News - Reduce Flooding

Those Who Deny History Are Doomed To Repeat It: Subsidence in 1974 and 2019

My post about Conroe escalating the Montgomery County water wars and putting millions of people in the crossfire from subsidence drew a response from Simon Sequeira, president of Quadvest. Sequiera is one of the litigants arguing for unlimited pumping of groundwater. On Facebook, he dismissively said, “Rehak has an elementary understanding of the issues.”

Who are Simon Sequiera and Quadvest?

Quadvest claims to be the “fastest growing, privately-owned utility company in Southeast Texas.” It has aggressive growth goals. Unlimited pumping of cheap groundwater would help them attain those goals. I consider Mr. Sequeira’s criticism with that in mind. He has some self-interest in this fight. If he wins, he gets even richer. Unfortunately, for millions of people in the Gulf Coast region, money has a short memory.

Denying History Means Learning the Hard Way

The history of Quadvest goes back only 40 years, so this 1974 Texas Monthly article about subsidence may not be part of Mr. Sequeira’s or the company’s institutional memory. William Broyles wrote it. Broyles helped found Texas Monthly and won numerous national magazine awards, one of the highest honors in journalism. Broyles later went on to a distinguished film career as a screenwriter.

The article, titled Disaster, Part Two: Houston, discusses subsidence. It begins with the story of a home – built less than 10 feet above sea level – that had subsided 10 feet in the previous 30 years, three of those feet in just the previous 10 years. The home was separated from the shore and surrounded by sand bags when Broyles wrote the article.

It was one of 448 homes in Brownwood, an exclusive subdivision in Baytown, that actually sank into Galveston Bay.

Cause of Subsidence

In the next paragraph Broyles discusses the cause: “Across the Houston Ship Channel, … the booming plants and industries of the world’s largest petro-chemical complex and the nation’s third largest port had set in motion an inexorable geologic process which destined their quiet neighborhood for the bottom of Galveston Bay. This great agricultural, industrial, and refining economy—and its population—have been fueled by 190 billion gallons of water a year, available easily and cheaply from industrial and municipal wells. These wells have steadily drained the Evangeline and Chicot aquifers (underground water storage systems) faster than they are refilled by annual rainfall. Each year the wells must go deeper to find water. Because of the region’s geology, water is a vital structural component of the clay and sand underlying the land surface; when it is removed, the land sinks.”

One aquifer in Montgomery County is being depleted 500 times faster than its recharge rate. This is clearly not sustainable.

Alternate Doomsday Scenario

Because of its proximity to sea level, Brownwood felt the effects of subsidence first. But the article goes on to discuss the effects of subsidence in the Sixties and Seventies on Pasadena, League City, Clear Lake, the San Jacinto Battle Ground, Galveston, Texas City, and the Johnson Space Center.

The doomsday scenario most feared then and now is a giant hurricane pushing storm surge up the Bay.

The specter of subsidence was so feared by the people of the time that it led to the creation of the Houston-Galveston Subsidence District by the Texas Legislature in 1975, just months after Broyles wrote the article.

Of course, most of Montgomery County is higher than the area bordering Galveston Bay. So why should Montgomery County residents worry?

Red contours show subsidence in last century. Blue contours show subsidence in first 16 years of this century. Note how the small red circle near Jersey Village (A) quickly expanded to the large blue circle around it. Also note (B) the widening gap between red and blue at the top of the frame. This shows that areas that depend on groundwater, i.e., Montgomery County, are subsiding faster than those on surface water, i.e., most of Harris County. Source: Harris-Galveston Subsidence District.

Water level declines start at the well locations where the aquifer is being overpumped. They call the drawdown curves “cones of depression.” Any local district allowing unlimited groundwater pumping would be impacted first and most. Then the effects would spread to neighboring counties such as Harris and Liberty. This could reduce the gradient of the San Jacinto, causing floodwaters to move slower or accumulate in certain places. Jersey Village is already experiencing this type of flooding due to excessive pumping that put it in the center of a giant bowl.

Fault Activation and Property Damage

Broyles’ article goes on to describe another fear: the activation of faults. “Subsidence caused by massive water withdrawal from regions of high compressibility has also nudged into activity more than 1000 miles of faults. These faults, which generally run parallel to the coast, range in displacement from several inches to eight feet. Such a fault has caused the variation in subsidence at the San Jacinto Monument, where one end of the reflecting pool has sunk three feet and the other end six feet.”

“This faulting,” continues Broyles, “… exacerbates the problems caused by relatively even subsidence; sewers, pipelines, foundations, sensitive catalytic units, and other highly sophisticated structures cannot survive faulting.”

A recent study by SMU, funded by NASA, confirms that fault activation is still a very real threat from subsidence in Montgomery County.

One economic geologist quoted by Broyles in 1975 characterized faults as “slow motion earthquakes.” There’s no shortage of pipelines, wells, and oilfield instructure. We should not forget that Humble Oil Company turned into one of the world’s largest brands, Exxon, and started right here. Also, there’s other infrastructure like roads, sewers and water distribution networks to be concerned about in northern Harris and southern Montgomery Counties.

Private Vs. Public Interest

If Mr. Sequeira is smart, he will pay close attention to the end of Broyles’ article. Broyles concludes with a discussion of a massive and messy class-action lawsuit between those fighting for unlimited pumping and those whose property was damaged.

Broyles said, “…People … endangered by subsidence are not accepting the extinction of their property … stoically.”

That should give everyone on both sides of the current water war lots to think about.

Many wells and pipelines run through the Lake Houston watershed. Hmmmm. Subsidence, faulting, ruptures, drinking water for 2 million people. It’s easy to see how this could get even uglier. Before there is any resolution, history may repeat itself.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/22/2019

692 Days since Hurricane Harvey

All thoughts expressed in this post represent my opinions on matters of public safety and interest. They are protected by the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP statute of the Great State of Texas.

Barrington Is BACK and BETTER!

This morning, more than 22 months after Hurricane Harvey, the Barrington held a grand re-opening ceremony for its 18,000 square foot Manor House. When project manager Lauren Blackburn cut the red tape, residents got their first glimpse of a newly renovated and re-imagined community facility without equal in Kingwood, and perhaps without equal in the Houston area.

*Houston City Council Member Dave Martin (left of bow) addresses a crowd gathered for the ribbon cutting ceremony.*

*Lauren Blackburn, right, the project manager planned the renovation meticulously. She laid out 72 steps that had to be taken before residents could even vote on the proposal.*

Time to Enjoy Life Again

Driving into the parking lot, I could sense the electricity in the air. A large crowd gathered in front of the Manor House. People wanted this.

Residents of one of the hardest hit subdivisions during Harvey were out to make a statement. Every home looked perfectly manicured and freshly painted. Every blade of grass looked neatly trimmed and postcard perfect. Golfers were enjoying the immaculate greens and fairways of the surrounding Kingwood Country Club. Even the bluebirds were singing.

*Impressive without being intimidating, the Manor House radiates warmth and welcome.*

*Part of the library in the Manor House.*

*A grand piano adorns the entry hall which looks out over the swimming pool.*

*Opposite the piano in the entry hall, another conversation area welcomes residents and guests to sit awhile and stay.*

*The Manor House is large enough to provide couples and friends with private, peaceful places to relax and socialize. It’s designed to bring people together..*

*One end of the Manor House provides an exercise room for adults.*

*The kitchen and dining area include a bar.*

*Game room for kids and teens includes a full size pool table.*

*…air hockey and more. Before the renovation, the Manor House did not have a game room at all.*

*The Manor House even has a play room for smaller children. Parents and babysitters can bring kids here to play and socialize.*

*The Manor House contains a room big enough to host parties, book clubs, church groups and more.*

*A lighted tennis court allows extended play for serious enthusiasts.*

*This cabana provides shade near the tennis courts and swimming pool.*

*Residents* *Audrey and Gabriel Alvarado with their daughters Gloria and Reeva, can all walk to the new Manor House.*

*The Barrington is surrounded by the Kingwood Country Club, one of the largest private clubs in the country. It offers 72 holes of golf. The Club’s Lake Course surrounds the Barrington.*

Overwhelmingly Approved by Barrington Residents

Blackburn says her team of residents surveyed the community three times to determine what the new Manor House should offer. Residents volunteered ideas for everything from the types of activities to the art on the walls.

Even though renovations cost more than $750,000, a whopping seventy-two percent of the residents voted for them.

Reflecting Needs of Next Generation

The developer originally conceived the Barrington for people older than 55. However, the survey found that 30% of the families had children under 10. As a result, the design of the original building, built in 2002/2003 changed.

“The community is different and the Manor House reflects the composition and wishes of the community,” says Blackburn.

Cultivating a Sense of Community

“In fact, we designed it to cultivate a sense of community,” said Blackburn. “People can hold all kinds of private events here. Or just hang out with friends. Groups can hold private events. Book clubs. Watch parties. Bible study. Birthdays. Community meetings. Weddings. Receptions. No other community has something like this. It’s what makes us special.”

*The Barrington offers stately homes on immaculate streets surrounded by the Kingwood Country Club and nature.*

Defined by Dreams, Not Disaster

Yes, the people of the Barrington made a statement today. They said, “We will no longer be defined by disaster. We will be defined by our dreams.” And they’re making those dreams come alive.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/20/2019

690 Days after Hurricane Harvey

MoCo Water War Escalates, Putting Millions in Crossfire

An old-West saying proclaimed, “Steal my horse; carry off my wife; but don’t touch my water.” Texans fight over water. Even here in the Gulf Coast area. In fact, in Montgomery County, we have a good, old-fashioned water war erupting. Last week in Conroe, it escalated again, putting millions of residents in surrounding counties at risk. Here’s the latest volley in a shot heard across the Gulf Coast.

Trigger: Resolution Passed by Conroe

On July 11, 2019, the Conroe City Council passed a resolution supporting the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District which is fighting the Texas Water Development Board’s (“TWDB”) recommendation to incorporate the 2010 Desired Future Conditions (“DFCs”) into its Groundwater Management Plan.

Battle Lines Drawn

To someone who hasn’t been following this controversy closely, that resolution sounded innocent enough. Like a little squabble about objectives. But it’s much more.

It’s a struggle for control of inexpensive ground water and the right to pump it, even though unlimited pumping will damage other people’s property.

One side says unlimited pumping has no negative consequences and that restricting the pumping of groundwater violates their constitutional property rights, impinges their freedom, and restricts their ability to grow. They also feel that the forced conversion to surface water is a monopoly conspiracy to run up prices needlessly. They see the other side as over-reaching bureaucrats eager to impose needless and expensive regulation on a population strapped by high water rates (even though Moco surface water rates compare favorably with others throughout the region).

The other side says unlimited pumping will cause subsidence, increase flooding, deplete aquifers, and deny others their fair share of groundwater. They see the other side as selfish water hogs, oblivious to the future, blind to science, and set on an unsustainable course.

Wowsers! How’d we get to this point?

Surface Water Vs. Groundwater: Pros and Cons

Several aquifers lie under the Houston region. Decades ago, people in neighboring counties learned that excessive pumping from these aquifers caused both depletion and subsidence. So they started converting to surface water to limit flood threats and property damage.

However, surface water is inherently more expensive for several reasons:

You have to buy land to create lakes.
You have to build dams and water treatment systems.
You have to build extensive water distribution networks instead of pumping it from under your feet.

All of that creates incentives to continue pumping groundwater.

So groups advocating cheaper water in Montgomery County found two hydrologists who, surprise, surprise, told them subsidence and depletion won’t happen there – even though the area is already subsiding and water well levels have been in decline!

*Large amounts of subsidence are already visible in southern Montgomery County where most groundwater pumping takes place.*

State Law Requires Neighboring Counties to Approve Pumpage

The state developed Chapter 36 of the Texas Water Code in large part to protect the public interest from private interests. It governs groups such as the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District in Montgomery County.

Chapter 36 legislates goals for districts. They include:

Conservation
Preservation
Protection
Recharging
Prevention of waste
Control of subsidence
Protection of property rights
Balancing conservation and development of groundwater
Using best available science.

Four Steps to Manage Groundwater

By law and convention, groundwater and subsidence districts manage groundwater with a four-step process.

First, they set goals by defining “desired future conditions.”
Second, they model how much groundwater they can pump to meet those goals.
Third, they develop a plan for achieving the goals.
Fourth, they develop rules for implementing the plan.

It’s enlightening to see how those steps have played out in Montgomery County.

Step One: Define Desired Future Conditions

Groundwater management AREAs (GMAs) set “desired future conditions” (DFCs) or goals for a region. This helps prevent selfish decisions by individual groundwater conservation DISTRICTS (GCDs).

Under current law, goals are now set by a vote of all the GCDs in a GMA.

Instead of your local GCD setting goals for its area, the district must go to the GMA and convince the larger group of GCDs to approve goals for the area. This limits local control, but prevents one district from allowing the aquifer to be mined to the detriment of surrounding counties.

*Legislators have divided the Sate into 16 groundwater management areas. Multiple groundwater conservation districts comprise each area (see below).* *For a high res pdf of this map, click here.*

*GMA 14 includes 20 counties (including Harris and Montgomery), five groundwater conservation districts and two subsidence districts. For a high res PDF of this map, click here.*

LSGCD did not like the DFCs (goals) that were approved by the members of this area in 2010. So the board, now run by a former Conroe mayor got the Conroe City council to pass a resolution that supported the exclusion of GFCs from the LSGCD groundwater management plan.

Step 2: TWDB Sets Limit

After the districts in a GMA set the DFC or goal, the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) sets the Modeled Available Groundwater (MAG). This is the volume of groundwater that can be pumped in a particular area while still meeting the DFC goal.

For example, if Montgomery County wants to maintain stable water levels in the aquifer (at today’s height), then producers can pump approximately 65,000 acre feet per year. Prior to the introduction of surface water in 2015, producers were already pumping in excess of 90,000 acre feet per year.

Step 3: GCD Develops Management Plan

Once TWDB sets the MAG limit, then the GCD is supposed to develop a management plan that includes the approved DFC and MAG. The plan describes how they will achieve the DFC goals.

The TWDB rejected the Lone Star Conservation District’s (LSGCD) plan because it did not include a DFC and MAG approved by the rest of the districts in GMA 14.

The LSGCD board doesn’t like the DFC that was approved by the other GCDs because it would limit pumpage to a sustainable amount. They think mining the aquifer will have NO negative consequences, either to them or to neighboring counties.

They don’t want to be stuck with the 2010 DFC because those DFCs limit pumpage to a sustainable amount. Their problem:

Texas law doesn’t allow TWDB to approve just any DFC that LSGCD wants. All GCDs in the area must approve the goal.

Step 4: GCD Adopts Rules to Meet Goals

Once TWDB approves the management plan, a GCD must adopt rules to achieve its goals. Most often, this means adopting rules that limit pumpage to no more than the MAG (limit).

However, GCDs can structure rules many different ways to accomplish their goal. For instance, they could proportionally limit everyone’s pumpage by the same percentage. Or establish different classes of users with different rules for each, etc.

Chapter 36 gives GCDs quite a bit of flexibility. However, a judge found in May that a rule adopted by L SGCD was outside their statutory authorit y (see point #4 on page 3). LSGCD is trying to argue that the Judge’s ruling rejected DFCs. However, other conservation districts argue that his ruling applies only to the rules LSGCD adopted.

DFCs Listed For MoCo in GMA-14 Report

To confirm the latter, I downloaded and reviewed the 2010 GMA-14 report on desired future conditions from the TWDB website. On pages 30/31, it lists the goals for Montgomery County’s LSGCD. The goals say things like, “From estimated year 2008 conditions, the average draw down of the Chicot aquifer should not exceed approximately 3 feet after 8 years.” They go into similar detail for other aquifers, but using different dates, time spans and depletion rates.

A 1186-page document adopted in 2016 contains similar DFCs. See Pages 21 and 22 in Section 3.1.9.

These goals are, in fact, different from the rules that the judge found unenforceable.

Section on Subsidence in Executive Summary

Note the executive summary in the last report. It says:

“Subsidence is a major factor in GMA 14. The GMA 14 consultants spent considerable time and effort to evaluate potential impacts by the DFCs on subsidence. The only means of preventing subsidence is stabilizing groundwater levels throughout the Gulf Coast Aquifer System. The District Representatives concluded that the only means of stabilizing groundwater levels is to limit groundwater production.”

This report was approved unanimously by every subsidence and groundwater conservation district in the management area plus their consultants.

Complaints by other Districts

If you have a hard time following this (and many people will), consider what other experts in GMA-14 say in their letters to the Texas Water Development Board when protesting the action of the LSGCD:

City of Houston Public Works: “Houston is concerned that (LSGCD’s) Management Plan … does not safeguard aquifer recharge and recovery and does not support efforts to address subsidence.”
North Harris County Regional Water Authority: Requests the TWDB to reject LSGCD’s most recent Management Plan for its failure to comply with the Texas Water Code.
Montgomery County Water Control and Improvement District #1: Complains about the loss of wells due to water level declines and the expenditure of millions of dollars to drill new wells and reset pumps. Requests TWDB to reject the LSGCD Management Plan.
West Harris County Regional Water Authority: Urges TWDB to reject LSGCD Management Plan because of the impact it will have on groundwater availability and subsidence in northern Harris County.
Woodlands Joint Powers Authority: Requests TWDB to reject LSGCD Management Plan citing pumping of groundwater above sustainable levels, risk of additional water level declines, land subsidence, and flooding that would negatively impact private property rights throughout the region.
Harris-Galveston Subsidence District: The LSGCD management plan… “underrepresents the amount of subsidence that has occurred in Montgomery County. … Any additional withdrawal could cause pressure declines in Northern Harris County and additional subsidence.”

Protect Your Own Interests

Every person and entity who stands to be negatively impacted by LSGCD and Conroe’s actions should make their voices heard. They should notify TWDB that they oppose LSGCD’s appeal and support DFCs that prevent water-level declines and subsidence. They also should notify newspapers, neighbors, and community groups. Subsidence is irreversible. A few years of unlimited pumping can produce water level declines that take hundreds of years to reverse.

So speak up NOW.