Gleick Tackled the Water-Energy Nexus then…Heartland

Published February 25, 2012 at 5:16 pm - No Comments

Recently a water-and-energy specialist named Peter Gleick found the spotlight. Using the memorable phrase, “peak water,” which he came up with while having worked on the issue for more than 25 years, he engaged many water experts in policy debates about climate change and water security. During this time he founded a nonprofit, the Pacific Institute, in order to conduct research and debate policy and had many followers.

Gleick, whose opinion is sought out by many public institutions, was able to make “Peak Water” such a standard phrase in industry circles that a recent story in a Bloomberg Sustainability report about the global resource crunch mentioned it.

Such is not the case this week as it only took a short time for folks to turn on Gleick and not without good reason. He has invited anger and disappointment from his followers. Gleick admitted his involvement in a political and legal imbroglio involving leaked documents from the Heartland Institute. Heartland is a Chicago-based nonprofit that funds research and operates as a think tank attacking climate change scientists.

As one of the first people to tackle the water-energy nexus, his opinion was very sought out by the California water industry, prior to the release of the Heartland documents. Here in California, Peter Gleick was the one man that legislation writers turned to when setting the tone for new policy if water was involved.

CA Representatives- Water Bill Neglects Years of Established Science

Published February 19, 2012 at 7:08 pm - No Comments

In Northern California this week, 10 state Representatives called on the House Committee on Natural Resources to talk water. These ten state leaders opposed H.R. 1837, San Joaquin’s Valley Water Reliability Act. The legislation proposes to divert additional water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta to South-of-Delta water consumers.

The opposition raises the point that diverting the water to users, runs counter to established economic and environmental policies that were established for a reason. Headed up by a Congressman that I met recently at a Salmon Association fundraiser, Mike Thompson (CA-1), the letter to the Committee writes that the new bill grossly diminishes the best available science and would also create job loss in the local economy.

Other arguments are made against the San Joaquin Valley Act such as damage to local tourism, repeals current environmental protections and hurt the fisherman and farmers who need the water and have contracts with the water companies and governments about water usage.

The San Joaquin Valley Act wants to give priority for use of San Joaquin River water sources to Central Valley farmers, which might possibly mean drying up the San Joaquin River for an almost 40-mile stretch. As when any time you re-route waterways, this would destroy the fragile Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta ecosystem, the largest estuary west of the Mississippi.

The main point of the letter was to reject the bill noting that it was damaging to farmers, fisherman, families and businesses who depend on the Delta for their livelihoods. This legislation was being considered by the House Committee on Natural Resources which prompted this letter from the 10 State Representatives.

Latest Articles

Latest Articles from the Blog