Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Region M Water Plan Overview – What Role Does Water Conservation Play?

111 views

Published on

Presentation by Tomas Rodriguez, Chair of the Rio Grande Regional Water Planning Group (Region M), at the 2016 SWIFT Funding Workshop in Weslaco, Texas.

Published in: Environment
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Region M Water Plan Overview – What Role Does Water Conservation Play?

  1. 1. Major Metropolitan Areas of Region M 1
  2. 2. MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREAS • THE RIO GRANDE REGIONAL WATER PLANNING AREA (REGION M) CONSISTS OF THE EIGHT COUNTIES ALONG THE MIDDLE AND LOWER RIO GRANDE NEAREST THE RIVER’“ MOUTH AT THE GULF OF MEXICO. THE AMOUNT OF RAINFALL VARIES ACROSS THE LOWER RIO GRANDE REGION FROM AN AVERAGE OF 28 INCHES AT THE COAST TO 18 INCHES IN THE NORTHWESTERN PORTION OF THE REGION. 2
  3. 3. 0 500.000 1.000.000 1.500.000 2.000.000 2.500.000 3.000.000 3.500.000 4.000.000 4.500.000 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 Population Decade Region M Historical and Projected Population Zapata Willacy Webb Starr Maverick Jim Hogg Hidalgo Cameron 3
  4. 4. HISTORICAL & PROJECTED POPULATION • REGION M’“ POPULATION I“ CONCENTRATED IN CAMERON, HIDALGO, MAVERICK AND WEBB COUNTIES. THE US CENSUS BUREAU ESTIMATED TOTAL POPULATION OF REGION M IN AT . MILLION. THE REGION IS EXPECTED TO GROW TO OVER FOUR MILLION BY 2070. 4
  5. 5. Region M Land Use Map 5
  6. 6. LAND USE MAP • THERE IS A SHIFT TOWARD URBANIZATION AND DIVERSIFICATION OF THE ECONOMY, BUT AGRICULTURE STILL PLAYS A MAJOR ROLE IN THE REGION. 6
  7. 7. River Basins in Region M 7
  8. 8. RIVER BASINS • REGION M HAS THE RIO GRANDE AND NUECES RIVER. THE VAST MAJORITY OF ITS WATER COMES FROM THE RIO GRANDE, VIA THE AMISTAD-FALCON RESERVOIR SYSTEM, WHICH IS SHARED WITH MEXICO. THE WATERS OF THE RIO GRANDE ARE MANAGED BY THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY WATERS COMMISSION (IBWC) AND TCEQ’“ RIO GRANDE WATERMASTER. THE MAJORITY OF THE INFLOWS IN THIS SECTION OF THE RIVER ARE FROM THE MEXICAN WATERSHED 8
  9. 9. RIVER BASINS • TWO MAJOR AGREEMENTS BETWEEN MEXICO AND U.S. (1906 AND 1944) ESTABLISH HOW THESE WATERS ARE SHARED. ADDITIONALLY MEXICO IS TO DELIVER 350,000 ACRE FEET PER YEAR TO THE UNITED STATES ON AN AVERAGE OVER A FIVE YEAR CYCLE, EXCEPT FOR YEARS OF EXTRAORDINARY DROUGHT, WHEN THE WATERSHED IN MEXICO CANNOT PROVIDE SUFFICIENT RUNOFF WATER 9
  10. 10. RIVER BASINS • THE TCEQ WATERMASTER COORDINATES RELEASES FROM AMISTAD AND FALCON DAMS. THE SYSTEM OF WATER RIGHTS IS UNIQUE TO THE RIO GRANDE: THERE IS A TIERED SYSTEM THAT PRIORTIZES DOMESTIC, MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL (DMI) WATER RIGHT“, AND E“TABLI“HE“ TWO CLA““E“ A AND B OF MINING AND IRRIGATION WATER RIGHTS 10
  11. 11. RIVER BASINS • THE DMI WATER RIGHT“ ARE REPLENI“HED EVERY MONTH TO ENSURE THAT THOSE WATER RIGHTS CAN BE DELIVERED IN FULL. CLA““ A AND B MINING AND IRRIGATION WATER RIGHTS ARE AFFECTED. THE FIRM YIELD OF WATER RIGHTS OF THE FALCON- AMISTAD RESERVOIRS RANGE FROM 1,061,000 TO 1,054,000 ACRE FEET FROM 2020 TO 2070 RESPECTIVELY. 11
  12. 12. Major and Minor Aquifers in Region M 12
  13. 13. MAJOR AND MINOR AQUIFERS • THE MAJOR AQUIFERS IN THE REGION ARE THE CARRIZO-WILCOX AND THE GULF COAST. THE MINOR AQUIFERS ARE THE YEGUA JACKSON, SPARTA, AND QUEEN CITY. 13
  14. 14. - 200.000 400.000 600.000 800.000 1.000.000 1.200.000 1.400.000 1.600.000 1.800.000 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 Acre-FeetofWater Projected Water Demands by WUG (Acre-ft./year) Manufacturing Demands Livestock Demands Mining Demands Steam Electric Power Demands Municipal Demands Irrigation Demands Water demand projections for each water user group type in Region M (Acre-feet/year) 14
  15. 15. PROJECTED WATER DEMAND BY WATER USER GROUPS • THERE IS AN INCREASE FROM 1.5 TO 1.6 MILLION AC FT 15
  16. 16. Water District Distribution Network, Lower Rio Grande Valley 16
  17. 17. WATER DISTRICT DISTRIBUTION NETWORK IN LOWER RIO GRANDE • REGION M HA“ TWO GENERAL TYPE“ OF WHOLESALE WATER PROVIDERS (WWP): • THERE ARE 27 IRRIGATION DISTRICTS THAT PROVIDE RAW WATER TO IRRIGATORS, CITIES, INDUSTRIAL AND LIVESTOCK USERS. 17
  18. 18. WATER DISTRICT DISTRIBUTION NETWORK • THE OTHER PROVIDERS ARE THOSE WHO SELL RETAIL AND/OR WHOLESALE TREATED WATER TO MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL USERS. 18
  19. 19. 0 100.000 200.000 300.000 400.000 500.000 600.000 700.000 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 Acre-feet/year Municipal Needs Compared with Demands (Acre-feet/year) Municipal Supplies Municipal Needs Municipal Supplies Shown relative to Municipal Demands (Acre-feet /year) 19
  20. 20. MUNICIPAL SUPPLIES RELATIVE TO DEMANDS • MUNICIPAL DEMANDS ARE GOING TO INCREASE FROM 312,000 TO 612,000 AC FT FROM 2020 TO 2070 RESPECTIVELY. 20
  21. 21. 0 200.000 400.000 600.000 800.000 1.000.000 1.200.000 1.400.000 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 Acre-feet/year Irrigation Needs compared with Demands (Acre-feet/year) Irrigation Supplies Irrigation Needs Irrigation Supplies as a Portion of Irrigation Demands (Acre-feet /year) 21
  22. 22. IRRIGATION SUPPLIES AS FUNCTION TO DEMAND • THE IRRIGATION REQUIREMENTS WILL BE DECREASING FROM OVER 1 MILLION TO APPROXIMATELY 900,000 22
  23. 23. 0 2.000 4.000 6.000 8.000 10.000 12.000 14.000 16.000 18.000 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 Acre-feet/year Mining Needs Compared with Demands (Acre-feet/year) Mining Supplies Mining Needs Mining Supplies as a Portion of Mining Demands (Acre-feet /year) 23
  24. 24. MINING SUPPLIES RELATIVE TO DEMAND • MINING DEMANDS ARE EXPECTED TO DECREASE FROM 17,000 TO 10,000 ACRE FEET 24
  25. 25. 0 5.000 10.000 15.000 20.000 25.000 30.000 35.000 40.000 45.000 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 Acre-feet/year Steam-Electric Needs Compared with Demands (Acre- feet/year) Steam-Electric Supplies Steam Electric Power Needs Steam Electric Water as a Portion of Steam Electric Demands (Acre-feet /year) 25
  26. 26. STEAM ELECTRIC SUPPLIES AND DEMAND • STEAM-ELECTRIC DEMANDS ARE ESTIMATED TO INCREASE FROM 15,000 TO 39,000 ACRE FEET 26
  27. 27. 0 1.000 2.000 3.000 4.000 5.000 6.000 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 Acre-feet/year Livestock Supplies and Demands (Acre-feet/year) Livestock Supplies Livestock Needs Livestock Water as a Portion of Livestock Demands (Acre-feet /year) 27
  28. 28. LIVESTOCK SUPPLIES AND DEMAND • LIVESTOCK DEMANDS ARE NOT EXPECTED TO CHANGE 28
  29. 29. 0 2.000 4.000 6.000 8.000 10.000 12.000 14.000 16.000 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 Acre-feet/year Manufacturing Needs Compared with Demands (Acre- feet/year) Manufacturing Supplies Manufacturing Needs Manufacturing Supplies as a Portion of Manufacturing Demands (Acre-feet /year) 29
  30. 30. MANUFACTURING SUPPLIES AND DEMAND • MANUFACTURING DEMANDS WILL INCREASE FROM 10,000 TO 15,000 ACRE FEET 30
  31. 31. Population Projections for Region M by County 31
  32. 32. POPULATION DEMANDS BY COUNTY • COUNTY 2020 2070 • CAMERON 478,974 913,000 • HIDALGO 981,890 2,200,000 • JIM HOGG 5,853 8,000 • MAVERICK 63,107 107,000 • STARR 70,803 112,000 • WEBB 318,028 647,000 • WILLACY 25,264 41,000 • ZAPATA 16,819 34,000 32
  33. 33. CAMERON; 81.393 HIDALGO; 158.629 JIM HOGG; 692 MAVERICK; 10.273 STARR; 10.597 WEBB; 43.754 WILLACY; 3.257 ZAPATA; 2.996 Region M Municipal Demand by County, 2020 (Acre- feet/year) Municipal Demand Distribution among the Eight Counties of Region M (Acre-feet/year) 33
  34. 34. MUNICIPAL DEMAND BY COUNTY ACRE FEET 2020 2070 • CAMERON 81,393 147,932 • HIDALGO 158,629 335,816 • JIM HOGG 692 871 • MAVERICK 10,273 16,738 • STARR 10,597 15,689 • WEBB 43,754 84,343 • WILLACY 3,257 4,982 • ZAPATA 2,996 5,756 34
  35. 35. Gallons per capita per day (GPCD) Municipal Demands of Major Cities CITY GPCD Brownsville 162 Harlingen 168 Port Isabel 211 McAllen 220 Mission 193 Eagle Pass 182 Rio Grande City 223 Laredo 134 Zapata 175 35
  36. 36. 84,3% 11,7% 2,2% 0,2% 1,5% Major Water Resources, Region M (2020) Amistad-Falcon Reservoir Gulf Coast Aquifer Yegua-Jackson Aquifer Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer Reuse Major Groundwater, Surface Water, and Reuse Water Source Projections in Region M 36
  37. 37. MAJOR WATER RESOURCES • AMISTAD-FALCON 84.3% • GULF COAST 11.7% • YEGUA JACKSON 2.2% • REUSE 1.5% • CARRIZO WILCOX 0.2% • CARRIZO WILCOX HAS NOT BEEN USED MORE EXTENSIVELY BECAUSE THE RECHARGE RATE HAS NOT BEEN CONFIRMED. MORE GROUND WATER STUDIES ARE REQUIRED. 37
  38. 38. 0 1.000.000 2.000.000 3.000.000 4.000.000 5.000.000 6.000.000 7.000.000 8.000.000 19.08.1953 19.08.1955 19.08.1957 19.08.1959 19.08.1961 19.08.1963 19.08.1965 19.08.1967 19.08.1969 19.08.1971 19.08.1973 19.08.1975 19.08.1977 19.08.1979 19.08.1981 19.08.1983 19.08.1985 19.08.1987 19.08.1989 19.08.1991 19.08.1993 19.08.1995 19.08.1997 19.08.1999 19.08.2001 19.08.2003 19.08.2005 19.08.2007 19.08.2009 19.08.2011 Amistad and Falcon Reservoir System Combined Historical Storage (Acre-Feet) INTERNATIONAL FALCON RESERVOIR STORAGE INTERNATIONAL AMISTAD RESERVOIR STORAGE Combined U.S. and Mexican Storage in Amistad and Falcon Reservoirs, 1953 – 2011 (Acre-feet). 38
  39. 39. COMBINED STORAGE IN AMISTAD & FALCON DAMS • FALCON DAM WAS COMPLETED IN 1953. THE RIVER STOPPED FLOWING IN 1953. THE 1954 FLOOD FILLED FALCON. AMISTAD DAM WAS COMPLETED IN 1968. THE DROUGHT OF RECORD IS 1993 TO 2000. 39
  40. 40. Rio Grande Basin, Showing Tributaries and Major Reservoirs in Mexico 40
  41. 41. RIO GRANDE BASIN IN TEXAS • THE CONCHOS, PECOS AND DEVILS RIVERS DISCHARGE INTO AMISTAD DAM. THE RIO SALADO DISCHARGES INTO FALCON DAM & SAN JUAN RIVER DISCHARGES BELOW AMISTAD 41
  42. 42. 42
  43. 43. WATER DELIVERED FROM MEXICO • THIS SLIDE INDICATES THE WATER DELIVERED BY MEXICO FROM OCTOBER 1988 TO DECEMBER 2013 43
  44. 44. 44
  45. 45. WATER DELIVERED BY MEXICO 2015 • THIS CHART SHOWS THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DELIVERED VERSUS WHAT WAS DELIVERED. MEXICO HAS FALLEN SHORT IN MEETING THEIR OBLIGATIONS. 45
  46. 46. 46 Edwards-Trinity Aquifer Water Budget Lower Pecos River Devils River Nueces River Colorado River-Concho Colorado River-Llano Rio Grande Amistad Rio Grande Falcon AMISTAD DAM AND PECOS RIVER STUDY
  47. 47. AMISTAD DAM- PECOS & DEVILS RIVERS • THE CITY OF LAREDO HAS RECEIVED A STUDY FROM DR. RONALD GREEN OF THE PECOS RIVER. THIS STUDY HAD THE ENDORSEMENT OF REGION M . IT AL“O RECEIVED FINANCIAL HELP FROM THE TEXAS AG INSURANCE, RIO GRANDE REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY, LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY WATER DISTRICTS, ZAPATA COUNTY AND THE CITY OF MCALLEN. 47
  48. 48. AMISTAD DAM – PECOS & DEVILS RIVERS • VALVERDE COUNTY HAS ALSO RECEIVED A STUDY FROM DR. GREEN OF DEVILS RIVER. BOTH STUDIES ARE TO DETERMINE HOW GROUND WATER PUMPING WOULD AFFECT THE SURFACE WATERS OF THE DEVILS, PECOS AND AMISTAD DAM. 48
  49. 49. Future Impact of Pumping on Rio Grande Water Budget in Val Verde County (acre-ft) Based on Proposed Water Export Lake Amistad Devils River 263,000 -150,000 83,000 Pecos River 195,000 -49,000 146,000 Rio Grande at Langtry 1,071,000 San Felipe Creek 65,000 Rio Grande below Amistad Dam 1,659,000 1,460,000 Rio Grande at Del Rio 1,659,000 1,460,000 Cienegas Creek 8,700 Gauging Station Goodenough Spring 103,000 49
  50. 50. DELIVERY OF WATER TO AMISTAD • WE SHOULD GET THE FOLLOWING IN ACRE FEET • CONCHOS RIVER -------------------------------- 1,071,000 • PECOS RIVER ---------------------------------------- 195,000 • DEVILS RIVER --------------------------------------- 263,000 • GOOD ENOUGH SPRINGS ----------------------- 103,000 • CIENEGAS CREEK ------------------------------------- 8,700 • SAN FELIPE SPRINGS ------------------------------- 65,000 • SUB TOTAL ----------------------------------------- 1,659,000 • LESS FROM PROPOSED EXPORT -------------- 199,000 • TOTAL ------------------------------------------------ 1,460,000 50
  51. 51. WATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND WATER CONSERVATION • WERE DERIVED FROM THE FOLLOWING • THE 2011 PLAN • RESPONSES FROM WATER PROVIDERS AND STAKEHOLDERS FOR PROJECT AND STRATEGY DESCRIPTIONS IN 2013 • LIST OF WMS FOR CONSIDERATION LISTED IN THE WATER PLANNING GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS PROVIDED BY TWDB 51
  52. 52. IRRIGATION DISTRICTS IMPROVEMENTS • IRRIGATION DISTRICTS (ID) CARRY OVER 85% OF THE WATER USED FROM THE RIO GRANDE “Y“TEM IN REGION M • ID SYSTEMS REQUIRE SIGNIFICANT REGULAR MAINTENANCE • ID SYSTEMS EXPERIENCE 25-40% LOSSES ESTIMATED TO BE 300,000 AC FT 52
  53. 53. IRRIGATION DISTRICTS PROCEDURES FOR DELIVERY TO FARMERS • IN MOST DISTRICTS AGRICULTURAL WATER DELIVERIES ARE MEASURED IN IRRIGATION“ WHICH ARE CON“IDERED TO BE 4 TO 8 INCHES OF WATER OVER EACH IRRIGATED ACRE, DEPENDING ON THE DISTRICT • THI“ PROCE““ I“ MONITORED BY CANAL RIDER“ WHICH I“ NOT THE MO“T EFFICIENT 53
  54. 54. IRRIGATION DISTRICTS IMPROVEMENTS • SIXTY FOUR PROJECTS WERE SUBMITTED • CANAL LINING • INSTALLATION OR REPLACEMENT OF PIPELINES • GENERAL REPAIRS • INSTALLATION OF NEW METERS 54
  55. 55. HARLINGEN IRRIGATION DISTRICT WATER CONSERVATION PROJECT • THIS PROJECT CONSISTED OF INSTALLING METERS AT FARM IRRIGATION DELIVERY SITE LOCATIONS SERVING 50% OF THE IRRIGATED ACREAGE IN THE DISTRICT • THE INSTALLATION OF METERS SAVED AN ESTIMATED 27% OF WATER PER YEAR 55
  56. 56. HARLINGEN IRRIGATION DISTRICT WATER CONSERVATION PROJECT • THE INSTALLATION OF METERS AND TELEMETRY EQUIPMENT PROVIDED FLOW DATA REQUIRED TO BALANCE THE DISTRIBUTION OF WATER WITHIN THE DELIVERY CANALS. THE ESTIMATED SAVINGS WAS 40% 56
  57. 57. IRRIGATION DISTRICTS IMPROVEMENTS • THE ESTIMATED SAVINGS IN OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ARE THE FOLLOWING: • 1. CANAL LINING -- $325 PER MILE • 2. INSTALLATION OF A PIPE - $3,976 PER MILE 57
  58. 58. WASTEWATER REUSE • DIRECT REUSE INVOLVES INTRODUCING TREATED WASTEWATER DIRECTLY FROM A WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT TO A PLACE OF USE – FOR EXAMPLE A GOLF COURSE • INDIRECT REUSE INVOLVES DISCHARGEING TREATED WASTEWATER TO A RIVER, STREAM OR LAKE 58
  59. 59. WASTEWATER REUSE • NON-POTABLE REUSE • POTABLE REUSE – PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE OF WATER REUSE IS A VERY IMPORTANT FACTOR 59
  60. 60. DESALINATION OF BRACKISH WATER • MOST COMMON METHOD IS MEMBRANE TECHNOLOGY • TREATMENT OF BRACKISH WATER NOT EXCEEDING 3,000 MG/L OF TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS (TDS) REQUIRES 200 PSI AND IS ESTIMATED TO COST BETWEEN $350 TO $780 PER AC FT OR $1.07 TO $2.39 PER THOUSAND GALLONS 60
  61. 61. DESALINATION OF SEAWATER • MOST COMMON METHOD IS MEMBRANE TECHNOLOGY • SEAWATER HAS AN AVERAGE OF 35,000 MG/L OF TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS, REQUIRES 1,000 PSI OF PRESSURE AND IS ESTIMATED TO COST FROM $820 TO $1,300 PER AC FT OR FROM $2.52 TO $3.99 PER THOUSAND GALLONS 61
  62. 62. ADVANACED MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION • MUNICIPAL UTILITIES MUST SUBMIT A DROUGHT CONTINGENCY AND WATER CON“ERVATION PLAN • MUNICIPAL UTILITES IMPLEMENTING ADVANCED CONSERVATION MEASURES WILL FACE REDUCED REVENUE AS A RESULT OF DECREASING DEMAND 62
  63. 63. ADVANCED MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION • METERING OF ALL NEW CONNECTIONS • RETROFITTING EXISTING CONNECTIONS • CONDUCT ANNUAL WATER AUDITS • CONDUCT WATER LOSS CONTROL AUDITS AND PROJECTS 63
  64. 64. REGION M WATER CON“ERVATION GOAL • MUNICIPALITIES ARE TO DECREASE CURRENT CONSUMPTION TO 140 GALLONS PER PERSON PER DAY 64
  65. 65. THANK YOU 65

×