[Senate Hearing 118-344]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 118-344
DROUGHTS, DOLLARS, AND DECISIONS:
WATER SCARCITY IN A
CHANGING CLIMATE
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
May 22, 2024
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Budget
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
55-998 WASHINGTON : 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island, Chairman
PATTY MURRAY, Washington CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa
RON WYDEN, Oregon MIKE CRAPO, Idaho
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
MARK R. WARNER, Virginia MITT ROMNEY, Utah
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas
TIM KAINE, Virginia MIKE BRAUN, Indiana
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico RICK SCOTT, Florida
ALEX PADILLA, California MIKE LEE, Utah
Dan Dudis, Majority Staff Director
Kolan Davis, Republican Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Mallory B. Nersesian, Chief Clerk
Alexander C. Scioscia, Hearing Clerk
C O N T E N T S
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 22, 2024
OPENING STATEMENTS BY COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Page
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Chairman............................. 1
Prepared Statement........................................... 30
Senator Charles E. Grassley...................................... 3
Prepared Statement........................................... 32
STATEMENTS BY COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Senator Ben Ray Lujan............................................ 19
Senator Chris Van Hollen......................................... 20
Senator Mitt Romney.............................................. 23
Senator Roger Marshall........................................... 25
Senator Alex Padilla............................................. 26
WITNESSES
Hon. Tanya Trujillo, Water Policy Advisor to the Governor, and
Deputy State Engineer, New Mexico.............................. 7
Prepared Statement........................................... 34
Mr. Adel Hagekhalil, General Manager and Chief Executive Officer,
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California......... 8
Prepared Statement........................................... 42
Mr. Kevin Richards, Farmer and Managing Partner, RB Ag........... 10
Prepared Statement........................................... 49
Dr. Michael Castellano, William T. Frankenberger Professorship in
Soil Science, Iowa State University............................ 12
Prepared Statement........................................... 52
Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr., Professor, College of Arts and Sciences,
University of Colorado Boulder................................. 14
Prepared Statement........................................... 60
APPENDIX
Responses to post-hearing questions for the Record
Hon. Trujillo................................................ 73
Dr. Castellano............................................... 75
Dr. Pielke................................................... 78
Statement submitted for the Record by Senator Charles E. Grassley 81
Document submitted for the Record by Mr. Kevin Richards.......... 83
Statement submitted for the Record by WateReuse Association...... 215
DROUGHTS, DOLLARS, AND DECISIONS:
WATER SCARCITY IN A
CHANGING CLIMATE
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 22, 2024
Committee on the Budget,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:30 a.m., in
the Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Sheldon Whitehouse,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Whitehouse, Merkley, Van Hollen, Lujan,
Padilla, Grassley, Romney, Marshall, Braun and R. Scott.
Also present: Democratic staff: Dan Dudis, Majority Staff
Director; Matthew Bolden, Climate Policy Advisory; Emily
Caffrey, American Nuclear Society Fellow.
Republican staff: Chris Conlin, Deputy Staff Director;
Krisann Pearce, General Counsel; Jordan Pakula, Professional
Staff Member; Ryan Flynn, Budget Analyst.
Witnesses:
The Honorable Tanya Trujillo, Water Policy Advisor to the
Governor, and Deputy State Engineer, New Mexico
Mr. Adel Hagekhalil, General Manager and Chief Executive
Officer, The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
Mr. Kevin Richards, Farmer and Managing Partner, RB Ag
Dr. Michael Castellano, William T. Frankenberger
Professorship in Soil Science, Iowa State University
Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr., Professor, College of Arts and
Sciences, University of Colorado Boulder
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN WHITEHOUSE \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Prepared statement of Chairman Whitehouse appears in the
appendix on page 30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chairman Whitehouse. Good morning, everyone. I'll call this
hearing of the Senate Budget Committee to order. Let me begin
by expressing condolences to my distinguished ranking member
for the loss of life in Iowa when a tornado that was described
as apocalyptic touched down and caused considerable death and
destruction. Today we have a different topic----
Senator Grassley. Thank you.
Chairman Whitehouse. Yes, sir. We address how climate
change is making droughts more severe which magnifies so many
of the other risks that we've talked about in this committee.
Climate change exacerbates the severity of droughts. Major
agricultural regions like the American West and the
Mediterranean are seeing less precipitation.
Many places around the world are whiplashed by wild swings
between drought and deluge. Almost everywhere is experiencing
increased heat. The most straightforward of these is increased
heat.
Hotter weather means higher demand for water, to drink, to
support agriculture, even to cool power plants. But without
cold winters, less snowfall accumulates in mountains and
there's less runoff into streams, rivers, and watersheds during
the summer months. Snowpack across the American West is down
almost 25 percent since 1955.
As temperatures go up, the pace of water returning to the
atmosphere from soils and plants also goes up. Global warming
is turbocharging evaporation and transpiration. Without water,
the agricultural industry suffers. Manufacturing slows.
Communities empty out. And real estate values can plummet.
The costs of running out of water can be existential. Since
1980, 31 droughts have cost the nation, an average of 11.6
billion dollars each in physical and economic damages notably
not counting loss of life and other nonmonetary harms. But the
true costs of drought are more systemic and amplify dangers
this committee has heard about.
Hot, dry weather increases the risk of wildfires. These
fires along with climate-driven flood risks are creating an
insurance crisis that The Economist says could cause a 25
trillion-dollar hit to global property values. This was their
cover article two issues ago, and I commend to anyone who is
interested.
Worsening droughts threaten national security. Droughts
have contributed to conflict and instability in Syria,
Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. The United Nations
estimates the 1.84 billion people worldwide, nearly a quarter
of humanity, lived under drought conditions between 2022 and
2023, the vast majority in low- and middle-income countries.
Droughts also jeopardize some of the world's most important
waterways and reduce food production, raising prices in grocery
aisles.
Years of drought depleted the Panama Canal, cutting ship
traffic in this major thoroughfare by nearly 40 percent. An
intense Mediterranean drought caused global olive oil prices to
rise 130 percent in 2023. The former executive director of
agri-giant Cargill warned that as a result of climate change,
and I'm quoting him here, ``U.S. production of corn, soybeans,
wheat, and cotton could decline by 14 percent by mid-century
and by as much as 42 percent by late century.''
Our infrastructure, the foundation of our economy, is also
harmed. Glen Canyon Dams electric power generating
infrastructure has been damaged by low water levels. New and
expanded reservoirs, channels, even desalinization plants could
be needed to make up water loss. Much of this infrastructure
will likely be funded by the federal government.
And more infrastructure means higher capital and operating
costs so utility companies will raise rates, putting the burden
ultimately on households and businesses. Climateflation flows
downstream. As droughts worsen, some places just won't have the
water to meet demand, creating hard choices likely to fall most
heavily on farmers and low income households. Development
options will wither in places where increased aridity leads to
real water scarcity.
Even communities that rely on oil and gas for tax revenue
should be concerned about the risks of drought as water
supports fossil fuel production and cools fossil fuel power
plants. Water shortage can lead to stranded assets for
companies and a declining tax base for communities. Today we'll
hear about the crisis of water scarcity from three different
witnesses who all face the same fundamental challenge, how do
we make do with less?
The hard choices and mounting costs associated with water
scarcity are the result of decades of negligence on climate. We
have a chance still to make a different decision and I hope we
will. Recognize Senator Grassley.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR GRASSLEY \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Prepared statement of Senator Grassley appears in the appendix
on page 32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Grassley. First of all, I thank you for recognizing
the tragedy that happened in Greenfield, Iowa. Probably if you
were watching morning television that's national, you would've
seen it on television this very morning. So before we start
since the Senate is in session and I can't be in Iowa, I want
to share that my thoughts are with the people of Iowa during
these troubled times, especially those in Adair County.
My staff is on the ground right now in Greenfield touring
unimaginable destruction from storms yesterday. I want to
commend the first responders and emergency managers for their
caring and humane work. I stand ready to help as our
communities recover.
Sadly, several fatalities have been reported. So Barbara
and I are praying for the families who have lost loved ones and
for those who have lost their homes and businesses so
unexpectedly. As to the subject of today's hearing as with the
previous 17 hearings, I've invited qualified scientists to
provide a reasoned view on the very real challenges that we
face as a result of changing climate.
I welcome Dr. Pielke to the committee, formerly a scientist
at the National Center for Atmospheric Research. He'll tell us
how the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is
uncertain as to the impact of climate change on droughts. In
fact, the IPCC has not detected strong trends in any of the
three types of droughts, meteorological, agricultural, or
hydrological, in any region of the entire world.
I also look forward to hearing from Dr. Castellano from
Iowa State Department of Agronomy. The doctor's extensive work
on soil composition shows us that there's no reason why farmers
can't adapt to climate change, preserve our environmental
health, and turn a profit at the same time. Rather than
speculate on climate change doomsday, we Iowans prefer to
confront problems head on.
Drought is a problem that we know better than most
Americans. I keep track of rain levels each week when I go home
to the Grassley farm. Finally, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to submit
an article titled, quote, ``The Importance of Distinguishing
Climate Science from Climate Activism,'' end quote, by Dr.
Buntgen of the University of Cambridge and put that in the
record.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Document submitted by Senator Grassley appears in the appendix
on page 81.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chairman Whitehouse. Without objection.
Senator Grassley. He's worried about activists who pretend
to be scientists. And we should all make sure that we're
following sound science. He hit the nail on the head when he
wrote, quote, ``Activists often adopt scientific arguments as a
source of a moral legitimation for their movements which can be
radical and destructive rather than rational and
constructive,'' end quote.
We've seen our fair share of activists testify before the
Budget Committee on matters well outside of what this committee
was set up to do. I welcome all of our witnesses today.
Chairman Whitehouse. Thank you very much. We have five
witnesses today including witnesses from New Mexico and
California and Oregon who will be introduced by their senators.
Now the first is Ms. Trujillo. Welcome, Tanya Trujillo. And
Senator Lujan, you have the floor to introduce your witness.
Senator Lujan. Well, good morning, Chairman and Ranking
Member. And thank you for holding this important hearing on the
risks that worsening droughts have on our economy and our
budget. Today, I'm honored to have the opportunity to introduce
my good friend and fellow New Mexican Tanya Trujillo.
I always feel grateful when New Mexicans appear before our
committee sharing their expertise with our committee colleagues
to answer questions to tough questions and especially providing
a perspective with more extreme drought conditions. New
Mexicans know drought like few others. We've lived in it for
centuries, mastering innovative techniques to conserve precious
water resource and protect diverse wetland ecosystems. Water is
New Mexico's way of life.
The foundation for the food we eat, the businesses we
create, and the cultural traditions we pass on. Ms. Trujillo's
testimony will illustrate the challenges facing water managers
in the southwest in dealing with extreme drought. But it's not
just New Mexico seeing these impacts on our economy.
As Tanya will make clear, the future of our nation's water
supply can no longer depend on lessons from the past. States
are losing the tools they have relied on for a long time to
anticipate future supply and manage competing needs. In the
end, it will be all water users, consumers, businesses, farmers
and ranchers, and more that will bear the brunt of these
decisions in higher costs and reduced supply.
Ms. Trujillo also brings this committee her decades of
experience on water litigation, professional development,
support, along with her tireless public service to our country.
As Assistant Secretary to the Department of Interior for Water
and Science, Ms. Trujillo oversaw key agencies responsible for
the sustainable management and development of our freshwater
resources. She now serves as water policy advisor for the
Office of New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham where I'm
glad her talents will be used to help New Mexicans secure their
water future.
Thank you again, Chairman Whitehouse, and Ranking Member
Grassley for this opportunity to introduce our witness. I look
forward to hearing from Ms. Trujillo and the rest of our
witnesses.
Chairman Whitehouse. Thanks very much, Senator Lujan. Our
next witness is Mr. Adel Hagekhalil who will be introduced by
Senator Padilla of California. You have the floor to make your
introduction, Senator Padilla.
Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's certainly my
pleasure to introduce my friend and our witness today, Mr. Adel
Hagekhalil, a fellow engineer, a fellow Angeleno, a fellow son
of immigrants. Mr. Hagekhalil is the general manager and chief
executive officer for the Metropolitan Water District of
Southern California, the largest wholesale drinking water
supplier in the country that provides water to 26-member public
agencies which collectively serve roughly five percent not just
of the Los Angeles population, not of the California
population, five percent of our nation's population.
Roughly 19 million people rely on the Metropolitan Water
District. And just to put that into context for my colleagues,
that's more people served by his agency alone than the entire
population of every other state represented on this dais. Under
Mr. Hagekhalil's leadership, Metropolitan is entering a new era
of sustainability and resiliency in the face of climate change
and other threats to Southern California's water reliability.
Before joining Metropolitan, he was the executive director
and general manager of the City of Los Angeles' Bureau of
Street Services where he worked to integrate climate adaptation
into the largest municipal street system in the nation. I first
came to know Adel when he was assistant general manager of the
Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation. There are few water managers
anywhere in the country and I'd argue in the world who have
more experience with and better understand the impacts of more
extreme droughts on water utilities and their budgets and what
drought impacted utilities are doing to adapt their water
supplies and infrastructure to meet our drinking water and
sanitation needs.
And as Mr. Hagekhalil and I have spent a lot of time
collaborating on them, he has been laser focused on what all
this means for household water rates and especially for low
income communities' water rates. So I want thank Mr. Hagekhalil
for flying here from Los Angeles to participate today. And Mr.
Chairman, thank you for holding this critical meeting.
Chairman Whitehouse. Thank you very much, Senator Padilla.
Our next witness is Mr. Kevin Richards from Oregon who will be
introduced by fellow Oregonian, Senator Merkley. Senator, you
have the floor to make your introduction.
Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I'm
delighted that Kevin Richards is here accompanied by his two
sons to share his on the ground experience of farming in our
home state. Our farmers in Oregon are facing immense
challenges.
The West is in the midst of a historic drought. Demands of
our water have never been higher while water levels have never
been lower. And climate chaos is making our summers hotter,
drier, and longer.
In Oregon as temperatures have climbed, the average
snowpack in the Cascade Mountains has dropped an average of
more than 20 feet over the last 90 years. That means less water
for our streams, less water for our farmers, and less water for
our ranchers. And the supply of snow melt runs out earlier in
the spring or summer than in the past.
Farmers across Oregon have been grappling with these
challenges. One of those farmers is our Kevin Richards from Fox
Hollow Ranch in Madras, Oregon. He's a second-generation
farmer.
His family specializes in growing seed crops like carrots
and Kentucky bluegrass. He also grows peppermint oil, wheat,
alfalfa, hay. Before Mr. Richards dug into the soil of
Jefferson County, he fought for our farmers here in Washington,
DC as director of regulatory relations for the American Farm
Bureau Federation.
And he's felt the effects of this prolonged drought in
central Oregon firsthand. Last summer, he was among hundreds of
farmers who received only half as much water as usual which
means, of course, fewer crops and less income. To address the
shortage of water, Mr. Richards has invested in irrigation
modernization programs like drip irrigation and wireless
irrigation monitoring to improve the efficiency of this farm.
To ensure the crops we need and more farmland doesn't fall
fallow, it's vital that we support our family farmers like Mr.
Richards. It's also important that irrigation districts
increase the efficiency in their delivery of water. That's why
I worked across the aisle with former Senator Thad Cochran of
Mississippi to revive the Department of Agriculture's watershed
and flood prevention operations program known back home as
PL566 to invest in irrigation modernization projects,
specifically the piping of irrigation districts to decrease the
loss both to the ground and to evaporation.
We need many more of these investments across Oregon and
across the West so that in the future Mr. Richards can pass on
his Fox Hollow family farm to his sons like his father passed
it on to him. It's a pleasure to welcome him here today. Good
to have you.
Chairman Whitehouse. Thank you, Senator Merkley. After Mr.
Richards, we'll hear from Dr. Michael Castellano who is an
associate professor in William T. Frankenberger Professor of
Soil Science in the Department of Agronomy at Iowa State
University. Let me extend my condolences to you as well as an
Iowan.
He participates in the university's environmental science,
sustainable agriculture and ecology, and evolutionary biology
interdepartmental graduate degree program. His research focuses
on the nitrogen cycle and ways it can be made more efficient
and sustainable. Last, we have Dr. Roger Pielke who has been on
the faculty on the University of Colorado, Boulder since 2001
where he teaches and writes on a diverse range of policy and
governance issues related to science, technology, environment,
innovation, and sports.
He is also a nonresident senior fellow at the American
Enterprise Institute where he focuses on science and technology
policy, the politicization of science, government science
advice, and energy and climate. Ms. Trujillo, we'll begin with
you. You have five minutes to make your opening statement and
your complete statements, like that of all the other witnesses,
will be made a matter of record. Please proceed.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE TANYA TRUJILLO, WATER POLICY ADVISOR
TO THE GOVERNOR, AND DEPUTY STATE ENGINEER, NEW MEXICO \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Prepared statement of Hon. Trujillo appears in the appendix on
page 34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. Trujillo. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the
opportunity to testify on this important subject. Thank you,
Senator Lujan, for the introduction. And thank you, Senator
Grassley, for looking out for the Iowans. My mom lives in Des
Moines, and I'm happy to say hello to her today.
As a western water manager from an arid state, I am keenly
aware of the need to be prepared for future drought conditions.
On today's drought monitor map, unfortunately, New Mexico takes
the prize in a bad way. But many areas have seen improvement
this year.
Two years ago, the drought monitor map painted a very
different picture with well over half the nation experiencing
some of the worst drought conditions in recent history and
major reservoirs hit record low levels. Communities imposed
drought restrictions on water use and emergency actions were
taken within the Colorado River Basin and California to protect
infrastructure. In New Mexico, over 40 miles of the Rio Grande
went dry, which had not been the case in over 40 years.
Last October on a return trip to Iowa City, I participated
in a discussion regarding the severity of the ongoing drought
there in Iowa. We know that drought conditions pose challenges
for every sector of our economy. Farmers make planting
decisions based on the availability of surface water and
groundwater.
Cities and towns have a responsibility to ensure that
residents have water regardless of the hydrology we are seeing.
And we're aware of the cascading effects of drought through
issues like wildfires where smoke crosses state lines and
subsequent rainstorms can produce debris flows that can shut
down highways or clog up water treatment facilities.
Fortunately, we are working on these issues.
And in many cases, we've been able to develop strategies to
manage and adapt to the drought. We are also working in
parallel on strategies to be able to store and capture water
during wetter times if those are the conditions that we see and
if we have the infrastructure available to do that. In New
Mexico like other western states, we have made significant
investments in infrastructure and water management programs.
But we know we need to do more. In January, our governor,
Michelle Lujan Grisham, released a 50-year water action plan.
That plan identifies 11 drought response areas that we need to
work on in order to enable New Mexicans to respond to the drier
conditions that may be on the horizon.
The 50-year water action plan is based on input received
from technical experts and water users around the state. And it
emphasizes the need to do more in water conservation among all
sectors. It also recognizes the need to protect water quality
and restore important watersheds and to look to the future to
develop new water supplies.
All of the efforts in the plan will require sustained
levels of funding and additional investments in infrastructure.
We are grateful for the recent announcements of federal funding
for water projects within New Mexico from the Inflation
Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. The new
federal funding will be paired with state and local
appropriations and will help our communities develop more
efficient water delivery systems and create backup supplies for
use during droughts.
The existing funding is a good down payment for the
additional funding that will be necessary to fully implement
the required actions. Having strong partnerships is a key to
all of these efforts. In New Mexico, we know we have to work
closely with our water users to manage the limited supplies we
have available.
We also know we have to work closely with our sister states
and continue to work with them on developing collaborative
agreements for water sharing. We work, of course, very closely
with the federal agencies who own and operate many of the large
infrastructure projects. And it will be required to have as
much flexibility as possible in those management decision
making processes to make sure we can get through the tough
drought years that may be ahead.
There's no doubt that the available funding works best when
it can be utilized in conjunction with collaborative efforts
among multiple water management agencies. Mr. Chairman, thank
you for the opportunity to participate in this hearing and
describe some of the ways that New Mexico and its partners are
responding to drought. The strategies and action under
development will ensure that New Mexico's communities can
continue to prosper even during drought or during whatever
future conditions we may see on the horizon. Thank you.
Chairman Whitehouse. Thank you very much, Ms. Trujillo.
It's wonderful to have you with us. Let me turn now to Mr.
Hagekhalil.
STATEMENT OF ADEL HAGEKHALIL, GENERAL MANAGER AND CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER, THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Prepared statement of Mr. Hagekhalil appears in the appendix on
page 42.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hagekhalil. Thank you, Chair Whitehouse. Thank you,
Member Grassley. Appreciate the opportunity to testify before
the committee and also extend my condolences to the families in
Iowa, Senator Grassley.
Also want to thank Senator Padilla for the introduction and
the partnership in uplifting communities everywhere, not only
in California but across this country. Thank you. Metropolitan
is the largest wholesale drinking water provider in the United
States.
We are committed to providing safe, reliable water for all
with no one left behind. I repeat, with no one left behind.
That's a commitment that we all have, that everyone should have
the right for water.
We represent 26 member agencies including 14 cities, 12
water districts, serving water to over 19 million people, and
supplying water to support an economy of 1.6 trillion dollars.
Water is life. Water is economy.
Metropolitan is renowned for our complex and integrated
water systems and our commitment to water use efficiency. This
combination of water reliability and water use efficiency have
long worked together to sustain the wellbeing of our
communities. Our water use today is the same as it was 50 years
ago with double the population through over billions of dollars
in investments and conservation.
Half the water we use is locally sourced. This year,
California and Metropolitan has conserved and added a record
amount of water in Lake Mead. Metropolitan alone has added 1.7
million acre-feet of water in storage in Lake Mead, equivalent
to 25 feet in elevation.
Overall, we have 3.4 million acre-feet across in total
storage in our system. That's equivalent to three years of
imported water for our users in Southern California. Colorado
River deliveries to the state in 2023 were the lowest since
1949.
However, the challenges we face today are enormous. Water
year '20 to '22 was the driest consecutive three-year period in
California. Notably, this extreme drought was immediately
preceded by and followed by very wet years in 2019 and '23.
Over the last five years, we have swung from record levels of
water in storage to record breaking drought conditions and back
again.
California has always had the most volatile year to year
precipitation in the nation. But this rapid swing, as we call
the climate whiplash, is unprecedented. We need new, adaptive,
resilient water management practices and tools.
The drought challenges our ability to reliably provide
water to our service area. Metropolitan imports half of its
water from Northern California via the State Water Project and
from the Colorado River. During the last drought, our water
deliveries were only enough for six areas in our region.
We had to provide human health and safety needs.
Unfortunately, the low water allocation highlighted the
vulnerability in our system in delivering water. Six of our 26
member agencies that we serve, nearly 7 million people, were
severely impacted by water shortage.
As a result, Metropolitan, our member agencies in
partnership with our ag partners implemented extraordinary
conservation measures, building our past actions and
partnerships. We launched an aggressive campaign that promoted
water-saving behaviors and invested 46 million dollars in
conservation rebates, landscape, and irrigation efficiency
measures. We reoperate our distribution system to utilize as
much stored water as possible and accelerated work on projects
totaling hundreds of millions of dollars to re-engineer our
existing water delivery system and improve our flexibility.
We also accelerated investment in 200 million construction
projects for groundwater storage in Antelope Valley to allow us
to store more water from the State Water Project south of the
delta and north of our service area. Additional storage and
conveyance projects are also in the works. I want to
acknowledge the partnership with the Bureau of Reclamation and
the commissioner, Commissioner Touton.
And thank you for the federal investments are helping us
move the needle on these investments. Even as California's
precipitation becomes more erratic, drought conditions are
putting pressure on the west overall and what we're looking at.
New infrastructure to recycle, capture, move, and store water
is needed to ensure the communities that we serve have reliable
water supply.
This includes projects like Pure Water Southern California,
the largest recycle water project in the country. We are
recycling 150 million gallons a day, serving 1.5 million
people. Metropolitan is developing climate adaptation master
plan for water to provide roadmap to guide us into the future.
Weather extremes has also had financial implications.
Drought compels us to double down on conservation and
efficiency investments and more resilient and climate adaptive
infrastructure. Metropolitan is currently evaluating new
infrastructure projects to improve our climate resiliency,
including the largest recycle project in the nation. Our
capital investments, we're looking at about 30 billion dollars
in 2023 dollars.
This is beyond what we can ask our rate payers. But it's
necessary to ensure they have safe and reliable drinking water
for generations to come with no one left behind. Sustained
federal assistance in the form of grants, new bond financing
mechanism, and assistance to low income households are
essential as we work to build more resilient water systems and
adapt to our changing climate. But it all requires us to
partner and work together across our watersheds. Thank you very
much.
Chairman Whitehouse. Thank you very much, sir. And we turn
now to Mr. Kevin Richards.
STATEMENT OF KEVIN RICHARDS, FARMER AND MANAGING PARTNER, RB AG
\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Prepared statement of Mr. Richards appears in the appendix on
page 49.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Richards. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity
to share the challenges farmers face as we struggle to adapt to
a changing climate characterized by drought and water scarcity
in the western states. I farm about 1,000 acres with my family
in the central Oregon high desert. We raise some livestock,
hay, and grain.
However, our farm and our region specializes in grass seed
and vegetable seed production. In fact, the county where I farm
produces the majority of the global carrot seed supply. Our
region historically receives less than ten inches of rain per
year, so we rely on irrigation water.
After in-stream water rights were exhausted in the 20th
century, the Federal Bureau of Reclamation built reservoirs to
capture winter snow runoff and divert stored water nearly 100
miles to 60,000 acres in North Unit Irrigation District where I
farm. Unfortunately, perennial drought has reduced allotments
to as low as 20 percent of normal in recent years and it would
require multiple wet years to restore reservoir and water
supply levels to their historic averages. How is drought
impacting our farms and communities?
Frankly, some farms simply cannot adapt fast enough. This
spring, there have already been three auctions in our small
community to liquidate farm equipment of multigenerational
family farms who have made the difficult decision to quit. Less
water means fewer crops and fewer jobs for farm workers and
agriculture businesses.
That is taking a toll on our local economy and employment.
Our rural town has three major equipment supply dealers. One of
those businesses decided to close their doors and relocate this
winter.
Our local school district is one of the most authentically
diverse in the nation with one-third of our students Native
American from the Confederated Tribe of Warm Springs and over
one-third of our students from Hispanic American families who
immigrated as farmworkers. Irrigated agriculture is the
economic engine that creates jobs and prosperity for these
families. And everyone suffers when that engine starts to run
out of fuel.
A less obvious cost of drought is the impact on the local
environment. When arable, irrigated farmland is dried up, it
creates micro ecological disasters in the form of erosion,
proliferation of noxious and invasive weeds, and soil
degradation. Sustaining soil health helps maintain the beauty
of our landscapes and it is essential to farm productivity.
But it is nearly impossible without adequate irrigation
water or sufficient farm revenue to justify costly inputs. How
are farms adapting to drought and water scarcity? All farms are
desperately searching for ways to tighten their belts and find
efficiencies.
Unfortunately, short-term solutions often come with
negative consequences. It's painful telling your loyal employee
they no longer have a job. And sometimes cutting expenses leads
to cutting corners and neglecting investments in maintaining
soil health or deferring investments.
Nevertheless, farmers like me who want to see American
agriculture in our rural communities thrive are finding ways to
adapt and invest in drought resiliency. We're adjusting our
crop rotation and looking for opportunities to grow new, high
value annual crops that allow for greater flexibility in our
water use. We're pouring or resources into on-farm conservation
by monitoring soil moisture, piping ditches, upgrading
sprinklers to the latest technology, and converting to drip
irrigation.
What collective solutions are available to enhance drought
resiliency? A robust farm safety net and risk management tools
like those authorized through the Farm Bill are enormously
helpful toward ensuring family farms can survive the risk and
volatility in modern agriculture. Please continue to support
those programs as well as ways to adapt those programs to be
more viable to the specialty crops that we grow in western
states.
However, some of the greatest opportunities to save water
are not on the farm but within our irrigation infrastructure. I
urge your support for programs and funding that help to
modernize irrigated agriculture in the west. As Senator Merkley
highlighted, the Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations
Program, also known as PL-566, has been especially beneficial
and used in novel ways to fund canal piping in central Oregon
and make sure water diverted from rivers makes it to farmers'
fields.
Senator Merkley has been a champion of this effort in
central Oregon, and I'm grateful that he's leading a bipartisan
effort to enhance the funding for PL-566 while taking a multi-
benefit approach that targets not just water savings but
ecosystem improvements and cultural priorities. Projects funded
through PL-566 and other investments in modernizing our
infrastructure have a tremendous return on investment and
deserve your support.
Finally, we're in search of larger, more permanent
solutions that will protect our rivers while preserving
irrigated agriculture in the communities that depend on farming
in central Oregon. I've included in my written testimony more
specifics on projects that we're pursuing that will help our
irrigation district continue to thrive throughout the 21st
century. Thank you.
Chairman Whitehouse. Thanks very much, Mr. Richards. We now
turn to Dr. Castellano.
STATEMENT OF DR. MICHAEL CASTELLANO, WILLIAM T. FRANKENBERGER
PROFESSORSHIP IN SOIL SCIENCE, IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Prepared statement of Dr. Castellano appears in the appendix on
page 52.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Castellano. Chairman Whitehouse, Ranking Member
Grassley, and committee members, thank you for the opportunity
to speak here today. As an alumnus of the University of Rhode
Island and a professor at Iowa State University, I feel very
comfortable before this committee. I can safely say that I've
worked with the best fishermen and farmers in the world.
I'm an ecosystems scientist with particular expertise in
the understanding and management of carbon, nitrogen, and water
dynamics in agronomic systems. I work with a range of
scientists, engineers, and most importantly farmers to
understand, design, and implement systems that minimize
tradeoffs between productivity and environmental performance.
I'm currently the U.S. representative to the United Nations
intergovernmental panel on soils where I'm the lead author on
the North American assessment of the forthcoming 2025 Status of
the World's Soil report.
Climate change is a serious risk. Weather variability,
particularly precipitation extremes, creates significant
challenges for farmers. We should take steps to mitigate and
adapt to climate change when and where it makes sense without
slowing of the progress we've made towards improving the human
condition, much of which is attributable to agriculture.
In the last 50 years alone, we've doubled corn production
per acre. The annual rate of yield gain shows no signs of
declining. And the increase in production has been accompanied
by significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
Nevertheless, emissions from crop production are
significant and among the most difficult to abate because
unlike other sectors, they're not from fossil fuel combustion.
Instead, they're from nitrous oxide, a biproduct of processes
that are critical for plant growth. Improved management of
nitrogen and water are required to minimize agricultural
emissions.
Although agricultural emissions are hard to abate, there
are strategies that increase yield while reducing emissions.
Agronomic practices that explicitly aim to increase the amount
and resilience of crop yield in an environmentally responsible
manner are often overlooked by conservation programs, yet they
can be extremely effective at adapting to climate change and
reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Today, I'd like to highlight
two of these practices, subsurface drainage and crop residue
management.
More than 50 million acres of cropland across all 50 states
benefit from subsurface drainage. This infrastructure includes
connected networks of private and community-owned drainage
pipes that can be valued at more than 50 billion dollars.
Subsurface drainage improves plant and soil health and allows
farmers to make timely field operations that enables successful
execution of additional conservation practices such as cover
crops and reduced tillage and precision fertilizer management.
Together, these factors reduce greenhouse gas emissions by
increasing yield while reducing nitrogen fertilizer needs and
nitrous oxide emissions. Although drains can promote nutrient
runoff, they also enable edge-of-field treatment opportunities
such as wetlands which are among the most effective nutrient
loss reduction practices and add diversity to the landscape.
Unfortunately, much of our drainage infrastructure was
installed more than 100 years ago and it is deteriorating.
In addition, capacity of our drainage infrastructure is no
long sufficient owing in part to an increase in heavy
participation in central and eastern U.S. The increase in heavy
precipitation also reinforces another growing opportunity, the
need for crop residue management. As I mentioned earlier, corn
yield and the yield of many other crops is increasing every
year, a great testament to farmer innovation and the success of
U.S. investments in agricultural research.
As yields increase, so do crop residues, the portions of
the crop that are not typically harvested. Crop residue
production of corn systems is increasing by about 100 pounds
per acre every year. In the 1970s and '80s, crop residue
retention was required to reduce erosion and build soil organic
matter.
However, the increase in residue production now creates
significant challenges for farmers. The extra residue keeps the
soil cold and wet, slowing the growth of subsequent crops and
challenging the implementation of conservation practices such
as reduced tillage and cover crops. The United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) Agricultural Research Service
and land grant universities have demonstrated the partial
residue harvest in corn systems can increase yield, reduce
nitrogen fertilizer needs, and reducing nitrous oxide emissions
without risking loss of soil health.
Hence, partial crop residue harvest can make significant
reduction in the carbon intensity scores of U.S. agriculture.
Moreover, the harvested residue can be transformed into
renewable fuels that make significant contributions towards
decarbonizing other hard to abate sectors of our economy.
Better communication about the environmental benefits of
drainage and crop residue management would ensure that farmers
understand and act on them.
Education, technical assistance, and incentive programs
could accelerate the implementation and maximize the benefits
of updating our drainage infrastructure and harvesting crop
residues for the decarbonization of agriculture and other
sectors. It's clear that opportunities to reduce agricultural
emissions can also contribute to productivity of our cropping
systems and decarbonization of agriculture in other sectors.
Going forward, we cannot, need not sacrifice productivity for
climate change mitigation. Thanks for your time.
Chairman Whitehouse. Thanks very much, Dr. Castellano.
Our final witness is Dr. Pielke.
STATEMENT OF DR. ROGER PIELKE, JR., PROFESSOR, COLLEGE OF ARTS
AND SCIENCES, UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO BOULDER \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Prepared statement of Dr. Pielke appears in the appendix on
page 60.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Pielke. Chairman Whitehouse, Senator Grassley, thank
you for the opportunity to testify today. For almost 30 years
along with many colleagues, I've studied extreme weather and
climate and associated impacts. Our work has been cited in the
most recent assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change or IPCC.
The IPCC is comprised of hardworking and intelligent people
who reflect a spirit of public service. They're also humans,
and the IPCC is, of course, fallible. Conclusions of the IPCC
reports are snapshots in time reflecting the evolution of
scientific understanding.
Individual experts may have legitimate views that are at
odds with the IPCC. And that is, of course, expected in a
diverse scientific landscape. I'm happy to report that the IPCC
Working Group 1 assessments on the literature of extreme events
in my areas of expertise have with few exceptions done an
overall excellent job accurately reflecting the scientific
literature.
Today, I summarize with the most recent IPCC report
concluded about the detection and attribution of trends in
drought at the global scale and also for the United States. I
start with some key IPCC terminology. First, detection, quote,
``the process of demonstrating the climate or a system affected
by climate has changed in some defined statistical sense
without providing a reason for that change. An identified
change is detected in observation if it's likelihood of
occurrence by chance due to internal variability is determined
to be small.''
Attribution, quote, ``the process of evaluating the
relative contributions of multiple causal factors to a change
or event with an assessment of confidence.'' Third, drought,
quote, ``periods of time with substantially below-average
moisture conditions, usually covering large areas, during which
limitations in water availability result in negative impacts
for various components of nature systems and economic
sectors.'' It is more challenging to achieve detection and
attribution of trends in drought than, say, hurricanes or
tornados because drought can be defined and measured in many
different ways in the context of significant and natural
climate variability.
Detecting and attributing trends in drought impacts is even
more challenging. It is very easy to identify drought trends
over various time periods in various places that are the result
of internal variability rather than an indication of a change
in climate. Often detection and attribution are confused and so
too is climate variability with climate change.
The IPCC finds with high confidence, that's an eight in ten
chance, that human-caused climate change influences the global
hydrological cycle and thus drought. My written testimony makes
four main points summarizing IPCC findings. Number one, the
IPCC focuses on three types of drought, meteorological,
hydrological, and what it calls agricultural or ecological
drought.
At the global scale, the IPCC has not detected and
attributed trends in any of the three types of drought for any
region with high confidence. That's an eight in ten chance. For
the United States which is summarized in the figure here which
is in my written testimony, the IPCC has only low confidence,
that is a two in ten chance, in detected or attributed trends
in all three types of drought for all regions with the
exception of Western North America where it has medium
confidence, that's five in ten chance, and the detection and
attributions of trends in agricultural and ecological drought.
Looking forward to 2100, which is summarized in this
figure, also in my written testimony. At the global scale, the
IPCC does not expect that a signal with trends in drought will
emerge in any region with high confidence. Again, that's an
eight in ten chance.
For the United States, the IPCC has only low confidence.
Again, that's a two in ten chance that a signal of trends in
drought will emerge from the background of natural variability
in all three types of drought for all regions except Western
and Central North America for agricultural and ecological
drought and also hydrological drought in Western North America.
Both of those are at medium confidence, five in ten chance.
So I know that's a lot of words. But my written testimony
includes several summary tables and figures from the IPCC
reports that concisely summarize these IPCC findings and
associated confidence levels. This is an image that comes from
Chapter 11 of the IPCC.
It's, I think, one of the last pages of the report. I
encourage you to take a close look at it. In plain English, the
IPCC concludes that changes to the climate system resulting
from human activity, notably the emission of carbon dioxide
from the burning of fossil fuels changes the hydrological cycle
and thus affects drought.
At the same time, the IPCC does not have high confidence
that research has detected the signal of a change in past
drought at the global scale or in the United States, nor does
the IPCC expect with high confidence such a signal to emerge
beyond internal variability, even under its most extreme
scenario to 2100. Such uncertainties and areas of ignorance can
inform both mitigation and adaptation policies and planning.
Fourth and my final point, to be absolutely clear, I emphasize
explicitly and unequivocally that human caused climate change
poses significant risks to society and the environment and that
various policy responses in the form of mitigation and
adaptation are necessary and make good sense. Thank you, and I
welcome your questions.
Chairman Whitehouse. Thank you very much. Hearing you, Mr.
Richards, reminds me a lot of conversations that I have with
our fishermen in Rhode Island. I remember going out on a
trawler one day just to see things firsthand and spend some
time with the fishing captain who operates the trawler.
And he turned to me and he said, Sheldon, what you gotta
Understand, this is not my grandfather's ocean. He'd grown up
beginning to fish with his grandfather. Sounds to me like this
is not your grandfather's land out in Oregon either.
Mr. Richards. I think that's right, Senator. As farmers, I
think we do relate to fishermen, and we consider ourselves
stewards of resources. But one of those resources that we're
stewards of is not just the water and the soil and the wildlife
but also the cultural heritage that is kind of the foundation
of American agriculture. And our resource industry is, like,
timber and our fisheries. And so we're working hard not just to
save water and preserve the agriculture industry but also to
preserve the heritage of American farming.
Chairman Whitehouse. Well, we hear very regularly from
Senator Merkley about the foresters, farmers, and fishermen of
Oregon. Ms. Trujillo, you mentioned Governor Lujan Grisham's
50-year water action plan. Could you give us a little
description of that plan and its foundation in science?
Ms. Trujillo. Yes, thank you, Senator. It is a report that
the governor asked us to work on to really demonstrate the
situation in New Mexico and the challenges that we may see if
we do see a continued dry future. And what we use to inform the
plan was a variety of information that came in from technical
experts, including a report from 2022 that analyzed the impacts
of climate change on our water resources.
It was developed from a panel of primarily New Mexico
scientists and researchers who had worked in the area for many
decades. And they looked at a variety of situations, from soil,
moisture impacts to groundwater recharge impacts, of course,
surface water implications, trying to predict what we might see
in the future, all tied together with an understanding that
there is uncertainty and we don't know exactly what the future
conditions are going to be. But if we see a drier future and if
we see the prediction that we may see, up to 25 percent less
water coming into our systems, we have to develop actions to
respond to that.
And so that's what this plan does. We have actions for
water conservation in particular that are going to help us meet
that supply and demand equation. Thank you.
Chairman Whitehouse. Thank you. And Mr. Hagekhalil, you
mentioned that business models for utilities are having to
change in the face of climate change. Could you describe
specifically how that's impacting the utility that you run, the
concerns are you see as you look forward?
Mr. Hagekhalil. Sure. I think to me it's the previous way
of charging for water was about the consumption of water use.
And most--it was what we call telescopic water charging. So the
more water you use, the more you pay.
But what we're seeing right now is that we're actually
incentivizing people. We're paying people to use less water.
And we're investing a lot of money to--whether it's through
changing the landscape or conservation informing, or changing
how you do that.
And that's why our water use is 50 percent. Half of the
water, we use 50 years ago. But for us to continue investing in
this water resiliency, and what we need to do is build more
storage, more conveyance so we can capture what water when we
have it.
And during dry conditions, we don't have to rely on and
fight over the water we don't have. And to do that, we have to
find new ways to charge for water without having to rely on the
less amount of water we're studying. So our business model has
to change.
We need to find ways to generate revenue that is not based
on the volumetric use of water. It has to be kind of a fixed
rate that's built on the overall base and sharing in the cost.
And also ensuring affordability for our community.
So we need to find ways where we award people for
conservation, address the affordability question. I appreciate
Senator Padilla's leadership on the low income assistance
program. But I think what we need to do is how we can raise the
money locally because we appreciate the federal government's
funding.
But most of the money is going to come from the local
investments and local rates. And how can we do it in a way that
does not force us to--force people to use more water? So we're
changing it now.
And last month, our board of directors approved for the
first time an increase in property tax to capture what we call
the resiliency investments to help us invest across the board
in projects that can move us forward and reduce our dependence
on the sale of water because that's the new model that we have
to do. And we are working through it. And we look forward to
developing a new business model for Metropolitan in our region.
But it also takes partnerships. And I appreciate the
partnership with our partners on the Colorado River. Arizona-
Nevada, for example, are partners with Metropolitan in Southern
California in building the recycled water project.
Because if we invest together, we are helping each other
reduce our dependence in imported water. So expanding the pie,
making the tent bigger, and working together across the
watershed and across the southwest and across California. Going
to help all of us continue to move forward and be resilient.
Chairman Whitehouse. Thank you very much. My time is up.
Senator Grassley.
Senator Grassley. Dr. Castellano, how can farmers in Iowa,
maybe states similar to Iowa, improve their soil quality and
limit emissions without demanding further input from the
federal government?
Dr. Castellano. Yeah, thank you for the question, Senator
Grassley. I think the way that farmers go forward and limit
their emissions and adapt and mitigate to climate change,
improve soil without further dependence on the federal
government is taking a systems approach to things like cover
crops and no till. And when I say a systems approach, these
practices, these conservation practices which are named in the
40(b), for example.
They can't be prescribed indiscriminately because they just
don't work everywhere. It's as simple as that. The science
shows that on average, in fact, they may even reduce crop
yields.
Yet when they're placed and targeted in proper systems,
they can be very effective and do many great things for the
environment. As I mentioned, subsurface drainage and crop
residue management are two practices that help put that systems
approach forward to allow other practices to go into the system
better. That's where I see things going.
Senator Grassley. And also for you, are you more concerned
with weather variability or drought in Iowa? And what can
Iowans do best to prepare so that there's more rainfall
absorbed as opposed to runoff?
Dr. Castellano. Sure. Thanks again for the question. As we
heard from Dr. Pielke, the clear challenge here is variability
and precipitation. And that's not just based on the science but
it's what we hear from the farmers as well.
There's big precipitation events as we saw yesterday in
Iowa that are a major concern. We heard in the testimony here
today about the ongoing drought in Iowa. That was punctuated by
May of this year which through yesterday is the second greatest
precipitation, May, on record.
Farmers are doing things too, I want to add, to adapt to
droughts. They did achieve very high yields in three of the
four years during the sustained drought that we had in Iowa,
including the record yield. And one of those four years we saw
a very low yield, and that was due to an extreme precipitation
event, a derecho storm that you remember very well, Senator.
Senator Grassley. Dr. Pielke, given your scientific
expertise, I'd like to give you an opportunity if you want to
take advantage of it to address any factually inaccurate
science-based statements that were made today. And then I have
a follow-up.
Dr. Pielke. Yeah, thanks. We're in a period where there's a
lot of what I would call anecdotal attribution. Something
happens somewhere in the world. There's a tragic event in the
skies over Southeast Asia yesterday, a turbulence event. And
the news is covered with this is caused by climate change.
And the quick attribution of everything that happens to
climate change flattens our understanding. And these are very
complex phenomena and processes. I learned three things in
reading my colleagues testimony that are fascinating and I
think a much more important part of the study.
One is that the Southern California Water District uses
half the water that it used to. That is an incredible story of
human ingenuity and innovation. I have to follow up on that.
The other is that most of the world's carrot seeds come
from the high desert which is another incredible testament. And
then the third thing I learned is that crop productivity,
despite all the variability and change in climate over the past
generation, since my grandparents were young people, has
continued to increase. It is expected to continue to increase
and is expected to continue to increase.
Senator Grassley. And also, I'd like to have you as my
final question, Dr. Pielke, to ask you why you've argued that--
let's say political liberals rather than people in just one
political party--are distancing themselves from the views of
the International Panel on Climate Change.
Dr. Pielke. Yeah. I mean, I'll just give you an anecdote. I
was first invited to testify before the Senate 22 years ago. I
think it was environment and public works.
And I was invited by Senate Democrats. And what they said
to me was, would you come before the Senate and summarize what
the recent, at that time, third assessment report that the IPCC
said. So I did that. And then last week, I was invited by
Senate Republicans to come with the exact same request. Could
you come summarize what the IPCC says?
My explanation of this is that at some point climate
proponents, climate activists decided to make extreme weather
events the face of climate change. And in doing so, they went
well beyond what the science can support. And so the IPCC is no
longer particularly useful making those arguments because as I
said today, it pours some cold water on the anecdotal
attribution claims.
Senator Grassley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you----
Chairman Whitehouse. Thank you very much, Senator Grassley.
Senator Grassley [continuing]. To all the panelists.
Chairman Whitehouse. Senator Lujan.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR LUJAN
Senator Lujan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Trujillo, thank
you again for being here today, especially to share New
Mexico's perspective with the committee. All New Mexicans
understand drought.
But the drought we are experiencing right now is different.
It's longer, it's hotter, and it's less predictable. Just look
at the Rio Grande River which is not getting the attention that
it deserves, especially with our brothers and sisters,
including New Mexico who depend on the Colorado.
In the legislation that this Congress passed, it also
included the Rio Grande River. So that's my way of trying to
get the Bureau of Reclamation's attention. Now for generations,
New Mexicans and the Rio Grande have worked in rhythm, snowpack
melting in the spring, would help communities weather tough,
dry periods in the summer.
That has a lot of the Rio Grande to sustain the region
providing a constant pulse of water that supports over 6
million people and agriculture and manufacturing industries
across two countries. That's all changed. With increasing
temperatures, snowpack is melting earlier and faster, forcing
communities to use groundwater and deplete aquifers at critical
levels. Ms. Trujillo, to protect water resources for
generations to come, how does New Mexico plan to deal with
rising temperatures, stronger drought, and less predictable
precipitation?
Ms. Trujillo. Thank you, Senator, for your leadership and
for your work on behalf of New Mexico. In New Mexico, we are
always thinking about how to deal with the next drought
situation and the ability to manage as you said in a complex
system of surface water supplies and groundwater supplies that
are interconnected. That ability for us to manage is going to
be what we need to get us through the dry years.
We are going to be also investing as I said earlier in the
actions in the governor's 50-year water action plan. That means
we're going to have to do more conservation in municipalities,
in agricultural communities, and on a systemwide basis. We're
also going to have to look for new water supplies in the future
if we continue to see the dry years on the horizon. And then
overarching everything, we have to make sure the water quality
is protected. So all of those actions are on our mind every day
as we're working to try to make sure we have water for our
communities.
Senator Lujan. I appreciate that. Now long-term drought is
also fueling more intense, frequent, and unpredictable
wildfires with costs that are felt for many years after the
fire is extinguished. During recent common extreme drought
conditions, small burns can rapidly evolve into megafires,
multiplying the costs of damages in the process.
Now that was the case in 2022 when the Forest Service lost
control of a prescribed burn that grew into Hermits Peak/Calf
Canyon Fire, the largest in New Mexico's history. Among the
impacts, billions of dollars in financial damages, hundreds of
homes lost. The fire left behind burn scars and the watershed
that served 17,000 people in and around Las Vegas. When
monsoons struck months later, the runoff flushed sediments and
other wildfire debris into the city's reservoirs.
The runoff was too contaminated for Las Vegas' only water
treatment plant with no backup groundwater while running. It
did not take long before supplies plummeted. Ms. Trujillo, how
did the water crisis get so dire so fast in Las Vegas, New
Mexico?
Ms. Trujillo. Thank you, Senator. And I was born in Las
Vegas. My family's ranch land is in the burn area. And I
appreciate your support and help and that of all of our
delegation in providing resources and assistance to our
community.
The city of Las Vegas is similar to many other western
cities or rural cities throughout the country where they are
reliant on a single supply of water. And in this circumstance,
unfortunately, that supply of water is fed by the watershed
that was in the burn area. And their system was not able to
handle the runoff and the debris that was coming through that
area.
The resources that we've been able to assist them with
include trying to develop cooperative agreements, trying to
improve the infrastructure there in the city to make sure they
can provide water to their citizens. And it's something that
many communities around the country should be thinking about if
they are in a similar circumstance to Las Vegas. So thank you
again for your support.
Senator Lujan. Thank you, Ms. Trujillo. Mr. Chairman, I
have several other questions. I'll submit them into the record
as well, and thank you again for this important hearing.
Chairman Whitehouse. Very well. Thank you very much.
Senator Van Hollen.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR VAN HOLLEN
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And
it's good to be here with you and my colleague from New Mexico.
And I know a lot of you represent western parts of the country.
But as you know, drought and water scarcity issues are not
limited to the west. In my state of Maryland, climate change is
causing more intense summer droughts and saltwater intrusion
which contributes to a growing water scarcity problem in our
state. And what you're seeing is a lot of our communities are
responding to try to remain more resilient.
The city of Westminster which is in Carroll County,
Maryland has initiated a project called Pure Water Westminster
to study the safety and effectiveness of advanced treatment of
reclaimed water for indirect potable reuse to augment surface
water storage. And then in Anne Arundel County, a major county
in Maryland, they're exploring the feasibility of large-scale
groundwater replenishment efforts to protect against
groundwater depletion. These are water recycling projects that
also have secondary benefits because when you prevent that
water from running off into the Chesapeake Bay, it obviously
means that the Bay doesn't face as many stresses.
So we're looking at more and more innovated recycling--
water recycling projects in Maryland as in other parts of the
country. I worked hard with my colleagues to secure the
inclusion of the alternative water source grants pilot program
as part of the Infrastructure Bill. It's authorized, but we
have not yet funded it, provided appropriations. So Mr.
Hagekhalil, could you just talk about the importance of these
water recycling programs and how they're becoming more
important because of the impact of climate change?
Mr. Hagekhalil. Thank you, Senator, for the question. And I
want to say is our success as a nation has to be through
collaboration across the entire nation. And that's why it's
important as water agencies and every utility is working
together in collaboration under the associations exchanging
knowledge, experience, and what we need to do because we can't
reinvent the wheel.
Next month, I'm actually going down to University of
Colorado, Boulder to talk about the future and how we do it.
But as Governor Newsom, for example, developed his water supply
action plan. And we know that 10 percent of the water supply in
California is going to disappear.
And what we need to do is manage risk because water is so
essential to our farmers. Water is so essential to our
businesses and economy. And what we need to do is develop risk-
based approach.
So we can't put all our eggs in one basket. So we need to
diversify our portfolio, what I call the one water approach.
And as you are looking at pure water in your community, we are
looking at pure water in Southern California.
We need to diversify our water supply. And we need to find
other sources of water that can augment it. So what we're
looking, recycling, building the largest recycle water project
in Southern California, 150 million gallons a day, actually,
the largest recycle water project in the country.
It's going to take water. Treat the water that was going to
go into the ocean and be wasted. Recycling it and putting it in
the ground. And now we have direct portable.
That means we can up it upstream or treatment plants. So
during drought conditions, we're not fighting over that water.
We're actually putting water away. And that can provide us a
supply we need, not only for Southern California but the entire
state and the entire Colorado River watershed.
By us working together in partnership and investing and
appreciate the funding from the infrastructure bill that we
have received and the Bureau of Reclamation's efforts on this,
I think we need to diversify. So recycling is critical.
Capturing water and storing it is critical.
Building the infrastructure to move water around and how we
store water, whether it's underground or above ground. All of
these have to come together, what I call it, it's a holistic
one water approach that we do it. But recycling with the
technology we have is safe, doable, and reliable source of
water that when we have dry conditions, we can use that water
to help continue the economy and continue the thriving of our
communities across the board.
Senator Van Hollen. I appreciate that. Thank you. Many
people when they think of farming also think of the Midwest. We
have a very vibrant farming community in the state of Maryland.
And saltwater intrusion is reducing the useable groundwater for
our farmers who often lack a backup water supply that they can
turn to.
We know that this will get worse as we see the continuous
impact of climate change. One of the programs that our farmers
are using to try to remain resilient in their operations is the
Natural Resource Conservation Service, NRCS, to help farmers
adapt. So Mr. Richards, I just wanted to get your thoughts on
the importance of that as one of the tools to address these
water issues.
Mr. Richards. Absolutely, Senator. Thank you for the
question. The programs that are available, accessible for
farmers through NRCS are tremendously helpful in incentivizing
cover cropping and water and soil conservation efforts on
farms, some of which were highlighted in other testimony today.
They are very useful and beneficial. One challenge is they're
not always available on an emergency basis when drought is
threatening the soil health and kind of microecological
disasters on neglected farmland.
And so I believe there's an opportunity to enhance some of
those programs and potentially make them available on a more
emergency basis. And actually, our county piloted a program in
2022 to cost share, incentivize cover cropping and weed
management on ground that was dried up due to drought to help
advert some of the environmental disasters that were at risk.
And so we're exploring ways to access grant funding through
NRCS to build that program and make it more robust on a
continuous basis.
Senator Van Hollen. Thanks for mentioning that. I look
forward to working with my colleagues here as part of the Farm
Bill reauthorization to see if we can fine tune some of those
programs to address these issues. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Whitehouse. I'm told we have two senators on the
way here, although one of the things that you learn quickly
around the Senate is that you can never believe senators about
where they are relative to where they're supposed to be.
There's a legendary story of the cloak room calling Ted Kennedy
and saying, we need you on this vote. Are you on your way?
Yes, he said. I'm at the airport, leaving out that he was
at the Boston airport. So I will take just a moment if you
don't mind, Mr. Castellano, to ask you to elaborate a little
bit on your statement. The potential to sustainably harvest a
portion of crop residue is growing every year, representing a
new source of feed, fiber, and fuel that can help to
decarbonize other sectors of our economy.
Could you elaborate on that sentence while we wait and see?
Oh, here we go. Look at that.
Dr. Castellano. May I still elaborate, Senator Whitehouse?
Chairman Whitehouse. You may elaborate.
Dr. Castellano. Thank you.
Chairman Whitehouse. Senator Romney is going to take a
minute to get himself sorted out.
Dr. Castellano. So as I mentioned, crop residues. The
production of them is growing every year as we increase yields
for corn. It's about 100 pounds per acre per year. That's a
significant amount of residue. Those residues can be harvested
and they can be turned into biofuels, renewable natural gas,
for example.
Chairman Whitehouse. Ethanol.
Dr. Castellano. Yeah, they could be. But that would be more
than grain. In our area in Central Iowa, we have one plant, for
example, Verbio, that is transforming the crop residues into
renewable natural gas.
And it's putting it directly into the pipeline. Not only--
the big point here is that not only is that good, but removing
part of the residue also reduces greenhouse gas emissions
directly from the field to the atmosphere which I pointed out
is one of the hardest to abate sources of emissions in our
economy writ large. And so there are multiple benefits for the
farmer and other industries.
Chairman Whitehouse. Great. Well, I will turn now to
Senator Romney because I already recognized him while the
question finished. Senator Marshall will be next and then
Senator Padilla should he return.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR ROMNEY
Senator Romney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As you all
probably know, my state is one of those that has been
experiencing a great deal of drought. I'm from the state of
Utah.
Estimates are that this is the longest period of drought in
the last hundreds of years, going back to 1500. And last couple
of winters, we've had some relief. This last winter, snowpack
was about 114 percent of normal.
But that doesn't begin to overwhelm the challenges that
we've had over a longer period of time. The state has taken a
lot of action to try and address that. The legislature has
changed water rights legislation.
They put in place a trust fund to buy water rights. Some
localities like South Jordan are reusing water in ways that are
novel and creative. But it continues to be a real challenge. I
guess I had thought as a non-climate scientist that with all
the warming, there'd be more rain and things would get wetter.
We keep on hearing about more storms and more violent
storms and so forth. So wouldn't there be more water? Maybe
there's more water in some places like Iowa or Nebraska or
other places.
But certainly in the American West, the intermountain west,
we're seeing a lot less water. And I guess the question is, how
is and can agriculture adapt to that kind of change? I mean,
are you seeing it in other parts of the country?
I'll turn to you, Mr. Richards, first. What can agriculture
do in a setting where you don't know whether it's going to get
wetter and wetter and wetter or drier and drier and drier? How
do you accommodate that kind of disparity?
Mr. Richards. Senator, thank you for the question. The
history of American agriculture is one of doing more with less.
And so we're very good at adapting and finding ways to be more
productive, more efficient with the resources that we have.
And I think you're exactly right. It's not just scarcity.
It's the variability and the unpredictability of water
shortages.
And so the questions I have is, can farmers--family farmers
who are just family businesses like my own, can we adapt fast
enough? Can we change our business model, change our crop
rotation, adjust how we're stewarding the soil and preparing it
for the variability in the future? Can we do that fast enough?
And so as your colleague asked earlier, I think that there
are programs within USDA, within NRCS that can enhance and
incentivize some of that adaptation. On the ground ultimately,
though, we need investment in infrastructure and not just to
save water but to manage it more collaboratively on basin-wide
approaches which some of my colleagues here at the table also
mentioned. And so in Central Oregon, we're finding ways for
irrigation districts and other water users who normally would
operate in isolation to work together and manage things more
collaboratively and invest in major projects that completely
transform the way that we're using water.
Senator Romney. Thank you. Mr. Castellano, in Iowa, what
are you experiencing there in terms of climate? And do what
degree are farmers and ranchers able to adjust?
Dr. Castellano. Thank you for the question, Senator Romney.
Just like yesterday in our state, it's precipitation extremes,
that is the biggest challenge for us, and of course,
variability from drought to precipitation excess as well. We
have a drainage infrastructure in our state just like
everybody--every state in the United States does.
We are using that drainage infrastructure to do things like
drainage water recycling that we heard about earlier. We take
the water that comes off the drains. Not only does that reduce
nutrient loss downstream which is a big concern for our Gulf of
Mexico as you're aware. So it mitigates that. It also can be
fed back onto the system to benefit the crop productivity later
in the year.
Senator Romney. Thank you. I'd just note, Mr. Chairman, I
think this is an important topic and I'm happy to learn about
it and ask questions and learn from these members of the panel.
I would note that I think perhaps Energy and Natural Resources
(ENR) would be the committee that would be focused on this more
than Budget. I'd hope that we in Budget can deal with the 1.15
trillion-dollar deficit we have and trying to find some
solutions to that because if we don't deal with that, we won't
have the resources to be able to deal with emerging crises as
they develop as a result of climate change and economic
disruption of various kinds. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Whitehouse. And thank you for accepting my
invitation and coming in to discuss the prospect for reforms in
healthcare. We can significantly reduce those at-year
expenditures. I was grateful you took the time to come and join
me during my office hours. Senator Marshall.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR MARSHALL
Senator Marshall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thanks again
to our panel for being here. Some of my questions may be
redundant, so forgive me. As you imagine, we're running back
and forth to other committee hearings this morning as well.
I'll start with Mr. Richards. Look, I'm a fifth-generation
farm kid. I don't remember a time in my life when there wasn't
some place in Kansas that was suffering from drought.
And my grandparents would say the same thing. Live through
the dirty '30s and this and that. And I think you all would
agree with me that the farmers and ranchers were the original
conservationists.
And given the tools and the flexibility, they're going to
do what's right for the land and try to grow the most with the
least possible. We're seeing great strides in precision
agriculture. So many things are working good.
And Mr. Richards, I assume that you use some of these
conservation programs right now. How would you describe the
flexibility portion of that? Are you able--do you feel like
there's too many rules and regulations, any concerns going
forward?
Mr. Richards. Senator, thank you for the question. There's
always opportunities to improve those programs. I do resemble
your remarks in the sense that we're optimistic and we're
always facing adversity and seeking ways to get better.
The programs that exist are tremendously helpful through
Farm Service Agency (FSA), the safety net that exists. I would
say unfortunately those programs tend to be catered more
towards commodity crops. In the west, we focus more on
specialty crops.
And so often those programs don't work as well or are
difficult to navigate for those of us in the western state who
grow smaller specialty crops. In terms of NRCS, similarly,
those programs are very helpful in incentivizing conservation
efforts, water and soil conservation. But often they don't work
well on a short-term emergency basis.
They're meant to or designed to incentivize paradigm shifts
for farmers. But often especially with drought, we need to
adapt right away. And so----
Senator Marshall. Thank you. Dr. Castellano, again, many of
these practices that are now being forced upon us have been
things we've been doing for decades. 1991, I remember starting
doing no-till farming on our farm. Cover crops, like, that's
something new.
But there are certain places in Kansas where that doesn't
work. In the western third of the state, there's simply not
enough moisture to do cover crops. Wherever we can, we do no-
till farming for a lot of reasons. A, it's economical, and B,
it's also the great conservation.
And here's my concern about the sustainable aviation fuel
that they're requiring all these climate practices be done.
It's, like, you can pick and choose. But again, there's just no
way to do cover crops in the western third, western half of the
state. So do you have any concern that losing, that's the right
thing to do, that we'll be losing some of the opportunities
here by adapting and required to adapt all these particulars?
Dr. Castellano. Yes, Senator Marshall. I share your
concern. I think it's a significant concern when we prescribe
conservation practices without considering the system in which
they're being placed.
You made the anecdote about Kansas. I'll provide one about
Iowa. No-tillage often doesn't work in North Central Iowa
because it's too cold. It's too wet.
We need to think about the full system. And those systems
which are flat, erosion is not a problem, we think about other
ways to warm up and dry out the soil and to get the crop
planted. I'd like to say as you move towards rulemaking,
towards the 45Z that we have to be thinking about field scale
analysis, an accounting of greenhouse gas emissions and
conservation practices, how they are effective in specific
scenarios. That's the way we need to go.
Senator Marshall. Yeah, I'm just as concerned about NRSC
and FSA, whether it's the Environmental Quality Incentives
Program (EQIP) program, whatever program it is. If we're over-
prescriptive, we're going to lose some of our farmers and
ranchers because they can't do all of those things. Believe me,
they would do them all if it's going to work.
And last question and I'll stick with Dr. Castellano. Look,
to do no-till farming, you have to have pesticides. You have to
be able to kill the weeds and that type of thing.
There's a lot of frustration in Kansas over the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) again being over-
prescriptive. It's going to prevent us from doing some of these
conservation projects we've been doing decades. How are we
doing in Iowa? Any concern about that?
Dr. Castellano. In Iowa, we have some concerns. In fact, we
have seen increases in tillage in places where no-till works
because of a lack of herbicide availability--effective
herbicide availability.
Senator Marshall. You got it. Yeah, it's too simple. Again,
I think if we just give our farmers and ranchers the tools,
they're going to do the right thing. What I see coming up in
the next Farm Bill is we're being overly prescriptive. That
very much concerns me. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Whitehouse. Thanks Senator Marshall. Senator
Padilla.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR PADILLA
Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Colleagues, there
are few places where the challenges of climate change, extreme
weather, and fluctuations in precipitation are felt more
acutely than in California. The corresponding water scarcity,
insecurity has created some really challenging circumstances
and at times some intense conflict for water users in
California.
You can see it from the Klamath River Basin, on the Oregon
border to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and all the way down
to the Colorado River and other places in between. That's why
at last Congress I fought so relentlessly to ensure that the
Inflation Reduction Act included funding for Interior to help
regions experiencing not just drought but severe drought and to
drive collaborative solutions to perennial water conflicts. Now
just yesterday, I participated in a ceremony at the Department
of Interior with some of our agricultural water users in the
San Joaquin Valley to celebrate a historic agreement that
leverages our Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) dollars to solve
some of our trickiest water fights in the San Joaquin Valley.
Mr. Hagekhalil, you've worked with Interior to leverage IRA
investments to help alleviate Colorado River water conflicts
with creative solutions. Can you speak to how important it is
for Congress to continue providing this type of funding?
Mr. Hagekhalil. Sure. I want to thank you for your
leadership. And to me, yesterday's signing ceremony is an
example of the collaboration. And I also want to say that
Metropolitan two weeks ago signed Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) partnerships with the farmers in Central Valley and San
Joaquin Valley to talk about how we can collaborate to address
the issues of groundwater basins and how we can store water
when we have it in the Central Valley to help the farmers help
us and be able to leverage.
And that's great collaboration adaptation to the changes
that we're seeing. But on the front of the Colorado River is
our farmers, as you heard, have been leading the way in
conservation. But they can't do it alone, and they need the
help financially.
So we're working with the farmers in Palo Verde Irrigation
District or Imperial Valley to implement. And we're able to
actually invest a huge amount of money in conservation. But one
of the things that we have done is actually work with the
farmers to do what we call seasonal farming.
And that means that if during the wintertime where the
commodities and the vegetables are growing is really valuable
across the nation, they can farm. But during the summer where
there's a huge competition for whatever they're farming, we can
keep the land idle and save that water and put it away. But we
need to support them financially.
What we've done is through this IRA, it helped them right
now in getting the funding to conserve more water so we can put
back in Lake Mead and not only serve California but served the
entire southwest and help us come together.
We're doing the same thing in the Border Irrigation
District down by Yuma where by doing the seasonal farming, the
farmers are taking some of the money that's being paid to them
to line canals and be more efficient and implement on farm
conservation and working with the tribes. The Quechan tribe by
the Yuma area, we're also partnering with the Colorado River
Indian Tribe.
We met with them last week to find new ways of farming.
But I think to me the money that we have from the IRA is
helping bridge the gap. And when you go to communities that are
farmers, behind every farm, there is communities and people
that suffer.
So Metropolitan invest a lot of money also in community
benefits and trying to find ways to uplift people. And your
funding from the IRA has been a huge help. And the Bureau of
Reclamation's help has been great.
Senator Padilla. That's great. I want to make sure I make
time for one additional question relative to resources. But
seasonal farming is a great example. We've been working
together on multi-benefit or alternative use of fallowed lands
as well.
But it's not just funding for severe drought that I want to
highlight today. Federal investment in water infrastructure as
a whole has declined about 77 percent since its peak in the
1970s. And although Congress has begun to rectify this by
making transformational investments in water infrastructure
through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, we know that the
funding through that measure is just a down payment.
It's not the end all, be all. And it's critical that we
continue to fund water infrastructure to help water systems
become more resilient to climate change. A follow-up question
to you, Adel. How can Congress best help water systems continue
to drought proof their infrastructure?
Mr. Hagekhalil. I mean, to me, the affordability question
is huge. And I appreciate the bill you introduced, 3830. And
for us to really, as you said, the federal help is a down
payment. Most of the rate is going to be raised locally.
But the biggest issue we have is there is communities are
suffering that are working two jobs and they can't move.
Whether it's San Fernando or Compton in our region. We need
find ways to help them.
So when we invest in the resiliency, we're talking about a
30-billion-dollar investments we need to make. How can we do it
without causing hardship on the communities that are
underserved or disadvantaged? And getting the low income
assistance program is going to help us increase the rates that
we need to do without causing hardship on the communities that
we serve.
Senator Padilla. I'm glad you mentioned the low income.
Chairman Whitehouse spoke to the need for a low income water
assistance program earlier as well because you know whose
hardest hit when it comes to these increased costs. The last
question in closing is can you speak for a moment about the
value or need to not just fund--make infrastructure investments
but for the federal government to be partners in funding
ongoing maintenance and operations?
Mr. Hagekhalil. Yeah, it's critical. As part of the IRA
funding, one of it is how we can reduce our dependence on
imported water. And I'll give two examples.
A number of communities in California are on groundwater
wells. And a number of them are struggling with ensuring they
maintain the water quality that we need in these wells whether
it's because of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) or
some contamination. And we have an interest in making sure
those communities stay on groundwater because if they get off
groundwater and these systems fail, they will have to go to
import water which has a huge rate shock.
So using the funding and we ask the Bureau of Reclamation
to help us fund some of these communities in San Fernando and
Compton and Fullerton and Santa Ana in our region to make sure
that they stay on groundwater and protect them from the
contamination and provide our communities safe water. So if we
can continue those investments, we not only provide resiliency
and response to that but also ensure that we are doing the
right thing for our future and giving safe water for our
communities.
Senator Padilla. And one final thing, colleagues, for the
committee to consider is pretty simple example of leaky pipes,
right? In a drought stricken western United States, the last
thing we can afford is to lose a significant amount of water
supply due to leaky pipes which is simply a result of old
infrastructure and deferred maintenance. And so if we're going
to make these investments to upgrade to modernize our
infrastructure, let's not make the same mistake again.
The better we maintain, the less likely we're going to be
in the situation in the near future of losing a precious
resource which is something as simple as leaky pipes. With
that, thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chairman Whitehouse. Excellent words to end on. I want to
thank the witnesses for appearing before the committee today.
Their full written statements are a part of the record.
As information for all senators, questions for the record
are due by 12:00 noon tomorrow with signed hard copies
delivered to the committee clerk in Dirksen 624. Emailed copies
are also fine. We ask the witnesses if you receive questions
for the record to respond timely, specifically within seven
days of receipt.
With no further business before the committee, I again
thank the witnesses and the hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:01 p.m., Wednesday, May 22, 2024, the
hearing was adjourned.]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]