«--Previous Post | Blog Index | Next Post--»
Changing Climate Requires Change in Water Planning
Guess what? The past is no longer a reliable base on which to plan the future of water management. So says a prominent group of hydrologists and climatologists writing in Science. The group calls for fundamental changes to the science behind water planning and policy.
Managers currently operate on the premise that historical patterns can be counted on to continue. But human-induced changes to Earth's climate are shifting the averages and extremes for rainfall, snowfall, evaporation, and stream flows. These are crucial factors in planning for floods or droughts, in choosing the size of water reservoirs, and in deciding how much water to allocate for residential, industrial and agricultural uses. Even with an aggressive reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, warming will persist and global water patterns will continue to show never-before-seen behavior.
"Our best current estimates are that water availability will increase substantially in northern Eurasia, Alaska, Canada and some tropical regions, and decrease substantially in southern Europe, the Middle East, southern Africa and southwestern North America," said lead author Christopher Milly, a research hydrologist with the U.S. Geological Survey. Drying regions will likely also experience more frequent droughts.
"For agencies like the Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation, this would mean fundamental changes in the way they do business. If you look at plans by those agencies for management of the Columbia River, essentially they've ignored climate change. For instance, until quite recently, the National Marine Fisheries Service didn't even mention what climate change might mean for rehabilitation of fish runs."
The authors propose a planning framework like the Harvard Water Program from the late 1950s and early 1960s, when scientists and engineers hammered out the basis for current water-management policies. A renewed effort in the spirit of the earlier program needs to incorporate shifting averages and variability.
Julia Whitty is Mother Jones' environmental correspondent and 2008 winner of the John Burroughs Medal Award. You can read from her new book, The Fragile Edge, and other writings, here.
Comments
That is fine, we will move to Canada. They can not stop the 100 million Americans. They do not have a military. We want, we take.
You can't move to Canada because I'll be there first, and it will be cold. Too cold for southerners.
I suggest all the Americans stay south and deal with the mess they've made. We'll enjoy the water.
Posted by: Elydog on 02/06/08 at 1:55 PM Respond
ARCHIVE
RECENT COMMENTS
MoJo Nukes Convo: Stewart Brand's Take (3)
Mother Jones staff wrote:
The comment currently attributed to Brandi Adamski was ori...
[more]
MoJo Nukes Convo: Judith Lewis Highlights (15)
G.R.L. Cowan, H2 energy fan 'til ~1996 wrote:
'James' says,
Has anyone REALLY solved the nu...
[more]
FDA Approves Cloned Animals for Store Shelves (9)
barbie oyunları wrote:
It's getting to the point where I feel like if my kids are...
[more]
Pigs Spared Med School Surgeries (3)
RW wrote:
The last set of IRB seminars I sat in on left me with the ...
[more]
Let Them Eat Biofuel (5)
Lars, the Viking wrote:
Rod, look at history, whenever the economy changes there a...
[more]
Growing Up Nuclear: Author Kelly McMasters Tells Her Story (5)
Barry Wallace wrote:
Kelly, No Nukes, et al.
I am disappointed none of you hav...
[more]
Some Corals Survived A-Bombs, Others Didn't (1)
BlueBerry Pick'n wrote:
that is fascinating. I'd never *considered* coral at all....
[more]
Antarctic Sea Ice Increase: Fodder for Global Warming Skeptics? (23)
Ted wrote:
Ed in Mt. You are right. America is the Saudi Arabia of Co...
[more]
Cheaper, More Reliable Solar? (2)
wiseman wrote:
Solar Thermal kicks ass....
[more]
Bush's EPA Pollutes Science (1)
Elydog wrote:
What is the American word for "Lysenko"?
Do we have a fav...
[more]
RSS
Feed
Movable Type 3.33
Posted by: Todd on 02/05/08 at 7:16 PM Respond