DAILY DIGEST, 7/24: White House rescinds $20m for clean water in rural CA; DWR: Securing statewide water supplies with Delta Conveyance Project; Marina voicing dispute over CalAm Water Desalination Plant; Lake Mead water projections raise red flags; – Maven’s Notebook

 

California Water Management and Sustainable Development Goals: A Report

Statewide Policy and Environmental Governance

Recent developments in California’s water and environmental policy highlight significant challenges and opportunities in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly concerning water access, climate action, and institutional integrity.

• Funding for Clean Water (SDG 6, SDG 3, SDG 10): The White House has rescinded a $20 million grant intended to provide clean drinking water to pesticide-contaminated rural communities in California’s agricultural heartland. This action directly impacts progress toward SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation) and SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) by removing critical funding for communities facing severe health risks from contaminated wells. The decision also raises concerns related to SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), as it disproportionately affects vulnerable agricultural worker populations.
• Environmental Review Law (SDG 8, SDG 9, SDG 11): California lawmakers have approved significant rollbacks to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The new law exempts several project types, including high-tech manufacturing, from environmental reviews to streamline construction. This policy decision creates a tension between promoting SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) and SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure), and upholding environmental protections central to SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) and SDG 15 (Life on Land).
• Public Opinion on Environmental Policy (SDG 13): A recent Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) survey indicates strong public support for environmental protection, as evidenced by the passage of a $10 billion state climate bond. However, it also notes a conflict between state policies and federal environmental shifts, alongside public concern about preparedness for climate-related events like wildfires and floods, underscoring the urgency of SDG 13 (Climate Action).

Infrastructure, Agriculture, and Climate Resilience

Efforts to secure California’s water supply and adapt to a changing climate involve major infrastructure projects, agricultural planning, and a shift toward renewable energy, all of which intersect with key SDGs.

• Delta Conveyance Project (SDG 6, SDG 9, SDG 13): The Department of Water Resources is advancing the Delta Conveyance Project to modernize the State Water Project. This initiative aims to enhance water supply reliability for 27 million people and agricultural land, addressing climate change impacts and contributing to SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation) and SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure). The project is framed as a critical adaptation strategy for SDG 13 (Climate Action) by improving water capture during infrequent, intense storm events.
• Almond Crop Forecast (SDG 2, SDG 8): The 2025 California almond crop is forecast to reach 3 billion pounds, a 10% increase from the previous year. This projection highlights the productivity of California’s agricultural sector, which is crucial for SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), while also underscoring the sector’s significant water demands.
• Renewable Energy on Farmland (SDG 2, SDG 7, SDG 13): Commentary suggests converting retired, water-scarce farmland to large-scale solar projects. This approach presents a strategy to advance SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) and SDG 13 (Climate Action) by building renewable energy infrastructure on land with fewer environmental conflicts, while navigating the transition away from water-intensive agriculture, which impacts SDG 2 (Zero Hunger).
• Microplastics and Human Health (SDG 3, SDG 14): A bipartisan federal bill, the Microplastics Safety Act, has been introduced to investigate the human health impacts of microplastics in food and water. This legislative effort aligns with SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and addresses a growing threat to SDG 14 (Life Below Water).

Regional Water Issues and SDG Implementation

North Coast

Restoration efforts on the North Coast focus on river health and indigenous heritage, advancing ecological and social sustainability goals.

• Klamath River Restoration (SDG 15, SDG 6, SDG 10): Following the removal of dams, a group of Indigenous youth completed a historic first descent of the free-flowing Klamath River. This event celebrates a significant achievement in ecosystem restoration (SDG 15: Life on Land) and the revitalization of cultural practices, contributing to SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and the long-term health of the river system (SDG 6).
• Potter Valley Project Agreement (SDG 6, SDG 15, SDG 16): A historic agreement has been reached for the Potter Valley Project, uniting diverse stakeholders on a plan to remove two dams on the Eel River while continuing water diversions. This collaborative effort exemplifies SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) and aims to restore habitat (SDG 15) while managing water resources (SDG 6).

Mountain Counties

In the Mountain Counties, research and advocacy efforts are centered on protecting iconic water bodies from emerging threats.

• Lake Tahoe Algae Research (SDG 14, SDG 6): Researchers are seeking funding for a new drone to better study algae in Lake Tahoe, including potentially harmful clumps. This work is vital for monitoring and protecting the lake’s ecosystem health (SDG 14: Life Below Water) and water quality (SDG 6).
• Yuba River Protection (SDG 6): The South Yuba River Citizens League highlights the importance of the Clean Water Act’s Section 401 in safeguarding the Yuba River from pollution related to federally permitted activities like hydropower and dam construction, emphasizing its role in achieving SDG 6.

Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys

These agricultural heartlands are grappling with issues of climate adaptation, sustainable urban growth, and the transition to cleaner industries.

• Flood Vulnerability in Lodi (SDG 11, SDG 13): City officials in Lodi acknowledge a 1% annual chance of flooding, highlighting the region’s vulnerability to extreme weather events. This underscores the need for robust infrastructure and planning to build climate-resilient communities, in line with SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) and SDG 13 (Climate Action).
• Port of Stockton Hydrogen Plant (SDG 7, SDG 11): The Port of Stockton has rescinded its approval for a planned hydrogen plant following an environmental lawsuit. The decision reflects a conflict between promoting alternative energy (SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy) and protecting local communities from potential air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions (SDG 11).
• Modesto Water Supply Study (SDG 6, SDG 11): Modesto will assess its capacity to provide water for a large-scale development in the Salida area. This study is a critical step in ensuring sustainable urban expansion and managing water resources effectively, aligning with SDG 6 and SDG 11.

Central Coast

Coastal communities are facing challenges related to aging infrastructure, political hurdles for funding, and disputes over new water supply projects.

• Pajaro River Levee Funding (SDG 11, SDG 13): The project to rebuild the Pajaro River levee, critical for protecting a farmworker community from floods, is facing political hurdles for future funding in Washington, D.C. This threatens the timely completion of a vital climate adaptation project aimed at fulfilling SDG 11 and SDG 13.
• Desalination Plant Dispute (SDG 6): The City of Marina is disputing the water demand estimates used to justify a proposed Cal-Am desalination plant. This conflict highlights the complexities of planning for future water security and ensuring that infrastructure projects align with realistic needs, a core component of SDG 6.

Southern California and San Diego

The region is addressing cross-border pollution, planning for climate-resilient land use, and observing the impacts of warming oceans.

• Cross-Border Sewage Funding (SDG 6, SDG 16): U.S. Representatives have requested $45 million in federal funding to combat the cross-border sewage crisis affecting San Diego. This effort seeks to address a severe public health and environmental problem through improved infrastructure and international cooperation, directly supporting SDG 6 and SDG 16.
• Mission Bay Land Use (SDG 11, SDG 15): San Diego has extended leases for two waterfront RV parks in Mission Bay, while long-term plans call for transforming the area into marshland. This decision balances current recreational access with future goals for ecosystem restoration and climate resilience (SDG 15 and SDG 11).
• Warming Water Indicators (SDG 13, SDG 14): The rare discovery of a violet sea snail on a La Jolla beach may be an indicator of warming ocean waters. Such findings provide tangible evidence of climate change’s impact on marine ecosystems, relevant to SDG 13 and SDG 14.

Colorado River Basin and National Water Issues

A System on the Brink

The Colorado River basin faces an existential crisis from overuse and climate change, threatening water and food security for millions and demanding unprecedented cooperation.

1. Impending System Failure (SDG 6, SDG 16): Federal officials are pressuring the seven basin states to reach a deal on future water sharing as reservoirs approach critically low levels. The situation highlights a potential failure of governance (SDG 16) and a severe threat to regional water security (SDG 6). Projections indicate Lake Mead could hit a new record low by 2027, and Lake Powell could fall below power-generation levels by 2026.
2. Water, Food, and Energy Nexus (SDG 2, SDG 6, SDG 7): The crisis directly threatens agriculture in areas like Yuma, Arizona, which supplies 90% of the U.S.’s winter leafy greens, linking regional water scarcity (SDG 6) to national food security (SDG 2). Concurrently, the growth of data centers in the West is creating a massive new demand for both water and energy, intensifying the strain on resources needed for SDG 6 and SDG 7.
3. Groundwater and Environmental Justice (SDG 6, SDG 10, SDG 11): In Arizona, cities are spending millions to import groundwater to support development, a practice that reflects unsustainable water management. Meanwhile, on the Navajo Nation, a legacy of unplugged and potentially contaminated oil and gas wells poses a severe threat to the water supply, representing a critical environmental justice issue that undermines SDG 6 and SDG 10.

National and International Climate Developments

Actions at the national and international levels are setting the stage for future climate policy and legal accountability.

• U.S. Climate Policy Reversal (SDG 13): The Trump administration is moving to rescind the EPA’s 2009 “endangerment finding,” which forms the legal basis for regulating greenhouse gases. This action would dismantle the federal government’s authority to address climate change, directly opposing the goals of SDG 13 (Climate Action).
• International Court of Justice Climate Opinion (SDG 13, SDG 16): The UN’s top court issued a landmark opinion stating that countries have a legal obligation to protect people from the “urgent and existential threat” of climate change. This strengthens the international legal framework for SDG 13 and links climate action to human rights, reinforcing SDG 16.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article discusses a wide range of environmental, social, and economic issues in California and beyond, directly connecting to several Sustainable Development Goals. The primary SDGs addressed are:

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: Issues of contaminated drinking water and the health impacts of microplastics and pollution are central themes.
• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation: This is the most prominent SDG, with numerous articles focusing on water contamination, water supply security, infrastructure projects, water rights, and ecosystem health.
• SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy: The article touches upon the transition to renewable energy, specifically solar power, and the challenges associated with energy projects like hydropower and hydrogen plants.
• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure: Discussions revolve around modernizing water infrastructure, building levees, and the environmental regulations concerning industrial and manufacturing development.
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: The article covers topics like flood risk in communities, urban water supply, housing for farmworkers, and the impact of land subsidence on cities.
• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production: The use of pesticides in agriculture and the resulting water contamination highlight issues of unsustainable production patterns.
• SDG 13: Climate Action: Climate change is presented as a major driver for many issues, including water scarcity, wildfires, sea-level rise, extreme weather events, and flash floods.
• SDG 14: Life Below Water: The health of marine and freshwater ecosystems is discussed in the context of dam removals, water clarity in lakes, oil pipeline risks, and the impact of warming waters on marine species.
• SDG 15: Life on Land: The article addresses forest management, wildfire prevention, habitat restoration, and the conflict between development and preserving natural lands.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions: This is evident in reports on government policy changes, legal battles over environmental regulations (CEQA), international court opinions, and the rescinding of federal grants.
• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals: The importance of collaboration is shown in agreements between tribes, government agencies, and environmental groups for river management and in requests for federal funding.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues discussed, the following specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Target 6.1: By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all.
   • This is directly addressed in the section “White House rescinds $20m for clean water in pesticide-contaminated rural California,” which states that for decades, “thousands of residents in California’s agricultural heartland couldn’t use their wells because the water was too contaminated with pesticides.” The rescinded grant was intended to “provide clean water.”
2. Target 6.3: By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials.
   • The article mentions water contaminated with “staggering levels of highly toxic pesticide ingredients.” It also discusses the “Microplastics Safety Act” aimed at understanding the impacts of microplastics in the water supply and the “sewage crisis” in San Diego, which requires funding to combat cross-border pollution.
3. Target 6.5: By 2030, implement integrated water resources management at all levels, including through transboundary cooperation as appropriate.
   • This is evident in the discussion of the “Delta Conveyance Project” to manage statewide water supplies, the “historic Potter Valley Project pact” involving multiple counties and tribes, and the federal pressure for seven states to “reach deal on the future of the Colorado River.”
4. Target 7.2: By 2030, increase substantially the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix.
   • The commentary “California needs a little less farmland, a lot more solar power” highlights the approval of the “nation’s largest solar-plus-storage project” on retired farmland, contributing directly to this target.
5. Target 11.5: By 2030, significantly reduce the number of deaths and the number of people affected and substantially decrease the direct economic losses relative to global gross domestic product caused by disasters, including water-related disasters, with a focus on protecting the poor and people in vulnerable situations.
   • The struggle for funding for the “Pajaro River levee” project after a “catastrophic breach” and the analysis of Lodi’s vulnerability to “catastrophic flooding” directly relate to mitigating the impact of water-related disasters on communities.
6. Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries.
   • The article notes that California’s “vital water supply is at risk due to climate change, sea level rise and earthquakes.” It also discusses the “age of megafires” and the fact that “2025 became the summer of flash flooding in America,” all of which point to the need for increased resilience to climate-related hazards.
7. Target 14.1: By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities, including marine debris and nutrient pollution.
   • The proposal of the “Microplastics Safety Act” to study microplastics in the food and water supply and the legal complaint against an “offshore oil system” for “unpermitted pipeline work” are direct actions related to this target.
8. Target 15.2: By 2020, promote the implementation of sustainable management of all types of forests, halt deforestation, restore degraded forests and substantially increase afforestation and reforestation globally.
   • The section “On controlling fire, new lessons from a deep indigenous past” discusses how a history of stamping out wildfires has led to thicker forests that are more prone to megafires, and how Indigenous fire management created healthier, less dense forests. This relates to implementing sustainable forest management.
9. Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.
   • The article highlights several instances of decision-making processes and their consequences, such as the “White House rescind[ing] $20m for clean water,” lawmakers rolling back the “California Environmental Quality Act” through a last-minute budget bill, and the public’s inability for “Residential well owners [to] protest Paso groundwater rates.”

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article mentions or implies several quantitative and qualitative indicators that can be used to measure progress:

• Indicator for Target 6.1: The number of people lacking access to safe water (“thousands of residents”). Progress could be measured by the reduction in this number. The amount of funding allocated, such as the rescinded “$20m grant,” is another indicator of effort.
• Indicator for Target 6.3: The clarity of Lake Tahoe’s water, measured in feet (“averaged 62 feet last year”), serves as a direct indicator of water quality. The concentration of pollutants like pesticides and microplastics, while not quantified, is an implied indicator.
• Indicator for Target 6.4 (Water-Use Efficiency): The water levels in major reservoirs like Lake Mead and Lake Powell are critical indicators. The article provides specific projections, such as Lake Mead’s level dropping to “about 1,038 feet by the end of June 2027.”
• Indicator for Target 7.2: The generating capacity of new renewable energy projects is a clear indicator. The Darden project will provide “up to 1,150 megawatts of solar energy and 4,600 megawatts-hours of battery storage.”
• Indicator for Target 11.5: The status and funding of disaster mitigation infrastructure, such as the “15 miles of new flood walls” for the Pajaro River levee project, serve as an indicator of preparedness.
• Indicator for Target 13.1: The rise in average temperatures (“risen by 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit since 1895”) and the frequency of extreme weather events (“more than 3,600 flash flood warnings across the United States in 2025”) are indicators of increasing climate hazards.
• Indicator for Target 14.2: The restoration of river ecosystems can be indicated by the removal of dams (“removal of Scott Dam and Cape Horn Dam”) and the return of free-flowing rivers (“first descent of the recently undammed Klamath River”).
• Indicator for Target 15.2: Forest density, measured in trees per hectare, is a specific indicator mentioned. The article notes that current forests have “200 to 775 trees per hectare — more than four times the historical average of 50 to 190 trees,” indicating a deviation from historical, sustainably managed conditions.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

SDGs	Targets	Indicators Identified in Article
SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation	6.1: Achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all.	Number of residents without safe well water due to pesticide contamination; Allocation of funding for clean water projects (e.g., “$20m grant”).
SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation	6.3: Improve water quality by reducing pollution.	Presence of “highly toxic pesticide ingredients,” microplastics, and cross-border sewage; Water clarity measured in feet (e.g., “Lake Tahoe’s clarity…averaged 62 feet”).
SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation	6.5: Implement integrated water resources management.	Existence of management plans and agreements (Delta Conveyance Project, Potter Valley Project pact, Colorado River deal).
SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy	7.2: Increase substantially the share of renewable energy.	Megawatts of new solar energy and megawatt-hours of battery storage capacity (e.g., “1,150 megawatts of solar energy and 4,600 megawatts-hours of battery storage”).
SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities	11.5: Reduce the impact of water-related disasters.	Funding and construction status of protective infrastructure (Pajaro River levee); Assessed probability of flooding (e.g., “1% chance of flooding each year” in Lodi).
SDG 13: Climate Action	13.1: Strengthen resilience to climate-related hazards.	Increase in average temperature (“2.5 degrees Fahrenheit since 1895”); Frequency of extreme weather (e.g., “more than 3,600 flash flood warnings”).
SDG 14: Life Below Water	14.1: Reduce marine pollution.	Introduction of legislation to study pollutants (Microplastics Safety Act); Legal actions against polluters (Coastal Commission complaint).
SDG 15: Life on Land	15.2: Promote sustainable management of all types of forests.	Forest density measured in trees per hectare (current “200 to 775 trees per hectare” vs. historical “50 to 190 trees”).
SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions	16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, and representative decision-making.	Governmental actions such as rescinding grants, passing laws that limit environmental review (CEQA rollback), and court rulings on environmental cases.

Source: mavensnotebook.com