Maze Proposes Yokohl Valley Reservoir

Tulare County - Assemblyman Bill Maze has authored a measure (AB-450) to earmark $200,000 in state general fund monies to study an off stream storage reservoirs at Yokohl Valley to be carried out by Friant Water Users.

The valley east of Visalia has been the subject of some water storage studies in the 1960s says Friant Water Users member Dennis Keller. Those surveys had suggested the site of the reservoir would likely be in the western part of the 10 mile long valley backing up against Rocky Hill or Badger Hill since the water would have to be pumped back up from the Friant Kern canal or Kaweah River area.

The valley has a few scattered homesteads and is mostly used for ranching. “The idea would be to store flood waters in wet years in the reservoir and use it when it provides benefit,” says Keller. The site might have less impact on both the environment and Indian artifacts since the location is on a seasonal stream rather than on a year-round waterway like the Kaweah. However, the area is prime condor habitat, notes Keller, used by the endangered birds for foraging and could be impacted if the bird returns to its former range, notes Keller. In fact the valley is a chuck wagon for most of the area’s birds of prey.

The last time Yokohl Valley was in the news was related to the plan to mine sand in Yokohl Creek - a plan that met with plenty of environmental and traffic impact concerns.

Yokohl is mentioned in some preliminary Friant Water Users papers including the new partnership with Metropolitan Water District. The memorandum from September 2001 suggests Yokohl Valley along with Hungry Hollow east of Porterville or Deer Creek in the south part of the county might be likely candidates for additional water storage as part of a water management plan with MWD. Metropolitan seeks an exchange of water with Friant that would provide greater supplies of state water provided by MWD for lesser amounts of purer San Joaquin River water that flows down the Friant Kern. That potential partnership is to the point that projects within FWU individual districts are now being targeted.

Maze, who only recently joined the State Assembly, surprised Friant with this Assembly bill just introduced to the point that few at the most recent Friant board meeting held last week in Visalia knew that it had been introduced or that it was even considered particularly in this tough state budget times.

Asked about its prospects aide to Assembly member Sarah Reyes, Felina Sutton - who was speaking to the Friant board last week suggested its chances for full funding were not good since the Assembly speaker had already suggested he would not entertain general fund expenditures over $100,000 this year.

Tying the Yokohl Valley to the Friant Kern would clearly be a major expense but logically such a pumping plant could lift water around the base of Badger Hill or the saddle near Rocky Hill - both less than a mile from the foothill surrounded valley.

---

San Joaquin Valley - On almost every front and in every emission category, farmers are being vilified for polluting our valley air. Pressed by environmental lawsuits, the EPA has agreed it will no longer allow farms in the state to be exempt from clean air laws.

Target one for EPA is older stationary diesel engines that are the workhorse at valley farms pumping water or producing electricity. A new engine is far cleaner than pre 1987 engines putting out only 20% of the particulates that an old engine spews and about half the nitrogen oxide emissions - a precursor to smog.

But industry representative Manuel Cunha Jr. of Fresno based Nisei Farmers League says the plan to require a permit to operate diesel engines isn’t necessary and reminds us that valley farmers have already replaced over 2300 pre-1996 engines in the past three years. A voluntary program through the state offers a 71% cost subsidy to replace the older engines.

“We believe with funding already in place we can replace the rest of them by the end of 2004,” says Cunha who has been directly involved in the program and negotiations with both the state and USDA to implement the program. “The new Farm Bill has some $12 million in EQIP funds available to continue the replacement program, he says.

The EPA is on the hot seat over how to regulate diesel pumps in the state - whether to classify them as Title V - stationary sources with emission thresholds and per ton fines - or as EPA has suggested in the past few days - classify the farm pumps in with tractors and concentrate on cleaning up those pumps while sparing farmers the paperwork as well as the fees that go with them.

EPA has said that if diesel pumps are included in the final Title V rule, farmers will have to apply for permits by May 14. By August 1, 2003 other major stationary sources like dairies would have to file.

What ever course it takes farmers will replace their entire inventory of diesel pumps within the next 21 months, says Cunha, and continue to implement other emission cutting programs already in place.

Those USDA programs include:

• Orchard chipping under 5 year contract rules that has resulted in some 18,501 acres chipped instead of burned in the open field.

• 1755 miles of roads treated with oil to cut 1456 tons of particulate matter. A five year contract reduces each year the amount of federal subsidy a farmer gets to wet his roads.

• Encouragement on the issue of conservation tillage that means the ground is not broken up releasing particulates - money approved by Congress but available later this year for farmers.

Widely Exaggerated

Cunha says estimates of ag’s contribution to the valley’s air problem has been widely exaggerated and is wanting to complete a few more studies to finalize just what the inventory and farmer’s contribution of emissions is.

Tops on that list is a $31 million PM-10 study that is expected to greatly reduce the scientific estimate of the PM-10 tonnage from farm practices Cunha says the current estimate from 1972 that suggested much more land in the valley was tilled than actually is and also had categorized the valley as a “wind blown region” greatly exaggerating how much dust is caused. “Much of westside foothills is not disked or plowed nor is the eastside foothills that is range land and is not tilled or harvested. The former estimate of “ag land prep” to PM-10 emissions was about 34,000 tons/year but with the new estimates from PM-10 study it is now about 14,000 tons/year. Still farmers will have to plow less under a proposed new rule outlining conservation management practices.

Dairy emissions earlier estimated as contributing 179 lbs. per year per cow of PM-10 has now been scientifically measured at closer to 6 to 7 lbs. per year as a result of a recent study done by UC Davis and Texas A&M.

With 3 million cows in an estimate that is 30 times too large can make a huge difference in assessing just what it takes to clean our air. Supporters say the dairy industry will respond to clean up plans once the science is in because this is a top valley health concern - as it should be. Dairies will have to clean up emissions with either technology or farm practices, likely with government incentives.

As we wrote in a recent edition of the Valley Voice that included new estimates of ammonia emissions as well. ARB funded research on dairy contribution of reactive organic gas emissions is also underway in California and it is expected that this number too has been exaggerated based on a 1930s study. Yet the Fresno Bee and L.A. Times print headlines like “Cows Rival Cars As Smog Producers.”

Late this year enough scientific studies will be able to accurately gauge ag’s contribution. In the new estimate only harvest PM-10 conditions appear to be higher than earlier estimates as done by UC Davis with almonds being a major dust maker at nearly 41 lbs. PM-10 per acre. Other factors are lower like vehicle miles traveled on unpaved roads - estimates how big a dust problem there is. The Air Resource Board has been using a 4.4 vehicle mile traveled per acre per year factor but most crops are under .5 to 1.2 according to a new crop specific study.

The upshot is that when ag is blamed as being 54% of the ag particulate problem by the current ARB estimate - that number was based on old research that is likely not valid. “All we want is for good science to dictate the plan,” says Cunha.

Farm leaders point out that the valley is out of attainment for particulates in the winter time - when little farm activity is taking place and therefor to blame ag for the dust doesn’t make sense. Livestock emissions are expected to be part of the equation. Unpaved roads are a problem as well but that includes unpaved roads - not just on farms - but on mountain and foothill roads. But all the science isn’t in yet on this. The Air Resource Board’s funded studies on all emission categories should be ready later this year. These new estimates will be used to develop a state action plan.

Not to say all the lawsuits and press attention on smog hasn’t moved us closer to solving a real problem - people here are sick of the bad air. People are getting sick and industry - new jobs - are scared away because of this problem. But lets count the number of new cars registered in Fresno along with the new cows registered in Tulare County.

Ferment

Still there is ferment in Sacramento to do more. Bakersfield State Senator Dean Florez has proposed legislation to phase out open field burning and ban it by June 2005 and help air districts to help find alternatives to field burning. Tops on that list would be to mandate biomass plants burn local ag waste in the plan amounting to at least 30% of the wood waste they take in. A second Florez bill considered to be helpful by farmers is another Florez bill that revokes so-called utility “stand by” charges that farmers must pay to study connecting to the grid.

Not so popular in farm circles is Florez’s proposed air pollution permits for diesel powered pumps and confined animal feeding operations by January 2005 and a ban on dairies to take effect within 3 miles of a school or urban area. Florez also calls for a new program to help farmers make the transition to cleaner technology with low interest loans.

The situation is reminiscent of the pesticide debate of the 1970s through 1990. Under pressure farmers adapted to research that showed some pesticides were dangerous and that impacts could be reduced with a new approach that limits the worst pesticides and adopted Integrated Pest Management strategies. Farmers did that and today there has been a dramatic decrease in pesticide spraying and farmers are not out of business. How did we get there? Not just with pressure but with research that worked with the farm community to develop a sustainable program.

---

America’s technological progress can be measured not just by newer, more powerful machines, but by cleaner, more efficient fuels to run them.

Remember when everyone burned wood or coal to keep warm and our urban areas turned black from coal dust? Our children choked on the fumes.

Progress was measured not by digging deeper to produce more coal, but by competitive alternative technologies that invented a better product. The solution to go faster wasn’t a bigger buggy whip for a horse, but inventing a horseless carriage that ran on portable fuel. For better or worse - it transformed the world.

Today the focus in the California air debate - as it relates to farms - is that massive infusion of capital is needed to clean up farming practices and save the valley’s air. It will for example take some $25 million - much of it public money - to buy 2000 new stationary diesel engines for farms who use them to pump water and make electricity. Already the public has paid some 71% of the cost to buy 2321 new diesel pumps for farmers since 1997.

Even with the incentive built in - for farmers today facing the worse crisis in commodity prices in decades - it may be a tough sell. Funding for stationary engines doesn’t fix the problem of farm vehicles that remains unregulated - can they run cleaner too?

We want clean air but we don’t want more farms to put out the for sale sign. We know in the valley the only alternative to farms is houses and more pavement. That means more cars and sprawl.

To borrow a phrase from the computer world - while there is a need for hardware changes - software may be a key way to fix our problem.

Proponents of both lower emission petroleum-based and renewable-based fuels suggest there may be a cheaper way to clean the air we breathe - and that is sell cleaner fuels.

What about the dust problem? Should it take big bucks to clean up particulates as well?

Well thought out practices that are not capital intensive can help reduce PM-10 emissions by adopting farming practices like “no till” that stir up less dust.

On the dairy a manure collections system designed by a Kingsburg farmer separates the manure when it’s fresh and filters it before it becomes a massive emission problem percolating in a lagoon.

Farming practices - again rather than capital investments could pave the way for farmers to survive the big air debate before they take their “Last gasp.”

Consider some alternative fuels to common 500 ppm sulfur diesel - the standard in all 49 states but California where the standard is the far lower polluting diesel rated at 50 ppm. Now a new proposed standard diesel being phased in nationally in 2006 will take the level down to 15 ppm of sulfur - drastically reducing particulates.

The valley’s air problems are estimated by the ARB as 60% transportation related and diesel truck traffic estimated to be 60% of that problem.

Now weigh in the fact that some 15,000 out of state trucks run up and down the valley every day belching gas they bought out of state rated at 500 ppm sulfur content, says Manuel Cunha Jr. - a farm activist who heads the Nisei Farmers League.

Most agree that cars and trucks are far bigger a problem than farms and Cunha says scientific studies are proving that farmers play a smaller role in our air problems than has been claimed (see other article).

Ethanol

Look at the fuel choices in California recently. Because we need an oxygenate by federal rule in our gasoline we used oil-based MTBE for years to help make fuel burn cleaner. But the stuff pollutes our ground water and now in the past few months is on its way out replaced by all major gasoline sellers with renewable based ethanol - without any transition problems as some had predicted.

The potential market for ethanol fuel in California is thought to be 900 million gallons in coming years and with the potential to make ethanol from farm based crops here there is a budding plan to build a handful of new ethanol producing plants in California - some in central California. The upshot could be the fuel crisis will produce win win for our air and our farms and maybe for the earth.

Congressional legislation could turn the existing 2.13 billion gallons of ethanol produced this year into 5 billion gallons by 2012 if a national renewable fuel standard is adopted.

Like some other fuels ethanol runs in traditional automobile engines and even adds a little muscle to your get up and go. No need to literally reinvent the wheel on how you fuel your car.

Hybrid technology is another example of how blending electric with ultra low emission technology transitions us from the pure petroleum age into the next era. Now even President Bush is suggesting hydrogen could help cut our dependence on Middle East oil. This new technology is out there although years from implementation and requiring a new fueling infrastructure.

Biodiesel

Closer to home there was some big news out of Bakersfield in the past month where the nation’s largest biodiesel plant is nearing start up. Green Star Products Inc. is involved with a joint venture with Hondo Chemical Inc. expected to make 35 million gallons of fuel for the California market that smells like french fries. The source for biodiesel is both soybean oil shipped in from the Midwest by rail and California’s own large supply - some 100 million gallons of waste cooking oil, says Green Star partner Bill Wason who heads up American Bio-Fuels, the name of the joint venture.

What’s so great about biodiesel? First if you spill it don’t worry - it won’t pollute the ground water because it’s completely biodegradable.

Most importantly - it runs in our diesel engines without modification unlike converting the engine to other power sources - electricity or natural gas.

It’s far cleaner than petroleum diesel cutting particulates by 47% says a November 2002 EPA report, cutting cancer causing components found in petroleum diesel by 90% and contains no sulfur. In addition biodiesel, unlike all petroleum products does not contribute to global warming cutting CO2 emissions. The only knock against biodiesel has been studies that show it raises NOx emissions - sulfur dioxide emissions that precurse smog - by a small fraction over petroleum diesel while greatly reducing other smog components. But Wasson says they have a fuel additive to the biodiesel that cuts NOx from 20 to 40% that is awaiting certification. The additive also helps increase fuel milage making any extra cost for the biodiesel negligible, he says.

Wason says while the California market for biodiesel seems promising a big market exists in Europe where biodiesel volume has reached 400 million gallons compared to just 20 million gallons in the US today. The European Union has a rule set to be implemented by 2005 to include 2% biodiesel blends in petroleum diesel on all fuel sold by then.

Biodiesel is typically sold as a blend of from 5% to 20% renewable biodiesel and the remaining petroleum diesel. Likewise with ethanol, where the blends can run from 6% to 85%.

Wason says Bakersfield was targeted to make the biodiesel in part because there is ready market in the farm community. “We expect it will be sold this year through card lock facilities and jobbers,” he says.

If the EPA and ARB recognize the air cleaning benefits of biodiesel and low sulfur petroleum diesel; “the cost to change fuel blends is going to be less than changing vehicles or converting all their diesel pumps to electric,” says Wason. He says his company expects certification and recognition for the benefits of biodiesel with new additive helping to clean our air without breaking the bank.

Another project close to home is in Hanford where a company is negotiating with Kings Waste Recycling for a location at their yard to recycle plastic to make into a clean diesel fuel - taking a waste and generating fuel.

There is a major benefit from biodiesels like ethanol - the stuff comes from farms helping to motivate farmers to become part of the solution. Air pollution can be thought of as a cost but it is also an opportunity.

Diesel - criticized over the years as a culprit in most analysis of our bad air - in part because diesel vehicles are not regulated - could return to its roots when Rudolph Diesel used peanut oil to fire up his engine at the World’s Fair back in 1900.

There is yet another reason to support these alternative fuels - we can lessen our dependence on imported oil - we bring in 58% of the oil we use now - and replace it with domestically produced product heading to a goal of energy independence in the future.

---