At long last, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta twin-tunnels boondoggle is dead.
Good riddance.
Gov. Gavin Newsom made that official Tuesday during his State of the State address, calling instead for a smaller, single-tunnel approach that would include a broad range of projects designed to increase the state’s water supply.
Bravo. It’s a refreshing shift from Gov. Jerry Brown’s stubborn insistence that California spend $19 billion on a project that wouldn’t add a drop of new water to the state supply. But it would have further threatened the health of the Delta and facilitated the biggest water grab in state history. That’s saying something, given California’s past record.
Newsom’s announcement sets up an opportunity to end what has been a decade-long fight pitting Northern California against Southern California, and environmentalists against farmers and urban dwellers.
The audacity of Brown’s proposal was staggering. Digging projects are notorious for coming in wildly over-budget. This would have been the largest digging project in U.S. history, the equivalent of building a 35-mile long, 10-lane freeway 150 feet underground, capable of moving enough water south to fill 8,000 Olympic-size swimming pools every day.
The most disturbing aspect of Brown’s push for the twin tunnels was his willingness to ignore the science of the Delta. Multiple studies, including by the prestigious National Academy of Sciences, made clear that only pouring more water — not less — through the Delta would maintain its long-term health. Brown also turned a blind eye to the fact that the state never developed a cost-benefit analysis anyone could take seriously. Even the Central Valley’s Westlands Water District and Metropolitan Water District board members from the two largest cities in Southern California, Los Angeles and San Diego, were skeptical that it penciled out.
As welcome as Newsom’s Delta announcement is for Californians, questions remain about a single-tunnel approach. Environmentalists have pointed out that a single tunnel that increases diversions from the Delta is far worse than the status quo for fish and wildlife.
The goal of a single tunnel should be to improve reliability while also maintaining the health of the Delta. While the twin-tunnel plan would have been capable of carrying 9,000 cubic feet of water per second, the smaller, single-tunnel alternative would only carry 3,000 cubic feet per second. It would embrace the “big gulp, little sip” approach, allowing for increased water exports during wet years and reducing diversions during dry years.
The cheaper cost of a single tunnel — estimated at roughly $10 billion — would allow the state to invest $5 billion in a comprehensive water plan that would increase water supply through added storage, recycling and conservation. It could also include investments in repairing the Delta’s levees and restoring habitat, improving the long-term health of the largest estuary west of the Mississippi.
The Delta supplies water for some 27 million Californians and 3 million acres of irrigated farmland. The single-tunnel, portfolio plan outlined by the governor Tuesday offers the best chance of meeting the co-equal goals of maintaining the health of the Delta while providing a reliable source of water for users.
