Yuba River Disaster: It could be coming to a river near you

The recent rupture of a massive pipe at the New Colgate Powerhouse on the Yuba River, about 50 miles north of Sacramento, was not a natural disaster. It was an infrastructure failure. 

The rupture of the penstock pipe in February sent a torrent of water down a steep hillside, triggering erosion that carried sediment and man-made debris into the Yuba River. An oil sheen was detected. The emergency also triggered the shutdown of another powerhouse downstream, causing a sudden drop in river flows, killing hundreds — possibly thousands — of young Chinook salmon at a time when the state has been trying to help struggling salmon populations recover.

We still don’t know exactly why it happened. Federal regulators have ordered Yuba Water Agency, the public owner and operator of the project, to retain independent forensic engineers to determine the root cause of the failure and to have independent consultants oversee reconstruction.

But more of the same is likely to happen in California.

New Bullards Bar Dam and the New Colgate Powerhouse were built in late 1960s, an era when the fleet of dams in California rapidly expanded to meet growing demand for water, energy and flood control. PG&E paid for a substantial portion of the agency’s project in exchange for the power and profits it generated in its first 50 years. 

Like many of the state’s major water projects, this infrastructure is now increasingly strained by age and changing rain and snow patterns. Yuba Water Agency has been making upgrades since taking control back from PG&E in 2016. But the risks associated with maintaining highly engineered river systems remain significant.

These risks are not unique to the Yuba River.

Across California, dams, tunnels, canals, penstocks and spillways built in the mid-20th century or earlier are reaching or exceeding their design lifespan. More than one in five dams in California are over 100 years old. 

When water infrastructure fails, the consequences are immediate and far-reaching: disrupted water deliveries, impaired flood control, power outages and environmental disasters. 

In this case, the loss of flexibility in the timing and amount of water released at New Bullards Bar could affect reservoir management and revenue for a year or more. This will impact water users, funding for forest and river habitat restoration and the wildlife that depend on Yuba River flows.

Climate change raises the stakes even further. More intense storms place additional pressure on aging infrastructure, while declining fish and wildlife populations are less able to withstand catastrophic events. An emergency that might once have been easily weathered can now push vulnerable species closer to collapse.

Yet even as we struggle to safely operate existing infrastructure, billions of dollars are being directed toward planning new mega-projects like the Delta Tunnel and Sites Reservoir. These projects won’t do much for the state’s water supply but will increase dependence on unreliable imported water. 

Every dollar wasted planning new projects is a dollar not invested in maintaining and modernizing what we already depend on for public safety and environmental protection. Put plainly, it’s irresponsible to spend billions on risky investments when we are struggling to operate our water system safely as-is. 

We have already seen the cascading consequences of poor design choices and overdue maintenance and upgrades. The Oroville spillway failure in 2017 forced the evacuation of nearly 200,000 people and exposed critical weaknesses in infrastructure we assumed was secure. 

This is now two major infrastructure failures in the same region of the state in the last 10 years. The Yuba penstock rupture may not have required evacuations, but it offers another warning.

Resilience in California’s water system will not come from building more dams or massive tunnels. It will come from reinvesting in aging infrastructure, restoring natural systems that work with — rather than against — our rivers and budgeting our water responsibly.

This incident could have been worse. We should treat it as an opportunity to confront the growing liabilities embedded in our water system — before the next failure happens somewhere closer to home.