Privacy Policy A legal disclaimer The explanations and information provided on this page are only general and high-level explanations and information on how to write your own document of a Privacy Policy. You should not rely on this article as legal advice or as recommendations regarding what you should actually do, because we cannot know in advance what are the specific privacy policies you wish to establish between your business and your customers and visitors. We recommend that you seek legal advice to help you understand and to assist you in the creation of your own Privacy Policy. Privacy Policy - the basics Having said that, a privacy policy is a statement that discloses some or all of the ways a website collects, uses, discloses, processes, and manages the data of its visitors and customers. It usually also includes a statement regarding the website’s commitment to protecting its visitors’ or customers’ privacy, and an explanation about the different mechanisms the website is implementing in order to protect privacy. Different jurisdictions have different legal obligations of what must be included in a Privacy Policy. You are responsible to make sure you are following the relevant legislation to your activities and location. What to include in the Privacy Policy Generally speaking, a Privacy Policy often addresses these types of issues: the types of information the website is collecting and the manner in which it collects the data; an explanation about why is the website collecting these types of information; what are the website’s practices on sharing the information with third parties; ways in which your visitors and customers can exercise their rights according to the relevant privacy legislation; the specific practices regarding minors’ data collection; and much, much more. To learn more about this, check out our article “Creating a Privacy Policy ”.

Engage Well-thought-out communication and engagement plans result in more effective, successful, and supported adaptation. Climate adaptation often requires field building and change management. As such, engaging internal and external stakeholders (two-way communication, listening and sharing) to motivate action, connect with and support others, and develop climate messages can go a long way toward making your adaptation efforts successful. The following leading practices are in the action area of ENGAGE and are described below: Recognize many ways to motivate climate adaptation action Seek out and support climate champions throughout your utility (also in SUSTAIN ) Consult expertise throughout your utility regularly and with purpose Tailor the climate adaptation message for the intended audience Develop a climate communications plan Include equity from the beginning Make the business case for climate adaptation (also in SUSTAIN ) ENGAGE Recognize many ways to motivate climate adaptation action Many things can motivate investment in climate adaptation, including climate champions, natural disasters or crises, peer and public pressure, personnel changes, personal observations of change, and access to new knowledge. Leverage the motivational opportunities that fit your circumstances. Example: Simultaneous natural disasters in Colorado In 2002, Denver Water saw unprecedented simultaneous natural disasters in its watersheds. During the single worst one-year drought ever recorded in Colorado, the largest wildfire the state had ever seen occurred in one of its largest and hardest working watersheds. Just weeks after the fire was contained, a rainstorm brought sedimentation and debris into streams and reservoirs, significantly impacting water quality and reservoir capacity. Now, nearly two decades later, the watershed is still noticeably scarred, and the memory of the 2002 natural disasters is still very present. While climate change did not cause these disasters, science tells us that recent warming contributed to their impacts. Overall, the experience helped Denver Water understand the importance of addressing climate change challenges. Now, dedicated staff actively work to understand and prepare for changes that may dramatically impact Denver Water's system and business model, such as continued warming and extreme heat; intensified droughts, floods, and forest fires; and changes to snowpack, Denver Water's high-elevation supply source. Example: Droughts and floods in Texas Austin, Texas, is prone to frequent droughts often followed by intense rainy periods. The most recent drought (2008-2016) dropped water levels in area reservoirs to near-record lows and ultimately surpassed the severity of the 1950s' drought of record. In some areas, lake levels were so low that it became difficult to launch boats and enjoy other water-based activities. The drought and high temperatures also took a visible toll on landscapes and other vegetation. Then, in 2018, historic flooding brought massive amounts of silt and dirt—over 100 times the typical level—into Austin's drinking water supply. This impacted raw water quality and slowed treatment systems. To ensure adequate flows in case of fires, Austin Water issued the first system-wide boil water notice in its 100-year history. With climate change, the utility expects these types of events to become more frequent and severe. Austin's leadership has long acknowledged and addressed climate impacts in its water planning efforts. The public has benefited, especially in the context of recent events, building momentum for additional actions. Most recently, the Austin City Council adopted Water Forward, an integrated water resource plan, which used a regional water supply context to develop strategies to ensure a sustainable and resilient water future into the next century. This experience can also help the abstract concept of climate change become more concrete. Example: Collective action because of a summit In January 2007, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SF PUC) hosted the first national Water Utility Climate Change Summit, which was attended by more than 200 water and wastewater utility executives, government officials, climate change experts and environmental leaders. The purpose of the gathering was to help participants better understand the impacts of climate change on water-related infrastructure and water resource supplies. During that summit, utility leaders recognized the future risks and value a collective effort would bring to the climate adaptation conversation. As the summit drew to a close, SF PUC General Manager Susan Leal committed to fund an effort from the dais and issued a challenge to attendees. Turning to Metropolitan Water District of Southern California General Manager Jeff Kightlinger, who had served on a panel but was now back in his seat among the audience of 200, she said: "Jeff?" Kightlinger replied, "Sounds good to me!" and turned to his Board Chair, Tim Brick, who was also in the audience, and said "Tim?" Brick gave his thumbs up, Metropolitan matched the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission's pledge, and planning for what became WUCA began. (Interesting note: that initial pledge lasted nearly ten years because the bulk of WUCA's work has been driven by utility staff and volunteer experts drawn into the collaboration). Shortly after the summit, WUCA was formed, which has led to over a decade of innovative work in climate adaptation, as highlighted throughout these leading practices. ENGAGE SUSTAIN Seek out and support climate champions throughout your utility Progress happens more quickly with the support of motivated individuals who value and prioritize climate adaptation work, including executive-level leaders. It is therefore important to build relationships with and educate champions who can influence climate adaptation actions, then help sustain and strengthen those efforts. Having champions across an organization (in planning, engineering, finance, public relations, and other roles) can contribute diverse expertise and resources and help provide institutional memory as individuals' roles change. This practice is included under both ENGAGE and SUSTAIN climate adaptation actions. Example: Building a cross-functional team of champions The Central Arizona Project (CAP) climate adaptation plan(Opens another site in new window) was developed with an education and engagement mindset, which elevated existing and promoted future climate champions throughout the organization. Key to the development of the plan was the active participation of a cross-functional team of internal experts comprising all of CAP's climate-sensitive functions, including water policy, operations and engineering, maintenance, public affairs, technology, legal services, finance and administration, and employee services. The team collaboratively identified implications of climate change for CAP's functions as well as all components of the CAP climate adaptation plan. This approach helped foster climate champions in each of CAP's organizational functions by actively educating and engaging them in the climate adaptation process. It also gave members of the CAP team ownership in addressing CAP's climate challenges. Example: Interactive climate education with an organization One important way to build climate champions is through interactive climate education sessions within an organization. For example, Denver Water includes a "Climate 101" unit in all orientation sessions for new employees and provides climate science, adaptation, and mitigation information in its new employee onboarding package. As part of the Climate 101 education sessions, new employees are given prompts to brainstorm how climate change could impact various utility business functions (finance, water treatment, construction, etc.). This approach gets employees thinking creatively about climate change from day one of the job and establishes a baseline level of climate knowledge. After a Climate 101 session, a new employee of Denver Water's youth education team was inspired to integrate climate change into the youth education curriculum and has since created an entire climate change and water module that is presented to schools throughout the region. Building on the successful implementation of these Climate 101 sessions for new employees, the climate team began offering the sessions to other sections at the utility, usually in groups of three to five people to allow for more interactive conversation. This small scale and interactive approach to climate education has allowed the climate team to build climate champions throughout the organization, as well as to build relationships and co-produce climate adaptation ideas with subject matter experts from many business functions. Example: A dedicated person to support champions utility-wide Austin Water has a long history of implementing a variety of climate planning and management measures. While these efforts have traditionally been housed in the Environmental Affairs and Conservation Program Area, climate work has also been done across utility program areas—like Operations, Pipeline Engineering, and Water Resources Management—and, to some extent, in different city departments. In 2019, Austin Water established a new staff position, Climate Protection Consultant, to place additional utility-wide focus on climate issues. This includes taking steps to enhance information sharing about climate change across the utility, continuing to better incorporate climate concerns into cross-functional utility planning efforts, and representing Austin Water on city-wide climate planning initiatives. This position reports to the Assistant Director of Environmental, Planning, and Development Services. This reporting structure provides frequent opportunities for sharing climate-related information with utility leadership. In addition, the Office of Sustainability, a department within the City of Austin, is currently evaluating options for creating a new Chief Climate Resilience Officer position to address city-wide climate resilience planning and strategy implementation. ENGAGE Consult expertise throughout your utility regularly and with purpose Adapting to climate change requires diverse expertise and broad participation, both of which can be gained by consulting others throughout your organization. The type of engagement that works best varies depending on an organization's culture, but a little forethought and some regularity can go a long way (e.g., begin with listening and ask what matters). Example: Business function conversations Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) climate adaptation staff initiated a process of engagement with internal experts by first sharing results from a region-specific climate change projection study. At early meetings, department heads learned about the types of changes expected in the future and weighed in on how these changes might impact utility business functions. From these initial meetings, a few key business function areas were identified to develop adaptation actions. Then, SNWA set up small group meetings and interviewed each business function area to gather how the organization's experts thought they could address potential impacts. Conversations were summarized, and each small group reviewed the recommended actions and helped develop next steps. The process accomplished several goals: It educated staff about climate change It introduced staff to SNWA's climate leadership so they know whom to contact in the organization with questions Because business function experts were the ones to develop the solutions, it ensures buy-in and increases the likelihood that proposed solutions will be implemented See Example: Business function mapping to learn about a framework for considering climate change across an organization’s business functions. Example: Trash removal as an unexpected adaptation need Adaptation planners at the Philadelphia Water Department (PWD) recognized that successful adaptation requires expertise on both climate science and operations. It is not possible for PWD's adaptation planners to possess all of the necessary operational knowledge for the numerous systems PWD operates and maintains across the city (drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater). So the PWD Climate Change Adaptation Program (CCAP) prioritized engaging in two-way conversations with utility operators early and often to share information and begin developing meaningful solutions/adaptation strategies. For example, PWD's adaptation planners met with operations staff at one of PWD's wastewater treatment plants. After presenting future projections of precipitation increases, the operators shared that these conditions would likely produce more trash, accumulating at faster rates, during the initial screening stage of the wastewater treatment process. This consequence, which was only identified after consulting with plant operators, has implications for resources—more staff and equipment may be needed to remove and process trash to maintain current levels of service. Example: Utility-wide climate adaptation planning Preparing a Climate Adaptation Plan provides an opportunity to form a cross-functional team with a clear purpose (see ENGAGE: Seek out and support climate champions throughout your utility). Important lessons Have well-organized information for people to react to. However, do not wait for the analysis to be perfect—share what you have along the way. Strike the right balance between reaching out to staff and respecting their time. ENGAGE Tailor the climate adaptation message for the intended audience One key to successful communication is knowing your audience(s) and framing your message so it has meaning and value to them. A climate adaptation message that resonates with one individual or group might not "land" with others. Identifying which messages work best is time well spent. Example: Be clear why climate change matter Over the past 10 years, the Alliance has homed in on messages that resonate with water utilities to demonstrate the impact climate change could have on critical utility operations and functions. Powerful, clear messages that connect climate change to water utility responsibilities include climate change is water change and warming is here and now. Example: Messages that resonate with engineers When the Philadelphia Water Department (PWD) Climate Change Adaptation Program (CCAP) was ready to share information and results from analyses internally, success—i.e., whether climate information would eventually be adopted within existing planning, design, and asset management processes—hinged on good communication. For example, when sharing information with engineers who work on long-term infrastructure plans, CCAP first explained how climate change is altering the water cycle and how climate non-stationarity might challenge standard engineering practices, procedures, and tools. Planners and design engineers are used to working with return intervals and other statistical tools and methods that are based on historic data. It was essential to explain that, because of climate change, these traditional tools and methods may no longer be adequate moving forward. It was also important to convey that the CCAP team is available to help PWD staff tackle these challenges. Example: Concrete impacts of warming temperatures Climate change can be an abstract concept for water utility professionals whose daily responsibilities include operating reservoirs, designing and building projects, and managing aging infrastructure. To make climate change concrete, the Portland Water Bureau has identified a spectrum of ways in which climate warming and its impacts affect water utility functions and operations, from engineering and operations groups to finance, communications, and maintenance & construction. For example, climate warming and wildfire smoke directly affect the health and safety of the outdoor workforce. Also, increased risk of flooding and landslides could damage critical bureau assets. Presenting direct impacts to the day-to-day job of construction field crews and asset management engineers has successfully resonated with these staff. To recognize these impacts and the need for adaptation more formally, the Portland Water Bureau has included several climate adaptation strategies in the utility’s updated strategic plan. The utility also gives many internal and external presentations within the water sector, and most of these communications begin by connecting the physics of a warmer atmosphere to the hydrologic cycle. From there it is easier to illustrate how a changing water cycle will affect a given water utility. ENGAGE Develop a climate communications plan Taking time to consider how climate change information and adaptations strategies are communicated both internally and externally can help motivate action and avoid conflict or confusion. ENGAGE Include equity from the beginning Effective solutions to climate change challenges depend on many factors, all of which might not be clear at the onset. Engaging and focusing on the needs of communities, particularly those most vulnerable to disruptions caused by climate impacts, is best done at the beginning and throughout a project. By improving conditions for the most vulnerable in your community, you also improve conditions for everyone. ENGAGE SUSTAIN Make the business case for climate adaptation Improving resiliency takes time and resources but can also save time and resources. Transparency about financial elements, including tradeoffs in costs and other triple-bottom-line benefits — social, environmental, and financial — can motivate action and demonstrate how adaptation investments can save money in the long run. This helps engage people from the beginning and sustain the effort. This practice is included under both ENGAGE and SUSTAIN climate adaptation actions. See examples in the SUSTAIN section.

Understand Understanding is continuous and foundational to climate adaptation work. Knowing more about climate change science, how your system functions along with its underlying conditions and key vulnerabilities, provides valuable context to assess future risks and opportunities for adaptation actions. Leading practices in the UNDERSTAND action area illustrate ways to facilitate better understanding. In the UNDERSTAND action area, leading practices include: Invest in understanding climate science Explore how extremes might change in the future Value simple vulnerability assessments Foster sustained relationships with the climate science community Know your water system Think broadly about climate impacts Be a savvy consumer: recognize values and limits of climate science in practice Know your past climate conditions Recognize the value of long-term monitoring UNDERSTAND Invest in understanding climate science Many things can motivate investment in climate adaptation, including climate champions, natural disasters or crises, peer and public pressure, personnel changes, personal observations of change, and access to new knowledge. Leverage the motivational opportunities that fit your circumstances. Example: Learning about climate change science Climate change science underlies our understanding of the impact climate change will have on our water systems. Knowing what the science says about local and regional temperature increases, precipitation changes, snowpack declines, and changes in streamflow timing can help you better navigate available climate information and how it might be useful in decision making. WUCA has supported a series of regional two-day workshops. A key element of the trainings is to help attendees become more savvy consumers by enhancing their understanding of the capabilities and limitations of climate science and learning best practices for using it in long-term water, wastewater, and stormwater utility planning. Example: Learning about climate change science As part of its 2015 Urban Water Management Plan update, the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) develop downscaled climate change scenarios for its service area. SDCWA adopted a qualitative evaluation approach that uses a manageable number of climate change scenarios to develop a range of potential water demands. The development of demand forecasts based on alternative climate scenarios began by selecting Bias-Corrected Constructed Analog scenarios reflecting central tendencies and extremes of climate projections. First, the temperature and precipitation dimensions were evaluated separately, ranking projected annual changes from smallest to largest and identifying the 95th, and 5th and 50th percentile values for each variable. Next, each "ideal" scenario was defined by a pairing– for instance, the warm/dry scenario might contain the 95th percentile value for temperature and the 5th percentile value for precipitation. The final step of the scenario selection process involved the identification of individual model projections that have temperature and precipitation projections closest in value to the "ideal" scenario description (for example, the model projection that has a pairing of temperature and precipitation that is nearest the "ideal" 95th percentile temperature change and 5th percentile precipitation change). Model projections closest to "ideal" conditions were chosen as the representative climate change scenarios. Five scenarios were selected in this manner and used to prepare an ensemble of climate-change influenced demand projections for inclusion in SDCWA's Urban Water Management Plan. SDCWA has also worked with the US Bureau of Reclamation to assess climate change impacts on surface water runoff for the San Diego region. In 2015, SDCWA partnered with the City of San Diego and the Bureau of Reclamation on the San Diego Basin Study(Opens another site in new window) (Basin Study). The purpose of the Basin Study was to determine potential climate change impacts on water supplies and demands within the San Diego region, and to analyze structural and non-structural concepts that can assist the region in adapting. The Basin Study investigated potential changes to existing operating policies for regional water supply facilities (i.e., dams, reservoirs, conveyance facilities, and water treatment and water recycling plants), modifications to existing facilities, development of new facilities that could optimize reservoir systems, and additional new water supply options including desalination and indirect potable reuse options. The study performed a trade-off analysis that served as a valuable tool to compare the ability of Concepts (adaptation strategies) to achieve Evaluation Objectives (criteria developed through stakeholder input to characterize desired outcomes). The analysis provided a relative ranking of Concepts determined by the specific set of Evaluation Objectives included, the data used to calculate performance measures, and the weights determined from a survey, and are intended to be used to screen promising Concepts rather than prioritize recommended approaches. Example: Impacts to New York City's water supply The Climate Change Integrated Modeling Project (CCIMP) was initiated in 2008 to evaluate the effects of future climate change on the quantity and quality of water in the New York City water supply. The CCIMP has addressed three issues of concern to NYC: overall quantity of water, turbidity, and eutrophication. Models are currently in development to simulate precursors of disinfection byproducts. In the first phase of the project, an initial estimate of climate change impacts was made using available global climate model data sets and NYC Department of Environmental Protection's suite of watershed, reservoir, and system operation models. Initial results from the CCIMP suggest that streamflow would increase during the late fall and winter and decrease in spring due to a shift toward more rain and less snow, as well as earlier melting of the typically smaller snowpack that does develop. The shifting seasonal pattern in streamflow could also result in increased turbidity in the fall and winter, but decreased turbidity in the spring. This information provides a foundation from which the impact of this shifting pattern is being evaluated to determine any changes to operating rules used to optimize water quality for the water supply. UNDERSTAND Foster sustained relationships with the climate science community Climate science continues to advance, providing new data, tools, and knowledge. Long-term relationships with those who study climate science and provide climate services can help you navigate what is new and relevant and help scientists focus on questions that matter to society. The relationship, how it is established and maintained, can vary, thus opportunities exist that span a range of needs and resources. UNDERSTAND Value simple vulnerability assessments Exploring how a simple change in temperature and precipitation impacts water utility resources and functions offers a low-cost, quick, and informative mechanism to better understand system vulnerability. Simple assessments provide knowledge and help utilities gain insights necessary to build adaptive capacity. Example: Vulnerability assessments in the Colorado Front Range In 2008, Denver Water invited five other water utilities, the state of Colorado, the Western Water Assessment, the National Center for Atmospheric Research, Research Triangle International, and the Water Research Foundation to coproduce the Joint Front Range Climate Change Vulnerability Study (Front Range Study), to better understand how climate change may impact future water resources in Colorado. Together, the group explored potential future climate-informed hydrology and developed a thorough understanding of climate models, projections, climate assessments, and uncertainty. While the project was completed in 2010, Denver Water continues to convene the climate change group biannually to collaborate on new activities, learn about new science together, and learn from each other (see Example: Regional communities of champions). The figure on the right depicts how annual temperature and precipitation conditions may change over time. What we learned from this scatter plot is that our region will continue to warm as greenhouse gases increase in the atmosphere. The exact amount our watersheds will warm over time is uncertain. Denver Water also learned that precipitation in our region may increase, indicated by all the dots above the red line, or it may decrease, shown by all the dots below the red line. There is not a consistent signal of how precipitation may change in our region. It was these scatter plot findings that most influenced Denver Water's climate assessment philosophy. We learned that modeling precipitation is incredibly complicated, that our region may not see model agreement for precipitation, and that there is significantly more skill and confidence in temperature projections. Based on this, Denver Water shifted focus to warming. This figure illustrates how temperatures and precipitation are projected to change in the 2040s and 2070s using climate projections (BCSD CMIP3). Changes in temperature are plotted along the x-axis and percent changes in precipitation are plotted along the y-axis.SOURCE: Front Range study UNDERSTAND Explore how extremes might change in the future Annual and long-term (e.g., 30-year) averages and trends are common in climate change impact assessments, while extremes like hurricanes and rapid-onset droughts, which are more challenging to simulate and less certain, are under-reported in assessments and reports because extremes are difficult to model. Considering how extremes could change gets people thinking outside of what is “normal” and helps them think through what-if scenarios. UNDERSTAND Know your water system To better understand how your utility will be impacted by climate change, it is important to know your system: Where does your water come from? How does it move throughout the collection system? How is it stored? What are your utility’s key operations? What are its current underlying vulnerabilities? What interdependencies exist with other systems and across sectors (e.g., energy, transportation)? Knowing your system allows for a deep understanding of the factors that influence a system’s vulnerabilities and risks, including but not limited to climate change, and can help direct resources and inquiries more effectively. UNDERSTAND Think broadly about climate impacts Climate change is a risk multiplier that will create new, unexpected challenges. Utilities often focus on water quantity, but many other factors can affect water supply and public safety, including how extreme storms, flooding, sea level rise, extreme heat, extreme drought, low snowpack, fire, smoke, and wind, might impact water quantity, water quality, health and safety, risks to assets and built infrastructure, treatment processes, financial risks, etc. These can also cause other cascading impacts. UNDERSTAND Be a savvy consumer: recognize values and limits of climate science in practice Climate science helps us better understand what we might expect from a warmer world (e.g., changes in temperature, precipitation, snowpack), but there are limits to what models can simulate and intrinsic uncertainties in future projections. Climate change information is created using models and methods that are more appropriate for certain questions than others. Use science to inform the process, but do not wait for nor expect climate change science to provide precise predictions. UNDERSTAND Know your past climate conditions Understanding the past is crucial to better understanding the future. Even though climate is changing (stationarity is no longer an appropriate assumption), information about past climate conditions is essential to understanding the range of natural variability and how your system’s baseline is changing relative to what you have already experienced. UNDERSTAND Recognize the value of long-term monitoring Long-term records can help an organization understand where trends are occurring and whether and when to make climate change-related investments. Becoming familiar with what data have been collected already and what environmental conditions and operational procedures should be monitored is time well spent. A defined baseline, in the context of other information, can help determine: What climate change information is appropriate for the region of interest If changes are occurring What changes are significant enough to pass a threshold that requires action This requires understanding what has (or should) be monitored and then sustaining a monitoring effort, as highlighted in SUSTAIN: Monitor current

WUCA Resource Library Search Search the website instead Please report broken links via our contact form WUCA Annual Reports Water Utility Climate Alliance Annual Report 2025 Water Utility Climate Alliance Annual Report 2024 Water Utility Climate Alliance Annual Report 2023 Water Utility Climate Alliance Annual Report 2022 Water Utility Climate Alliance Annual Report 2020 Water Utility Climate Alliance Annual Report 2019 Water Utility Climate Alliance Annual Report 2018 Water Utility Climate Alliance Annual Report 2017 WUCA Strategic Plans Water Utility Climate Alliance Strategic Plan 2022-2026 Water Utility Climate Alliance Strategic Plan 2017-2021 Water Utility Climate Alliance Strategic Plan 2012-2016 WUCA Guidance Documents A Beginner's Guide to Decision Making Under Deep Uncertainty for Water Utilities, 2026 How Do North American Water Agencies Define Water Supply Level of Service, 2025 CMIP6 Frequently Asked Questions: A resource for water managers, 2024 Improving the Vegetation Representation in Hydrologic Models Alters Hydroclimate Projections, A Summary of Impacts in Several Western U.S Basins, 2024 A Summary of Impacts in Several Western U.S Basins Beyond Barriers to Implementation, A Water Sector Perspective on Sea Level Rise Adaptation, 2022 Scaling and Application of Climate Projections to Stormwater and Wastewater Resilience Planning, 2022 An Enhanced Climate-Related Risks and Opportunities Framework and Guidebook for Water Utilities Preparing for a Changing Climate, Project 5056, 2021 Mapping Climate Exposure and Climate Information Needs to Water Utility Business Functions (project 4729), Executive Summary, 2020 Mapping Climate Exposure and Climate Information Needs to Water Utility Business Functions (project 4729), Research Report, 2020 Water Utility Business Risk and Opportunity Framework A Guidebook for Water Utility Business Function Leaders in a Changing Climate, Project 4729, 2020 Insurance, Bond Ratings and Climate Risk - A Primer for Water Utilities (2019) Co-Producing Actionable Science for Water Utilities, 2016 Research Documents Planning for Sea Level Rise: An AGU Talk in the Form of a Co-Production Experiment Exploring Recent Science,2017 Presentations Presentation materials from all WUCA Resilience Trainings, 2018- present Water system resilience in an uncertain climate future, Presentation at AWWA Sustainable Water Management Conference, Portland, Oregon, 2018 Climate Change Resiliency Planning For Water, Wastewater, and Stormwater, Presentation at AWWA Sustainable Water Management Conference, Portland, Oregon, 2018 Successful Coproduction and Collaboration, Presentation at AWWA Sustainable Water Management Conference, Denver, Colorado, 2018 WUCA Leading Practices Water Utility Climate Alliance Leading Practices Report 2021 Water Utility Climate Alliance Leading Practices Worksheet 2021 Water Utility Climate Alliance Leading Practices Overview 2021 Heat Impacts Case Studies Heat Impacts Case Study, Southern Nevada Water Authority, Nevada Heat Impacts Case Study, Portland Water Bureau, Oregon Heat Impacts Case Study, Oklahoma City Utilities Department, Oklahoma Heat Impacts Case Study, Miami, Florida Equitable Climate Solutions Case Studies Equitable Climate Solutions Case Study, Leveraging Data for Equitable Climate Outcomes Equitable Climate Solutions Case Study, Equity and Affordability in Water Conservation Equitable Climate Solutions Case Study, Equitable Community Engagement for Climate Action Climate Risk Disclosure for Equitable Climate Action, 2025 Climate Investments that Support Underserved Communities, 2025 Engineering Case Studies Engineering Case Study, Tarrant Regional Water District, Pump Station Cooling Solutions, Extreme Heat Adaptation, Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas Engineering Case Study, Seattle Public Utilities & King County, Ship Canal Water Quality Project, Seattle, Washington Engineering Case Study, Southern Nevada Water Authority, Low Lake Level Pumping Station, Drought Adaptation, Las Vegas, Nevada Engineering Case Study, City and County of San Francisco, Sea Level Rise Capital Planning and Guidance, California Engineering Case Study, Miami-Dade Water & Sewer Department, Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrades for Sea Level Rise and Storm Surge, Florida Engineering Case Study, Copenhagen Cloudburst Management Plan for Extreme Rainfall, Denmark Engineering Case Study, Colorado Dept of Natural Resources Dam Safety Design for Extreme Rainfall, Colorado Engineering Case Study, New York City Dept of Environmental Protection Climate Resilience Standard Operating Procedure for Sea Level Rise and Extreme Weather Events, New York Greenhouse Gas Case Studies Greenhouse Gas Case Study: The Water Energy Nexus (WEN) protocol, California Department of Water Resources, California Greenhouse Gas Case Study: Sustainable Water Treatment Plant, Denver Water, Colorado Greenhouse Gas Case Study: Pumping efficiencies, MWRA, Massachusetts Greenhouse Gas Case Study: Biogas to Local Natural Gas, NYC DEP, New York Greenhouse Gas Case Study: Inline Micro-Hydro, Portland Water Bureau, Oregon Greenhouse Gas Case Study: Energy Recovery System for the Carlsbad Seawater Desalination Plant, Poseidon Water, California Greenhouse Gas Case Study: Pumping Optimization, City of Lakewood, California Greenhouse Gas Case Study: Solar Panels, San Diego County Water Authority, California Greenhouse Gas Case Study: Wind power, solar, and battery storage, Inland Empire Utilities Agency, California Greenhouse Gas Case Study: Carbon Free Water, Sonoma Water, California Greenhouse Gas Case Study: Floating Solar, Lake County Special District, California Greenhouse Gas Case Study: Reducing Fleet Emissions, East Bay Municipal Utility District, California Greenhouse Gas Case Study: Smart Building Cooling, Waternet Amsterdam, Netherlands

Sign up for email updates We'll keep you in the loop about upcoming webinars, case studies, and opportunities to participate Name Organization Email Sign Me Up Thanks for submitting!We'll be in touch. Email Us Name Organization Email Message Thanks for reaching out! Send

Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Case Studies WUCA recognizes the importance of greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation as a key climate adaptation strategy and an issue of climate leadership in the water sector. Ultimately, the more GHG emissions are mitigated, the less water utilities will need to adapt. Therefore, a key objective in WUCA's 2022-2026 Strategic Plan is for the alliance to continue developing practical examples and case studies of climate adaptation and climate mitigation. Water utilities have a unique role to play in mitigating GHGs, both due to the high energy usage of the water industry as well as the leading example that the water industry sets for other industries and business communities. These GHG mitigation case studies are examples of progressive GHG mitigation projects at water utilities and include lessons learned during implementation. The selection of case studies is designed to represent a wide swath of project types—it is not an exhaustive list but hopefully a strong starting point for utilities to learn from each other. The focus was on water supply utilities, but many of the projects can be equally applied at wastewater and stormwater utilities. The case studies were developed in partnership with the utilities profiled, and contacts are provided in each case study to facilitate follow-up and enable interested readers to learn more about implementing similar projects Floating Solar Location: Lake County, California Utility: Lake County Special District Inline Micro-Hydro Location: Portland, Oregon Utility: Portland Water Bureau Wind Power, Solar and Battery Storage Location: Southern California Utility: Inland Empire Utilities Agency Carbon Free Water Location: Sonoma, California Utility: Sonoma Water Reducing Fleet Emissions Location: Oakland, California Utility: East Bay Municipal Utility District Pumping Optimization Location: Lakewood, California Utility: City of Lakewood Sustainable Water Treatment Plant Location: Denver, Colorado Utility: Denver Water Smart Building Cooling Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands Utility: Waternet Solar Panels Location: San Diego, California Utility: San Diego County Water Authority Biogas to Local Natural Gas Location: New York, New York Utility: New York City Department of Environmental Protection Energy Recover for Carlsbad Seawater Desalination Plant Location: Carlsbad, CA Utility: Poseidon Water The Water Energy Nexus Protocol Location: Sacramento, California Utility: California Department of Water Resources Pumping Efficiencies Location: Boston, Massachusetts Utility: Massachusetts Water Resources Authority

Thank you, Donor Name We are so grateful for your generous donation of $0. Your donation number is #1000. You’ll receive a confirmation email soon.

Heat Impact Case Studies The case study executive summaries below outline vulnerabilities that may be experienced due to future increases in extreme heat events as a result of projected changes in climate. The methodology focuses on examining the effects of extreme temperatures on personnel and facilities in the future. These case studies identified a suite of strategies to adapt to extreme heat that can be employed by WUCA utilities and others in the water sector. Denver Water Miami Dade Water and Sewer Oklahoma City Utilities Department Portland Water Bureau Southern Nevada Water Authority

CMIP6 Frequently Asked Questions: A Resource for Water Managers CMIP6 (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project, Phase 6) is the most recent organized international "roundup" of global climate projections from several dozen climate models. The models are run using standardized input scenarios (e.g., of greenhouse gas emissions and other climate drivers) to produce thousands of simulations of past and future climate conditions that get widely used in climate research, assessment, and adaptation planning. The WUCA CMIP6 Working Group sought out specialists to develop a CMIP6 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document for water managers which would assume little or no previous experience with CMIP6 and other climate-model datasets. The goal was to develop a dozen or so highly relevant questions — and clear responses — to aid in the use and interpretation of CMIP6 datasets, with a focus on the contiguous United States. The FAQs were initially proposed by Working Group members, and then iteratively refined in collaboration with the Working Group, resulting in 13 questions. The document benefited considerably from reviews by the CMIP6 Working Group and by external subject matter experts. Each question has a "short answer" (1–2 paragraphs) and a "long answer" (2–5 pages), including figures where appropriate, recommendations for further reading, and other references. Read the FAQ Excerpt from the FAQ: What studies have already been conducted using CMIP6 byor on behalf of water agencies? What was learned about CMIP6? Short answer As of Fall 2024, a handful of research and assessment efforts using CMIP6 have been conducted by or on behalf of water agencies in Oregon, Colorado, and Florida. More studies will be coming out soon. Long answer Below are short overviews of the studies and assessments to date and their key findings. CMIP6 model performance over the Pacific Northwest (Taylor et al. 2023; Portland Water Bureau). Supported in part by Portland Water Bureau, Taylor et al. (2023) analyzed the raw output of 25 CMIP6 models to evaluate their fidelity in simulating several common, large-scale atmospheric circulation patterns (e.g., low- and high-pressure systems) that drive seasonal precipitation anomalies in the Pacific Northwest. They found that the CMIP6 models are generally able to simulate the range of observed circulation patterns with reasonable fidelity, although model skill varies across the ensemble. This generates confidence that the models, when simulating regional precipitation and temperature anomalies, do so for the correct physical reasons. They did not, however, compare the CMIP6 models’ performance with CMIP5 models. Climate Change in Colorado (Bolinger et al. 2024; Colorado Water Conservation Board) The 3rd edition of the Climate Change in Colorado report (Bolinger et al. 2024), produced in partnership with the Colorado Water Conservation Board, compared raw CMIP5 (36 models) and CMIP6 (37 models) projections of statewide-average change in annual temperature andannual precipitation, under 4.5 emissions scenarios. Figure 13.1. Projected change in Colorado statewide average annual temperatures to 2100,relative to a 1971–2000 baseline, from raw CMIP5 model output (median and range) andraw, unscreened CMIP6 model output (median only) under medium-low emissionsscenarios (RCP4.5, SSP2-4.5), compared to observed temperatures through 2022. Themedian warming seen in CMIP6 diverges from the CMIP5 median after 2020, with thedifference increasing to ~1.0°F by 2070. (Figure 2.7 in Bolinger et al. 2024) The results of this Colorado-focused comparison were consistent with results of the CONUS-wide and regional comparisons described in Q7: The CMIP6 ensemble range was overall shifted warmer (Figure 13.1) and slightly wetter relative to CMIP5, with substantial overlap between the ensemble ranges. Screening out CMIP6 hot models (using Likely TCR) reduced the warming gap between CMIP6 and CMIP5 by ~50%, but had no effect on the CMIP6 precipitation change. After screening, CMIP6 was still slightly warmer and slightly wetter than CMIP5 for Colorado, so modeled hydrologic outcomes using screened CMIP6 CMIP6 vs CMIP5 model performance: Florida precipitation (Wang and Asefa 2024; Tampa Bay Water) Wang and Asefa (both with Tampa Bay Water) assessed the performance of 18 CMIP5 and 27 CMIP6 models in simulating historical monthly precipitation for 24 grid boxes across Florida.They found that the CMIP6 models, overall, were significantly better than the CMI5 models in terms of bias (too much/too little) in simulated monthly average precipitation, simulation of the seasonal cycle of precipitation, and simulation of the onset and end of the summer rainyseason. Spatially, in both CMIP6 and CMIP5, precipitation over the Peninsula was better simulated than precipitation over the Panhandle. Short Answers to FAQs 1. What is CMIP 6? CMIP6 (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project, Phase 6) is the most recent organized international "roundup" of global climate projections from several dozen climate models. The models are run using standardized input scenarios (e.g., of greenhouse gas emissions and other climate drivers) to produce thousands of simulations of past and future climate conditions that get widely used in climate research, assessment, and adaptation planning. 2. How is CMIP6 different from CMIP5, and is CMIP6 better? Short answer CMIP6 differs from CMIP5 in several ways, although these differences do not set CMIP6 completely apart from its predecessors. CMIP6 models generally have higher spatial resolution and greater complexity than their CMIP5 counterparts, although the range in those attributes across the CMIP6 ensemble overlaps with the CMIP5 range. For measures of model performance, general improvements are seen in CMIP6, again with substantial overlap between the CMIP6 and CMIP5 ensembles. CMIP6 does include projections under a greater diversity of emissions scenarios than CMIP5 (8 vs. 4) and includes many more model runs per model/scenario pairing, on average. As climate modeling continues to develop and mature, the overall improvement represented by a new CMIP has become smaller. CMIP6 is better overall than CMIP5 by many measures, but not by so much as to make CMIP5 obsolete. Depending on the specific use case, there may be compelling reasons to use data from CMIP6 or CMIP5, aside from the qualities of the models themselves. 3. What is the CMIP6 hot-model issue, and what are its implications for users? Short answer About one-quarter of the CMIP6 models show greater future warming, given comparable emissions scenarios, than even the hottest-running models in the CMIP5 or CMIP3 ensembles. Most of these "hot" CMIP6 models also simulate recent global warming (1980 to 2015) that is greater than the instrumentally observed global warming over that period. Follow-up studies and other evidence suggest that the very high rate of warming seen in the hot CMIP6 models may be physically implausible. Due to the inclusion of these hot models, CMIP6 shows substantially warmer projected futures, on average, in nearly all locations globally, including in the U.S., than CMIP5 under comparable emissions scenarios. Several methods have been developed to screen or weight the hot models, reducing their influence, as the IPCC authors did in the latest AR6 reports. However, it is not clear that the hot models' picture of an extremely warm future should be discounted. Also, screening or weighting the hot models may not be appropriate for regional analyses of precipitation and other non-temperature variables. Note that even with the hot models removed, the CMIP6 model ensemble is still somewhat warmer than CMIP5 (see question 7). 4. What are the emissions scenarios in CMIP6 and how do they differ from CMIP5 scenarios? Short answer The CMIP climate modeling approach uses multiple emissions scenarios as model inputs to represent deep uncertainty in the future socioeconomic and policy conditions that will drive the trajectory of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and concentrations in the atmosphere over the 21st century and beyond. Each emissions scenario encodes a different degree of anthropogenic influence on the climate (i.e., radiative forcing). Which emissions scenario we end up closest to — and thus the severity of the warming we experience — largely depends on how much additional GHG emissions our collective activities produce. In addition to GHGs, the scenarios specify future changes in land use and anthropogenic aerosols. For CMIP6, there were eight such scenarios under which the models were run, spanning a broad range of potential future trajectories. Four of the eight CMIP6 scenarios (SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5, SSP4-6.0, and SSP5-8.5) are roughly comparable to the four RCP scenarios (RCP2.6, RCP4.5, RCP6.0, and RCP8.5) used in CMIP5. 5. Which CMIP6 emissions scenarios (SSPs) should be used in an analysis? Short answer The decision of which SSP(s) to use in an analysis should consider several aspects of the scenarios and the intended application, including scenario likelihood, data availability, planning horizon, consistency with previous analyses, and risk tolerance and system vulnerability. Scenario likelihood — which scenarios are more likely to occur, given recent trends in emissions and current policies — is a key consideration for most planning applications. On that basis alone, SSP2-4.5 and SSP4-6.0 would be advisable, followed by SSP4-3.4, with SSP3-7.0 as a potential high-stress scenario. However, there is less output (fewer models/projections) available for SSP4-6.0 and SSP4-3.4 than for SSP2-4.5 and SSP3-7.0. Since the climate outcomes for each SSP increasingly diverge over time, for any analyses focused on later time horizons (~2060 onward) the choice of SSPs is more consequential than for analyses centered earlier in the 21st century. 6. What are Global Warming Levels (GWLs) and how do they correspond to the CMIP6 emissions scenarios? Short answer Global Warming Levels (GWLs) are a relatively new approach for analyzing and communicating regional-to-local climate changes that sidesteps the questions of exactly when those changes might happen and under what emissions scenarios. GWL-based analyses are typically displayed as maps or tables. They show the spatial pattern of projected future changes in a particular variable (e.g., extreme precipitation) that are associated with a particular increment of globally averaged warming, such as +2°C (+3.6°F). GWL-based analyses can provide a versatile framework for risk assessment but may require some adaptation to use in more traditional long-range planning centered on a specific time horizon. Figure 6.1. Example of a Global Warming Level (GWL) analysis: Projected future increase in the number of days per year over 35°C (95°F) at a GWL of 2°C, based on the mean projection from 27 CMIP6 models. (Source: Modified from IPCC WGI Interactive Atlas 7. Does CMIP6 show different future climate outcomes for the U.S. than CMIP5, given comparable emissions scenarios? Short answer For projected future temperature and precipitation for the U.S., the differences between the CMIP5 and CMIP6 ensemble means are relatively small compared to the overlap between the two ensembles of global models. The respective spatial patterns of projected temperature and precipitation change for CMIP5 and CMIP6 are also very similar. (Robust comparisons of fine-scale hydrologic changes between CMIP5 and CMIP6 are not feasible with existing datasets as of Fall 2024.) That said, in the preliminary comparisons, the CMIP6 ensemble mean and median show greater warming for the major U.S. regions than the mean and median for CMIP5. This also holds true for most locations in the U.S., even after screening or weighting models for the hot-model issue (Q3). The differences in projected temperature are large enough that CMIP6-based analyses may show appreciably greater temperature-related vulnerabilities — and potentially greater hydrology-related vulnerabilities as well — than the equivalent CMIP5-based analyses. 8. How does the level of uncertainty in CMIP6 compare with CMIP5? Short answer There are several sources of uncertainty in any set of future climate and hydrology projections at local-to-regional scales (e.g., emissions scenario uncertainty, model uncertainty, natural variability uncertainty). An especially important one to consider in comparing CMIP6 with CMIP5 is model uncertainty, sometimes called structural uncertainty. The model uncertainties in projected future temperature can be characterized by the spread of projected changes across the model ensemble. By this measure, model uncertainties seen in CMIP6 are of similar magnitude to CMIP5, given comparable emissions scenarios and comparably sized model ensembles. However, the total uncertainty in a CMIP6-based analysis of local climate and hydrology changes could differ from the uncertainty in a CMIP5- based analysis for multiple reasons beyond the climate models themselves. Also, consulting a larger number of models will typically reveal greater uncertainty. 9. Should CMIP6 or CMIP5 be used in a new analysis? Should existing CMIP5 analyses be updated with CMIP6? Short answer If a new analysis of climate projections is required, then it makes sense to use CMIP6, assuming the desired type and spatial scale of CMIP6-based data are accessible. Downscaled hydrologic model output based on CMIP6, for example, is not yet widely available. It is not usually necessary, however, to update existing CMIP5-based analyses just for the sake of using the latest CMIP projections. That said, updating an analysis to CMIP6 also provides an opportunity to implement enhancements in other data-processing and modeling steps. 10. What CMIP6 datasets are available for visualization and/or download, and where can they be accessed? Short answer The primary Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) archive of original-resolution (raw) CMIP6 projections is available to any user, but the archive is enormous and challenging to navigate, and the data files are very large. Alternatively, the CMIP6 portals on Amazon Web Services and Google Cloud host the ESGF data files and allow users to perform analyses in the cloud, but these portals require high skill in data handling as well. More manageable partial archives of raw CMIP6 projections are available from three other portals where users can visualize the data prior to downloading, with options for spatial and temporal clipping and averaging of the data. A handful of higher-resolution, downscaled CMIP6 datasets are also available for global or U.S./North American domains. These are value-added products based on subsets of the primary raw CMIP6 archive and are produced by research groups outside of the CMIP framework. Only one downscaled dataset (LOCA2) is currently accessible through a visualization portal (USGS National Climate Change Viewer; the other datasets are download only). More options for downscaled data are likely to become available soon. Figure 10.1. Schematic showing selected CMIP6 datasets that are currently available as of Fall 2024, as matched with user needs and characteristics. See “Long answer” below for more details and links to these datasets. 11. What additional CMIP6 downscaling and modeling efforts are in progress? What new capabilities will they provide? Short answer As of Fall 2024, there are several CMIP6 downscaling efforts in progress that once completed will provide new capabilities: variables that are not available from other datasets, expanded visualization and data-handling options, and/or more physically realistic simulation of finescale processes and changes. 12. How can under-resourced communities and water providers best use CMIP6 (and/or CMIP5)? Are there specific resources that enable easier access to, and interpretation of, local or regional climate projections? Short answer When resources are limited, it may be more effective to use those resources to better understand a community’s or water system’s vulnerabilities and impact thresholds, rather than to perform new localized analyses of CMIP projections. Relevant climate change information can often be obtained "off-the-shelf," in climate assessments and similar resources. These resources include interpretation of the projected climate changes alongside curated graphics and key findings and messages. 13. What studies have already been conducted using CMIP6 by or on behalf of water agencies? What was learned about CMIP6? Short answer As of Fall 2024, a handful of research and assessment efforts using CMIP6 have been conducted by or on behalf of water agencies in Oregon, Colorado, and Florida. More studies will be coming out soon.

Equitable Climate Solutions Case Studies More intense storms, rising sea levels, and more frequent droughts can strain water supplies, damage infrastructure, threaten public health, and challenge the delivery of clean water, sanitation, and stormwater management. While climate and water resource challenges affect many communities, those already overburdened with economic, environmental, and health challenges are especially vulnerable. Those most affected often include Black, Indigenous, and Communities of Color, lower-income people, children, and the elderly, among others. Imbuing the climate action work of water utilities with an ethos of water equity can accelerate progress toward a resilient future for all. According to the US Water Alliance, water equity occurs when all communities have access to safe, clean, and affordable drinking water and wastewater services; are resilient in the face of floods, drought, and other climate risks; have a role in decision-making processes for water management in their communities; and share in the economic, social, and environmental benefits of water systems. The water sector is at the forefront of the climate crisis, and water, wastewater, and stormwater utilities have a critical role as anchor community institutions to center equity and climate resilience in all aspects of their water management. In recognition of the responsibility to help their communities thrive, utilities should recognize the links between water challenges, opportunities to advance equity, and the need for urgent yet thoughtful adaptation, resilience, and mitigation investments. To advance the work of the water sector on this topic and in support of WUCA's Strategic Plan, WUCA partnered with the US Water Alliance to develop a series of case studies that highlight leading practices for equitable climate action within the water sector and provide examples of how utilities are working with communities to address climate impacts and climate planning in equitable ways. The topics for each case study were co-developed by the WUCA Equity Committee and the US Water Alliance based on existing work and topics of interest from WUCA members. The selected topics span a wide range of key actions to achieve equity in climate resilience—some practices that are relatively well-known and understood, and others that are new avenues for action.Each case study provides key background information, select utility profiles, and a list of additional resources to support implementation. Utility profiles include detailed narratives of how leading utilities center equity in their climate adaptation efforts. The narratives were co-developed with each utility and feature key insights identified by the utility. Contact information is provided for each narrative to facilitate follow-up and enable interested readers to learn more about implementing similar projects. Leveraging Data for Equitable Climate Outcomes Community-informed data is an essential tool to promote accountability, social resilience, and equitable climate action in the water sector. Profiles of utility best practices include insights from Portland Water Bureau and Philadelphia Water Department. Equitable Community Engagement for Climate Action Equitable community engagement in the pursuit of empowered and authentic utility-community relationships underpins all equitable climate action work. Profiles of utility best practices include insights from Raleigh Stormwater, Seattle Public Utilities, and Austin Water Equity and Affordability in Water Conservation Affordability-focused household water conservation programs have the potential to promote community-wide water accessibility while supporting utility fiscal health and the long-term durability of water sources. Profiles of utility best practices include insights from Houston Public Works, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, and San Diego County Water Authority. Climate Risk Disclosure for Equitable Climate Action Climate related challenges, including extreme weather, flooding, droughts, wildfires, and heatwaves, can undermine utilities' financial health, operational stability, and capacity to serve all in their communities equitably. These challenges necessitate efforts to assess, manage, and effectively communicate climate risks. Climate Investments that Support Underserved Communities Case studies highlight utilities that implement data-driven, community-informed strategies to bridge historical investment gaps and support those most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.

Sign up for email updates from the Water Utility Climate Alliance We'll keep you in the loop about upcoming webinars, case studies, and opportunities to participate. Estimated frequency: 1 email/month Name Organization Email Sign Me Up Your submission has been received. Thanks! Questions? Feel free to email us instead.

June 2024 Resilience Training, Seattle WA Welcome and Agenda Review Decisions for the Decades: Understanding Deep Uncertainty Decision-Making in the Face of Uncertainty: Seattle Public Utilities Case Study Regional Climate Impacts in the Pacific Northwest A Practical Look at Using Climate Science, Locally Portland Water Bureau Case Study Reflections on Day 1 and Review of Day 2 Agenda Stories from EPA’s CRWU: Providing Technical Assistance for Scenario-Based Planning to Water Utilities Adapting to Climate Change Scenario Design: Accelerated Introduction to Scenario Planning Adaptation Decision-Making Lessons Learned: City of Santa Cruz, California Case Study October 2023 Resilience Training (virtual) Welcome and Agenda Review Practical Considerations for Climate Adaptation One Water Management in the Delaware River Basin Climate Modeling and Projections for Water Sector Professionals Addressing Climate Change Impacts at the Basin Scale Key Takeaways, Reflections and Next Day Preview Welcome: Reflections on Day 1, Preview Day 2 Water Utility Climate Adaptation and Resilience Planning: Some Guiding Principles Methods for Decision-Making Under Deep Uncertainty Case Study: Adaptation Decision-Making at Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Case Study: Dynamic Adaptive Policy Pathways (DAPPs) in South Florida Key Takeaways, Reflections and Next Day Preview July 2022 Resilience Training (virtual) Pre-training webinar Day 1 Day 2 Day3 Decisions for the Decade: A "Serious Game" for Water Planners Practical Considerations for Climate Analysis and Adaptation: Know Before You Go Climate Science for Water Professionals: What Insight Do We Get from the Climate Models? A Practical Look at Downscaling, Bias Correction, and Translating Climate Science into Hydrology in the Colorado River Basin Downscaling Approaches and Hydrologies Developed for the Colorado River Simulation System Decision Making in the Face of Uncertainty: SNWA Case Study Water Utility Climate Adaptation and Resilience Planning: Some Guiding Principles Methods for Decision Making Under Conditions of Deep Uncertainty Adaptation Decision Making at Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Confronting Common Challenges and Addressing Institutional Barriers to Change December 2019 Resilience Training, Austin TX From Conservation to Climate Change: Planning for an Uncertain Future Practical Considerations for Climate Analysis and Adaptation: Know Before You Go... Climate Science for Water Professionals: What Do We Know About How the South Central's Climate Will Change? Modeling 101 Climate Science for Water Professionals: What Insight Do We Get from Climate Models? A Practical Look at Downscaling, Bias Correction, and Translating Climate Science into Hydrology Integrating Climate Data Into Forecasting Hydrologic Inflow Water Utility Climate Adaptation and Resilience Planning: Some Guiding Principles EPA's CREAT: Decision Support Example Houston Strong: Building Resilience to Climate Change Scenario Design: An Accelerated Introduction to Scenario Planning Methods for Decision Making Under Conditions of Deep Uncertainty (DMDU) Adaptation Decision-Making at Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Using Communication Best Practices to Engage Audiences & Address Institutional Barrier May 2019 Resilience Training, Tampa Bay, FL Decisions for the Decade: Understanding Deep Uncertainty Decision-Making in the Face of Uncertainty: Tampa Bay Water Practical Considerations for Climate Analysis and Adaptation Climate Science and Modeling for Water Sector Professionals Climate Science and Modeling for Water Sector Professionals: Florida A Practical Look at Downscaling, Bias Correction, and Translating Climate Science into Hydrology Case Study: Evaluation of Future Climate and Water Use Scenarios for Water Supply Planning in the Tampa Bay Region Guiding Principles for Adaptation and Resilience Planning EPA's CREAT: Decision Support Example Case Study: Broward County – Water Resources Resilience Case Study: Peace River Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority (PRMRWSA) Scenario Design Methods for Decision-Making Under Deep Uncertainty Adaptation Decision-Making at Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Using Communication Best Practices to Engage Audiences and Address Institution Barriers December 2018 Resilience Training, Portland, OR Decision-Making in the Face of Uncertainty: The evolution of supply planning and climate adaptation at the Portland Water Bureau Practical Considerations for Climate Analysis and Adaptation: Know before you go... Climate Science for Water Professionals: What Do We Know About How the Climate of the Northwest Will Change? A Practical Look at Downscaling, Bias Correction, and Translating Climate Science into Hydrology Conveyance System Stress Testing Pilot Study Water Utility Climate Adaptation and Resilience Planning: Some Guiding Principles EPA's CREAT: Decision Support Example Seattle Public Utilities Case Study Methods for Decision Making Under Conditions of Deep Uncertainty (DMDU) Robust Decision Making in Metropolitan's IRP Using Communication Best Practices to Engage Audiences & Address Institutional Barriers