How much Delta water is pumped?

C

Comfortably Numb

Member
exMember
Joined
Jan 9, 2008
RO Number
29205
Messages
283
Anyone know just how much of the Delta water is "conveyed" away Vs how much stays in the rivers?

Jim
 
A TV show recently reported that 5,000,000 gallons per sec were pump from the delta to the Ca Aquaduct.
 
But that is not the only place water is pumped! Sacramento has a pumping station north of the I Street Bridge. A new one went online there 2-3 yrs ago and the marinas downstream to about Courtland were in the mud! Now they time the pumping for high tide to make it more acceptable.

Then EBMUD pumps water from Comanche Lake, bypassing the Moke/San Joaquin completely. And there is the "other" aquaduct which parallels the CA Aquaduct [I forget its name]. It goes on and on and on.....
 
5 million gallons per second out of the delta? I think that's a typo.

According to the Bureau of Reclamation, the Hoover Dam's maximum discharge capacity is "about" 500,000 cubic feet per second, which calculates out to 3.7 million gallons per second. http://www.usbr.gov/lc/hooverdam/faqs/tunlfaqs.html

I've heard it said that the Golden Gate flows 4.5M gallons per second, but I can't find a source for that right this moment.
 
Do those Golden Gate cfm figures relate to total water flow? Remember that this water is under tidal influence and most water that passes under the Golden Gate Bridge has passed there several times before on previous tides. Total cfm here does not equal fresh water leaving the bay.

We are kind of programmed to think that the California Delta is a discrete system that has X amount of water in the rivers and sloughs and Y amount of water that gets pumped out.

That's the way water users want us to think. It makes this region's water ungovernable and easy prey for commercial interests.

The Delta does not exist as a water system by itself. The Delta is part of a large watershed that begins on the east side of the Sierra Nevada Mountains near Yreka to as far south as Tejon Pass on the Grapevine. Water in this watershed is collected in tributaries of two major river systems: the Sacramento and the San Joaquin rivers: which meet in the California Delta and flow into the Pacific Ocean at the Golden Gate.

Water that is diverted anywhere from the system upstream of San Francisco Bay will affect the California Delta. It not just the California Aqueduct or the South Delta pumps.

The best way I have of looking at it is to look at the two rivers. Of the Sacramento River system: about 50% is diverted (never reaches SF Bay). Of the San Joaquin River: about 97% is diverted.

There are two big water projects that rely exclusively on water from the Sacramento and San Joaquin watershed.

The 2008 allocation for the State Water Project (SWP, administered by DWR) is 1,457,283 acre feet. As an example of how much water 1,457,283 acre feet represents: that's a yearly average of about 1.3 billion gallons per day. SWP includes the California Aqueduct. SWP 2008 allocation is about 35% of historic yearly demand. In 2006, SWP allocated a whopping 4.13 million acre feet or 100% of contract demand.

Central Valley Project (CVP, administered by Bureau of Reclamation) traditionally delivers 7 million acre feet per year. CVP expects to deliver about 45% of its agricultural allocations this year and about 75% of its urban allocations.

Some other trivia:

California Aqueduct capacity at the SWP Banks pumping plant is 10,600 cfs. That's up to 6.8 billion gallons per day.

Max capacity at CVP Tracy pumps is 4,602 cfs.
 
Thanks for that info and the stats yzer! It is all mind boggling. This is what should get folks attention:

"Of the Sacramento River system: about 50% is diverted (never reaches SF Bay). Of the San Joaquin River: about 97% is diverted."
 
Great input, and Holy SH**!
Does anyone know how to post a pic? There is a great salinity testing sequence done by the state in 1994 at

http://modeling.water.ca.gov/delta/reports/annrpt/2002/2002Ch10.pdf

Fig 10.5 shows the Sac total flow, less pumping, and what makes it through the river. If someone could post the table here, it will be a great point of reference as to how much water is now being taken Vs 14 years back. Certainly a real help in understanding WHY the delta ecosystem is in such a world of hurt. The plot is over several months and levels change, but it looks to be about 7000 CFS average. Converting to gallons, 7.48 Gal per foot, means 52,360 Gallons pes second.

These numbers are mindboggling! yzer - you cease to amaze me in your understanding of these issues!

Jim
 
A few months ago the Delta Blue Ribbon Task Force wanted answers to some of these same salinity questions and asked CALFED Science to discuss the results of state-of-the-art of Delta water modeling.

At this time modeling is available that will tell water planners nearly everything about Delta hydrology: where and how much water runs through the Delta system under conditions including seasons, tides and export facilities. One glaring exception is the effect of wind on hydrological models. No modeling is currently available for that. Remember (wind-driven) fetch almost caused a disaster in the New Year’s storms of 2006. A lot of water got released into the Delta during those storms and fetch caused a surprise overtopping of several levees. Special modeling programs can be run to simulate hydrology changes with new salinity gates and canals, but with less than complete reliability. For example, the only way to know how a salinity gate on Three-mile Slough will affect the Delta is to actually build a pilot version of the gate, operate it for a couple of years on the Delta and evaluate the data.

All in all, the hydrology modeling is very good. Salinity modeling is good enough for a rough estimate but is not reliable enough at this time to make informed decisions about how any Delta changes will affect salinity.

Modeling for pelagic species is almost non-existent. Pelagic species are the critters that live in the water. The life cycles, migrations and effects of flow changes on pelagic species are mostly unknown and not modeled. Only years of research will yield up these answers and some useful modeling.

All Delta scientists are now collaborating on the choice of models currently in use. Models are more reliable at some functions and less so with others. Scientists involved in all aspects of Delta research recognize the need to agree on which models will be used to provide the most reliable results for specific tasks before they can make recommendations for further engineering in the Delta.

What does this mean for the proposed "solutions" to Delta problems like dual and isolated conveyance projects? It means that there is no science available at this time to reliably predict their effects on Delta water quality and environmental issues. If we start an aggressive program of Delta research and experimentation we may have many of those answers fifteen years from now. Some of that experimentation will include things like salinity gate pilot programs which may cause us boaters some inconvenience and test reductions of water exports that water users won't enjoy.
 
yzer,

If you don't mind me asking, what is your background? I tried to ask with a PM but could not get it to work!

Jim thinfilmguyrb2@gr5thotmail.com
 
I'm not in the water business or a scientist. I do have some science background but I'm mostly just a citizen interested in Delta water and enviromental issues.
 
Hey, Jim, the "at" symbol is modified to rb2@gr5t by the website. This helps to eliminate email address harvesting by spammers. So spelling it out as you did circumvents that and still prevents address harvesting.

The PM and email functions are only available to those ROs who have a picture of an anchor under their RO #. To get an anchor, go to the top of the page and click on "Help Support This Forum". Are you enjoying the faster loading of pages on this website? The server upgrade was paid for from funds Les received from anchored ROs.......

Cheers, Liz
 
Thanks Liz - I will sign up and pay my way! It's a great group.

When I posted the topic, I was trying to get a feeling for the change in water use (conveyed) from that 1994 level I found, but is hard to identify - kind of apples to oranges. Or possibly, but very, very unlikley, I might being doing some of my math wrong because things don't add up. What a surprise...

In retrospect, pulling what appears to be 75% or more of the fresh water out of the Delta's fresh water make-up, and not destroying the ecosystem completely, is a testament to science and man's ability to balance economic forces and nature. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears we may have gone too far in favor of economics, and the ecosystem is paying the price.

I am very impressed with the level of science and money spent to research this issue, but on the flip side, how hard it is to get straight answers. Seems to me this is a pretty basic piece of the puzzle - how much water is taken Vs what is left, and how it has changed over the years - is something that should be pretty obvious as a data point. Millions, if not more are spent in reasearching cures, but not much is said about the cause. It's like a team of the very best surgeons and doctors working on a patient, doing everything medical science (in California none the less!) has to offer and loosing ground. Behind the curtain, at the other end of the operating table, is a guy from blood services quietly pumping pint after pint of blood from the patient. At some point, they have to stop the draining blood and give the guy a fighting chance - no amount of science can save the guy until that happens.

Am I missing something, being too cynical, or is this a reasonable analogy? Again, I am new here and want to help so tell me if I am all wet.

I'm about an hour away from heading down to my boat - going to put my 27' in the water at Tower Park and clean it up for a showing on Sunday. If anyone is around, the boat is named Heatseeker - stop and say hello.

Thanks.

Jim
 
Jim, I think you made a great analogy! The reason, IMHO, you can't find out the total amount being pulled from the Delta is political. All of the water gurus such as CA Water Resources, EBMUD, So Cal Water Mgt Boards, etc, etc, is because they deliberately hide the details. Tis one big smoke screen! Add to that that there are so many different sources drawing water at various points before and in the Delta, and it is quite difficult to get a valid number. However, the result is that the Delta ecosystem is dying. Period.

Good luck showing your boat. Hope it sells! BTW, there is a free for sale forum on this site. http://www.boatered.com/forum/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=8
 
Here you go, Jim.

This graph shows combined SWP/CVP water exports from the Delta region alone. Note that 1994 was not anything like a typical water year. 1994 was a drought watch year: precipitation for water year 1993-94 was 65% of normal and water storage facilities were still recovering from the 1987-92 drought.

This graph is a couple of years old but it's still pretty good.

SWP-CVPexports.jpg


Compared to the effort we make on dams and ditches not much time (or money) is devoted to gaining an understanding of Delta ecosystems, many of which have been in a state of steady decline since people started building levees and draining the marshes in the 1850's. The San Joaquin was ruined in the 1940's. By the late 1950's the situation was getting so bad that all commercial fishing was banned in the Delta. Besides pumping out most of the fresh water most of the natual tree-lined banks were ripped out and covered with riprap. Those old dirt banks and trees did a lot: everything from bird habitat to nurseries for fish.

Its up to us to decide if we want to learn about what is left of the native estuary and try to keep some of it alive for future generations.

Hope you have a fine weekend. I plan to be out there finishing a boat project this weekend.
 
yzer, does this graph include water which is pulled out upstream of the Delta, such EBMUD and Sacramento? If let to nature, all of that water would flow through the Delta too!
 
No, Jim only wanted the exports from the Delta. That graph shows water taken only from the Delta region by SWP and CVP. That's the CVP pumping plant at Tracy and the SWP pumps at Barker Slough and the Banks plant.

The graph does not show water taken from the Delta by local agencies (they are not considered exporters) or agencies pulling water from outside of the Delta region. There are many including East Bay MUD, Contra Costa, Stockton, Sacramento, S.F., etc.

I'd like to see figures showing the rest of the water use. I'd also like to see yearly run-off, total watershed precipitaion and water storage figures. Except during the rain hardly any water runs through the Delta that isn't controlled somewhere at a SWP or Reclamation facility.
 
Me too yzer! That would give a truer picture of what effects the Delta ecosystem.
 
Hi guys, I'm back. Had a great weekend in my "little" boat - I had forgotten what it was like to go fast. I am pretty sure it is sold - actually have a couple of buyers. We took off from Tower Park, ran up to Oxbow for a great dock party, left Sat morning to the Riverboat, went for lunch at the Lighthouse but it was so rough we did not stay, and then headed back to Tower Park for lunch. A good day despite the wind!

yzer - once again you amaze me. What an interesting plot, and a suprise to me. I would have expected a gradual increase over time, but it appears that the levels were high even back in the 90's - I did not know that. I guess we will need to find the total water available for each year to understand what water still flows, specificallly back in the late 80's and early 90's there could have been really high flows available to allow that much to be taken and not dramatically change the water still flowing into the Delta. And like Flutterby said, there are many other sources of water siphoning not accounted for in those numbers.

I am humbled again by you folks and you understanding of the issues. I had no idea that this goes back to the 40's and earlier - I thought it was just the past dozen or so years that things "changed", and people started to really siphon more water, but I'm way off.

I've never really fought for a cause at this level, and it is overwhelming how politics - politicians - will allow these things to happen. This is a true David and Golaith - but it seems to me the little guy one, right? So what do you think is the best way to help?

By the way Flutter,, I contributed to the site but did not get an anchor by my name - any idea if that is normal? I want my Anchor!

Thank you all for the education.

Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top