June, 04 2009, 01:35pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Kate Fried, Food & Water Watch (202) 683-2500


Adam Scow, Food & Water Watch (415) 293-9915
Marin Desalination Plant Unnecessary Finds Food & Water Watch Report
New Analysis By Former Marin Municipal Water District Water Conservation Coordinator Recommends a Package of Smart Water Solutions
SAN FRANCISCO
A package of smart water solutions that includes improving landscape irrigation, decreasing system leaks, and enhancing reservoir operation can meet Marin's future water needs at a much lower cost than the proposed desalination facility finds a new report released today by the consumer advocacy group Food & Water Watch. The report, Sustaining Our Water Future: A Review of the Marin Municipal Water District's Alternatives to Improve Water Supply Reliability, is authored by James Fryer, who served as coordinator of the Marin Municipal Water District's (MMWD) water conservation program from 1990 to 1999.
Based on a thorough review and analysis of MMWD and water industry documents and records, interviews of MMWD staff and other water experts, this report recommends a package of solutions that would provide approximately 7,950 acre feet of water per year for the district, more than double the projected 3400 acre feet of water MMWD's plan states it can obtain from conservation.
Alternatively, the desalination plant would carry significant costs for consumers and the environment. In addition to a price tag of over $100 million for construction, the facility would cost millions more to operate, which would mean significant rate increases for consumers. Further, the plant would increase energy use, potentially doubling the district's carbon footprint and could further degrade the San Francisco Bay. Moreover, desalination is not favored by Marin residents according to public opinion surveys outlined in the report.
"This report illustrates that water efficiency and waste prevention measures, not desalination, are the best options for ratepayers and the environment," said Mark Schlosberg, California director of Food & Water Watch. "MMWD Board members David Behar, Cynthia Koehler, and Alex Forman should follow through on their commitments to prioritize conservation and implement these low cost solutions."
Additional key recommendations of the report include:
* Reestablishing a citizens advisory committee to support water conservation program development and implementation.
* Conducting a comprehensive urban landscape analysis using GIS and on-site surveys to determine the state of existing landscape water use.
* Carrying out a comprehensive district-wide groundwater study that also evaluates the integration of cisterns, rain gardens and flood management with groundwater recharge and management.
* Conducting a comprehensive reservoir reoperation study to identify optimum management schemes to increase yield in an environmentally friendly manner.
Sustaining Our Water Future: A Review of the Marin Municipal Water District's Alternatives to Improve Water Supply Reliability is available online at:
https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/sustaining-our-water-future
Food & Water Watch mobilizes regular people to build political power to move bold and uncompromised solutions to the most pressing food, water, and climate problems of our time. We work to protect people's health, communities, and democracy from the growing destructive power of the most powerful economic interests.
(202) 683-2500LATEST NEWS
Climate Movement Cheers Michigan AG's Plans to Sue Big Oil
"Pursuing this litigation will allow us to recoup our costs and hold those responsible for jeopardizing Michigan's economic future and way of life accountable," said the state attorney general
May 09, 2024
Advocates of holding fossil fuel giants accountable for their significant contributions to the climate emergency welcomed Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel's Thursday announcement that she intends to sue the polluting industry.
"Big Oil knew decades ago that their products would cause catastrophic climate change, but instead of doing the right thing they lied about it," declared Richard Wiles, president of the Center for Climate Integrity. "The people of Michigan deserve their day in court to make these companies pay for the massive harm they knowingly caused."
Dozens of municipalities and attorneys general for the District of Columbia and eight states—California, Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Vermont—have already filed climate liability suits against Big Oil in recent years.
"Our 'Pure Michigan' identity is under threat from the effects of climate change," said Nessel, whose state was praised last year for passing clean energy legislation. "Warmer temperatures are shrinking ski seasons in the UP and disrupting the wonderful blooms of Holland's Tulip Time Festival. Severe weather events are on the rise."
"These impacts threaten not only our way of life but also our economy and pose long-term risks to Michigan's thriving agribusiness," she continued. "The fossil fuel industry, despite knowing about these consequences, prioritized profits over people and the environment. Pursuing this litigation will allow us to recoup our costs and hold those responsible for jeopardizing Michigan's economic future and way of life accountable."
The Democratic attorney general's office explained that she is "seeking proposals from attorneys and law firms to serve as special assistant attorneys general to pursue litigation related to the climate change impacts caused by the fossil fuel industry on behalf of the state of Michigan."
The Detroit Newsnoted that "Nessel took a similar tact in suing drugmakers for the opioid crisis, farming out much of the work to outside law firms in Michigan, Texas, and Florida."
According to the newspaper:
Nessel's office is working with other state departments to assess the costs associated with climate change, such as the cost of expanding storm water systems to handle flooding caused by stronger storms, responding to natural disasters, or supporting northern Michigan tourism economies dealing with dwindling ice and snow.
"This is going to be a massive discovery effort to find out exactly what our Michigan damages are now already and what can we expect to see in the future as a result of climate change," she said.
"I don't know that there's a bigger issue facing the state of Michigan than climate change," Nessel told the outlet. "We are talking about billions and billions of dollars in damages and we're already starting to see that on a day-to-day basis. We know this is only going to get worse."
The youth-led Sunrise Movement applauded Nessel's plans and asserted that U.S. President Joe Biden—who is seeking reelection in November—and the Department of Justice "must follow suit."
The group's call echoed similar demands that emerged last week in response to the U.S. Senate Budget Committee's hearing about a three-year investigation into "Big Oil's campaign of deception and distraction."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Critics Compare Biden's Proposed Asylum Rule to 'Failed Trump-Era Policies'
"The Biden administration and Congress must not erect any more unjust barriers to asylum that will sow further disorder and result in irreparable harm," said one migrant rights advocate.
May 09, 2024
Immigrant rights advocates on Thursday slammed the Biden administration's proposal to fast-track the rejection of certain migrants seeking asylum in the United States.
On Thursday the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) proposed a rule that would empower immigration officials to disqualify certain asylum-seekers during their initial eligibility screening—called the credible fear interview (CFI)—using existing national security and terrorism-related criteria, or bars.
DHS said the rule would apply to noncitizens who have "engaged in certain criminal activity, persecuted others, or have been involved in terrorist activities."
"I urge President Biden to embrace our values as a nation of immigrants and use this opportunity to instead provide relief for the long-term immigrants of this nation."
Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas called the proposed rule "yet another step in our ongoing efforts to ensure the safety of the American public by more quickly identifying and removing those individuals who present a security risk and have no legal basis to remain here."
However, Greg Chen, senior director of government relations for the American Immigration Lawyers Association, argued that while "bars are an important feature of our immigration laws to ensure that dangerous individuals are not allowed into the country," they must be "accurately applied where warranted."
"This change could make the process faster by excluding people who would not be entitled to stay," he noted. "However, due process will likely be eroded by accelerating what is a highly complex legal analysis needed for these bars and conducting them at the preliminary CFI screening."
As Chen explained:
At that early stage, few asylum seekers will have the opportunity to seek legal counsel or time to understand the consequences of a bar being applied. Under the current process, they have more time to seek legal advice, to prepare their case, and to appeal it or seek an exemption. Ultimately to establish a fair and orderly process at the border, Congress needs to provide the Department of Homeland Security with the resources to meet its mission and also ensure the truly vulnerable are not summarily denied protection without due process.
Democratic lawmakers—some of whom held a press conference Wednesday on protecting undocumented immigrants in the U.S.—also criticized the proposal.
"As the Biden administration considers executive actions on immigration, we must not return to failed Trump-era policies aimed at banning asylum and moving us backwards," said Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), referring to former Republican President Donald Trump, the presumptive 2024 GOP nominee to face President Joe Biden in November.
"I urge President Biden to embrace our values as a nation of immigrants and use this opportunity to instead provide relief for the long-term immigrants of this nation," he added.
One year ago, critics accused Biden of "finishing Trump's job" by implementing a crackdown on asylum-seekers upon the expiration of Title 42—a provision first invoked during Trump administration at the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic and continued by Biden to expel more than 1 million migrants under the pretext of public safety.
Earlier this week, the advocacy group Human Rights First released a report detailing the harms of the policy on its anniversary. The group held a press conference to unveil the report and warn of the dangers of further anti-migrant policies.
"The interviews with hundreds of asylum-seekers make clear that the asylum ban and related restrictions strands in danger children and adults seeking asylum, punishes people for seeking protection, leads to the return of refugees to persecution, spurs irregular crossings, and denies equal access to asylum to people facing the most dire risks," Human Rights First director of research and analysis of refugee protection Christina Asencio said during the press conference.
"The Biden administration and Congress must not erect any more unjust barriers to asylum that will sow further disorder and result in irreparable harm," Asencio added.
On Wednesday, three advocacy groups—Al Otro Lado, the Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center, and the Texas Civil Rights Project—sued the federal government on behalf of noncitizens with disabilities seeking more information regarding CBP One, the problem-plagued Customs and Border Protection app migrants must use to schedule asylum interviews at U.S. ports of entry.
"We have and continue to see migrants with disabilities facing unlawful discrimination and unequal access to the asylum process due to the inaccessibility of the app," said Laura Murchie, an attorney with the Civil Rights and Education Enforcement Center involved in the case.
"CBP needs to release these documents so we can advocate for and ensure compliance with the law so asylum-seekers with disabilities do not continue to be harmed by CBP's disregard for rights that are guaranteed by federal disability law," she added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Netanyahu Says Israel 'Will Stand Alone' as Biden Threatens to Withhold Arms
"If we have to, we will fight with our nails," the Israeli prime minister said in response to the American leader's warning against a major Rafah invasion.
May 09, 2024
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday responded to U.S. President Joe Biden's threat to withhold shipments of arms used by the Israel Defense Forces to kill thousands of Palestinian civilians by declaring that his far-right government would continue its assault on Gaza with or without American help.
"If we are forced to stand alone, we will stand alone," Netanyahu said in a video ahead of next week's anniversary of Israel's establishment in 1948, largely via the ethnic cleansing of Palestine's Arabs. "I have already said that if we have to, we will fight with our nails."
Echoing Netanyahu, Israel Defense Forces spokesperson Daniel Hagari said the IDF already has the "necessary weapons" to wage war, "including in Rafah," where over 1 million people forcibly displaced from other parts of Gaza are sheltering alongside around 280,000 local residents, all of them bracing for a full-scale Israeli invasion.
The prime minister's remarks came a day after Biden threatened to withhold bombs and artillery shells from Israel if it launches a major invasion of Rafah—even as critics noted that Israeli forces have already attacked and entered the city. Some accused Biden of walking back a previous "red line" warning against any assault on Rafah.
Common Dreamsreported Tuesday that Biden is delaying shipments of two types of bombs to Israel in order to send a message that the president's tolerance for what he called Israel's "indiscriminate bombing" of Gazan civilians is waning.
However, observers noted that Biden recently signed off on $14.3 billion in emergency armed assistance for Israel atop the nearly $4 billion the key ally already receives from Washington each year. The Biden administration has quietly approved more than 100 arms sales to Israel since October 7, while pushing for billions of dollars worth of additional deals, including advanced fighter jets.
Biden has also repeatedly bypassed Congress to fast-track weapons transfers to Israel as it wages what the International Court of Justice in January called a "plausibly" genocidal war that's killed, injured, or left missing more than 124,000 Palestinians—mostly women and children—since October 7.
The U.S. administration also provides diplomatic cover for Israel's policies and practices in the form of United Nations Security Council vetoes.
Despite all this support—which comes as most election-year voters supporting Biden's Democratic Party believe Israel is committing genocide in Gaza—Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir on Thursday tweeted, "Hamas ❤️ Biden."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular