El Niño vs. the Drought
medium.com
medium.com
The first thing to know about the California Water Project is that it's designed to store enough water for three dry years. Last year was year four. The last time that happened was 1976-1977. Agricultural water customers have had huge cutbacks in their water deliveries.
Right now, rainfall is more important than reservoir level changes. It takes time for the water to reach the reservoirs. Rainfall so far this year is slightly above average, after four years of below average. This is not enough to recharge the reservoirs; that will take about two wet years. It's also not that important how much is in which reservoir; most of them are connected.
Here's the drought contingency plan updated to February 13, 2016.[1]
Household water isn't a big problem. It's agriculture that's hurting. Especially low-value crops such as rice and alfalfa.
Orange County is already recycling water from their sewerage disposal plant into drinking water. San Jose has that capability with a new plant, but isn't using it for drinking water yet. (But if you take the tour there[2] you can drink some.) San Diego County's desalinization plant opened last December and is now providing about 10% of their water. There's a lot going on to deal with the problem.
[1] http://www.water.ca.gov/waterconditions/docs/2016-DroughtCon...
[2] https://www.eiseverywhere.com/event_calendar.php?accountid=5...
- Often reservoirs are filled via gravity from elevations that are higher. If the precipitation at those higher elevations is falling as snow, you have to wait for it to melt before seeing the benefits.
- When the ground is dry and the aquifers depleted, less of the rainfall will make it into the reservoirs. I'm from central PA and MOST of our water is actually stored in the natural aquifers (under my area of the state, it's water-fllled limestone caves). So to be fair to el Nino, you have to look at how the aquifers are responding to the rain.
- California would be an unpleasant place if four years of drought were reversed in a single year.
This article is confusing level with flow rate. For Lake Shasta in particular, it looks like we're trending upward faster than the previous average.
I'm really not sure if this is an appropriate criticism, but if you are trying to plot something like this and you don't like the color contrast because it's hard to see then change it. For me, the cyan-on-grey is tough to see.
[1] http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cdecapp/resapp/resDetailOrig.action...
http://californiawaterblog.com/2012/02/09/insights-for-calif...
I find the Lopez article to be a better read because it is detailed and level-headed.