By Jane Palmer for Ensia.
Broadcast version by Eric Galatas for Colorado News Connection reporting for the Solutions Journalism Network-Public News Service Collaboration

The summer of 2022 was tough for farmers in the American West: Hot, dry conditions led snow to melt early, reservoirs to run low and streams to pare down to mere trickles. For many, that meant less water to grow crops and reduced yields. But Byron Kominek, a farm manager near Longmont, Colorado, enjoyed an abundant harvest of peppers, tomatoes, squash and lettuces.

When his family farm stopped making a profit, Kominek installed solar panels on the plot and invited Sprout City Farms to grow crops beneath them. It's a setup known as agrivoltaics - where solar panels and agriculture occupy the same land - and the duo effectively harvests the sun twice, for both food and electricity.

Protected from the high midday sun, plants under panels become mini swamp coolers: As they open their pores to photosynthesize, water escapes from their leaves - creating a cooler microclimate. This reduction in heat increases the efficiency of the panels - even as the panels are sheltering the crops beneath from overexposure to the hot sun. Consequently, agrivoltaics can provide benefits to both farmers and electricity producers. In the past few years another possible advantage has come to the fore: crops grown under panels need less water.

"If you spilled your water in the shade versus the sun, where would it stay wet longer?" asks Greg Barron-Gafford, a University of Arizona professor who has helped set up the site as well as experimental agrivoltaic plots in Arizona, Africa and Israel.

At one such site, Biosphere 2 near Oracle, Arizona, Barron-Gafford has found that some crops beneath solar panels only need watering every couple of days, compared to every few hours for those grown in direct sunlight. Agrivoltaic cherry tomatoes proved 65% more water efficient than those grown under an open sky, for example, and the total fruit production doubled. Researchers are now scrutinizing how different spacings of panels are impacting the water needs of a range of crops in the hot, dry climate of the Sonoran Desert.

Meanwhile, at Kominek's farm, now called Jack's Solar Garden and the largest commercially active agrivoltaics system in the United States, the same scientists are testing which crops thrive under panels in the varied seasons of Colorado.

Barron-Gafford believes agrivoltaics could be help farmers in the West who want to keep farming in the face of climate change. "We want to adapt our food system to survive through periods of drought and warmer temperature changes, and that comes down to easing our dependence on irrigation," he says.

Harvest Hacking

Against the backdrop of Sonoran Desert scrub on a sunny but chilly November morning, Nesrine Rouini tends to seedlings under a canopy of solar panels at the Biosphere 2 site. A mere 9- by 18-meter (30- by 59-foot) garden, the experimental agrivoltaics site resembles an intensive care unit for plants - stakes bearing barcodes identify each new sprout, and a network of cables and wires runs along each seedbed to a centralized data logger. This Gordian knot of leads and controls transmits real-time data of a plant's living environment - soil moisture, temperature, solar radiation and a host of other variables - hour by hour to the research group in Tucson. Simultaneously, cameras track its growth from seedling to sprouting to flowering. A plant can't so much as open a stoma without its actions being spotted, relayed and recorded.

Once a week, Rouini, an agrivoltaics researcher on Barron-Gafford's team, visits the site and a control plot, which is not under panels. Using a handheld gas exchange device, she takes the pulse of each plant and checks how well it's coping with the shade or open sky. "This is how we found out that plants in the control plot experience midday depression and don't photosynthesize," Rouini says. "While the ones under the panels keep trucking along."

Irrigation on both plots starts at 7 a.m. By 9 a.m. the control plot soil already appears drier to the naked eye than earth under the panels. "Without shade the water just evaporates so much quicker," Rouini says.

Basic physics dictates that crops grown under panels need less water, but scientists still don't know how each crop will fare in each location and exactly how much water will be saved. Consequently, in Arizona, Colorado and a network of nearly 30 sites around the country, groups of researchers are trying to close that data gap.

Although scientists have studied the interaction between light and plants for decades, the novel shading regime of solar panels presents many unknowns, says Jordan Macknick, the lead energy-water-land analyst for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and the principal investigator of the Innovative Solar Practices Integrated with Rural Economies and Ecosystems (InSPIRE) network of agrivoltaic sites. "The Holy Grail would be for any farmer to be able to pick a point on a United States map and retrieve information about what crops they could grow, the best configuration of panels and how much water they need," he says.

Focusing on Feasibility

In Colorado, Liza McConnell, Jack's solar research farm manager with Sprout City Farms, observed that the lettuces grown with half the amount of water administered to a control plot were only a little smaller and significantly sweeter than their sun-exposed equivalents. Celery, typically a high-water-use crop, also fared well under a reduced watering regime, as did smaller peppers, but the larger Anaheim peppers under panels didn't produce as much fruit as hoped. With the West in a prolonged drought and climate change taking its toll, people might have to adapt to not getting the exact type of pepper they want all year round McConnell says.

"In the face of climate change we need all options on the table," she says. "Agrivoltaics is not the only solution, but it is going to be one of the things that will help keep our communities safe and resilient."

Despite its many benefits, agrivoltaics may not be feasible for large-scale, single-crop farms that grow corn and soybeans and rely on using heavy machinery. Farming under solar panels is even challenging for farmers on their feet: McConnell equates it to farming on an obstacle course. On the flip side, the panels provide much needed shade for farmers on hot days.

"We're producing energy, we're producing food, we're conserving water, and we're building soil health that further conserves water and nutrients," McConnell says. "And then we're also protecting necessary human labor and quality of life for farmworkers."

The yield of certain crops, specifically warm-season peppers and tomatoes, might also be less under panels in Colorado, McConnell says. But these fruits only ripen at certain temperatures; if it's too hot, they won't ripen at all. "So a reduced yield is still better than having no tomatoes in the face of climate change," she says.

Macknick points out that the revenue that farmers can make by selling solar-generated power will more than compensate for any reductions in farm produce and that agrivoltaics could help farmers in the West and the Colorado River Basin be more financially resilient to droughts and climate change.

Another potential benefit of agrivoltaics is that it could open more land to farming, including Indigenous lands where food security and energy access have been issues. In hot and dry desert lands, for example, growing crops under panels can reduce the need for scarce water and increase productivity and feasibility for farming efforts. "Can some of these places now produce food because we've taken off that harsh edge of the environment?" Macknick poses.

Agrivoltaics also offers the potential to harvest and store rain so it can be used for irrigation. Gutters attached to the bottom of solar panels can capture rain and channel it into small reservoirs. But challenges exist in the execution. In Tucson, for example, water simply flows off water panels and gets wasted. "It would be good to think about how to set up guttering on panels to collect water intentionally and do it the right way," Barron-Gafford says.

Large-scale agrivoltaics endeavors will face plenty of challenges, and they won't be right for every farmer, Macknick says. But there's potential to improve yields of some crops while enhancing soil health, reducing water needs and producing power, too. "It is certainly going to play a growing role in farming," Macknick says. "I think we are going to see more and more of this."


Jane Palmer wrote this article for Ensia.


get more stories like this via email

By Diego Mendoza-Moyers for El Paso Matters.
Broadcast version by Freda Ross for Texas News Service reporting for the Solutions Journalism Network-Public News Service Collaboration

El Pasoans will no longer have to rely on the Rio Grande for drinking water in the near future, as El Paso Water gradually replaces the river that has historically supplied nearly half of the city’s water with other sources that are less susceptible to drought.

Regional drought and fluctuating snowfall at the head of the Rio Grande basin in southern Colorado in recent years have left El Paso Water officials increasingly unsure how much water will flow through the river into the city each year. 

In 2020, water from the Rio Grande supplied 38% of the city’s water, but in the next two years, the river supplied just 14% and 17% of El Paso’s water supply. Last year, river water provided 31%.

Soon, however, El Paso Water won’t have to worry about those yearly fluctuations as much. 

“We’re probably only a year or two out from being able to operate without any water” from the Rio Grande, said John Balliew, El Paso Water’s longtime chief executive. “We would like to be drought-proof as a community.”

If the drought in the region persists or even gets worse in the years ahead, instead of relying on the Rio Grande for water, El Paso’s water utility plans to use a mix of technologies to make up the difference. 

Balliew highlighted the $150 million advanced water purification plant that will clean wastewater to drinkable standards and is expected to start operating next to the utility’s Bustamante Wastewater Treatment Plant in the Lower Valley within the next few years, as well as an expansion at El Paso’s water desalination plant near the airport to boost daily production capacity to 33 million gallons per day from 27.5 million currently. The utility is paying for that desal plant expansion by using some of the extra cash generated from the rate increase it enacted earlier this year. 

An engineered arroyo in the far Northeast will also allow the utility to pump more excess water underground to replenish groundwater supplies.

“With all of those things put together, I would agree with what (Balliew is) saying,” said Alex Mayer, director of the Center for Environmental Resource Management at the University of Texas at El Paso. “There’ll be very little reliance on the Rio Grande.”

Shifting away from the Rio Grande as a water source is a big development for El Paso’s water utility, which is expecting to see a more intense drought next year amid a La Niña weather pattern. 

Scott Reinert, water resources manager for El Paso Water, said he expects Elephant Butte will be just 5% full this fall, down from about 12% full as of August 1 and 23% full this time last year. Once snow melts in southern Colorado after winter, it flows south through the Rio Grande basin in New Mexico before reaching Elephant Butte, where the water is released to El Paso. So, the city will probably receive less water from the Rio Grande next year and will have to pump more groundwater compared with this year, Balliew said.

“This year is relatively normal, but next year is probably not,” Balliew said.

On average, El Pasoans use about 110 million gallons of water per day. On the hottest summer days, however, water usage across the city can top 162 million gallons as people water their plants more, run water-using evaporative air conditioners or shower more than once. 

El Paso Water says it can pump a maximum of 170 million gallons of groundwater from its system per day. And the Advanced Water Purification plant will produce as much as 10 million gallons per day when it’s up-and-running – the “window” of supplies that the utility needs, Balliew said. 

“That 10 is an important number, because that’s really the difference between having to implement the drought and water emergency plan and not,” Balliew said. “Ten million gallons per day is the window that we need to be able to operate without any surface water.”

The utility isn’t quite there yet; for now even a small amount of water coming from Elephant Butte “makes all the difference,” Balliew said. 

An ongoing years-long water dispute between Texas, New Mexico and the federal government – over complaints that New Mexico has shorted Texas on Rio Grande water deliveries – remains stalled after the U.S Supreme Court in June rejected a settlement between the two states. But even if the parties reach a settlement at some point, persistent drought and climate change still threaten to further diminish Rio Grande flows into El Paso.

El Paso Water’s strategy to develop a drought-proof supply of drinking water is motivated by history. 

Back in the late 1940s and early 1950s, El Paso was entirely dependent on the Rio Grande for water, but a severe drought hit and by 1951 the city’s water utility warned of shortages. At a meeting of the city water board that year, Water Department Superintendent E. J. Umbenhauer said “there isn’t going to be enough water to go around this summer,” according to the El Paso Times. 

After that water shortage episode, El Paso leaders in 1952 established the Public Service Board to govern city-owned El Paso Water and solve the problem of water scarcity here. Part of the solution over the last several decades has been encouraging water conservation – a success up until now that has driven daily water usage down from 187 gallons per person in 1990 down to around 130 gallons per person today. 

The utility hasn’t been able to lower per-person usage much further over the last decade, however. As a result, diversifying the city’s water supply, instead of just lowering demand, has also become a major focus for El Paso Water. 

“What we have been striving for for many years is to get to a point where, if that happens again, where there’s no water that can come out of the Rio Grande,” Balliew said, “that we would be able to continue to operate the city like normal.”

To make up a shortfall in river water in any given year, the water utility pumps more groundwater out of the Hueco Bolson aquifer and, to a lesser extent, the Mesilla Bolson beneath the Westside. Over the last four years, the Hueco Bolson has annually provided as little as 40% of El Paso’s water and as much as 61%.

“It’s meaningful in that we won’t have to worry about that variability anymore, which is very likely caused by climate change,” Mayer said of less reliance on the Rio Grande. “The consequence of that is that the cost goes up.”

Largely replacing the Rio Grande with more reliable water sources won’t come cheap. 

El Paso Water has been spending heavily in recent years to renovate the city’s aging water and sewer systems that were built in the post-World War II era, and also to develop new water supply and storage systems. 

During this year and the next two years, the utility plans to spend $2.3 billion on capital projects compared with $1.3 billion over the prior three years, from 2021 through 2023. In order to fund citywide infrastructure improvements, El Paso Water in its 2023 financial report said it expected water rates to double over the ensuing five years, and wastewater rates to rise by 86% over that time.

Roughly speaking, it costs El Paso Water something like $150 to pump an acre-foot of fresh groundwater, which is nearly 326,000 gallons of water. Drawing and treating an acre-foot of surface water from the Rio Grande costs around $300. And an acre-foot of desalinated water costs the utility about $500 to produce. 

Meanwhile, the advanced water purification process that El Paso Water plans to rely more on in the future costs $1,000 per acre-foot of water produced, according to the utility’s estimates. And piping water from Dell City into El Paso – El Paso Water’s long term water supply plan for the decades ahead – will cost around $3,000 per acre-foot. 

“The poorest people in the city will be paying as much as 10% of their income just for indoor water. That doesn’t include outdoor water,” Mayer said. “It’s time to start thinking about how these increases are going to affect our poorest residents.”

El Paso Water’s rates per gallon increase as a customer uses more water. So Mayer suggested El Paso Water could look at lifting rates even further on the highest-use tiers, meaning the biggest water consumers would see the largest bill hike. The utility could also look at increasing the fixed charge on the bill, called the water supply replacement charge, Mayer said. 

Balliew last year said El Paso Water needed to study more how to give a “life line” to low-income customers with water bills set to escalate further in the coming years. He said the utility will at some point establish a citizen committee and take a look at changing how it bills customers. He also suggested El Paso Water could tweak the block tiers in which customers pay more per unit of water after using a certain amount of water every month. 

El Paso Water is poised to maintain a stable water supply for decades, but the question is how much that may cost customers. 

“We don’t want companies to make a decision: ‘Well, we’re not going to invest in El Paso because of the water supply situation,’” Balliew said. 

El Paso Water, Balliew added, is “confident, regardless of what sort of climate impact, drought, those sorts of things, that we’ll be able to function normally.”


Diego Mendoza-Moyers wrote this article for El Paso Matters.


get more stories like this via email

A recent report gives the majority of cruise ships anchoring in Maine ports a failing environmental grade.

The Cruise Ship Report Card from Friends of the Earth finds companies, including Carnival and Princess Cruises, release significant amounts of toxic wastewater and air pollution while docked in cities such as Portland and Bar Harbor.

Report author and the group's Oceans and Vessels Program Director, Marcie Keever, said newer ships may run on liquefied natural gas, but are still adding to the industry's climate footprint.

"You're driving your hotel around on the ocean," said Keever. "It's going to use a ton of fuel and generate a significant amount of CO2 emissions."

The cruise ship industry maintains it is highly regulated and has taken steps to install advanced water- and air-pollution controls.

But Keever said despite hundreds of industry violations, the EPA has done little to enforce protections for coastal communities.

Corporate transparency played a large role in the cruise ship ratings. Companies that fully disclose their environmental and sustainability practices fared better than those that do not.

The Norwegian-based Hurtigruten, which is developing the first zero-emission cruise ship, won top marks for its openness and environmental efforts.

Keever said the report card can help consumers decide if a cruise is the right kind of vacation for them.

"If the environment and climate are important to you, really take a look and make a decision based on that," said Keever, "instead of just what the industry is putting out as this sort of shine on their industry."

Keever said cruise companies will continue to violate environmental laws without independent observers on-board to ensure water and air quality standards.

The last remaining on-board observation program, the Ocean Rangers out of Alaska, was defunded in 2019.





get more stories like this via email

Across Pennsylvania and other northern U.S. states, climate change -- from burning oil, coal and methane gas -- is increasing the number of winter days with minimum temperatures above freezing.

The phenomenon is known as "lost winter" and a Climate Shift Index analysis of temperatures showed more than 60% of 28 snow belt states are having at least one additional week of days above freezing.

Shel Winkely, a meteorologist and weather and climate engagement specialist for Climate Central, said winter weather will not be as cold for as long as it used to be.

"Temperatures that are below freezing -- so, 32 degrees Fahrenheit, or zero degrees Celsius -- those are important days," Winkely explained. "We found out how many days climate change has taken away overnight lows that are at or below the freezing temperature."

Winkley pointed out when you look at the 30-year average of snowfall for Pennsylvania, cities like Philadelphia now have only a 9% chance of seeing a white Christmas, with Pittsburgh faring a bit better at about 31%.

Winkley emphasized the loss of cold winter days can negatively affect some regions that depend economically on winter sports for recreation and tourism income. He added lost winter days can also contribute to a smaller snowpack, meaning less spring-melt water is available for municipal systems or agricultural operations.

"On the whole, the state, when you take the average over this decade -- again, 2014 to 2023 -- climate change added about 10 days per year above 32 degrees or so above freezing," Winkley reported.

Winkley noted the report does not mean winters are going away but the warming climate is making winters shorter and less intense.

"This doesn't mean that there's not cold, or that we're losing all of the cold," Winkley stressed. "We still have cold that is to be found. It just means that we're losing those classic winters. This isn't the winters that our parents experienced or that our grandparents experienced."


get more stories like this via email