duo finally brought Hollender’s idea to fruition, dumping his name for something sleeker and creating a condom that’s sustainably produced, lacks the carcinogenic chemicals found in the standard brand, and is marketed specifically for women. Their Sustain Natural condoms brand, which has been on the market for just a year and a half, is one of a handful of eco- and body-friendly condom brands that have cropped up in recent years. The new wave of condoms include brands that take a more hipster, less macho tack to advertising, one that delivers condoms by bike and one that named their company after unicorns, for example.

Since founding Sustain, the Hollenders have gone beyond their flagship product, which boasts a long list of certifications and perks—they now also manufacture and sell “post-play wipes” and lube. And Jeffrey’s wife runs the companies charitable arm, which donates 10 percent of its condom and lube proceeds to women’s health care organizations such as Planned Parenthood.

Meika and her father, whom she calls “Jeffrey,” chatted with Mother Jones about latex allergies, lube, and what it’s like creating a condom company with your dad.

Mother Jones: What makes your condoms environmentally friendly?

Jeffrey: If you look at the life cycle of the condom, you start with the fact that they’re made from the sap of the rubber tree, like maple syrup is from a maple tree. We were lucky enough to find the world’s only fair trade certified rubber plantation. The plantation provides free education for 1,000 people in southern India. They built a hospital that provides 100 percent free medical care to employees and a discount to the whole community. And they provide free housing. It’s the only one certified by the Forest Stewardship Council, which means they’re managing the biological diversity on the plantation, the use of chemicals and pesticides. We took that through to the factory—changing the way the product is made. We reduced the protein content in the latex, which is what causes allergies. Most condoms are contaminated with a carcinogen called nitrosamine. We removed casein, which makes it ok for vegans to use. It’s the only non-GMO-certified condom in the United States. But the more important part of the story is that condoms help women plan the size of their families. When women plan the size of their families they have a better socioeconomic outcome. There’s a lot we can do without, but we need condoms. The world’s most sustainable, responsible, condoms.

MJ: How is the standard condom made?

Jeffrey: Mostly there’s children working on the plantation. If you look at the living conditions of most rubber capitals and their income relative to other people in those countries, they’re at the lower end of the spectrum. That’s invisible to most consumers. There’s been way more progress in the labor conditions of fair trade coffee, but condom production is a whole world that people have not shined a light on.

MJ: Why does Sustain focus on women’s condom use instead of men’s?

Meika: Our goal in the condom space is to get more young women to be using condoms, period. We have to get more women to use condoms over time which is going to take education.

Meika and Jeffrey Hollender Courtesy of Sustain Natural

Jeffrey: It’s scary how few women use condoms. The average woman who graduates from her first year in college, 25 percent will have an STD because they aren’t using condoms. In Sacramento today and New York until a year ago you could be arrested for carrying condoms. We’ve been supporting a group of women in Sacramento to help change that law. You shouldn’t be searching and arresting them because they carry a condom. It also sends a terrible message to young women about what it means when you do.

MJ: On the website you talk specifically about gay women and men. Will non-straight relationships be a focus of yours?

Jeffrey: We have not been as focused on the LGBT market as we should be, and we see a real opportunity. Particularly with lubricants, it’s a huge issue for gay men, and the health issues with lubricants are very significant for both sexes.

Meika: You don’t want to use anything that has parabens or glycerin. And you don’t want petroleum-based lube. What happens with the petroleum when it enters your body is it damages the cell tissue in that area and makes you more susceptible to contracting an STI. That combined with bacterial vaginosis, which can also be caused by petroleum or silicone-based lubricant, makes you 13 times more likely to contract an STI. So the health benefits were so obvious to us. And women in general are moving in a direction of wanting more natural condoms.

MJ: What kind of stereotypes do you two experience as a father-daughter condom company?

Meika: In the original round of investing, Jeffrey was raising money from friends, like upper class white men who thought the idea of starting a condom company with your daughter is a little uncomfortable. But we draw a line. People have been like, “Why don’t you do eco sex toys?” honestly that to me is something we wouldn’t want to do together. It’s a sensitive relationship and condoms is more of a public health category. If something does make us uncomfortable, most things don’t, but we do draw a line.

Jeffrey: There’s no child I know of who says, “When I grow up I want to be a condom salesman!” I say to Meika, “You have to be brave to do this.” People think it’s a weird thing for a father and daughter to be doing because it’ not something we talk about openly enough and that people have fears and secrets about. So from my perspective it’s a great way to shift those attitudes for us to be in business about it. No one should think twice about it.

MJ: How many people assume that sustainable condoms means they are biodegradable?

Meika: At least 60 percent.

Jeffrey: Nobody wants a biodegradable condom.

MJ: How will Sustain condoms increase the number of women buying condoms?

Meika: One is just through packaging, branding, and design. The condoms on the market were all extremely male oriented, and women felt like they had no brand loyalty because they weren’t targeted at them. So that was a low bar for us we just thought we could create something that’s more beautiful, that has more functional benefits and attributes, like the sustainability piece.

Jeffrey: Tactically, we’re helping to overturn these laws around women carrying around condoms is also foundational. It continues to reinforce these attitudes that are so dangerous. We haven’t met anyone that has the magic solution to changing these attitudes. We know there’s an absence of dialogue with families and pediatricians. There’s not one point you can focus on that will change this.

View this article:

Worried About the Planet? These Condoms Are Your Ticket to Guilt-Free Sex

Posted in alo, Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, Hoffman, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Worried About the Planet? These Condoms Are Your Ticket to Guilt-Free Sex

California Farmers Have Agreed to Water Cuts. What Exactly Does That Mean?

by OrvilleRuc Posted on May 22, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

As California endures its fourth year of grueling drought, officials are getting more serious about mandatory water cuts. Gov. Jerry Brown imposed the state’s first-ever water restrictions last month, ordering cities and towns to cut water by 25 percent. But the vast majority of water in California goes not to homes and businesses but to farms, which so far have suffered minimal cuts.

On Friday, the state’s Water Board approved a deal with farmers in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta in which some farmers will voluntarily reduce water use by 25 percent in exchange for assurances that they won’t suffer reductions later in the growing season. “We’re in a drought unprecedented in our times,” said Board Chair Felicia Marcus on Friday. “The action we’re announcing today is definitely unusual, but we are in unusual times.”

Here’s a primer on how farms are using water now, who holds rights to it, and what restrictions may come next.

How much water do California farms use? Farms consume about 80 percent of the state’s water supply, and use it to grow half of the fruits and veggies that are produced in the United States. Almonds and alfalfa (cattle feed) use more than 15 percent of the state’s water.

What are water rights? Water rights enable individuals, city water agencies, irrigation districts, and corporations to divert water directly from rivers or streams for free. The rights are based on a very old seniority system: “Senior” water rights holders are the first to get water and the last to suffer from cuts. There are two primary types of these senior holders: Those who started using the water before 1914 (when the water permit system was put in place), and “riparians,” who own property directly adjacent to streams or rivers. Water rights often, but don’t always, transfer with property sales.

Who are senior water rights holders? Senior water rights holders are the corporations, individuals, or entities who either staked out the water before 1914, when the state started requiring permits and applications for water; those who live directly adjacent to a river or stream; or those who have bought property with senior water rights. This system made sense in the era of pioneers settling the Wild West: As the Associated Press recently put it, “Establishing an early right to California water was as simple as going ahead and diverting it. Paperwork came later. San Francisco got the Sierra Nevada water that turned its sand dunes into lush gardens by tacking a handwritten notice to a tree in 1902.” Today, there are thousands of senior water rights holders; most of them are corporations, many of which are farms. The holders include utilities company Pacific Gas and Electric, the San Francisco water agency, a number of rural irrigation districts, and Star Trek actor and rancher William Shatner.

What water cuts were announced Friday, and what’s coming next? The Water Board announced that it would accept a voluntary deal in which riparians in the 6,000-acre Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (shown in the map below) would reduce their water use by 25 percent, or fallow 25 percent of their land. In exchange, the Water Board promised them that they wouldn’t suffer cuts in the coming year. There are about 1,000 water holders in the area who could be candidates for the deal, which will be enforced by a combination of a complaint system, satellite imagery, and spot checks.

In addition, the Board will announce mandatory curtailments to other senior water holders next week for the first time since the 1970s. The Board is still figuring out the location and percentage of these cuts.

So before Friday’s cuts, farmers were just using as much water as they wanted? Well, not exactly. Farmers with “junior” (post-1914) rights in the San Joaquin and Sacramento River basins, home of the normally fertile Central Valley, were ordered to stop using the river’s water a month ago. But the regulations are enforced by the honor system and reported complaints; so far, only a fifth of junior water holders in the area have confirmed that they are complying.

The Department of Water Resources has also made substantial cuts to the state’s two major water projects—a system of aqueducts, dams, and canals across the state that distributes water from water-rich Northern California to the water-poor Central Valley. Growers who use water from the Central Valley Water Project are only receiving 20 percent of their allocated water, and farmers of the State Water Project aren’t receiving any at all.

All of this has led more and more farmers to rely almost exclusively on groundwater, but it’s undeniable that the drought has led to less farming overall: Last year, five percent of irrigated cropland went out of production, and officials expect that number to rise this year.

What is groundwater, and how much of it are farmers using? Groundwater is the water that trickles down through the earth’s surface over the centuries, collecting in large underwater aquifers. It’s a savings account of sorts—good to have when it’s dry but difficult to refill—and it wasn’t regulated until last year, when Gov. Brown ordered local water agencies to come up with management plans. The water agencies are still in the process of implementing those plans, and in the meantime, no one knows exactly how much groundwater is being used. We do know this: Groundwater usually makes up about 40 percent of the state’s total freshwater usage, but lately, the state has been running on it. It made up 65 percent of freshwater use last year, and may make up as much as 75 percent this year. As a result of overpumping, the land is sinking—as much as a foot a year in some areas—and officials are worried that the changing landscape threatens the structural integrity of infrastructure like bridges, roads and train tracks.

Link – 

California Farmers Have Agreed to Water Cuts. What Exactly Does That Mean?

Posted in Anchor, FF, For Dummies, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on California Farmers Have Agreed to Water Cuts. What Exactly Does That Mean?

Here’s how California could fix its drought-time water woes

by ReginalJobe Posted on June 10, 2014

Here’s how California could fix its drought-time water woes

By

Shutterstock

The drought that’s ravaging every square inch of California is nature’s doing, albeit arguably juiced by climate change. But water shortfalls, which are prompting the government to suspend environmental protections for rivers and wildlife, are largely the result of inefficient use of water, and that’s a problem that can be solved.

That’s the message of a new report by the Pacific Institute and the Natural Resources Defense Council. The nonprofits looked at the practices of California’s farmers and cities, and at statewide water-recycling and stormwater-capture practices, and identified improvements that could provide 10.8 million to 13.7 million acre-feet of additional fresh water every year. That’s more water than is used by all the cities in the state every year.

“The good news is that solutions to our water problem exist,” the report states. “They are being implemented to varying degrees around the state with good results, but a lot more can be done.”

Here’s an overview of the report findings, in handy infographic form:

Click to embiggen.

And here’s how the report’s authors sum up their recommendations in an opinion piece in The Sacramento Bee:

• [E]xpand … adoption of modern irrigation technologies and practices …

• Improve water-use productivity in our homes, industries and businesses [by]reducing leaks, installing efficient appliances, using less-wasteful manufacturing processes and replacing water-guzzling lawns with beautiful native landscapes …

• Expand use of high-quality recycled water in our homes and cities. …

• Expand capture and use of rainfall and stormwater runoff.


Source
The Untapped Potential of California’s Water Supply, NRDC
California can expand its water supply and reduce demand, The Sacramento Bee

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

View post – 

Here’s how California could fix its drought-time water woes

Posted in ALPHA, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s how California could fix its drought-time water woes

California’s drought plan will screw the environment

by Brittany9138 Posted on April 10, 2014

California’s drought plan will screw the environment

By

Mike Vondran

California rivers like this one will be allowed to run drier this year than ever before.

California has a radical plan for managing its rivers and reservoirs as drought grips the Golden State for the third consecutive year. It could help the state cling to water that would normally flush through rivers and into the Pacific Ocean — at the expense of wildlife and fishing folk who rely on the health of those rivers.

The seven-and-a-half-month plan, developed in consultation with federal officials, doesn’t increase the amount of water that will be delivered to customers, but it makes major changes to how precious drops remaining in snowpacks, reservoirs, and rivers will be managed. The Sacramento Bee hits on the plan’s highlights:

Among other things, the plan calls for further loosening of water quality rules in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, allowing the agencies to keep river flows low to preserve as much water as possible in upstream reservoirs, especially Shasta Lake. Temporary dams are proposed on three Delta channels to allow the remaining freshwater runoff to more effectively push back saltwater intrusion from San Francisco Bay.

It also calls for additional hatchery breeding of endangered winter-run Chinook salmon. Normally, those young salmon would be released into the Sacramento River. But because the river could become too warm to sustain them, some of the fish may be relocated into cold-water habitats where they have not existed for decades, such as Battle Creek near Red Bluff.

Environmentalists are warning that these steps could decimate wildlife populations that rely on Californian rivers for their survival. “It’s a disaster,” sport-fishing advocate Bill Jennings told the Bee. “The storage they’re talking about saving isn’t going to be enough to protect the rivers from high temperatures. It is a complete breach of trust, an almost total rejection of laws and regulations.”

Meanwhile, experts are warning that there is little relief in sight for California, where 99.81 percent of the state is considered to be in drought. “Climate patterns may be in the early stages of aligning to quench the state’s thirst,” writes Climate Central reporter Andrea Thompson. “[B]ut if that happens — and there are no guarantees — it won’t happen until after the dry season ends, a long six months or more to wait until dwindling reservoirs are replenished.”


Source
California water plan unveils hardships to come as drought persists, The Sacramento Bee
Why California’s Drought Isn’t Going Anywhere, Climate Central

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Read this article:

California’s drought plan will screw the environment

Posted in Anchor, FF, Free Press, GE, ONA, Uncategorized, wind power | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on California’s drought plan will screw the environment

Jerry Brown keeps getting heckled by anti-fracking protesters

by y0afvun Posted on December 3, 2013

Jerry Brown keeps getting heckled by anti-fracking protesters

By

Steve Rhodes

California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) is finding the fracking issue to be increasingly irritating. Or more to the point, he’s finding anti-fracking activists to be increasingly irritating.

Brown is a long-time environmental champion with a strong record of advancing clean energy and climate action, but he doesn’t mind the fracking that’s going on in his state. In fact, he kinda likes it.

The San Jose Mercury News reported a month ago on Brown’s “most extensive remarks yet defending his administration’s fracking policy”:

Brown said he saw no contradiction in calling climate change “the world’s greatest existential challenge” Monday while refusing to impose a moratorium on fracking …

“In terms of the larger fracking question — natural gas — because of that, and the lowered price, the carbon footprint of America has been reduced because of the substitution of natural gas for coal,” Brown said. “So this is a complicated equation.” …

Asked whether fracking should be banned, as Monday’s protesters were demanding, Brown said: “What would be the reason for that?”

Environmental activists who are calling for a moratorium list plenty of reasons: water pollution, air pollution, methane leakage from fracking operations, and the folly of continuing to rely on fossil fuels instead of focusing on a switch to clean energy.

And the enviros have a lot of company. A number of Hollywood celebs are calling for a ban. Famous foodies too. Last month, 20 leading climate scientists sent Brown a letter arguing that his support for fracking runs counter to his efforts to fight climate change. More recently, 27 former advisers to Brown wrote a letter asking him to impose a moratorium on fracking until more study is conducted into its environmental impacts.

janinsanfran

To make sure he doesn’t forget all this anti-fracking fervor, activists now trail the governor around the state reminding him. The Sacramento Bee reports:

Environmentalists frustrated with Brown’s permissiveness of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, have followed the Democratic governor to events throughout the state since September, heckling him for his approval of legislation establishing a permitting system for the controversial form of oil extraction.

The protests have become an awkward sideshow for the third-term governor, highlighting the deepening division between Brown and environmentalists — a reliably Democratic constituency — as he prepares for a re-election bid next year.

Could fracking be a decisive issue in the 2014 governor’s race? Fifty-eight percent of California voters support a moratorium on fracking until more environmental studies are done, according to a June poll. But those voters probably won’t have a viable anti-fracking candidate to support instead.

And Brown’s fracking stance could make him more appealing to moderate Democrats and independents, argues Jack Pitney, a government professor at Claremont McKenna College. “There are probably people out there who are thinking, ‘Well, if the environmentalist wackos are mad at him, he must be doing something right,’” Pitney told The Sacramento Bee.

But the environmentalists, wacko and otherwise, aren’t going to be dissuaded. “It’s a growing grass-roots movement across the state,” Rose Braz of the Center for Biological Diversity told the Bee. “It’s not going to go away. It really is not until the governor acts to halt fracking.”


Source
Jerry Brown followed to events, heckled by California environmentalists over fracking, The Sacramento Bee
Fracking and reducing climate change: Can Jerry Brown have it both ways?, San Jose Mercury News

Lisa Hymas is senior editor at Grist. You can follow her on Twitter and Google+.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Link: 

Jerry Brown keeps getting heckled by anti-fracking protesters

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Jerry Brown keeps getting heckled by anti-fracking protesters