Water news for a thirsty world…

A Web application that alerts wine grape farmers when their vines are thirsty has won first place in a competition to spur entrepreneurs in the investment-starved water sector, organizers said on Monday.

Fruition Sciences, which operates in both California and France, came first among 50 teams in Imagine H2O’s global competition aimed at building a “Silicon Valley” for water.

Water is a $500 billion business worldwide, but draws a mere 0.5 to 1.0 percent of venture capital and only a handful of investments per year despite growing demand for solutions to widespread water shortages.

The prize rewards the business plans with the greatest promise of breakthroughs in the efficient use and supply of water, and Fruition was able to show significant water savings for nine California grape growers that used the monitor.

“In the water sector, most entrepreneurs want to be in every single market, but Fruition has started out with an intriguing niche market where they can polish their idea and then go broader into other agricultural markets,” said Scott Bryan, director of operations for Imagine H2O, a non-profit backed by Royal Bank of Canada (RY.TO) and PriceWaterhouseCoopers.

Fruition co-founder Sebastien Payen said he saw a real challenge in the wine industry because there were “absolutely no plant-based sensors to optimize water management.”

He combined his expertise in sensor and information technology with co-founder Thibaut Scholasch’s research on vine water status to create the Web application.

Australia’s Rainwater HOG was prize runner-up with its H2OG water tank, which collects rainwater and can be used by city dwellers who do not have much space.

The tank already sells in the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom and markets are opening in India and Japan.

California’s WaterSmart Software was also a runner-up with a Web-based application that allows water utilities to optimize their water conservation programs.

Once it goes to market, the WaterSmart application could save participating homeowners an average of 3,000 gallons of water per year, and in some cases lead to a total water use reduction of 20 percent, Imagine H2O said.

Imagine H2O offers cash prizes as well as business, legal, accounting and tax support, and access to partners, customers and financiers to bring ideas to market.

“The prize is intended to become a magnet for water entrepreneurship and give the finalists extraordinary exposure to the investment and business community,” said Imagine H2O chairman and executive director Tamin Pechet, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist.

Popularity: unranked [?]

Sierra snow pack numbers were released today, revealing an above-average year. Of course, water officials are still crying drought, making one wonder what act of nature would be necessary to end California’s seemingly endless water shortage. Luckily, we skiers are a short-sighted lot, happy to slide around on the snow stuff while the reservoir watchers wallow in their gloomy warnings.

Here’s the story from the Associated Press, in case you want to know more:

California’s wet winter has left an above-average snowpack in the Sierra Nevada, boosting prospects for additional water deliveries to cities and farms, water officials said on Wednesday.

But the California Department of Water Resources cautioned that the winter rain and snow was not enough to fully offset three previous years of drought.

“We must remember that even a wet winter will not fully offset three consecutive dry years or pumping restrictions to protect Delta fish, so we must continue to conserve and protect our water resources,” said Mark Cowin, director of the Department of Water Resources.

Popularity: 32% [?]

Californians are experiencing a unique kind of drought – one in which there appears to be plenty of water to squirt around.

Repeated deluges have replenished many reservoirs and blanketed the Sierra with snow, ensuring that there will be at least an average amount of runoff in the spring.

And the state’s third monthly survey of snow in the Sierra showed Wednesday that the water content of the snowpack is 107 percent of average statewide for this time of year. Last year at this time, it was just 80 percent of average.

Despite this bounty, the California Department of Water Resources is reluctant to declare an end to the state’s three-year drought.

“February was a below-average month” for rainfall and snow, explained David Rizzardo, the chief of snow surveys for the Department of Water Resources. “So if you look at that bigger picture, things haven’t improved. The recent storms have definitely slowed the bleeding of the drought, but we still have a good month of precipitation to go here before we can really determine where we stand.”

The real pool-party pooper is Lake Oroville, the State Water Project’s primary source of drinking water, which is only 40 percent full. That’s 55 percent of the average storage for this date even after repeated winter deluges heaped snow all over the mountains.

Oroville provides drinking water to about 25 million Californians and irrigates 700,000 acres of farmland. Water officials hope melting snow in the northern Sierra will fill up the reservoir, but they won’t know until April, when the snowpack reaches its historic peak.

Still, Wednesday’s monthly trek into the high country to measure the Sierra snowpack indicates that the state’s water supply is doing pretty well. The water content was 102 percent of the average for this time of year in a field next to the privately owned cabin known as Phillips Station, a 6,800-foot elevation spot where the department traditionally announces the results of the snow surveys.

The water content was 94 percent of average at 7,600-foot Alpha; 105 percent of average at 6,700-foot Lyons Creek; and 112 percent at Tamarack Flat, which is at 6,500 feet.

Those four locations, located off Highway 50 near Echo Summit on the way to Lake Tahoe, are averaged with electronic measurements taken elsewhere in the state to come up with the statewide figure of 107 percent of average.

Estimating the supply

The measurements are done so that water agencies will be able to anticipate how much water will be available for consumption. It is an effective measure because the vast majority of California’s water supply takes the form of snow during the winter.

The monthly surveys, which have been conducted from January through May for more than 80 years, are fed into a statewide database with survey information from 300 locations collected by 50 other agencies, including the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, the U.S. Forest Service, several municipalities and water agencies, and PG&E.

Most eyes are on the measurements in the northern Sierra, where the snowpack is 126 percent of normal. Rain and snow runoff in the northern Sierra and Cascade regions feeds the state’s largest reservoir, Shasta Lake, which, at its current 75 percent capacity, is at 101 percent of average for this date.

The federal Central Valley Project uses water from Shasta to irrigate about 3 million acres of farmland from Redding to Bakersfield and provide drinking water for close to 2 million people. The relative abundance at Shasta may explain why the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation decided last week to increase the amount of water it will provide to farmers this year.

Feeding Lake Oroville

A different part of the northern Sierra feeds Lake Oroville, the second-largest reservoir, oriented more toward urban and industrial uses. The reservoir, which relies almost entirely on snowmelt, would need close to 2 million acre feet more water before it reaches average storage. One acre-foot is enough water to cover an acre in one foot of water, the amount used by a typical family of four in one year.

As of Wednesday, the central Sierra’s snowpack was 93 percent and the southern Sierra was 109 percent of average.

The snow that melts in the spring and summer in the Sierra contains up to 60 percent of California’s water, which is used to irrigate some 9 million acres of farmland and quench the thirst of 36 million people.

Changes in allotments

The drought, which left what amounted to puddles in the state’s largest reservoirs, caused the state and federal governments to drastically reduce water allotments, forcing residents to ration water and farmers to leave fields fallow. Federal protection of fish like the chinook salmon and the endangered delta smelt have also forced reductions in the amount of water pumped out of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.

The situation has improved to the point that fisheries analysts are predicting a large increase in the number of chinook salmon in the Sacramento River system this fall after record low numbers the past two years forced bans on ocean fishing.

Recent increases in state and federal allotments of water prompted Sen. Dianne Feinstein to rescind her threat to bypass the Endangered Species Act to get farmers more water.

Popularity: 34% [?]

A mighty turn of the federal faucet has ended the latest chapter in California’s water wars. A wet winter that’s filling rivers and reservoirs will let Washington dole out extra supplies for cities, farms and wildlife and cap a political rebellion in the San Joaquin Valley.

The outcome is clearly welcome. After three dry years, heavy rains and snowfall have all but ended drought conditions, leading federal water authorities – and state officials to a lesser extent – to forecast healthy flows to water systems and agricultural districts. It’s a commonsense conclusion, no doubt spurred by the reality of an election year and high jobless rates in valley towns.

The move has another beneficial side effect. It buys time for negotiation and study in the multilayered dispute over sharing a precious resource in a growing state. California’s water supply remains fragile, burdened by competing uses, legal fights, crumbling concrete and brutal politics.

That’s why the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation decision is timely. It cancels a showdown over a provocative pledge by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., to grab water for farmers on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. The newly promised water releases match the amount she was after, and led her to table her unfortunate tactic.

By no means is the game over. Another dry year could restart the water wars. Feinstein, known as an effective coalition builder, should put her energy into a long-term compact, one that emphasizes conservation, fair water pricing and preservation of river flows and the delta, California’s natural water bank.

This direction is one in which state authorities – including the governor and Legislature – are headed. Their solution in mending the state’s share in California’s vast plumbing system preserves the delta, rebuilds tattered levees and other facilities, and rests on science and political compromise, not deal making. This approach hinges on an $11 billion bond measure on the November ballot.

After playing stingy for years, Mother Nature has poured on the precipitation. It’s brought relief for hard-pressed farmers, big-city water districts and fish that need steady flows to survive. Now it’s time for all sides to use this gift and find a lasting peace in the water wars.

Popularity: 9% [?]

A possible signal of a new movement, takebackthetap.org is a site run by Food & Water Watch to create awareness in the public of the misconceptions most have about both tap water and bottled water, especially in terms of cleanliness and environmental friendliness. The bottom line? Just because water comes in a sealed plastic bottle doesn’t make it any cleaner than the tap water in your area. In fact, it might even be dirtier! The site includes lists of restaurants in New York, San Francisco and Portland that have made commitments to ban bottled water from their menus, as well as a learning section to inform you about the health, justice, and economic impact of bottled water versus tap water.

Popularity: 16% [?]

The Los Angeles County Flood Control District faces a state fine of almost $275,000 for allegedly allowing bacterial pollution to flow into the harbor at Marina del Rey for more than two years, officials said Monday.

The staff of the Los Angeles region of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board issued a complaint against the district Feb. 18, recommending $274,896 in fines.

The board, part of the California Environmental Protection Agency, cited 186 violations from 2007 to 2009 of the district’s storm water permit, which was issued in accordance with federal and state clean-water standards.

The state water board is scheduled to vote May 17 on the complaint. The panel can modify the fine, reject it or let it stand.

The regulatory action and fine are precedent-setting, said Samuel Unger, the water board’s assistant executive officer and principal engineer. Previous storm drainage complaints typically dealt with industrial or construction discharges, Unger said.

Kerjon Lee, a flood-control district spokesman, said he could not comment.

Under its permit, Unger said, the district was required to comply with bacterial water quality standards at Marina del Rey by August 2007. The complaint alleges the district failed to meet the deadline and continued polluting in subsequent years.

The action stems from intensive state and federal regulatory efforts designed to improve the water quality of Marina del Rey harbor, Santa Monica Bay and other heavily polluted waterways frequented by waders and boaters. Urban runoff is a major contributor to sullied waterways.

The flood control district, part of the L.A. County Department of Public Works, is legally obligated to maintain its storm sewer system so it does not discharge bacterial and other pollutants into rivers, streams, the ocean and harbors, Unger said.

The complaint alleges district officials have known for years — and failed to report to the regional water board — that its diversions and pump station have not been properly designed and maintained.

The system failed to divert runoff flows from 22 catch basins near Washington Boulevard in Venice to the Hyperion Waste Water Treatment plant, Unger said. Instead, he added, the contaminated water flowed to a pump station and then into the harbor.

“Basically, this makes the water unsafe, unhealthy for recreation,” Unger said.

The board wants the defects cleared up by summer, he said.

The violations occurred from April 1 to Oct. 31 during the years in question, when rainfall is minimal.

Runoff during such periods can come from sources such as street cleaning, car washing or excess lawn irrigation.

A “much larger challenge,” Unger said, is how to regulate flows during the rainy season, when the amount of water coursing through storm drains can be much higher.

“We’re working on fixes there,” Unger said.

Popularity: 47% [?]

SALEM — Five years ago, Klamath Basin tribal leaders, longtime farmers, fish-loving environmentalists, PacifiCorp suits and government regulators sat down to take a shot at ending one of the West’s grittiest water wars.

“We had people around the table who could barely look at each other, let alone speak to each other,” said Thomas O’Rourke Sr.,  chairman of the Yurok Tribe.

O’Rourke and 29 other representatives from all sides of the Klamath battle gathered in the Capitol rotunda Thursday to sign a peace accord that might double as the United States’ biggest dam removal and river restoration compact ever.

Under the two Klamath Basin agreements, four PacifiCorp dams on the Klamath River could fall, salmon could reclaim 350 miles of a legendary salmon run, tribes could see fishing grounds restored and Oregon farmers could get guaranteed water supplies.

The deal is far from certain: Congress must approve $500 million in extra federal expenses over 10 years for river restoration and protecting farmers in dry years. The dams wouldn’t come down until 2020, and there are plenty of outs along the way. Critics say the accords give Klamath Basin irrigators too much locked-in water and amount to a sweetheart deal for PacifiCorp, which owns the dams.

But the mood was upbeat at the Capitol signing ceremony, which got a celebrity boost when California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger  joined Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.

The agreements spell out water allocations for farmers and set up a plan for dam removal, if Salazar approves it in 2012 after scientific study. The accords should be a model for the nation, Salazar and Schwarzenegger said.

“Protecting the environment and protecting the economy can go hand in hand,” said Schwarzenegger, a Republican.

Said Kulongoski, a Democrat: “There is no need for this conflict to rage on.”

The Klamath Basin’s water squeeze was big news in 2001, when farmers using irrigation water from Upper Klamath Lake went dry and their plight became a rallying cry against putting fish before people. The next year, farmers got more water under Bush administration directives and fish died en masse nearer the river’s mouth in Northern California.

The upper basin around Klamath Falls, home to the huge Upper Klamath Lake, was once an expansive series of marshes, top-notch habitat for fish and birds.

In the early 1900s, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation initiated a project to turn much of that marshland into farmland. Marshes were drained. Fish-blocking, hydropower-generating dams went up. Farms spread out, today covering more than 200,000 acres.

Coho salmon on the Klamath are listed under the Endangered Species Act. So are two species of suckers in the upper basin, where high water temperatures and high nutrient levels from fertilizers and other sources have created extensive algae problems that threaten the fish.

Three tribes — the Klamath, Karuk and Yurok — nontribal commercial fishermen and sports fishermen have seen allowable catch shrink from the Klamath, which trails only the Columbia and Sacramento among the top three salmon rivers in the West.

The competing interests, Salazar said, have led to “one of the most intractable water wars in the country.”

The dam agreement directs Salazar to make the call on dam removal. It also budgets $450million to tear down the dams, which provide about 1 percent of PacifiCorp’s power generation.

Last year, the Oregon Legislature passed a bill allowing PacifiCorp to levy a 2 percent surcharge on its Oregon customers, which should raise about $180 million over a decade. California ratepayers would cough up about $20 million, leaving California to come up with an additional $250 million for dam removal.

The California Legislature put that $250 million in an $11.1 billion water bond slated for November’s ballot, though Schwarzenegger conceded passing the bond will be “very challenging” given the state’s budget crisis.

A second agreement, 369 pages’ worth, aims at pinning down water allocations between farmers and fish. It would slate an extra $500 million toward restoration, monitoring, increasing water supplies and boosting tribal fish programs. Nearly $100 million would go toward helping farmers prepare for dry weather.

The Hoopa Valley Tribe and four environmental groups, including Oregon Wild, pulled out of the deal.

Sean Stevens  of Oregon Wild said the agreement, spawned during the Bush administration, favors PacifiCorp and irrigators, limits PacifiCorp’s liability, delays dam removal and gives irrigators water priority over fish and wildlife reserves.

Other environmental groups, including American Rivers and Trout Unlimited, support the accords and say the deal will provide more water for fish in most years and improve habitat — better than the traditional route of lawsuits and complex battles over dam relicensing.

Salazar said he’s confident the package can make it through Congress, largely because it sets an example for the nation.

The first test of the guts of the agreement — water allocations between fish and farmers — might come as early as this summer, with water levels already low in Upper Klamath Lake.

“We all need to see a healthy watershed,” said Luther Horsley,  president of the Klamath Water Users Association, but he added: “2010 will test us.”

Popularity: 100% [?]

Alexandria, VA – A new analysis performed by the Beverage Marketing Corporation (BMC) for the International Bottled Water Association (IBWA) shows that over the past eight years the gram weight of the 16.9 ounce “single serve” bottled water container has dropped by 32.6%. The average PET bottled water container weighed 18.9 grams in 2000 and by 2008, the average amount of PET resin in each bottle has declined to 12.7 grams.BMC estimated that during this time span, more than 1.3 billion pounds of PET resin has been saved by the bottled water industry through container light-weighting.In 2008 alone, the bottled water industry saved 445 million pounds of PET plastic by reducing the weight of its plastic bottles.

“The International Bottled Water Association (IBWA) is proud the bottled water industry has worked diligently to reduce the weight of its plastic bottles,” said IBWA President and CEO Joseph K. Doss.“In addition, IBWA salutes the PET plastic resin manufacturers who worked hard to find new ways to strengthen PET plastic resin so that less plastic goes further in maintaining the structural integrity of the thinner bottle.”

Although PET plastic bottled water containers make-up a tiny fragment of the waste material going into landfills (according to the U.S. EPA, the figure is 1/3 of 1 percent) light-weighting lessens the impact of water bottles that are not recycled.“Advances made in light-weighting bottled water containers reduce waste, preserve resources and deliver a more sustainable product to consumers,” Doss continued.

Since the endpoint of the BMC analysis in 2008, some IBWA member companies report further declines in bottle gram weight, with some bottled water containers on store shelves now weighing less than 10 grams; a fact that is certain to be reflected in future analysis.

“When coupled with bottled water’s safety, convenience and healthfulness, the ‘total bottled water package’ is one that consumers can feel proud about,” said Doss. “No one should be surprised that the bottled water industry would be a trend-setter and industry leader in PET plastic container weight reduction, but the facts speak for themselves. This is one way we as a nation can put a meaningful dent in post-consumer disposal of plastic that is not recycled.”

Popularity: 45% [?]

A giant tunnel – not a canal – has emerged as the leading option to ship Sacramento River water across the Delta to thirsty Californians from theSilicon Valley to San Diego.

Officials guiding the Bay Delta Conservation Planchose the tunnel for more detailed study at a meeting Thursday in Sacramento. The plan is an effort to secure California water supplies from environmental problems, flood risk and rising sea levels in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.

About 25 million Californians and 2 million acres of farmland depend on the Delta today for at least some of their water supplies.

The decision Thursday only targets the tunnel for more detailed study. It was not a decision to build a tunnel or to exclude other options.

The tunnel would be 43 miles long. Over most of its length it would consist of not one, but two, parallel tunnels about 150 feet underground, each 33 feet in diameter.

They would rank among the largest tunnels of their kind in the world. Multiple tunnelling machines would work simultaneously for about eight years, consuming $284 million worth of electricity to build them.

The tunnels could move water at 15,000 cubic feet per second, or 10 times the volume in the American River today.

Estimated cost: Up to $11.6 billion.

Water agencies and users that benefit, notably San Joaquin Valley farmers and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, have agreed to pay for it. The cost would be passed on to their ratepayers.

“I believe it is a milestone that we just arrived at,” said Karen Scarborough, undersecretary of California’sNatural Resources Agency, who chairs the group’s steering committee. “It’s a major thing that we just did.”

Participating environmental groups supported further study of the tunnel but have not yet agreed to support its construction.

Their involvement was shaken Thursday by news that U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein plans to amend a jobs bill to alter Delta fish protections. It would guarantee San Joaquin Valley farmers 40 percent of their contract water deliveries for two years. Such diversions could harm threatened salmon and Delta smelt.

Ann Hayden, a senior water analyst at Environmental Defense Fund, said her group would quit the conservation planning process if the Feinstein amendment passes.

She called it an act of betrayal, since some water interests on the committee undoubtedly asked Feinstein for the amendment.

“It doesn’t help to know that folks we’re partnering with are playing it both ways,” Hayden said. “It will make the long-term planning almost meaningless if, in the short term, actions are taken that push some species to the point of extinction.”

A draft environmental study is not expected until year’s end. It then must be approved by wildlife agencies to satisfy the Endangered Species Act.

In Washington on Thursday, Feinstein said, “I believe we need a fair compromise that will respect theEndangered Species Act while recognizing the fact that people in California’s breadbasket face complete economic ruin without help.” She discussed the water delivery issue in a conference call with Westlands Water District and others favoring more irrigation deliveries to farms.

The Delta project also hinges on state politics. The Schwarzenegger administration supports the plan and believes it has legal authority to build a canal or tunnel. But a new governor will be in charge by the time a decision must be made. The Legislature also could influence the outcome.

Current estimates are that construction would start in 2013 and finish in 2022.

Some view the tunnel favorably because it minimizes environmental harm on the surface, as well as the amount of land that must be acquired.

That is significant because most Delta residents oppose the project and could mount fierce resistance. Already, the state Department of Water Resources is fighting more than 120 lawsuits with Delta property owners who refuse access for preliminary surveys.

DWR Deputy Director Jerry Johns said his department was pleased that the tunnel option is being studied.

The tunnel, however, comes with greater construction risk, largely because the structure of soils 150 feet beneath the Delta is not well known.

Tunneling of the sort required for the project is actually easier in solid rock than in loose material, because of threats of collapse and flooding.

Ken Verosub, a UC Davis geology professor, said there is no solid material beneath the Delta. Instead, it is probably layer upon layer of loose material deposited as the Delta shrank and expanded with repeated glacial periods.

“There are older Delta sediments – peats and organics and sands – down several hundred feet at least,” said Roy Shlemon, a consulting geologist in Newport Beach who has studied the Delta.

Popularity: 41% [?]

LONE PINE, California (Reuters) - An old battleground of California’s water wars could turn into one of the largest solar farms in the world, with thousands of shiny black and blue panels mounted across the desiccated, salty white crust of Owens Lake.

That’s the plan by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (DWP), the largest public utility in the United States.

The project may eventually generate 3 to 5 gigawatts of power — enough for 10 percent of California’s power supply — and include other utilities like PG&E and Southern California Edison and independent power producers.

Its scale would beat the largest current project, planned by industry bellwether First Solar in China.

The project adds to the list of large-scale solar projects slated for California and the southwestern United States. They could help the country overtake Germany as the world’s largest solar market by 2012.

It would also help meet renewable energy goals in Los Angeles and California. Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa wants the city to get 40 percent of its energy from renewable resources by 2020; California wants clean power to provide one third of its electricity by that time.

Some of the best solar resources shine on Owens Lake, some 200 miles north of Los Angeles, the city’s utility head says.

“If you’re trying to do massive solar… you need a large flat area that’s already under single ownership, you need transmission access and you need good sun. The Lord is the one that picked that site. I didn’t,” said David Freeman, the interim chief of Los Angeles’ utility, in an interview.

Some large-scale solar projects — hungry for sunny, wide-open spaces — have been at odds with conservationists, who aim to protect wildlife and pristine habitat.

Those tensions may ease at Owens Lake, where the scarred earth has suffered environmental damage.

SOLAR VS DUST

Yet where water once flowed, mistrust lingers.

The proposed site of the solar complex is where Los Angeles in 1913 built the first of two aqueducts to carry water from Owens Valley to the growing city. The lake was dry by the end of the 1920s.

Freeman says the solar array may be a way to “make peace.”

“Eighty years ago, we stole the water. It’s been an intense relationship,” he added.

The residents of Inyo County approach the plans with caution — in particular those in small towns like Keeler where gauzy white dust storms still blow at times from the lake.

“I think there’s a lot of potential for benefits for folks in the county and in the city, but they need to do it right,” said Mark Bagley, who works with the Sierra Club and the Owens Valley Committee. The groups successfully fought the DWP to restore the Lower Owens River.

Among the concerns: local jobs, protecting habitat for local wildlife and whether solar panels will stop the dust.

“It could be another boom and bust,” said Kathleen New, a Lone Pine native who runs the local chamber of commerce.

She wants more jobs and land for town housing — even if it is only a dozen homes. The DWP or state and federal governments own 98 percent of the land in Inyo County.

Once silver ore flowed from Owens Valley. Now the local economy runs on cattle and tourism. Visitors trek to see Mount Whitney or the nearby Death Valley, the nation’s highest and lowest elevations, respectively.

PLAN DETAILS

Los Angeles is moving fast to build in 2011 a pilot project of 6 to 10 megawatts over 80 acres. The DWP plans to finance the cost of $30 million to $40 million itself.

Freeman said that Los Angeles could expand its array to 250 MW, with construction starting in 2012 and operations in 2014. The DWP also may lease land to other utilities for their own solar arrays, creating a solar park of 3 to 5 gigawatts. Outside financing would be needed for that kind of expansion, Freeman said.

The overall project is still in its conceptual phase, with many details yet to be determined, such as suppliers for solar panels from the likes of California’s SunPower Corp or China’s Suntech Power Holdings Co Ltd.

It also needs environmental approval as well as financing and more transmission capacity if the plans reach the envisioned scale. And state authorities must decide if the panels can slow strong winds, stopping dust storms.

So far, the DWP has spent $500 million to control the dust with shallow flooding, ponds and salt grass planted on parts of the lake bed. Residents say the work has helped.

“It’s an added bonus if it makes electricity,” said Beverly Vander Wall, who owns a gift shop in Lone Pine.

“There’s a lot, a lot of sun here. Why not use it to our benefit?” she added.

(Reporting by Laura Isensee; Editing by Tim Dobbyn)

Popularity: 37% [?]