Southern Nevada growth and water realities

To the editor:

The Review-Journal’s Henry Brean has been following the water-supply events with comprehensive reporting. His reports have been in-depth and factual, with minimal interpretations.

Mr. Brean needs to be cautious, however, because for years Review-Journal editorials and commentaries have questioned the science of global warming, created by those pesky environmentalists and Al Gore.

But we are apparently beginning to harvest the fruits of global warming that are becoming quite real and frequent at a global scale. Every year, greenhouse gas emissions are increasing and atmospheric concentrations are also rising.

At a global scale, weather patterns are becoming markedly altered in many regions, often for the worse – just as forecasted by many modeling studies on the potential impacts from warming.

And, at a more local scale, Las Vegas has not entirely escaped – almost like a slow motion playback of a horrific accident developing, each water-supply story is, frame by frame, leading up to a crash. Except these are in real time, so the “accident” is yet to play out because warmer translates to generally less runoff from the major catchment basins.

The Southern Nevada Water Authority was right on target to recommend and act on a “third straw.” But a “third straw” insurance policy is useful only if it’s operational. And this year’s Colorado River flows are not very encouraging as to how soon it will be needed. If next year’s Colorado River runoff is also drought-like, an intake design “B” had better be established and ready for implementation, even if of a temporary nature, perhaps, jury-rigged to the current intake facilities.

Las Vegas has benefited from enough relatively low- cost Colorado River water (with return flow credits) to meet growing water demands for continual growth since the 1970s. Now costs have gone up as we attempt to keep the primary supply flowing. The next large source targeted by water authority will prove to be super pricey if it’s added on – and there is a big problem.

The new source – from rural Nevada via long pipelines and new well fields – presents major upfront investments in infrastructure. Existing water users would need to cover the upfront billions for new infrastructure that is required before any of the new water source can be delivered to the Valley, whether to support increased water demands, or to augment reductions in Nevada’s Colorado River allotment.

Have we reached a limit to growth? If existing water users – who have already choked on resulting new water rates – have any say, maybe so.

MARTIN MOFFIN

LAS VEGAS