yet another company trying to hyjack water to sell.
it's not just nestles
sighQuotehttps://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/court-nixes-federal-approval-for-cadiz-pipeline-to-suck-water-out-of-the-mojave-to-sell/ar-AADiyFx?li=BBnb7Kz
Court Nixes Federal Approval For Cadiz Pipeline To Suck Water Out Of The Mojave To Sell
Mary Papenfuss 3 hrs ago
A federal court has ruled that an environmental review exemption by the Trump administration for a pipeline to extract water from the Mojave Desert is illegal.
The 43-mile pipeline planned by Cadiz Inc. would cut through Mojave Trails National Monument and other public lands in southern California to suck ground water out of the desert aquifer and sell to cities. It would pump an estimated 16 billion gallons a year from the fragile desert ecosystem.
California U.S. District Court Judge George Wu ruled Thursday that the federal Bureau of Land Management failed to provide sufficient evidence for its 2017 decision to reverse its own 2015 decision requiring an environmental review for the pipeline. A full review could take at least and year and could open up Cadiz to even more litigation.
Cadiz, citing an obscure 1873 law, had argued that it had a right to build the pipeline within a railroad right-of-way without environmental review as long as the water had a rail-related use. Cadiz claimed that some water would be used by another party to operate a steam-powered train.
The Obama administration rejected the argument and ordered a full environmental review. That decision was reversed by the Trump administration following the appointment of David Bernhardt, a former lobbyist for Cadiz, as deputy Interior secretary. He's now secretary of the Interior.
"We're grateful the court decision will stop the Trump administration's blatant attempt to do a favor for their corporate friends," said Lisa Belenky, a senior attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the environmental groups that sued to halt the project. "This massive water-privatization scheme is not sustainable. Cadiz will devastate the entire Mojave Desert ecosystem that relies on that water for survival."
Extracting the water to sell will destroy vegetation, including the famous Joshua trees, and threaten the survival of wildlife, including the rapidly vanishing desert tortoises, kit foxes, the Mojave fringe-toed lizards and Bighorn sheep, according to the center. A study by the U.S. Geological Survey in 2017 determined that the project would be catastrophic for the desert. "Based on the independent study, it's clear that Cadiz would quickly drain the aquifer, destroying all of the desert life it supports," Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said then.
Earthjustice attorney Greg Loarie hailed the court for seeing "right through the Trump administration's attempt to shoehorn the massive Cadiz pipeline into a railroad easement through Mojave Trails National Monument."
Cadiz said in a statement that the company considers the ruling a procedural matter that will easily be resolved, the Los Angeles Times reported.
This article originally appeared on HuffPost.
https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-court-rejects-blm-cadiz-pipeline-decision-20190621-story.html
Court throws out federal approval of Cadiz water pipeline
By BETTINA BOXALL
JUN 21, 2019 | 7:00 PM
https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/2019/06/21/judge-tosses-back-federal-exemption-cadiz-water-project-mojave/1529229001/
Federal judge: Trump land regulators wrongly reversed Obama-era denial of railway exemption for Cadiz' Mojave Desert water project
Janet Wilson, Palm Springs Desert Sun Published 5:16 p.m. PT June 21, 2019 | Updated 4:51 p.m. PT June 22, 2019
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/cadiz-pipelin-water-trump-administration-mjave-desert_n_5d0f1840e4b0a3941863a0b9
ENVIRONMENT 06/23/2019 04:01 am ET
Court Nixes Federal Approval For Cadiz Pipeline To Suck Water Out Of The Mojave To Sell
43-mile pipeline was approved by Trump administration after former Cadiz lobbyist David Bernhardt became deputy secretary of the Interior.
By Mary Papenfuss
nestle story here:http://www.thelivingmoon.com/forum/index.php?topic=6598.msg112045#msg112045
Why anyone would think sucking a desert aquifer dry for commercial profit is okay in any way shape or form just confirms, for me, one thing.
Some people, as the Brits say, have no bottom. They will do anything to make a buck off someone or something else. Even a precious, rare resource.
These are the people who should burn in everlasting fire.
Efforts have been made to steal water from the Sand Dunes. The Zapata family has been able to shut that down for now. They own the ranch adjacent to the dunes.
As a side note:
Fresh Water under the ocean
https://www.foxnews.com/science/mysterious-freshwater-reservoir-hidden-ocean
Quote from: Sgt.Rocknroll on June 24, 2019, 10:03:42 PM
As a side note:
Fresh Water under the ocean
https://www.foxnews.com/science/mysterious-freshwater-reservoir-hidden-ocean (https://www.foxnews.com/science/mysterious-freshwater-reservoir-hidden-ocean)
You have to wonder what would happen if we emptied a reservoir under all that ocean. Like sinkholes. Maybe the East coast would disappear.
Freshwater is now the largest commodity in the world.
well this isn't exactly stealing but dang messing with the military - not goodQuotehttps://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/a-new-drinking-water-crisis-hits-us-military-bases-across-the-nation/ar-AAEhcai?li=BBnb7Kz
CNBC
A new drinking water crisis hits US military bases across the nation
Jaden Urbi 1 day ago
good vid at link
The U.S. military's use of firefighting foam that contains potentially dangerous chemical compounds could have serious health consequences for the workers who handle it and those who live nearby.
The Department of Defense had identified 401 military sites that could be contaminated with the toxic compounds, known as PFAS, as of August 2017. The Environmental Working Group and Northeastern University have mapped at least 712 documented cases of PFAS contamination across 49 states, as of July 2019. That map includes contamination on military bases along with industrial plants, commercial airports and firefighting training sites.
PFAS, short for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are found at high levels in a concentrate for a firefighting foam called AFFF, or aqueous film forming foam, which has seeped into groundwater and at times tainted drinking water. The Environmental Working Group estimates more than 100 million Americans could be drinking tap water contaminated with PFAS.
Dubbed "the forever chemical," PFAS don't naturally break down in the environment, which explains why some water sources are still contaminated from AFFF use decades ago.
(https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AAEheGg.img?h=327&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f)
© Provided by CNBC LLC As of July 2019, EWG and Northeastern University have mapped out 712 PFAS contamination sites across 49 states in the U.S.
The Centers for Disease Control recognizes an array of health effects linked to PFAS exposure, such as lowering a woman's chance of getting pregnant, issues with childhood development and even cancer.
Now, communities and service members across the country are wondering what PFAS-contaminated water means for their health and their homes, and who's responsible to clean it all up. The investigations are a tangled mess of politics and national security. The chemicals in the foam are the subject of corporate lawsuits and scientific discovery. And scientists are concerned about their ongoing threat to human health.
And while there's a patchwork of regulations across state lines, there's no legally-enforceable federal drinking water standard when it comes to PFAS.
© Photo by Bastiaan Slabbers/NurPhoto via Getty Images Water tower near the former Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Willow Grove, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, USA on February 6, 2019. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is expected to release updates on tests of per- and polyfuoroalkyl substances or PFAs pollution in public water supplies for 16 million Americans in 33 states, including Pennsylvania. The federal report is delayed due to January 2019 shutdown. Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick, Republican of Bucks County in Eastern Pennsylvania and Democrat Dan Kildee, of Michigan cochair a bipartisan task force in the House of Representatives, formed to take on the growingPFAS ContaminationCrisis. The usage of foam at nearby former military bases is linked to tainted drinking water, affecting tens of thousands of residents in Bucks and Montgomery Counties in Eastern Pennsylvania. (Photo by Bastiaan Slabbers/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
As of July 2019, the Department of Defense has spent more than $550 million on PFAS investigations and responses including providing bottled water and in-home water filtration systems, according to Heather Babb, DOD Spokeswoman. But DOD has not come up with a plan to actually clean up the PFAS contamination across the country, something the Pentagon roughly estimated could cost $2 billion.
CNBC went to some of the communities near military bases to see how PFAS contamination is playing out today. Watch the video above to hear from impacted citizens, veterans and military officials.
Don't think we should drink water in Michigan. They have other issues already.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lekYRPRZEJQ
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-49265355/do-these-icebergs-produce-the-world-s-purest-water
Do these icebergs produce the world's purest water?
Selling water harvested from icebergs is big business on Canada's eastern coast.
But there are concerns over Arctic warming, with an increasing number of icebergs floating south from Greenland.
8h ago
"https://www.bbc.com/news/av/embed/p07jzbtx/49265355">
sorry can't figure out how to move the vid
not stealing exactly but...Quotehttps://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/the-west-is-trading-water-for-cash-the-water-is-running-out/ar-AAFQ183?li=BBnb7Kz
The West Is Trading Water for Cash. The Water Is Running Out
Luke McGrath 6 hrs ago
When it comes to global warming's one-two punch of inundation and drought, the presence of too much water has had the most impact on U.S. agriculture this year, with farmers across the Midwest swamped by flooding throughout the Mississippi Basin.
But in the Southwest, it's the increasing lack of water that's threatening the agricultural economy, as well as the welfare of 40 million Americans and part of the food supply for the entire nation.
The 1,450-mile-long Colorado River serves as a source of water for seven states, but climate change and overuse have caused its levels to drop precipitously. From 2000 to 2014, flows declined 19% from the 20th century average, according to American Geophysical Union Water Resources research. By 2100, the river flow could fall as much as 55%.
The threat to fresh water is of course global in scope. Last week, the World Resources Institute reported that access to water for hundreds of millions of people is now at risk due to global warming. Along the Colorado River, climate change is also taking its toll, responsible for aridification—the progression from cyclical drought to a permanent decrease in water.
With big western cities clamoring for a share of the river's diminishing supply, desert farmers with valuable claims are making multimillion dollar deals in a bid to delay the inevitable. It's an echo of the historic manipulation that long ago subdued this waterway, the carver of the Grand Canyon and icon of the American West. But if the river's water keeps falling, more radical measures will be needed to protect what remains.
Since the 19th century, the biggest users of Colorado River water have been farmers, turning millions of acres of unforgiving landscape in California and Arizona into a patchwork of green and brown visible from space. For a century, their water supply has been governed by agreements among the states along the river basin. But the water itself is doled out by state administrators in part under a "first in time, first in right" mechanism that's even older, dating back to the decades following the American Civil War.
When the states came together in the 1920s to sign a compact dividing rights to the river, they were operating from an overly optimistic assessment of how much water was available. Thus behind the eight-ball from the start, increasing water demands in the decades since have created a situation where more water is taken out of the river than flows into it. In March, with the river's main reservoirs now below half of total capacity and the federal government about to step in, the states reached a temporary deal to cut river water use.
But in 2026, a more severe reckoning looms when a long-term deal must be struck. The Colorado River provides drinking water for 1 in 10 Americans, many in cities such as Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Denver and Phoenix. It also waters almost 90% of the nation's winter vegetables, according to American Rivers, an advocacy group. When the broader compromise is due, it may remake how an entire region grows food and uses water.
"It wasn't like one state used more water than they were supposed to: Each state is using what they're legally entitled to under the compact," said John Berggren, a water policy analyst for Western Resource Advocates. When you combine institutionalized overuse with an accelerating climate crisis, Berggren explained, that's when you get "the problem."
(https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AAFQhZR.img?h=351&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f)
© Bloomberg Storage Levels in Decline
The "first in time" aspect of Colorado River rights began in the late 1800s, and is known as Prior Appropriation. A claimant, having through diversion of the river made beneficial use of the water (by farming or mining, for example), can continue to take the same amount they always have in perpetuity, or convey that "senior right" as a form of property. As faster-growing states like California accumulated more claims, however, slower-growing upriver states feared they'd be shut out.
The 1922 Colorado River Compact was meant to fix this. The agreement meant that some 7.5 million acre-feet of water (equal to an entire acre of land covered in 1 foot of water, or 326,000 gallons) would be allotted every year to both the Upper Basin (Colorado, Wyoming, Utah and New Mexico) and the Lower Basin (Nevada, Arizona and California). Since the river flows from north to south, Upper Basin states are obligated to make sure Lower Basin states get their due.
But the math was wrong, and there was much less water available over the following years than the signatories had predicted.
Since 1989, Lower Basin states have often used much more than their share under the compact. As agriculture and big cities expanded, the deficit was made up by tapping the massive reservoirs of Lake Mead and Lake Powell. The river itself long ago ceased flowing into the Gulf of California, instead petering out in the Mexican desert. As water levels continued to decline and climate change added to the river's stress, the Lower Basin has engaged in what John Fleck, director of the Water Resources Program at the University of New Mexico, called "de facto prior appropriation."
"The math is unbelievably simple," said Douglas Kenney, director of the Western Water Policy Program at the University of Colorado Law School. "You just can't use more than comes in."
(https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AAFQ17e.img?h=351&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f)
© Bloomberg Equal Rights, Unequal Use
As western cities grew, added demands were placed upon the Colorado River. But unlike many of the desert farming communities, urban areas have made great strides in water conservation. Examples include Las Vegas paying residents to rip out their lawns and plans by Los Angeles to recycle 100% of its wastewater by 2035.
But it's not enough to slow the river's demise, given that about 70% of it goes to agriculture. Robert Glennon, a regents professor at the University of Arizona, said there needs to be improved efficiency in how desert farms irrigate their crops, as well as mutually beneficial programs to divert water to urban areas seeking insurance policies against future drought.
Indeed, a brisk trade "water marketing" has sprung up. Municipal water authorities pay hundreds of millions of dollars to holders of senior river rights, or to fund rural conservation efforts, in exchange for water. Glennon said the farmers and their water districts long ago realized that, unless they inked deals with the big cities, the federal government would eventually step in.
No government is going to let some of its biggest cities go dry over antiquated claims to water, according to Glennon, author of Unquenchable: America's Water Crisis and What To Do About It. "If you don't take advantage of doing deals with the cities for a modest amount of money, what you're going to see is new legislation that crimps your rights, insists on greater conservation without paying for it," he said.
For a price, cities can divert Colorado River water intended for crops via aqueduct to kitchen taps in Santa Monica and La Jolla. The water marketing model has been so successful that agricultural land use in the region is projected to decrease as conversion to urban use accelerates, according to a 2012 Bureau of Reclamation study.
One of the biggest water marketing deals was in 2003. The Quantification Settlement Agreement will soon send 200,000 acre-feet of water westward annually at a "melded supply rate" of $474 per acre-foot, for an approximate annual price of $94 million. The water originates from the rural Imperial Irrigation District (IID) in southeastern California and ends up with the San Diego County Water Authority. The IID also has a deal with the Metropolitan Water District (MWD), which serves Los Angeles and Orange counties, sending them 105,000 acre-feet a year at $111 per acre-foot.
The Palo Verde Irrigation District (PVID), a roughly 131,000-acre area next to where the river forms California's border with Arizona, is locked into a 35-year deal with the MWD, which paid $6.2 million last year. Under the agreement, the MWD can demand that the rural district leave 28% of its land fallow to free up 115,000 acre-feet of water for some of Southern California's largest cities and approximately 20 million people.
Not counting upfront payments, the MWD paid the farmers of the Palo Verde district about $164 million between 2005 and 2018. Deven Upadhyay, assistant general manager and chief operations officer of the MWD, said water marketing deals provide California's southern cities with latitude to deal with changing climate conditions.
"We'll continue to pursue flexible arraignments that allow us in wet years to store water, in drier years to do exchanges with other agencies," he said.
(https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AAFQ63I.img?h=351&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f)
© Bloomberg Natural Flows Creep Lower
With that kind of money at stake, even tiny water districts are getting involved. The Bard Water District, near the Mexican border, is only about 7,000 acres. But it's already on its second, two-year pilot program in which it agrees to leave 2,000 acres fallow in exchange for money from the MWD. It made $950,000 for farmers and water district improvements during its first pilot in 2016-201.
But there is another price to be paid for these arrangements, said Ron Derma, general manager of the Bard district. Damage to residents and businesses who aren't parties to the deals, and who depend on the farming economy, is getting worse. Leave too much land untilled, Derma warned, and the commercial infrastructure that supports agricultural communities could be permanently hobbled.
"You got people that depend on irrigation, you got people that spray [pesticides], tractor sales—all the things that are connected to farming," he said.
But Bart Fisher, a board member of the Palo Verde Irrigation District and owner of an 11,000-acre farm a few miles from the river, said water marketing programs are beneficial to the community. Fisher, who MWD records show has collected at least $30 million under the fallowing agreement (not including any upfront payments), acknowledged that the deal has some "unanticipated, negative effects." But he added that keeping land fallow also requires work, and that the influx of money fuels the local economy.
"There are elements of the economy that get a big bump when fallow payments come in," Fisher said. "I get phone calls from the local John Deere dealer wondering when will there be a newer fallow program so they can sell new equipment."
The local water districts and their member farmers have come to rely on all that city money. The MWD has slowly become the largest owner of land in the Palo Verde district, with 22,000 acres and the water rights that come with them. The PVID eventually sued, accusing the MWD of "thinly veiled attempts" to turn local lands into "water farms," according to court documents. The University of Arizona's Glennon said the 2017 lawsuit, which has since been dropped, sprang from fear among the farmers that their cash payments would dry up.
"The gravy train would come to an end," Glennon said.
The MWD is quick to note that as part of the water marketing deals, it has made an effort to support rural towns, including paying $6 million for "community improvement" to the Palo Verde district, which is centered on the town of Blythe.
The town of almost 20,000 people is named for Thomas Blythe, who in 1877 became one of the first to establish rights to Colorado River water. The municipality, hard up against the Colorado River's western bank, is surrounded on three sides by cropland. The farmers here are at the top of the list when it comes to claims on river water. Blythe's 1877 claim yielded upwards of about 450,000 acre-feet a year as long as the Lower Basin still received 7.5 million acre-feet.
But Blythe itself is hurting. Census data estimate the median household income has decreased from about $48,000 in 2012 to less than $40,000 in 2017. Robert Conway, the general manager of Jordan/Central Implement Co., said the town has gone downhill since the fallowing program began.
"There's not a lot of trickle-down economics in Blythe, that's for sure," he said.
For rural communities further down the list of water rights, the growing shortage of Colorado River water has become an existential threat. Arizona's Pinal County, an agricultural community wedged between Phoenix and Tuscon, ranks near the bottom when it comes to claims. Here, farms lay fallow not for money, but simply because there's not enough water.
Paul Orme, general counsel to four Pinal County irrigation districts, said planned reductions in water allotments may force local farmers to leave as much as 40% of their land unfarmed.
"The irrigation districts are going to have to tell their farmers at some point that instead of delivering you 'x' amount of water, we can deliver you 'y'," Orme said. "It will be up to the farmers to determine if they can make that work."
To contact the author of this story: Luke McGrath in New York at lmcgrath18@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: David Rovella at drovella@bloomberg.net
For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com
©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
Microsoft may earn an Affiliate Commission if you purchase something through recommended links in this article.
see that last little blurp there? just how does microsoft KNOW if you purchase something or not?......think about it
your personal info is worth money..especially if you spend money on something...feel the breath on your neck yet?