Yesterday's New York Times, April 23, 2015, had an article in the Energy section by Felicity Barringer on the Troubling Interdependency of Water and Power: Warnings that the scarcity of one resource could result in escalating prices for both. The article acknowledged that water requires power for pumping aquifers and that power, in the form of hydropower, needs water as its source of energy. Thermal plants, such as coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear, and geothermal, also require water for cooling. The Congressional Research Service's report, Energy's Water Demand: Trends, Vulnerabilities, and Management, stated that the energy sector constitutes the fastest-growing industrial water user. Although the bulk of the article focused on California and its drought, it mentioned other Western states, such as Arizona, Texas, and Oregon.

Regarding the use of energy by water managers and distributors, the article stated that California, according to the researchers at the University of California, Davis, spent twenty (20) percent of the energy consumed on moving and treating water. A similar type of report but from a national perspective by the University of Texas in 2010 calculated a figure of 12.6 percent of energy use.

From the perspective of energy's water consumption, the article referenced Pacific Institute's study, Impacts of California's Ongoing Drought: Hydroelectricity Generation, that provided the data analysis for the conclusions summarized in the article. The report documented these findings:

 "During the three years ending in October 2014 (the end of the 2014 "water year"), the "cost" to
California ratepayers of the reduced hydroelectricity production and the use of additional natural
gas was approximately $1.4 billion dollars. The additional combustion of fossil fuels for electric
generation caused an eight percent increase in the release of carbon dioxide from California power plants (CARB 2015). As of the publication of this analysis in March 2015, that drought has not yet ended and we expect these costs to rise further." (p.2).

The quote, in part, explains the consequence of the water shortage on the price of energy in California and the related environmental damage. The New York Times article, however, did not explain the environmental or financial impact of the lack of water on the R. W. Miller plant in Palo Pinto, Texas. Because of the lack of water, the plant went off-line this year.

The Congressional report listed three options available to the federal government, even though water management and distribution remain primarily a state and local issue: First,  "minimize the growth in energy's freshwater use (e.g., through promotion of water-efficient energy alternatives and energy demand management)" (p. 2). Second, "improve access to water for the energy sector" (p. 2). Third, "investing in data and research to inform decision making and to expand water-efficient energy technology choices" (p. 2). Which of these options has gained the most traction in Congress, I will address in a future post.

Barringer, F. (2015, April 23). Troubling Interdependency of water and Power. The New York Times, p.F6.
Gleick, P. H. (2015). Impacts of California's Ongoing Drought: Hydroelectricity Generation. Oakland, California: Pacific Institute.
Carter, N. T. (2010, November). Energy's Water Demand: Trends, Vulnerabilities, and Management.
Washington, D. C.: Congressional Research Service.