In last Sunday’s Conversation, University of Pacific economist Jeffrey Michael pointed out that the cost to build twin tunnels through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta did not make economic sense. The value derived from the benefit of the tunnels did not justify the $15 billion cost.
We asked: What is your opinion of the plan to build tunnels and restore habitat in the Delta?
LETTERS TOTHE EDITOR
Destroying Delta is morally wrong
Sign Up and Save
Get six months of free digital access to The Sacramento Bee
Re “Cost of Delta tunnels doesn’t add up” (Forum, July 26): Tunnels or no tunnels, thank goodness for the Delta farmers and environmental advocates. If it weren’t for them, Southern California water agencies and Big Ag would extract every last drop of fresh water from the Sacramento River, leaving the Delta a salty, stagnant, lifeless mess. Providing fresh water to Southern California at the expense of the Delta and its farmers is not just a bad idea, it is morally wrong.
Harold G. Dahl – Waste of money, will destroy the Delta to the benefit of Southern California. Forget the tunnels and build desal plants along the entire coast.
Kevin Knauss – No water project ever generates more revenue than expenses. But that hasn’t stopped us from building all sorts of dams and canals. Either a canal or tunnel concept has been suggested for the Delta since the 1930s. It’s time to complete the water project with the tunnels.
Matt Waterworth – Sacrificing farmland where the water actually is, to ship it, at a great loss, south to corporate investment farms is the biggest crock I’ve ever heard in my life.
David Vaughn – No tunnels. How about more dams to actually store the water? Let’s finally build the Auburn dam.
Sharon Chin – No tunnels. Fix highways and bridges.
Lv McGraw – No tunnels. Sending water south will destroy the ecological balance of the area.
Porter Bennefield – Seems to me that those who want the tunnels won’t be satisfied till they’ve taken every ounce of water they can divert to the south, even if it destroys the environment of the northern half of the state. Once that’s done, what’s next – Oregon’s water?
Carolyn Howerton – Waste of money. Bad for the fish. Bad for the Delta businesses. Bad for California.
Don Howson – Costly. Certain to harm the fragile environment and fisheries. Damaging to the Delta and costs always go up, not down. Build water storage to use when we all need it, not foolish tunnels.
Marc J. Metivier – If the Romans could build aqueducts 2,000 years ago, then why can’t California import water from Seattle, with an aqueduct or a pipeline?
Liz Taylor – Better to invest in wastewater recycling and groundwater recharging.
Kurt Miller – Another very expensive, very bad idea from a delusional state government.