The water in the development of the Millennium (MDGs) after 2015 strategy: what are the goals for the future?

This post is about question 3:

Which of the original MDGs targets must be kept, abandoned or added? Assuming that you would like to than the targets after 2015 to include a target still on the water, how would frame you? What would the key progress and success measures?

Firstly, a few words to the proposals below in context. Water and its different uses (including to grow food, to generate prosperity for the daily life and survival of individuals) is essential for all human societies around the world; It is a central element of the ecosystem of the Earth and water for survival is a human right. It therefore deserves special attention in the discussion of the 2015 Millennium development goals.

My proposal is not to create new targets related to water, but instead, we should strengthen and clarify existing instruments.

Make sure first, objective access to more ambitious water safety in the achievement of the MDGs. We must bear in mind that access to safe water is a man good, that is to say, it has a special status compared to some of the other objectives. With 95 million additional people access to drinking water, we could reach the target of 100% by 2030. I think we should be more ambitious and try and achieve the 100% coverage for water already by 2025 or earlier. This objective should be complemented with guarantees that the needs of fresh water (25-50 litres per person, per day, with the quantity to be defined in accordance with the local situation, the climate, etc.) will be provided free of charge to those who cannot afford it.

There may be also necessary to define a regional focus to these efforts. According to a study recently published by the United Nations program for the environment (UNEP), about 51 million people in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - three quarters of the country's population - have no access to clean water, even if the country holds more than half of the Africa water reserves.

In addition, we should look for opportunities to establish quality objectives. On the one hand, to improve the quality of the water supplied (in many places, it has deteriorated) and on the other hand, to improve the type of access (from a village well at faucets in the home). Today, more than a third of what is considered the access to drinking water still comes from public taps, terminals fountains, tube wells, boreholes and dug wells.

Given also speed up urbanization, the goal of sanitation must be set even more ambitious way and implemented more rigorously. The question of access to sanitation is particularly complex and needs further analysis. What should be included in this analysis and in goal, is the maintenance of the existing structures as well as the development of new products.

One the greatest challenges for access to drinking water and sanitation, including the maintenance, renewal and extension, is the cost - with an estimated $ 27 trillion infrastructure spending needed by 2030 all. It is the equivalent of about one-third of global annual GDP today. The key to the success measures should include looking at the side funding too.

Management of water resources: the objectives must be managed, but formulated in a much clearer manner. Discovered the water is already a very serious problem today ' hui. If no action is taken, this may seriously endanger the food security, economic growth (water, energy and industry) and finally also the quantity and quality of drinking water.

For example, in Bangladesh, massive over-pumping of groundwater and resulting from falling water tables have led to an increase in important and dangerous natural arsenic dissolved in the water. Some of my ideas are influenced by my work as a catalyst 2030 water resources group (there are also discovered by watershed estimates), but there are other ways to address the problems. For the Group of water resources, there may be a "result" and "facilitator" to articulate. This takes us into the realm of exploitable multi-stakeholder partnerships with Governments, as those put in place supported by WRG locally.

The water is local, and therefore the global goals must be relevant at the local level. In addition, the goal for a result of better management of the resources is much more difficult to identify and measure progress toward a goal for the first two goals (drinking water, sanitation). My proposal to provide a direction and to reflect on the new lens formula is to line up fresh water withdrawals in the main basins catchment/River sustainable return of supply (natural renewal less environmental flows).

These objectives should be implemented in a dynamic environment, characterized by growing needs of water and in the link between the energy of the water. No doubt, learning in water to date suggests that focusing on the improvement of management of water resources (the "how" rather than the "what") may be the key.

Given this perspective, it will be also important to provide tools that ensure that the measures taken are actually relevant to the gap between the withdrawals and sustainable supply (not pretend, not in piecemeal) and that they are cost-effective.

Please let me know your thoughts.

My answers to other questions about "Water in the Millennium after 2015 strategy" can also be interested:

1 Have been useful original targets in the mind of the Government, companies and civil society with emphasis on the water crisis and its importance in social and economic development overall?

2. What remains to be done before that date to complete the work begun in 2000?

4. What role and responsibility of the private sector to take delivering these objectives?

5. What would you do the Governments?

Climate change and California water – past, present and future

AppId is over the quota AppId is over the quota  Folsom Lake, 1976. California Department of Water Resources

Everyone talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it.
– Charles Dudley Warner, 1897

By Jay R. Lund

Talk of climate change and water in California is fraught with handwringing and delusions. Much discussion borders on alarmist or seems to presume magical abilities to precisely plan and prepare for a future climate.

Here are some observations – based on climate statistics and the physics, economics and history of water in California – that may put some concerns in perspective:

1. Californians have experienced abrupt climate change before. Most immigrants to California in the 1850s experienced abrupt climate change, because they came mostly from humid parts of the United States and Europe with wet summers. It took more than 70 years for this society to develop laws, institutions and infrastructure suited to California’s climate (Pisani, 1982; Kelley 1986). Many newcomers adapted to the foreign climate and prospered, as with the development of irrigated agriculture. Still, the process of climate adaptation has been politically intense and lengthy – and continues to this day.

2. Climate change is not the only game-changer. In the past 100 years, California water management has changed tremendously, driven by changes in population, economic structure, technology, and social and environmental objectives (Hanak et al . 2011). Climate change is just one more big driver – and may not be the biggest one (Vörösmarty 2000).

3. We will not know the extent of climate change until long after the change has occurred. Even in an unchanging climate, it takes several hundred years of data to firmly answer such questions as, “How large is the ‘100-year flood?’” With a changing climate it will take decades to make good statistical estimates, even of changes in annual average precipitation and streamflow (Klemes 2000). And there is no reason to expect the climate to stop changing.

4. Climate change is now. In the last 50 years, California has seen a shifting share of runoff from the spring to the winter (Aguado et al. 1992).  Also, sea level has risen about 1 foot in the last 100 years. Both trends are consistent with climate warming.

5. California is prone to massive climate change. In medieval times, parts of California experienced extreme droughts lasting more than 100 years (Stine 1994).

6. Expanding reservoirs is not necessarily useful for climate change. In a much drier climate, such as California experienced in medieval times, existing reservoirs would never fill and expanded storage capacity would be useless (Harou et al. 2010). Climate warming will reduce seasonal snowpack, but with some changes in reservoir management, existing large reservoirs on most of California’s rivers can largely accommodate seasonal shifts in runoff (Connell-Buck et al. 2011). Climate warming will be somewhat costly, but not catastrophic for most conventional water storage operations (Willis et al. 2010; Madani and Lund 2010). Change in total precipitation is more important than warming alone. The physical, economic and ecological instability of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta probably poses more risk to California’s water supply than climate warming (Lund et al. 2010).

7. Handwringing is not adaptation. Climate change introduces uncertainties, but California water management has always involved immense uncertainties. Effective water management adaptations to climate change emerge from comprehensive analysis of water markets, conjunctive use of ground and surface waters, water conservation, and from re-operation of some reservoirs (Harou et al. 2010; Tanaka et al. 2006; Medellin et al. 2008; Hanak and Lund 2011; Ragatz 2012).

The key to water management adaptation for climate change is mostly good management. But, as always with California water, good management will involve controversy and require both political and technical leadership (Crawford and Herrick 2006)..

Jay Lund is the Ray B. Krone Professor of Environmental Engineering at UC Davis and director of the university’s Center for Watershed Sciences.

Sources and further reading
Aguado, E., D. Cayan, L. Riddle, and M. Roos (1992), “Climate fluctuations and the timing of West Coast streamflow,” Journal of Climate, Vol. 5, December, pp. 1468-1483.

Connell-Buck, C.R., J. Medellín-Azuara, J.R. Lund, and K. Madani, “Adapting California’s water system to warm vs. dry climates,” Climatic Change, Vol. 109 (Suppl 1), pp. S133–S149, 2011.

Crawford, J. and J. Herrick, “Intelligent Engineering: William Hammond Hall and the state engineering department,” Sacramento History, Journal of the Sacramento County Historical Society, Vol. VI , No. 1-4, 2006.

Hanak, E., J. Lund, A. Dinar, B. Gray, R. Howitt, J. Mount, P. Moyle, and B. Thompson, Managing California’s Water: From Conflict to Reconciliation, Public Policy Institute of California, San Francisco, CA, 500 pp., February 2011.

Harou, J.J., J. Medellin-Azuara, T. Zhu, S.K. Tanaka, J.R. Lund, S. Stine, M.A. Olivares, and M.W. Jenkins, “Economic consequences of optimized water management for a prolonged, severe drought in California,” Water Resources Research, doi:10.1029/2008WR007681, Vol. 46, 2010

Kelley, R. 1998. Battling the Inland Sea. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Klemes V. 2000. “Design Implications of Climate Change.” In Common Sense and Other Heresies: Selected Papers on Hydrology and Water Resources Engineering, ed. V. Klemes (Cambridge, Ontario: Canadian Water Resources Association).

Lund, J., E. Hanak, W. Fleenor, W. Bennett, R. Howitt, J. Mount, and P. Moyle, Comparing Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, February 2010.

Madani, K. and J.R. Lund, “Estimated Impacts of Climate Warming on California’s High Elevation Hydropower,” Climatic Change, Vol. 102, No. 3-4, pp. 521–538, October 2010.

Medellin-Azuara, J., J.J. Harou, M.A. Olivares, K. Madani-Larijani, J.R. Lund, R.E. Howitt, S.K. Tanaka, M.W. Jenkins, and T. Zhu, “Adaptability and Adaptations of California’s Water Supply System to Dry Climate Warming,” Climatic Change, Vol. 87, Sup.1, March, pp. S75-S90, 2008.

Pisani, D. 1984. From the Family Farm to Agribusiness: The Irrigation Crusade in California, 1850–1931. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Roos, M. (2003), The Effects of Global Climate Change on California Water Resources, A report to the California Energy Commission’s Public Interest Energy Research Program (PIER), Sacramento, September 2002.

Stine, S. 1994. “Extreme and Persistent Drought in California and Patagonia during Medieval Time.” Nature 369: 546–49.

Tanaka, S.K., T. Zhu, J.R. Lund, R.E. Howitt, M.W. Jenkins, M.A. Pulido, M. Tauber, R.S. Ritzema and I.C. Ferreira, “Climate Warming and Water Management Adaptation for California,” Climatic Change, Vol. 76, No. 3-4, pp. 361-387, June 2006.

Vörösmarty, C. J., P. Green, J. Salisbury, and R. B. Lammers. 2000. “Global Water Resources: Vulnerability from Climate Change and Population Growth.” Science 289(5477): 284–88.

Willis, A.D., J.R. Lund, E. S. Townsley, and Beth Faber, “Climate Change and Flood Operations in the Sacramento Basin, California,” San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, Vol. 9, No. 2, 18 pp., July, 2011.

Notice
This winter, the UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences is presenting a weekly speaker series on California water policy. The public is welcome to attend.

Schedule of speakers

Videos of talks available on iTunes and YouTube

Climate change and California water - past, present and future

Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 2, position 8505. Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 9135. Folsom Lake, 1976. California Department of Water Resources

Everyone talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it.
– Charles Dudley Warner, 1897

By Jay R. Lund

Talk of climate change and water in California is fraught with handwringing and delusions. Much discussion borders on alarmist or seems to presume magical abilities to precisely plan and prepare for a future climate.

Here are some observations – based on climate statistics and the physics, economics and history of water in California – that may put some concerns in perspective:

1. Californians have experienced abrupt climate change before. Most immigrants to California in the 1850s experienced abrupt climate change, because they came mostly from humid parts of the United States and Europe with wet summers. It took more than 70 years for this society to develop laws, institutions and infrastructure suited to California’s climate (Pisani, 1982; Kelley 1986). Many newcomers adapted to the foreign climate and prospered, as with the development of irrigated agriculture. Still, the process of climate adaptation has been politically intense and lengthy – and continues to this day.

2. Climate change is not the only game-changer. In the past 100 years, California water management has changed tremendously, driven by changes in population, economic structure, technology, and social and environmental objectives (Hanak et al . 2011). Climate change is just one more big driver – and may not be the biggest one (Vörösmarty 2000).

3. We will not know the extent of climate change until long after the change has occurred. Even in an unchanging climate, it takes several hundred years of data to firmly answer such questions as, “How large is the ‘100-year flood?’” With a changing climate it will take decades to make good statistical estimates, even of changes in annual average precipitation and streamflow (Klemes 2000). And there is no reason to expect the climate to stop changing.

4. Climate change is now. In the last 50 years, California has seen a shifting share of runoff from the spring to the winter (Aguado et al. 1992).  Also, sea level has risen about 1 foot in the last 100 years. Both trends are consistent with climate warming.

5. California is prone to massive climate change. In medieval times, parts of California experienced extreme droughts lasting more than 100 years (Stine 1994).

6. Expanding reservoirs is not necessarily useful for climate change. In a much drier climate, such as California experienced in medieval times, existing reservoirs would never fill and expanded storage capacity would be useless (Harou et al. 2010). Climate warming will reduce seasonal snowpack, but with some changes in reservoir management, existing large reservoirs on most of California’s rivers can largely accommodate seasonal shifts in runoff (Connell-Buck et al. 2011). Climate warming will be somewhat costly, but not catastrophic for most conventional water storage operations (Willis et al. 2010; Madani and Lund 2010). Change in total precipitation is more important than warming alone. The physical, economic and ecological instability of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta probably poses more risk to California’s water supply than climate warming (Lund et al. 2010).

7. Handwringing is not adaptation. Climate change introduces uncertainties, but California water management has always involved immense uncertainties. Effective water management adaptations to climate change emerge from comprehensive analysis of water markets, conjunctive use of ground and surface waters, water conservation, and from re-operation of some reservoirs (Harou et al. 2010; Tanaka et al. 2006; Medellin et al. 2008; Hanak and Lund 2011; Ragatz 2012).

The key to water management adaptation for climate change is mostly good management. But, as always with California water, good management will involve controversy and require both political and technical leadership (Crawford and Herrick 2006)..

Jay Lund is the Ray B. Krone Professor of Environmental Engineering at UC Davis and director of the university’s Center for Watershed Sciences.

Sources and further reading
Aguado, E., D. Cayan, L. Riddle, and M. Roos (1992), “Climate fluctuations and the timing of West Coast streamflow,” Journal of Climate, Vol. 5, December, pp. 1468-1483.

Connell-Buck, C.R., J. Medellín-Azuara, J.R. Lund, and K. Madani, “Adapting California’s water system to warm vs. dry climates,” Climatic Change, Vol. 109 (Suppl 1), pp. S133–S149, 2011.

Crawford, J. and J. Herrick, “Intelligent Engineering: William Hammond Hall and the state engineering department,” Sacramento History, Journal of the Sacramento County Historical Society, Vol. VI , No. 1-4, 2006.

Hanak, E., J. Lund, A. Dinar, B. Gray, R. Howitt, J. Mount, P. Moyle, and B. Thompson, Managing California’s Water: From Conflict to Reconciliation, Public Policy Institute of California, San Francisco, CA, 500 pp., February 2011.

Harou, J.J., J. Medellin-Azuara, T. Zhu, S.K. Tanaka, J.R. Lund, S. Stine, M.A. Olivares, and M.W. Jenkins, “Economic consequences of optimized water management for a prolonged, severe drought in California,” Water Resources Research, doi:10.1029/2008WR007681, Vol. 46, 2010

Kelley, R. 1998. Battling the Inland Sea. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Klemes V. 2000. “Design Implications of Climate Change.” In Common Sense and Other Heresies: Selected Papers on Hydrology and Water Resources Engineering, ed. V. Klemes (Cambridge, Ontario: Canadian Water Resources Association).

Lund, J., E. Hanak, W. Fleenor, W. Bennett, R. Howitt, J. Mount, and P. Moyle, Comparing Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, February 2010.

Madani, K. and J.R. Lund, “Estimated Impacts of Climate Warming on California’s High Elevation Hydropower,” Climatic Change, Vol. 102, No. 3-4, pp. 521–538, October 2010.

Medellin-Azuara, J., J.J. Harou, M.A. Olivares, K. Madani-Larijani, J.R. Lund, R.E. Howitt, S.K. Tanaka, M.W. Jenkins, and T. Zhu, “Adaptability and Adaptations of California’s Water Supply System to Dry Climate Warming,” Climatic Change, Vol. 87, Sup.1, March, pp. S75-S90, 2008.

Pisani, D. 1984. From the Family Farm to Agribusiness: The Irrigation Crusade in California, 1850–1931. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Roos, M. (2003), The Effects of Global Climate Change on California Water Resources, A report to the California Energy Commission’s Public Interest Energy Research Program (PIER), Sacramento, September 2002.

Stine, S. 1994. “Extreme and Persistent Drought in California and Patagonia during Medieval Time.” Nature 369: 546–49.

Tanaka, S.K., T. Zhu, J.R. Lund, R.E. Howitt, M.W. Jenkins, M.A. Pulido, M. Tauber, R.S. Ritzema and I.C. Ferreira, “Climate Warming and Water Management Adaptation for California,” Climatic Change, Vol. 76, No. 3-4, pp. 361-387, June 2006.

Vörösmarty, C. J., P. Green, J. Salisbury, and R. B. Lammers. 2000. “Global Water Resources: Vulnerability from Climate Change and Population Growth.” Science 289(5477): 284–88.

Willis, A.D., J.R. Lund, E. S. Townsley, and Beth Faber, “Climate Change and Flood Operations in the Sacramento Basin, California,” San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, Vol. 9, No. 2, 18 pp., July, 2011.

Notice
This winter, the UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences is presenting a weekly speaker series on California water policy. The public is welcome to attend.

Videos of talks available on iTunes and YouTube

Climate change and California water - past, present and future

Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 2, position 8505. Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 9135. Folsom Lake, 1976. California Department of Water Resources

Everyone talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it.
– Charles Dudley Warner, 1897

By Jay R. Lund

Talk of climate change and water in California is fraught with handwringing and delusions. Much discussion borders on alarmist or seems to presume magical abilities to precisely plan and prepare for a future climate.

Here are some observations – based on climate statistics and the physics, economics and history of water in California – that may put some concerns in perspective:

1. Californians have experienced abrupt climate change before. Most immigrants to California in the 1850s experienced abrupt climate change, because they came mostly from humid parts of the United States and Europe with wet summers. It took more than 70 years for this society to develop laws, institutions and infrastructure suited to California’s climate (Pisani, 1982; Kelley 1986). Many newcomers adapted to the foreign climate and prospered, as with the development of irrigated agriculture. Still, the process of climate adaptation has been politically intense and lengthy – and continues to this day.

2. Climate change is not the only game-changer. In the past 100 years, California water management has changed tremendously, driven by changes in population, economic structure, technology, and social and environmental objectives (Hanak et al . 2011). Climate change is just one more big driver – and may not be the biggest one (Vörösmarty 2000).

3. We will not know the extent of climate change until long after the change has occurred. Even in an unchanging climate, it takes several hundred years of data to firmly answer such questions as, “How large is the ‘100-year flood?’” With a changing climate it will take decades to make good statistical estimates, even of changes in annual average precipitation and streamflow (Klemes 2000). And there is no reason to expect the climate to stop changing.

4. Climate change is now. In the last 50 years, California has seen a shifting share of runoff from the spring to the winter (Aguado et al. 1992).  Also, sea level has risen about 1 foot in the last 100 years. Both trends are consistent with climate warming.

5. California is prone to massive climate change. In medieval times, parts of California experienced extreme droughts lasting more than 100 years (Stine 1994).

6. Expanding reservoirs is not necessarily useful for climate change. In a much drier climate, such as California experienced in medieval times, existing reservoirs would never fill and expanded storage capacity would be useless (Harou et al. 2010). Climate warming will reduce seasonal snowpack, but with some changes in reservoir management, existing large reservoirs on most of California’s rivers can largely accommodate seasonal shifts in runoff (Connell-Buck et al. 2011). Climate warming will be somewhat costly, but not catastrophic for most conventional water storage operations (Willis et al. 2010; Madani and Lund 2010). Change in total precipitation is more important than warming alone. The physical, economic and ecological instability of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta probably poses more risk to California’s water supply than climate warming (Lund et al. 2010).

7. Handwringing is not adaptation. Climate change introduces uncertainties, but California water management has always involved immense uncertainties. Effective water management adaptations to climate change emerge from comprehensive analysis of water markets, conjunctive use of ground and surface waters, water conservation, and from re-operation of some reservoirs (Harou et al. 2010; Tanaka et al. 2006; Medellin et al. 2008; Hanak and Lund 2011; Ragatz 2012).

The key to water management adaptation for climate change is mostly good management. But, as always with California water, good management will involve controversy and require both political and technical leadership (Crawford and Herrick 2006)..

Jay Lund is the Ray B. Krone Professor of Environmental Engineering at UC Davis and director of the university’s Center for Watershed Sciences.

Sources and further reading
Aguado, E., D. Cayan, L. Riddle, and M. Roos (1992), “Climate fluctuations and the timing of West Coast streamflow,” Journal of Climate, Vol. 5, December, pp. 1468-1483.

Connell-Buck, C.R., J. Medellín-Azuara, J.R. Lund, and K. Madani, “Adapting California’s water system to warm vs. dry climates,” Climatic Change, Vol. 109 (Suppl 1), pp. S133–S149, 2011.

Crawford, J. and J. Herrick, “Intelligent Engineering: William Hammond Hall and the state engineering department,” Sacramento History, Journal of the Sacramento County Historical Society, Vol. VI , No. 1-4, 2006.

Hanak, E., J. Lund, A. Dinar, B. Gray, R. Howitt, J. Mount, P. Moyle, and B. Thompson, Managing California’s Water: From Conflict to Reconciliation, Public Policy Institute of California, San Francisco, CA, 500 pp., February 2011.

Harou, J.J., J. Medellin-Azuara, T. Zhu, S.K. Tanaka, J.R. Lund, S. Stine, M.A. Olivares, and M.W. Jenkins, “Economic consequences of optimized water management for a prolonged, severe drought in California,” Water Resources Research, doi:10.1029/2008WR007681, Vol. 46, 2010

Kelley, R. 1998. Battling the Inland Sea. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Klemes V. 2000. “Design Implications of Climate Change.” In Common Sense and Other Heresies: Selected Papers on Hydrology and Water Resources Engineering, ed. V. Klemes (Cambridge, Ontario: Canadian Water Resources Association).

Lund, J., E. Hanak, W. Fleenor, W. Bennett, R. Howitt, J. Mount, and P. Moyle, Comparing Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, February 2010.

Madani, K. and J.R. Lund, “Estimated Impacts of Climate Warming on California’s High Elevation Hydropower,” Climatic Change, Vol. 102, No. 3-4, pp. 521–538, October 2010.

Medellin-Azuara, J., J.J. Harou, M.A. Olivares, K. Madani-Larijani, J.R. Lund, R.E. Howitt, S.K. Tanaka, M.W. Jenkins, and T. Zhu, “Adaptability and Adaptations of California’s Water Supply System to Dry Climate Warming,” Climatic Change, Vol. 87, Sup.1, March, pp. S75-S90, 2008.

Pisani, D. 1984. From the Family Farm to Agribusiness: The Irrigation Crusade in California, 1850–1931. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Roos, M. (2003), The Effects of Global Climate Change on California Water Resources, A report to the California Energy Commission’s Public Interest Energy Research Program (PIER), Sacramento, September 2002.

Stine, S. 1994. “Extreme and Persistent Drought in California and Patagonia during Medieval Time.” Nature 369: 546–49.

Tanaka, S.K., T. Zhu, J.R. Lund, R.E. Howitt, M.W. Jenkins, M.A. Pulido, M. Tauber, R.S. Ritzema and I.C. Ferreira, “Climate Warming and Water Management Adaptation for California,” Climatic Change, Vol. 76, No. 3-4, pp. 361-387, June 2006.

Vörösmarty, C. J., P. Green, J. Salisbury, and R. B. Lammers. 2000. “Global Water Resources: Vulnerability from Climate Change and Population Growth.” Science 289(5477): 284–88.

Willis, A.D., J.R. Lund, E. S. Townsley, and Beth Faber, “Climate Change and Flood Operations in the Sacramento Basin, California,” San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, Vol. 9, No. 2, 18 pp., July, 2011.

Notice
This winter, the UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences is presenting a weekly speaker series on California water policy. The public is welcome to attend.

Videos of talks available on iTunes and YouTube