1

Scenarios and MoreScenarios and More

California Water Plan Advisory Committee Meeting

April 14th, 2005

2

Objectives for PresentationObjectives for Presentation

● Review goals for quantitative information● Provide context for scenarios● Summarize scenarios and comments● Describe next steps

3

GoalsGoals

Why We Want Quantitative Information

4

Big Picture for NumbersBig Picture for Numbers

● Enhance shared understanding of California water management system

● Illustrate recent conditions ● Consider what changes are

likely between now and 2030● Identify and test promising

responses to expected changes

5

Views of California Water Views of California Water ManagementManagement

● California water management is a large topic

● Too large to “see” from a single view

● Multiple views can provide a more complete picture

6

Multiple Quantitative ViewsMultiple Quantitative Views

● Water Portfolios

Describe where water originates, where it flows, and what it is used for based on recent data

● Future Scenarios Describe expected changes by 2030 if water

managers do not take additional action

● Alternative Response Packages Describe packages of promising actions, predict

expected outcomes, and compare performance under each scenario

7

Putting the Views TogetherPutting the Views Together

Present Future

Objectives

State of the System

State of the System

Responses

Evaluate

Water PortfoliosWater Portfolios

ScenariosScenarios

Alternative Response Packages

Alternative Response Packages

8

The PointThe Point

● More complete view of water management system will: Help inform policy discussions Promote rational decisions regarding

investments to meet objectives Support regional planning Support statewide planning

9

What vs. HowWhat vs. How

● The what: Water portfolios Scenarios Alternative Response Packages

● The how: Observable data Causal relationships Analytical tools

Agree on the whatAgree on the what

Working on the howWorking on the how

10

Quantitative Quantitative InformationInformation

Update 2005 vs. Update 2010

11

Analysis in PhasesAnalysis in Phases

Update 2005● Describe quantitative

approach● Illustrate part of the

approach – future scenarios

● More to come…

Update 2010● Refine quantitative

approach● Refine future

scenarios● Quantify response

packages● Compare

performance

12

Scenarios in Update 2005Scenarios in Update 2005

● Identify important factors likely to change independent of water managers

● Acknowledge uncertainty in planning for future

● Quantify plausible changes and effects● Indicate what could happen if we do not

take additional management action

13

Summary of Partial ApplicationSummary of Partial Application

● Potential changes in demand do not represent future shortages Consider factors independent of water

managers Do not consider how or whether demands

could be met

● Future supply availability and response packages not quantified yet

14

ImplicationsImplications

● Scenarios suggest demand for water in California can change significantly by 2030

● Changes could include shifts in demand by sector or shifts in demand by region

● Potentially large changes underscore the importance of continuing to improve our understanding of the system and prepare for an uncertain future

15

Comments & ResponsesComments & Responses

● C: Estimates are called “water demands”, when they are actually “water uses”.

● R: Technically water quantity demand for given price, climate, population, etc.

● C: There is no economic presentation or discussion of water demands/uses.

● R: Economic assumptions are discussed in appendix article.

16

Comments & ResponsesComments & Responses

● C: We do not see any mention of the role which water pricing can play in water use.

● R: Price is fixed for this analysis. Water prices are currently set independent of management objectives. The potential role of changing price will be explored more when evaluating possible management responses.

17

Comments & ResponsesComments & Responses

● C: This approach continues to be reactive, responding to changes over which we have no control.

● R: The current information contained in Scenarios does not, and is not meant to, describe responses. Only what might happen independent of water manager action. Analysis of Responses will be in 2010.

18

Comments & ResponsesComments & Responses

● C: DWR sets out three scenarios without recommending to decision makers which scenario is preferred.

● R: The scenarios represent would could happen to demand, irregardless of preference. Update 2010 will add the evaluation of Responses to the possible futures. Recommendations will be made based on comparative performance.

19

Comments & ResponsesComments & Responses

● C: We recommend that DWR put forth a positive philosophy for public investment, one that emphasizes resource protection, cost-effectiveness, and Environmental Justice.

● R: DWR will be able to make recommendations when analysis includes evaluation and comparison of Alternative Response Packages.

20

Comments & ResponsesComments & Responses

● C: “Current Trends” and “More Resource Intensive” do not mention the effect of not meeting CALFED ERP requirements.

● R: The quantitative results in Update 2005 do not address the effects on any sector. That will be addressed in 2010.

21

SummarySummary

● New approach includes: Water Portfolios Future Scenarios Alternative Response Packages

● Update 2005 presents numbers for: Water Portfolios The demand portion of Future Scenarios

22

Next Steps – Update 2010Next Steps – Update 2010

● Prioritize information to compute for 2010 based on evaluation criteria

● Document current understanding of key conceptual relationships between observable data

● Select data and tools to use for analyses● Develop work plan that specifies how

analyses will be conducted for Update 2010

Complete these tasks in Q1 2006Complete these tasks in Q1 2006

23