Hawaii First Water

For Honolulu, Rising Seas Deliver Flood Risks Three Ways

OCT 2020/Brett Walton, Circle of Blue/

Build a wall?

The biggest source of flooding linked to sea-level rise for Hawaii’s capital city comes not from the sea itself. It comes from underground.

It seems like an intuitive response for protecting a coastal city from rising seas. Just raise your external defenses. But the intuitive response, in certain cases, is also the wrong response, says Shellie Habel.

If the plan to prevent flooding in a city like Honolulu were to be simply block the ocean, “it’s not going to work,” Habel told Circle of Blue. Water has other, less obvious ways of invading, and that stealth movement has implications for water pollution and transportation in Hawaii’s largest city.

Habel is a coastal geologist with the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources and Hawaii Sea Grant. She is the lead author on a study that investigated three flooding pathways in Honolulu, all of which are a consequence of rising seas. The study is the first to attribute the percent of flooded area in the city that is due to each factor individually and in combination. The likelihood that floods will come from multiple pathways simultaneously — and cause more infrastructure damage — rises along with the seas.

In Honolulu’s case, a sea wall would be a losing strategy against sea-level rise because a wall would not address the most serious flooding problem. The largest source of inundation for the city’s roughly 350,000 residents is not the ocean. It’s groundwater.

Habel and her colleagues found that little more than 2 to 3 percent of flooded area in Honolulu’s urban core is a result only of overland marine flooding. That range holds for the four sea-level elevations that the study looked at.

Groundwater flooding, by contrast, is the predominant individual source of flooding. How does this happen? Groundwater in the coastal region is hydrologically connected to the ocean. When the Pacific swells, so does the inland water table.

A hypothetical wall on the Honolulu waterfront would fail to prevent flooding, Habel said, because water would still bubble up from underground and come through backed up storm drains, which are the third flooding pathway. Groundwater flooding today swamps basements and roadways in low-lying areas and is noticeable in underground parking garages.

“So even if you put in a sea wall, even if you change the type of drainage management, you still have flooding,” she said, adding that a solution that only addresses marine flooding will not work because 97 percent of the total area that is projected to flood will still flood from rising groundwater and storm drain backups. Places like New Orleans and cities in the Netherlands, which also have groundwater flooding problems, employ pumps for that purpose. “In order to mitigate all the flooding you have to adapt to all three pathways.”

For the rest of this article see…

US Supreme Court Rules Against Maui In Major Clean Water Case

April 2020, Civil Beat, Gruber. WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Maui County can’t skirt the Clean Water Act by merely pumping its sewage into groundwater before discharging it into the ocean.

In a 6-3 opinion written by Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, the majority ruled that Maui County, like other municipalities and businesses dumping pollutants into the nation’s rivers, lakes and oceans, must have a permit to do so.

The ruling is both a rebuke of Maui County and the Trump administration, which had joined the county in arguing that the Clean Water Act should only cover waste that was discharged directly into navigable waters, and not pollutants that were first filtered through groundwater before reaching their final destination.

To See the rest of the article in the Civil Beat, click here…

Raise Your Hand: Honolulu Advertiser 2020/ Water In the Islands

(Editor Comment:  We commend high school senior Megan Okuma for her insightful article on water scarcity in the islands.)

By: Megan Okuma, Leilehua High School, Class of 2020.

As inhabitants of an island, most of Hawaii cannot fathom running out of water. However, although we are surrounded by such a precious resource, only 0.4% of the world’s water is drinkable. In Hawaii, most of our water comes from aquifers where it has traveled for years through soil and volcanic rock. This extensive, natural purifying system is the reason why Hawaii ranks first for water quality domestically. Yet with the population increasing and climate change affecting our rainfall patterns, Hawaii may see a decline of the cleanest water in the country within the next 100 years.

Conserving water is one of the easiest tasks in our environmental crisis to tackle as individuals because each of our actions directly affect the state of our water supply. We have complete control over the amount of water we use and if we take responsibility for this natural resource, we control the future of our water supply.

Water is not an infinite resource and, with a water cycle that has sustained Hawaii for ages, it makes more sense to change our habits rather than continue harvesting a finite resource with the same practices that created the problem in the first place. Of the 164 gallons of water used by residents every day, 100 gallons are used just for basic tasks: 20 to 50 gallons for showering, 18 to 24 gallons for flushing toilets and 26 gallons on running faucets. Through installing water- saving technology and routinely checking for leaks, the amount of water used can be reduced significantly.  Fortunately, there is an array of technology designed to combat the water crisis from focusing on bigger efforts like creating a new source of freshwater to simpler efforts like home instillations.

For the rest of the article see here…

Our (Water) Project in Hawaii

December 2019 (LK: this is a fascinating article on water desal using solar power to begin to reforest an area on the Big Island) by Author Yishan Wong in Medium: In considering large-scale strategies to fix climate change, it turns out that the lowest-risk, lowest-cost, and most politically feasible strategy is the massive global reforestation of 3 billion acres.

To concretely prove out key technologies and costs, we have recently completed construction of the world’s largest fully off-grid 100% solar-powered desalination facility. There are other larger desalination plants, but they are all grid-tied and/or reliant at least partially on fossil fuels. In contrast, we are completely independent and 100% powered by solar energy.

Our facility comprises a half -acre of solar panels rated at roughly 128 kW total generating power and 300 kWh of battery storage. It is designed to produce 128,000 liters/day (34,000 gallons/day, or 128 m3/day) of freshwater, more than enough to irrigate the entire property. The facility is off the grid, so we have created our own electrical and water utility.

Recent cost improvements in solar mean that green desalination is now feasible. The significance of this cannot be understated, because desalination is uniquely suited to using solar power, as it avoids the solar intermittency issue.

The area of North Kohala where our project is located used to be covered with an ancient sandalwood forest, from the mountains to the shore. Hundreds of years ago, the entire forest was cut down to supply the profitable sandalwood trade and the region never recovered. It remains a desert to this day.

For the rest of this article see it here…

How Water Footprints Can Help Us Eat Less Water

September 2019, (Editor Note: This article originally appeared in 2017 but is worth repeating because of its ability to demonstrate how much water we use without giving it much thought…  In the future, this will have to change or the lack of water will negatively impact the quality of our lives…) 

By Robin Madel and Kai Olson-Sawyer , Senior Research and Policy Analysts at GRACE Communications Foundation.

How  do we get Americans to conserve water? The first step is to show just much water it takes to make the average American’s lifestyle possible. But water conservation means a lot more than the typical advice to take shorter showers and wash fewer loads of laundry. While such actions are important, there are other ways to save much more.

Those who use GRACE Communications Foundation’s Water Footprint Calculator know that diet makes up the largest part of our individual water footprints. This is part of what’s called “virtual” water use, or the amount of water required to produce the food we eat, energy we use and the things we buy. Even though the water consumed to produce these items can’t be seen or felt, it comprises the majority of our water footprint.

Agriculture’s Big Water Footprint

In the United States, agriculture is a major surface and groundwater user. In fact, a full 80 percent of all consumptive water use in the US comes from agriculture. When the historic California drought hit two seasons ago, many were shocked by what were once considered arcane facts about the water used to produce our food. Headlines about how it takes just over one gallon of water to produce an almond were common.

Generally, the water footprint of fruits, vegetables, grains and pulses (like beans) is smaller than that of meat, dairy and nuts. Beef is the king of big water footprints: It takes about 1,800 gallons of water to produce one pound of beef. This is because cattle are physically large, have relatively long lives, eat so much food and are rather inefficient at converting feed to meat (compared to, say, chickens). In the United States, most beef cattle are raised on feedlots for a large portion of their lives, and while there, they eat feed made from grains like corn, sorghum, barley and oats – lots of it. It takes a tremendous amount of water to grow feed, especially the grains that go into cattle feed. This can be problematic for strained water resources when those crops are irrigated.

In addition to water for animal feed, how and where water is used has a large impact. Crops grown in areas with abundant rainfall tend to put less pressure on water resources. On the other hand, thirsty crops grown in arid locations or areas prone to drought can challenge sustainable water use when irrigation is necessary. There are additional challenges when vulnerable water sources are used to boost crop yields. For example, irrigation nearly doubled from 2002 to 2016 in the water-stressed Republican River basin through parts of Colorado, Nebraska and Kansas.

Competition between different types of water users is another source of trouble. A large share of US crops are grown in areas where such competition for water exists, as is the case in California and other arid Western states, the drought-prone Southeast and even the Great Plains where a major aquifer is being drained from agricultural overuse. Different sectors, including energy, industry, residential and the natural environment, all have specific water demands that compete with agriculture.

In the end, no location is immune from drought or water resource problems, even if only on a temporary basis. As rainfall and drought patterns continue to shift and intensify, water supplies will become increasingly stressed, which will have an inordinate effect on farming and food production. To use water more sustainably, farmers and food companies find that they must measure and understand how water is used along the production chain, which helps them recognize the extent of their water use and identify areas where they can cut back. At the same time, farmers, ranchers and other producers must be aware of water pollution that occurs within the process. This is important because pollution increases water use since more water is required to help clean up pollution.

For the rest of this article see…

Maui County Running Out Of Time To Settle Clean Water Act Case

Aug 2019: Civil Beat: Author: Nathan Eagle; Maui County Council members are expected to decide Tuesday (3 Sept 2019)  if they want to go against Mayor Michael Victorino and settle a major Clean Water Act case instead of letting a conservative-leaning U.S. Supreme Court decide it in November.

The four environmental groups that brought the lawsuit delivered petitions this week with more than 15,000 signatures to Council Chair Kelly King. They are urging the council to step in now so it can spare the county — and the country — from an unfavorable judgment.

The Hawaii Wildlife Fund, Sierra Club-Maui Group, Surfrider Foundation and West Maui Preservation Association sued in 2012 after trying for years to reach an agreement with the county over its Lahaina wastewater reclamation facility, which has been releasing treated water into the ground that ends up entering the ocean and harming coral reefs.

The conflict revolves around the adverse effect of the effluent discharge on the coral reefs and marine ecosystem at Kahekili on Maui.

District and appeals courts have ruled that the county needs a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit for the facility, which handles about 3 million to 5 million gallons of sewage a day. It serves about 40,000 people. 

But Victorino is fighting that decision and has succeeded in getting the case before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Environmentalists are concerned that the court’s decision would gut the Clean Water Act, a situation that would have implications far beyond Hawaii.

For the rest of the Civil Beat article click here…

Hawaii Climate Change Panel Discussion – April 25, 2019

July 2018

Climate Change Panel Discussion – April 25, 2019

APRIL 25, 2019 – Members of the Board of Water Supply Stakeholder Advisory Group had the opportunity to learn about the impact of climate change on Hawaii.

Video Presentation Links (Vimeo)

If you would like to watch a specific presentation or just the Q&A, please use the following Vimeo links.

  1. Presentation by Dr. Charles H. Fletcher, III (Chip), UH Manoa, SOEST – Part I
  2. Presentation by Dr. Thomas Giambelluca, UH Manoa, Department of Geography and Environment
  3. Presentation by Dr. Charles H. Fletcher, III (Chip), UH Manoa, SOEST – Part II
  4. Presentation by Joshua Stanbro, Honolulu Office of Climate Change, Sustainability and Resiliency
  5. Presentation by Barry Usagawa, Board of Water Supply, Water Resources Division
  6. Question & Answer Session: Climate Change Panel

Opinion: House Bill 1326 Regarding Maui Stream Diversion

By Gary Hooser | April 21, 2019/ Star Advertiser Opinion:

In my 20 years of experience in government, politics and policy-making, House Bill 1326 is the most egregious example of special-interest legislation I have ever seen.

Fortunately the state Senate has taken time to listen to public concerns. After weighing both sides, conducting a thorough public hearing, asking tough questions and even visiting the Maui community most impacted, the Senate led by Water and Land Committee Chairman Kai Kahele has decided to shelve HB 1326.

Key Senate members have stated publicly they have no intention of passing HB 1326, but technically, it remains alive. Until the session ends May 2, anything can happen.

Alexander & Baldwin (A&B) stands to gain or lose $62 million, depending on the outcome of HB 1326. In essence, it is attempting to sell public trust water rights derived from stream diversions in east Maui. The intended beneficiary of this transaction is Mahi Pono — a California-based LLC, financed by a Canadian pension fund — which recently purchased the majority of A&B lands on Maui.

One fairly significant problem with this proposal is that A&B neither owns, nor has long-term control over this water.

In Hawaii, whether beneath the ground or flowing through our rivers and streams, water is a public trust resource. Businesses may use the resource, but must secure a permit that ensures sufficient water remains in the stream to preserve its natural ecosystem and that down-stream users also have access.

Yet this one company, the last remnant of the “Big 5” plantation era, and arguably the most politically powerful private landowner in Hawaii, is attempting, with the Legislature’s help, to secure those water rights without securing the proper long-term permits, and then transfer those water rights to Mahi Pono — pocketing a cool $62 million in the process.

The original HB 1326 proposed giving A&B and a handful of others an unlimited amount of time to divert an unlimited amount of water, without securing the permits and without ensuring environmental or down-stream user protections.

The present measure, HB 1326 House Draft 2, allows them 10 years, three of which have already passed, to comply with permitting requirements and convert their “temporary” one-year revocable permits (RPs) to proper long-term water leases.

Though A&B is the primary proponent and largest beneficiary of the measure, nine other RPs also are impacted by HB 1326 HD2, including some utilized by small ranchers and farmers.

The current controversy surrounding the plight of the small farmer and rancher is a manufactured crisis, perpetuated by the primary beneficiaries of HB 1326 HD2 and designed to promote fear and uncertainty.

The state Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) has issued RPs to small users in the past without a problem. There is no specific legal impediment that prevents DLNR from extending the temporary RPs of these particular small farmers and ranchers while they pursue long-term leases.

The DLNR could provide certainty today, to all concerned by simply announcing its intent to continue extending the RPs of small users, so long as they demonstrate good faith and positive intent in pursuing a proper long-term water lease.

To his credit, Kahele, while acknowledging that DLNR could act unilaterally to resolve the situation, offered up a compromise that protected the little guy, while holding A&B accountable. Unfortunately, this overture was rejected.

The underlying problem is DLNR’s inability to manage the permit process. However, it’s neither the Legislature’s job nor in the public’s best interest to attempt to fix bad management with bad special-interest legislation.

And it’s certainly not the Legislature’s job to bail out a company that sold water rights it does not own.

It’s time the Legislature demand that the DLNR do its job. We, the collective community and the Legislature, need to move past the distraction and passions generated by HB 1326, and focus instead on the myriad other important bills begging for our time and attention.

Gary Hooser, a former state senator and Kauai Council member, is board president of Hawaii Alliance for Progressive Action (HAPA) and executive director of Pono Hawaii Initiative.

Ocean sensors help UH researchers understand Hawaiʻi Island aquifers

May/University of Hawaii: Parrotfish, Pike, Pompano and Perch were instrumental in helping University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa researchers gain a better understanding of Hualālai aquifer on Hawaiʻi Island. The four marine electric-field receivers, dubbed with common fish names, are part of state-of-the-art technology used by researchers from ʻIke Wai, a large-scale, multidisciplinary project funded by the National Science Foundation’s Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR).

The nine-person research team conducted an eight-day marine survey and covered approximately 200 kilometers to gain a better understanding of how freshwater releases into the ocean from below the seafloor. Eric Attias, a postdoctoral researcher at the UH Mānoa served as chief scientist.

The backbone of the study uses a surface-towed marine controlled-source electromagnetic (CSEM) system called Porpoise that was recently developed by the Electromagnetic Laboratory at Scripps Institution of Oceanography.

“You have two novelties here, you have a very new system, in terms of worldwide, which is one-of-a-kind, and the second novelty is the capability of this system to detect deep submarine groundwater deposits. Hence, both the technology and its application are new,” said Attias.

Researchers can differentiate between fresh and salt water in submarine groundwater systems through the use of the new technology. CSEM is being used like MRI imaging to map the electrical resistivity of the groundwater structures along the coast up to about 500 meters below the seafloor.

For more information see…

Supreme Court to decide if Clean Water Act limits Hawaii’s underground wastewater dumping

By David Savage, Feb 2019, LA TIMES:

The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to decide whether the Clean Water Act can prevent sewage plants from putting waste water into the ground if it flows from there into a river, bay or the ocean.

The case from Hawaii is an important test of the reach of the federal government’s anti-pollution authority.

Environmentalists sued alleging a sewage plant in Maui was discharging treated waste water into the ground and it was flowing underground from there into the Pacific Ocean.

They won before a federal judge and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, which held that the pollution was subject to federal control because it was the “functional equivalent of a discharge into the navigable water.”

But the Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal from Hawaii that was backed by the Assn. of California Water Agencies. Their lawyers called the 9th Circuit’s ruling a “radical expansion” of federal authority. If upheld, its approach would extend new federal regulation to water treatment plants across the country, they said.

The Clean Water Act calls for preventing discharge of pollutants into the “navigable waters of the United States.” Water agencies say the law refers only to polluted water flowing directly into streams, rivers and bays, not groundwater.

For more than a decade, the justices have been split over how far the federal government can go to regulate water inside the United States, whether it be wetlands, or, as in this case, groundwater. The court’s conservatives have argued the federal government can only regulate polluted water that flows directly into a river, bay or the ocean. The law forbids discharges of pollutants into “the waters of the United States.”

But environmentalists as well as the court’s liberal justices have said this authority can extend farther inland to prevent pollution that will eventually flow into rivers and bays.

The case, County of Maui vs. Hawaii Wildlife Fund, is scheduled to be heard in the fall.

For the full article in the LA Times see: