My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SR0084717_SSNL
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
A
>
AUSTIN
>
285
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
SR0084717_SSNL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/17/2022 12:18:44 PM
Creation date
1/13/2022 9:53:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
FileName_PostFix
SSNL
RECORD_ID
SR0084717
PE
2602
FACILITY_NAME
285 S AUSTIN RD
STREET_NUMBER
285
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
AUSTIN
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
MANTECA
Zip
95336
APN
22802048
ENTERED_DATE
1/12/2022 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
285 S AUSTIN RD
P_LOCATION
04
P_DISTRICT
003
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\tsok
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
1028
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
california Water Today 101 <br />For this reason, many ecosystem service valuation efforts focus on a few services <br />that can be most easily quantified and tend to ignore or qualitatively discuss <br />the rest.26 <br />These difficulties notwithstanding, California has much to gain by adopting <br />a more comprehensive approach to assessing the value of ecosystem services. <br />Even where full economic valuation is not practical, an approach that considers <br />nonmarket functions of aquatic ecosystems can inform and guide decisions for <br />water supply and flood management to maximize overall benefits (Chapters 5, 6). <br />Considering the value of ecosystem services comports well with recent state leg- <br />islation and policies seeking to establish “co-equal” goals for ecosystem health <br />and water supply (Chapter 1). This approach also can help to dispel the myth that <br />healthy aquatic ecosystems conflict with a healthy economy (Hanak et al. 2010). <br />Water and Energy <br />Water is heavy; average urban use (about 200 gallons per capita per day) comes <br />to over 1,500 pounds a day. So the energy needed to move water can be consid- <br />erable. This is particularly true for Southern California’s urban water supplies, <br />which often involve lifting large amounts of water over mountains. These pump- <br />ing costs alone offer considerable incentive for water conservation (Wilkinson <br />2000). In addition to long-standing management concerns about the high cost <br />of energy involved in water production and use (Palmer and Lund 1986), there <br />have been growing policy concerns about greenhouse gas emissions from both <br />the production and use of water. In the latter context, it is frequently reported that <br />water use accounts for roughly 20 percent of the state’s electricity use, making it a <br />target for state policy efforts to reduce emissions (California Air Resources Board <br />2008). However, public discussions of this issue do not usually recognize that <br />almost three-quarters of water-related energy use occurs in the homes, businesses, <br />offices, and farms of end users (Table 2.5). Less than one-quarter is devoted to <br />operating local, regional, and statewide water infrastructure. <br />Most water-related energy use is in the urban sector. The most energy-intensive <br />urban uses involve water heating, electricity for washing machines, chilling <br />water and ice, and in-building pumps for spas, hot water circulation, evaporative <br />coolers, etc., as well as industrial and commercial processes. Agricultural end <br />26. A recent study by the Science Advisory Board for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2009) discusses a <br />variety of methods for valuing ecosystem services: (1) measures of public attitudes—surveys and focus groups that elicit <br />public preferences for ecosystem services, (2) economic methods—methods to estimate how much people are willing to <br />spend to avoid losing a service, and (3) civil valuation methods—public referenda or initiatives, which provide informa- <br />tion about how much the voting population values particular services.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.