Slide 1
Net Zero Proposal Analysis
Daniel Cormode
East Ventura Community Council
Planning & Development Committee
2016 04 24
04/24/2016
11
Evaluation of CIP Project and Net Zero Proposal data reveals:
•
Capital costs are based on the 2016-2022 CIP Project Cost discounted at a 2% rate for 30
years.
•
Net Zero Finance costs are based on 50% of the Discounted Capital costs and not 50% of
the CIP Project cost.
•
Net Zero Proposal Capital costs are not reduced by revenues collected from $62M Estuary
Protection Fee.
• The Proposed Foster Park Wellfield Restoration, CIP 97921 does little if any to provide any
new source of water due to the loss of the surface intake capability and questionable ability
to rehabilitate of subsurface diversion capability.
• The City Council and Water Commission’s action is urgently required to curtail exacerbating
the current water supply problem by continuing to allow more water entitlements for
development until a new source of water is available
Slide 2
Comparison of Water CIP Supply
Project Costs
Water CIP Supply Projects:
• Total Cost of Water CIP Projects is underestimated by $236,287,800 ($450,746,100 $248,577,000).
• Net Zero Proposal Capital costs are not reduced by revenues collected from $62M Estuary
Protection Fee.
• Ventura Water erroneously anticipates improvements resulting from the Foster Park
production restoration will restore the historical production capability to produce of up to
6,700 acre-feet of water per year.
• The historical production estimate is erroneously based on operational scenario comparable
to the 50 year average historical city production records between 1960 and 2009.
• The surface diversion capability was destroyed in 2005 when the elevation of the river was
lowered and permanently shifted easterly, thereby, invalidating the results of the 50 year
average historical city production records.
• The average production between 1995 and 2004 was 7,041 acre-feet per year.
• The average production between 2005 and 2009 was 2,250 acre-feet per year.
• The Ventura Water 2015 Comprehensive Water Resources Report identifies the 2016 Future
Supply Drought Impact for Ventura River/Foster Park to be 0-800 acre-feet per year.
Slide 3
Evaluation of CIP Project
and Net Zero Proposal
data reveals:
• Capital costs are based
on the CIP Project Cost
discounted at a 2% rate
for 30 years.
• Net Zero Finance costs
are based on 50% of
the Discounted Capital
costs and not 50% of
the CIP Project cost.
• Net Zero Proposal
Capital costs are not
reduced by revenues
collected from $62M
Estuary Protection Fee.
Evaluation of CIP Project and Net Zero Proposal data reveals:
•
Capital costs are based on the CIP Project Cost discounted at a 2% rate for 30 years.
•
Net Zero Finance costs are based on 50% of the Discounted Capital costs and not 50% of
the CIP Project cost.
•
Net Zero Proposal Capital costs are not reduced by revenues collected from $62M Estuary
Protection Fee.
Slide 4
Capital costs are based on the 2016-2022
CIP Project Cost discounted at a 2% rate for
30 years.
Capital costs are based on the CIP Project Cost discounted at a 2% rate for 30 years
Slide 5
Evaluation of CIP Project and
Net Zero Proposal data
reveals:
• Capital costs are based on
the CIP Project Cost
discounted at a 2% rate
for 30 years.
• Net Zero Finance costs are
based on 50% of the
Discounted Capital costs
and not 50% of the CIP
Project cost.
• Net Zero Proposal Capital
costs are not reduced by
revenues collected from
$62M Estuary Protection
Fee.
Evaluation of CIP Project and Net Zero Proposal data reveals:
•
Capital costs are based on the 2016-2022 CIP Project Cost discounted at a 2% rate for 30
years.
•
Net Zero Finance costs are based on 50% of the Discounted Capital costs and not 50% of
the CIP Project cost.
•
Net Zero Proposal Capital costs are not reduced by revenues collected from $62M Estuary
Protection Fee.
Slide 6
• CIP Costs are 20162022 CIP Project Cost
discounted at a 2%
rate for 30 Years.
• CIP Costs for Direct
Potable Reuse and
Desalination are
transposed.
Potential Water Supply Sources:
•
CIP Costs are 2016-2022 CIP Project Cost discounted at a 2% rate for 30 Years.
•
CIP Costs for Direct Potable Reuse and Desalination are transposed.
•
Costs do not include estimated Financing Costs of $144,073,800.
•
Foster Park yield is unreliable and not supported by historic data based on current
conditions.
• Total Cost of Water CIP Projects is underestimated by $236,287,800 ($450,613,800 $214,326,000).
• Ventura Water erroneously anticipates improvements resulting from the Foster Park
production restoration will restore the historical production capability to produce of up to
6,700 acre-feet of water per year.
• The historical production estimate is erroneously based on operational scenario
comparable to the 50 year average historical city production records between 1960
and 2009.
• The surface diversion capability was destroyed in 2005 when the elevation of the river
was lowered and permanently shifted easterly, thereby, invalidating the results of the
50 year average historical city production records.
• The average production between 1995 and 2004 was 7,041 acre-feet per year.
• The average production between 2005 and 2009 was 2,250 acre-feet per year.
• The Ventura Water 2015 Comprehensive Water Resources Report identifies the 2016
Future Supply Drought Impact for Ventura River/Foster Park to be 0-800 acre-feet per
year.
Slide 7
Evaluation of CIP Project and Net
Zero Proposal data reveals:
• Capital costs are based on the
CIP Project Cost discounted at a
2% rate for 30 years.
• Net Zero Finance costs are based
on 50% of the Discounted
Capital costs and not 50% of the
CIP Project cost.
• Net Zero Proposal Capital costs
are not reduced by revenues
collected from $62M Estuary
Protection Fee.
• Yield is overestimated.
Evaluation of CIP Project and Net Zero Proposal data reveals:
•
Capital costs are based on the CIP Project Cost discounted at a 2% rate for 30 years.
•
Net Zero Finance costs are based on 50% of the Discounted Capital costs and not 50% of
the CIP Project cost.
•
Net Zero Proposal Capital costs are not reduced by revenues collected from $62M Estuary
Protection Fee.
•
Yield is overestimated.
Slide 8
Evaluation of CIP Project and Net
Zero Proposal data reveals:
• Capital costs are based on the
CIP Project Cost discounted at a
2% rate for 30 years.
• Net Zero Finance costs are based
on 50% of the Discounted
Capital costs and not 50% of the
CIP Project cost.
• Net Zero Proposal Capital costs
are not reduced by revenues
collected from $62M Estuary
Protection Fee.
• Yield is overestimated.
Evaluation of CIP Project and Net Zero Proposal data reveals:
•
Capital costs are based on the CIP Project Cost discounted at a 2% rate for 30 years.
•
Net Zero Finance costs are based on 50% of the Discounted Capital costs and not 50% of
the CIP Project cost.
•
Net Zero Proposal Capital costs are not reduced by revenues collected from $62M Estuary
Protection Fee.
•
Yield is overestimated
Slide 9
• Calculation of Net Demand
Offset is erroneous due to
application of both Historical
Allowance and Total Credits.
• Believe NetZero Fee should
be $2,860,002 [(170.86 –
62.76) *26,457]
Example: Parklands:
• Calculation of Net Demand Offset is erroneous due to application of both Historical
Allowance and Total Credits.
• Believe NetZero Fee should be $2,860,002 [(170.86 – 62.76) *26,457].
• Water Demand for SF dwelling units is computed at 0.415 AFY/DU.
• Water Demand for MF and Apartment dwelling units is computed at 0.280 AFY/du.
Slide 10
Demand
Deficiency
Desal
Direct Potable Reuse
Recycle
Santa Paula Basin
Oxnard Plain Basin
Mound Basin
Casitas
Ventura River/Foster Park
Water Supply & Demand:
• Lake Casitas reduces deliveries and becomes dry in 2020 if current drought conditions
continue.
• Water shortages of 110 AF to 3,913 AF will exist between 2017 and 2029 if the current
drought continues.
• Water shortages of 175 AF to 2,420 AF will exist between 2030 and 2044 if the current
drought continues and Direct Potable Reuse becomes available in 2030.