Latest news with #TexasWaterDevelopmentBoard
Yahoo
29-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
The one thing Texas won't do to save its water supply
This article is part of Running Out, an occasional series about Texas' water crisis. Read more stories about the threats facing Texas' water supply here. LUBBOCK — Every winter, after the sea of cotton has been harvested in the South Plains and the ground looks barren, technicians with the High Plains Underground Water Conservation District check the water levels in nearly 75,000 wells across 16 counties. For years, their measurements have shown what farmers and water conservationists fear most — the Ogallala Aquifer, an underground water source that's the lifeblood of the South Plains agriculture industry, is running dry. That's because of a century-old law called the rule of capture. The rule is simple: If you own the land above an aquifer in Texas, the water underneath is yours. You can use as much as you want, as long as it's not wasted or taken maliciously. The same applies to your neighbor. If they happen to use more water than you, then that's just bad luck. To put it another way, landowners can mostly pump as much water as they choose without facing liability to surrounding landowners whose wells might be depleted as a result. Following the Dust Bowl — and to stave off catastrophe — state lawmakers created groundwater conservation districts in 1949 to protect what water is left. But their power to restrict landowners is limited. 'The mission is to save as much water possible for as long as possible, with as little impact on private property rights as possible,' said Jason Coleman, manager for the High Plains Underground Water Conservation District. 'How do you do that? It's a difficult task.' Rapid population growth, climate change, and aging water infrastructure all threaten the state's water supply. Texas does not have enough water to meet demand if the state is stricken with a historic drought, according to the Texas Water Development Board, the state agency that manages Texas' water supply. Lawmakers want to invest in every corner to save the state's water. This week, they reached a historic $20 billion deal on water projects. [Texas is running out of water. Here's why and what state leaders plan to do about it.] But no one wants to touch the rule of capture. In a state known for rugged individualism, politically speaking, reforming the law is tantamount to stripping away freedoms. 'There probably are opportunities to vest groundwater districts with additional authority,' said Amy Hardberger, director for the Texas Tech University Center for Water Law and Policy. 'I don't think the political climate is going to do that.' State Sen. Charles Perry, a Lubbock Republican, and Rep. Cody Harris, a Palestine Republican, led the effort on water in Austin this year. Neither responded to requests for comment. Carlos Rubinstein, a water expert with consulting firm RSAH2O and a former chairman of the water development board, said the rule has been relied upon so long that it would be near impossible to undo the law. 'I think it's better to spend time working within the rules,' Rubinstein said. 'And respect the rule of capture, yet also recognize that, in and of itself, it causes problems.' Even though groundwater districts were created to regulate groundwater, the law effectively stops them from doing so, or they risk major lawsuits. The state water plan, which spells out how the state's water is to be used, acknowledges the shortfall. Groundwater availability is expected to decline by 25% by 2070, mostly due to reduced supply in the Ogallala and Edwards-Trinity aquifers. Together, the aquifers stretch across West Texas and up through the Panhandle. By itself, the Ogallala has an estimated three trillion gallons of water. Though the overwhelming majority in Texas is used by farmers. It's expected to face a 50% decline by 2070. Groundwater is 54% of the state's total water supply and is the state's most vulnerable natural resource. It's created by rainfall and other precipitation, and seeps into the ground. Like surface water, groundwater is heavily affected by ongoing droughts and prolonged heat waves. However, the state has more say in regulating surface water than it does groundwater. Surface water laws have provisions that cut supply to newer users in a drought and prohibit transferring surface water outside of basins. Historically, groundwater has been used by agriculture in the High Plains. However, as surface water evaporates at a quicker clip, cities and businesses are increasingly interested in tapping the underground resource. As Texas' population continues to grow and surface water declines, groundwater will be the prize in future fights for water. In many ways, the damage is done in the High Plains, a region that spans from the top of the Panhandle down past Lubbock. The Ogallala Aquifer runs beneath the region, and it's faced depletion to the point of no return, according to experts. Simply put: The Ogallala is not refilling to keep up with demand. 'It's a creeping disaster,' said Robert Mace, executive director of the Meadows Center for Water and the Environment. 'It isn't like you wake up tomorrow and nobody can pump anymore. It's just happening slowly, every year.' The High Plains Water District was the first groundwater district created in Texas. Over a protracted multi-year fight, the Legislature created these new local government bodies in 1949, with voter approval, enshrining the new stewards of groundwater into the state Constitution. If the lawmakers hoped to embolden local officials to manage the troves of water under the soil, they failed. There are areas with groundwater that don't have conservation districts. Each groundwater districts has different powers. In practice, most water districts permit wells and make decisions on spacing and location to meet the needs of the property owner. The one thing all groundwater districts have in common: They stop short of telling landowners they can't pump water. In the seven decades since groundwater districts were created, a series of lawsuits have effectively strangled groundwater districts. Even as water levels decline from use and drought, districts still get regular requests for new wells. They won't say no out of fear of litigation. 'You have a host of different decisions to make as it pertains to management of groundwater,' Coleman said. 'That list has grown over the years.' The possibility of lawsuits makes groundwater districts hesitant to regulate usage or put limitations on new well permits. Groundwater districts have to defend themselves in lawsuits, and most lack the resources to do so. 'The law works against us in that way,' Hardberger, with Texas Tech University, said. 'It means one large tool in our toolbox, regulation, is limited.' The most recent example is a lawsuit between the Braggs Farm and the Edwards Aquifer Authority. The farm requested permits for two pecan orchards in Medina County, outside San Antonio. The authority granted only one and limited how much water could be used based on state law. It wasn't an arbitrary decision. The authority said it followed the statute set by the Legislature to determine the permit. 'That's all they were guaranteed,' said Gregory Ellis, the first general manager of the authority, referring to the water available to the farm. The Braggs family filed a takings lawsuit against the authority. This kind of claim can be filed when any level of government — including groundwater districts — takes private property for public use without paying for the owner's losses. Braggs won. It is the only successful water-related takings claim in Texas, and it made groundwater laws murkier. It cost the authority $4.5 million. 'I think it should have been paid by the state Legislature,' Ellis said. 'They're the ones who designed that permitting system. But that didn't happen.' An appeals court upheld the ruling in 2013, and the Texas Supreme Court denied petitions to consider appeals. However, the state's supreme court has previously suggested the Legislature could enhance the powers of the groundwater districts and regulate groundwater like surface water, just as many other states have done. While the laws are complicated, Ellis said the fundamental rule of capture has benefits. It has saved Texas' legal system from a flurry of lawsuits between well owners. 'If they had said 'Yes, you can sue your neighbor for damaging your well,' where does it stop?' Ellis asked. 'Everybody sues everybody.' Coleman, the High Plains district's manager, said some people want groundwater districts to have more power, while others think they have too much. Well owners want restrictions for others, but not on them, he said. 'You're charged as a district with trying to apply things uniformly and fairly,' Coleman said. Two tractors were dropping seeds around Walt Hagood's farm as he turned on his irrigation system for the first time this year. He didn't plan on using much water. It's too precious. The cotton farm stretches across 2,350 acres on the outskirts of Wolfforth, a town 12 miles southwest of Lubbock. Hagood irrigates about 80 acres of land, and prays that rain takes care of the rest. 'We used to have a lot of irrigated land with adequate water to make a crop,' Hagood said. 'We don't have that anymore.' The High Plains is home to cotton and cattle, multi-billion-dollar agricultural industries. The success is in large part due to the Ogallala. Since its discovery, the aquifer has helped farms around the region spring up through irrigation, a way for farmers to water their crops instead of waiting for rain that may not come. But as water in the aquifer declines, there are growing concerns that there won't be enough water to support agriculture in the future. At the peak of irrigation development, more than 8.5 million acres were irrigated in Texas. About 65% of that was in the High Plains. In the decades since the irrigation boom, High Plains farmers have resorted to methods that might save water and keep their livelihoods afloat. They've changed their irrigation systems so water is used more efficiently. They grow cover crops so their soil is more likely to soak up rainwater. Some use apps to see where water is needed so it's not wasted. Farmers who have not changed their irrigation systems might not have a choice in the near future. It can take a week to pump an inch of water in some areas from the aquifer because of how little water is left. As conditions change underground, they are forced to drill deeper for water. That causes additional problems. Calcium can build up, and the water is of poorer quality. And when the water is used to spray crops through a pivot irrigation system, it's more of a humidifier as water quickly evaporates in the heat. According to the groundwater district's most recent management plan, 2 million acres in the district use groundwater for irrigation. About 95% of water from the Ogallala is used for irrigated agriculture. The plan states that the irrigated farms 'afford economic stability to the area and support a number of other industries.' The state water plan shows groundwater supply is expected to decline, and drought won't be the only factor causing a shortage. Demand for municipal use outweighs irrigation use, reflecting the state's future growth. In Region O, which is the South Plains, water for irrigation declines by 2070 while demand for municipal use rises because of population growth in the region. Coleman, with the High Plains groundwater district, often thinks about how the aquifer will hold up with future growth. There are some factors at play with water planning that are nearly impossible to predict and account for, Coleman said. Declining surface water could make groundwater a source for municipalities that didn't depend on it before. Regions known for having big, open patches of land, like the High Plains, could be attractive to incoming businesses. People could move to the country and want to drill a well, with no understanding of water availability. The state will continue to grow, Coleman said, and all the incoming businesses and industries will undoubtedly need water. 'We could say 'Well, it's no one's fault. We didn't know that factory would need 20,000 acre-feet of water a year,' Coleman said. 'It's not happening right now, but what's around the corner?' Coleman said this puts agriculture in a tenuous position. The region is full of small towns that depend on agriculture and have supporting businesses, like cotton gins, equipment and feed stores, and pesticide and fertilizer sprayers. This puts pressure on the High Plains water district, along with the two regional water planning groups in the region, to keep agriculture alive. 'Districts are not trying to reduce pumping down to a sustainable level,' said Mace with the Meadows Foundation. 'And I don't fault them for that, because doing that is economic devastation in a region with farmers.' Hagood, the cotton farmer, doesn't think reforming groundwater rights is the way to solve it. What's done is done, he said. 'Our U.S. Constitution protects our private property rights, and that's what this is all about,' Hagood said. 'Any time we have a regulation and people are given more authority, it doesn't work out right for everybody.' The state water plan recommends irrigation conservation as a strategy. It's also the least costly water management method. But that strategy is fraught. Farmers need to irrigate in times of drought, and telling them to stop can draw criticism. In Eastern New Mexico, the Ogallala Land and Water Conservancy, a nonprofit organization, has been retiring irrigation wells. Landowners keep their water rights, and the organization pays them to stop irrigating their farms. Landowners get paid every year as part of the voluntary agreement, and they can end it at any point. Ladona Clayton, executive director of the organization, said they have been criticized, with their efforts being called a 'war' and 'land grab.' They also get pushback on why the responsibility falls on farmers. She said it's because of how much water is used for irrigation. They have to be aggressive in their approach, she said. The aquifer supplies water to the Cannon Air Force Base. 'We don't want them to stop agricultural production,' Clayton said. 'But for me to say it will be the same level that irrigation can support would be untrue.' There is another possible lifeline that people in the High Plains are eyeing as a solution: the Dockum Aquifer. It's a minor aquifer that underlies part of the Ogallala, so it would be accessible to farmers and ranchers in the region. The High Plains Water District also oversees this aquifer. If it seems too good to be true — that the most irrigated part of Texas would just so happen to have another abundant supply of water flowing underneath — it's because there's a catch. The Dockum is full of extremely salty brackish water. Some counties can use the water for irrigation and drinking water without treatment, but it's unusable in others. According to the groundwater district, a test well in Lubbock County pulled up water that was as salty as seawater. Rubinstein, the former water development board chairman, said there are pockets of brackish groundwater in Texas that haven't been tapped yet. It would be enough to meet the needs on the horizon, but it would also be very expensive to obtain and use. A landowner would have to go deeper to get it, then pump the water over a longer distance. 'That costs money, and then you have to treat it on top of that,' Rubinstein said. 'But, it is water.' Landowners have expressed interest in using desalination, a treatment method to lower dissolved salt levels. Desalination of produced and brackish water is one of the ideas that was being floated around at the Legislature this year, along with building a pipeline to move water across the state. Hagood, the farmer, is skeptical. He thinks whatever water they move could get used up before it makes it all the way to West Texas. There is always brackish groundwater. Another aquifer brings the chance of history repeating — if the Dockum aquifer is treated so its water is usable, will people drain it, too? Hagood said there would have to be limits. Disclosure: Edwards Aquifer Authority and Texas Tech University have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here. First round of TribFest speakers announced! Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Maureen Dowd; U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-San Antonio; Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker; U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California; and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Dallas are taking the stage Nov. 13–15 in Austin. Get your tickets today!
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Lawmakers near deal to spend $20 billion over two decades on water crisis
Texas lawmakers appear to have reached a deal this week and are on the brink of passing a sweeping plan to invest billions into the state's fragile water infrastructure and future water supply over the next 20 years, ending months of tense, back door negotiations. On Tuesday, the Senate approved House Joint Resolution 7, which will send to voters in November a proposal to allot $1 billion a year — $20 billion in total — until 2047 to secure the state's water supply. That money will be used to fund new water supply projects, such as desalination, repairing old water infrastructure, conservation and flood mitigation projects. Meanwhile, the House gave initial approval to Senate Bill 7, by Sen. Charles Perry, R-Lubbock, which lays out the administrative framework for funding water projects through the Texas Water Development Board. Lawmakers also agreed to a one-time investment of $2.5 billion into the water fund from House Bill 500, the supplemental budget, which is taken from the current budget surplus. About $880 million of that is already in the fund, so more than $1.6 billion will be deposited. A final, procedural, vote by the House on SB 7 is expected to happen Wednesday. [Water bills face deadline threat as Texas lawmakers negotiate spending priorities] Addressing the state's water crisis has been a big priority for lawmakers and Gov. Greg Abbott this year. Texas is running out of water, and fast. With aging pipes, drought pressure, and population growth squeezing resources, Abbott called water an 'emergency item.' The $20 billion deal is a step forward, but the funding is a fraction of what Texas needs to fully fix the problem. A Texas 2036 report estimated that the state needs nearly $154 billion by 2050 for water infrastructure, including $59 billion for water supply projects, $74 billion for leaky pipes and infrastructure maintenance, and $21 billion to fix broken wastewater systems. The funding also dries up in 2047, and unlike similar constitutional funds, such as those dedicated to transportation, the Legislature cannot extend the tax dedication by resolution. The Legislature, more than two decades from now, will have to amend the state constitution, again — with another two-thirds vote — to keep the money flowing. It will also be put to another state referendum. And as climate change accelerates, urban demand skyrockets, and critical infrastructure ages, this deal may prove to be a down payment. Perry acknowledged the shortfall on the Senate floor, but applauded the initial step. 'This plan is a good start to make that goal,' Perry said. Both bills have changed quite a bit throughout the legislative process. The biggest point of contention was how the annual $1 billion would be spent. The original House plan gave the Texas Water Development Board wide discretion over how to use the money. Waters experts said under that plan, local leaders would have had flexibility to prioritize their community's most pressing needs — whether cleaning salty water to make drinkable or repairing leaky pipes. However, a Senate push led by Perry locked in 80% of the funds for new water supply projects, such as desalination and treating oilfield wastewater. Under that plan, the remaining 20% would be reserved for repairs, conservation, and flood mitigation. The fight over that ratio became the flashpoint of the legislative debate. On Monday, both those proposals were walked back to a 50-50 split by an amendment added to the Senate bill by state Rep. Cody Harris, R-Palestine. During the discussion Monday about the Senate bill, Rep. Vikki Goodwin, D-Austin, cited a neighborhood in her district with chronic water line failures and old pipes that need repair. She asked if the water bill will help communities like that one with leaking pipes. Harris assured her the bill 'absolutely' addresses that. 'Being able to fix existing failing infrastructure is a major focus of this bill,' he said. The Senate and House need to approve each chamber's amendments, which they're expected to do, before the legislation can be sent to Abbott's desk. Disclosure: Texas 2036 has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here. First round of TribFest speakers announced! Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Maureen Dowd; U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-San Antonio; Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker; U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California; and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Dallas are taking the stage Nov. 13–15 in Austin. Get your tickets today!
Yahoo
01-05-2025
- Climate
- Yahoo
Can Texas clean up fracking water enough to use for farming? One company thinks so.
This article is part of Running Out, an occasional series about Texas' water crisis. Read more stories about the threats facing Texas' water supply here. MIDLAND — On any given day, energy companies across the vast Permian Basin in West Texas inject millions of gallons of water into the dry brown earth, breaking up layers of rock on the hunt for crude oil. As oil and gas are extracted, water flows back up. It is all but unusable — unless treated. Often referred to as produced water, the grimy backwash is full of dirt, minerals and hundreds of chemicals, some of which can be radioactive. Companies must dispose of it somehow. Most, with state permission, inject it underground. Increasingly, oil producers are cleaning it up just enough to reuse it for more fracking. Now, amid a growing water crisis, there is interest in oil country — and Austin — to clean the water further for agriculture and other industries. Texas Pacific Water Resources is one company leading the effort. The West Texas company says it has developed methods to clean the water sufficiently to be released into bodies of water that can be used by farmers. And it's seeking state permission to expand its operation, with the hope of sending millions of gallons up the Pecos River to parched farm land. [Texas is running out of water. Here's why and what state leaders plan to do about it.] 'We've seen in testing the soil and the crops that no contamination was detected,' Adrienne Lopez, a research manager at Texas Pacific, said. 'The soil's been perfectly healthy, as well as the plants.' The state's water supply is under duress from a growing population, climate change and deteriorating infrastructure. In West Texas, as in much of the state, there is not enough water to meet demand if the state is struck by a 100-year drought, according to state data. The state's water plan suggests municipal needs, in particular, will grow in this region of the state for decades to come. And data gathered by the Texas Water Development Board, which monitors the state's water distribution, estimates the region will need tens of thousands of acre-feet to sustain the multiple industries — especially the power generators. Because of this, there is much urgency to find new water supply. Lawmakers are debating a package of bills that would inject billions to secure the state's water future. Meanwhile, supporters of cleaning fracking water, however, caution this effort is years away from saving the state from its water crisis. Laura Capper, founder and CEO of EnergyMakers, an oil and gas consulting firm, who has advised on produced water projects for more than a decade, said that the hundreds of millions of gallons of oil and gas wastewater can be reused. But it is years away from pulling Texas out of its water crisis. 'We're absolutely not moving fast enough,' Capper said. 'We could be looking at four or five years from now, even if we were full steam ahead before we got big facilities up and running, that could make a difference in these water shortages.' Meanwhile, skeptics warn the effort is not a solution at all. Decisions regarding produced water discharge should not be driven by urgency, said Jennifer Walker, senior director of the Texas Coast and Water Program at the National Wildlife Federation. She said questions remain about how reliable the treatment methods are, whether there is enough energy to sustain them and the costs. 'We need to take our time and be really, really careful about this and build a lot of trust around it if this is the path that we're going to go down,' she said. The amount of water that oil and gas companies need to fracture a well can vary. A federal estimate put it as high as 16 million gallons per well. But Capper said a modern well needs double — up to 34 million gallons. Oil companies rarely use fresh water, instead using brackish or recycled produced water. The state prohibits oil companies from discharging untreated produced water into lakes and rivers. Instead they must put the resurfaced produced water in a disposal well or reuse it for more fracking. Those disposal practices harm the environment in other ways. The Texas Railroad Commission established a connection between disposal in deep disposal wells and seismic activity, resulting in regulators limiting how much water that operators can inject underground. Produced water has also burst through abandoned wells at least eight times. Scientists have studied produced water for at least a decade. And during the last five years, research has accelerated. The Texas Legislature even put up $10 million to help study the practice. Inside Texas Pacific Water, rows of pipes line the edges of the floors, walls and ceiling. They're connected to water tanks inside a chilly, compact room where Lopez and her four-person crew study produced water treatment methods. The water is hauled from the 7,000 oil fields that make up this region of the state. And it is just a fraction of the millions of gallons of wastewater produced daily by oil and gas. The Texas Pacific Land Corporation, which owns Texas Pacific Water, was founded in the 19th Century. It is one of the largest landowners in the state. The company inherited the land originally owned by a defunct railroad company. For decades, it has managed leases, royalties and land sales. The water business launched in 2017. Texas Pacific Water's main business is to provide water for fracking. It constructs above-ground source water pits, large trenches filled with brackish water. It sells the water to oil companies drilling wells as far as 70 miles, sending it through pipelines to well sites. And now it is cleaning up that water. With at least 400 contaminants, produced water is a highly complicated and unpredictable liquid to treat. The amount of chemicals in each sample varies, depending on the layer of rock from which the water escapes. It is up to four times saltier than seawater. Texas Pacific Water gets the water from Midland, Loving and Reeves counties, Lopez said, adding that the chemical properties in each varied, allowing them to study more samples. Most of the produced water it cleans is returned to its customers. Industry leaders estimate that produced water makes up about half of the water that operators use for fracking, with the rest being mostly brackish water. Few use freshwater, experts said, a practice that is frowned upon in the industry. The scientists start by oxidizing the water, which kills hydrogen sulfide, or H2S, a colorless, flammable and incredibly toxic gas. Oxidizing the water also scrubs out the oil and converts any iron into a solid particle. H2S, oil and iron are the contaminants that need to be removed from the water to be used for fracking. This step can take a day. In 2020, they started freezing the water. The method crystallizes the liquid, which forces more impurities out. The temperature at which they freeze the water will depend on its salinity. After freezing, the water is desalinated again. Lopez and her team began testing treated produced water on native West Texas plants in August of 2023. Inside a makeshift greenhouse, there were yucca, mesquite and agave plants, and grass. With state permission, they began discharging produced water into a controlled tract of land where alfalfa was grown in February 2024. The soil and plants were tested again for any toxic contaminants. None were detected. 'The native plants took the water very well,' she said. 'The mesquite trees grew almost out of control.' The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, which regulates air and water pollution, is evaluating four applications requesting to discharge, or release, produced water into the environment. Texas Pacific Water Resources is one of them. In a statement, the environmental quality commission said the permits are designed to protect receiving waters and human health, and include monitoring requirements and federally mandated limits on the amount of pollutants that can enter the water. Regulators are also considering information gathered by the Texas Produced Water Consortium, which is conducting similar research in five separate pilot projects. Dan Muller, an engineer and consultant on produced water projects for over a decade, said the science is not yet there. 'You really cannot rush science,' he said. 'I recognize that people are anxious, but we've got to make sure as data is generated, there's good scientific review and frank conversations around that data, what it tells us, what it doesn't tell us, and what the next step is.' Texas Pacific Water Resources is bullish about its method. Robert Crain, executive vice president of Texas Pacific Water Resources, said the goal was to prove the water can be cleaned and regulated enough and released into other bodies of water that farmers can use. 'I think the amount of work that we and one or two other companies have put in has been there to quell the fears in a completely scientific way and say, 'Look, this is safe water,'' Crain said. Tickets are on sale now for the 15th annual Texas Tribune Festival, Texas' breakout ideas and politics event happening Nov. 13–15 in downtown Austin. Get tickets before May 1 and save big! TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.
Associated Press
03-04-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
Bill that prioritizes creating new water supplies gets Texas Senate OK
The Texas Senate gave unanimous approval to a sweeping water bill Wednesday that would address a range of issues that have caused a looming water crisis in the state. The bill focuses on creating new sources of water supply to meet Texas' growing water needs. Senate Bill 7, filed by state Sen. Charles Perry, R-Lubbock, was the first bill in a highly anticipated package of water-related bills to pass. It includes proposals to address Texas' water supply needs by using funds on strategies such as desalination, projects on produced water treatment plants and reservoir projects. It also creates an office tasked with planning and coordinating the development of infrastructure to transport water — referred to by lawmakers as a 'water tree' — made by a project. During the discussion on the Senate floor, Perry reaffirmed his push toward creating new supplies of water. He said the bill prioritizes new water sources, including brackish and marine water, along with 'shovel-ready' reservoirs and wastewater treatment in rural communities. Perry has acknowledged in the past that the state's water infrastructure needs repairs. However, he did not spend much time discussing that concern Wednesday. Perry said after traveling the state, he believes Texas is 25 years behind on supply development. 'We've developed all the cheap water, and all the low-hanging fruits have been obtained,' Perry said. In addition, Perry stressed that any new water supply plan has to include all of Texas' 254 counties. He also said it has to be a coordinated planning approach across the state that leverages existing water resources to regional expertise. Changes were made in Perry's bill since it was first introduced. The new version of the bill added provisions that would separate the Texas Water Development Board's funding specifically for administrative costs — up to 2% in funding — and carryover of unused funds. While Texas prohibits using state-funded pipelines for intrastate water transfers, the bill clarifies that out-of-state water can be imported through these pipelines. One other change offers protections to sources of freshwater by prohibiting projects that extract water from sources with a certain amount. Perry assured lawmakers they were not funding the depletion of existing freshwater aquifers. State Sen. Roland Gutierrez, D-San Antonio, called the bill visionary and applauded Perry on his work. 'It changes water law, it changes water procurement,' Gutierrez said. Moving forward, the constitutional amendment that will accompany the water bill is House Joint Resolution 7, which will dedicate $1 billion to the Texas Water Fund for up to 10 years. The annual stream of state tax dollars would help cities and local water agencies buy more water and repair aging infrastructure. If approved, Texans can vote on that ballot measure in November. With the state's population booming, data shows the state's water supply is falling behind. According to the state's 2022 water plan, water availability is expected to decline by 18%, with groundwater seeing the steepest drop. A Texas Tribune analysis found that cities and towns could be on a path toward a severe water shortage by 2030 if there is recurring, record-breaking drought conditions across the state, and if water entities and state leaders fail to put in place key strategies to secure water supplies. Water experts and organizations celebrated the passage of SB 7. Jennifer Walker, director of the Texas Coast and Water Program for the National Wildlife Federation, said it's a step in ensuring Texans have reliable and resilient water supplies. Perry Fowler, executive director of the Texas Water Infrastructure Network, said he is grateful for Perry's work on the bill. '(I look) forward to reconciling the House and Senate approaches to accomplish the best collaborative water policy for Texas to secure our shared water future,' Fowler said. Jeremy Mazur, director of infrastructure and natural resources policy for Texas 2036, said the unanimous passage of SB 7 is a good sign the chamber wants to move forward with a bold strategy to address infrastructure challenges. However, he said there is still more work for the Legislature to do. 'Even though SB 7 has passed, there are several other big measures in the legislative pipeline that need to be addressed, including the constitutional dedication of state revenues for water infrastructure,' Mazur said. Perry said the water development board will still have to establish rules for what kind of projects get prioritized for funding. The House will now take up SB 7 for debate. Perry's Senate Resolution has been referred to a Senate committee on finance but has not been heard yet. A similar House bill, led by state Rep. Cody Harris, R-Palestine, is still pending. Harris' HJR 7 was passed unanimously out of committee and is waiting to be scheduled for a hearing.
Yahoo
03-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
From desalination to water treatment: Bill that prioritizes creating new water supplies get Texas Senate OK
The Texas Senate gave unanimous approval to a sweeping water bill Wednesday that would address a range of issues that have caused a looming water crisis in the state. The bill focuses on creating new sources of water supply to meet Texas' growing water needs. Senate Bill 7, filed by state Sen. Charles Perry, R-Lubbock, was the first bill in a highly anticipated package of water-related bills to pass. It includes proposals to address Texas' water supply needs by using funds on strategies such as desalination, projects on produced water treatment plants and reservoir projects. It also creates an office tasked with planning and coordinating the development of infrastructure to transport water — referred to by lawmakers as a 'water tree' — made by a project. During the discussion on the Senate floor, Perry reaffirmed his push toward creating new supplies of water. He said the bill prioritizes new water sources, including brackish and marine water, along with 'shovel-ready' reservoirs and wastewater treatment in rural communities. Perry has acknowledged in the past that the state's water infrastructure needs repairs. However, he did not spend much time discussing that concern Wednesday. Perry said after traveling the state, he believes Texas is 25 years behind on supply development. 'We've developed all the cheap water, and all the low-hanging fruits have been obtained,' Perry said. In addition, Perry stressed that any new water supply plan has to include all of Texas' 254 counties. He also said it has to be a coordinated planning approach across the state that leverages existing water resources to regional expertise. Changes were made in Perry's bill since it was first introduced. The new version of the bill added provisions that would separate the Texas Water Development Board's funding specifically for administrative costs — up to 2% in funding — and carryover of unused funds. While Texas prohibits using state-funded pipelines for intrastate water transfers, the bill clarifies that out-of-state water can be imported through these pipelines. One other change offers protections to sources of freshwater by prohibiting projects that extract water from sources with a certain amount. Perry assured lawmakers they were not funding the depletion of existing freshwater aquifers. State Sen. Roland Gutierrez, D-San Antonio, called the bill visionary and applauded Perry on his work. 'It changes water law, it changes water procurement,' Gutierrez said. Moving forward, the constitutional amendment that will accompany the water bill is House Joint Resolution 7, which will dedicate $1 billion to the Texas Water Fund for up to 10 years. The annual stream of state tax dollars would help cities and local water agencies buy more water and repair aging infrastructure. If approved, Texans can vote on that ballot measure in November. With the state's population booming, data shows the state's water supply is falling behind. According to the state's 2022 water plan, water availability is expected to decline by 18%, with groundwater seeing the steepest drop. A Texas Tribune analysis found that cities and towns could be on a path toward a severe water shortage by 2030 if there is recurring, record-breaking drought conditions across the state, and if water entities and state leaders fail to put in place key strategies to secure water supplies. Water experts and organizations celebrated the passage of SB 7. Jennifer Walker, director of the Texas Coast and Water Program for the National Wildlife Federation, said it's a step in ensuring Texans have reliable and resilient water supplies. Perry Fowler, executive director of the Texas Water Infrastructure Network, said he is grateful for Perry's work on the bill. '[I look] forward to reconciling the House and Senate approaches to accomplish the best collaborative water policy for Texas to secure our shared water future,' Fowler said. Jeremy Mazur, director of infrastructure and natural resources policy for Texas 2036, said the unanimous passage of SB 7 is a good sign the chamber wants to move forward with a bold strategy to address infrastructure challenges. However, he said there is still more work for the Legislature to do. 'Even though SB 7 has passed, there are several other big measures in the legislative pipeline that need to be addressed, including the constitutional dedication of state revenues for water infrastructure," Mazur said. Perry said the water development board will still have to establish rules for what kind of projects get prioritized for funding. The House will now take up SB 7 for debate. Perry's Senate Resolution has been referred to a Senate committee on finance but has not been heard yet. A similar House bill, led by state Rep. Cody Harris, R-Palestine, is still pending. Harris' HJR 7 was passed unanimously out of committee and is waiting to be scheduled for a hearing. Disclosure: Texas 2036 has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here. Tickets are on sale now for the 15th annual Texas Tribune Festival, Texas' breakout ideas and politics event happening Nov. 13–15 in downtown Austin. Get tickets before May 1 and save big! TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.
