Water is perhaps the most essential resource for human civilization. Most early settlements developed near or around rivers such as the Tigris, Euphrates, and Indus for easy access to water for drinking and irrigation. The importance of water has become even more pronounced in modern times, since all products made from paper, fabric, metal and plastic are water-intensive. California is a state especially dependent on a steady supply of water due to a large population of citizens and a growing economy that has established strong footholds in everything from handheld electronic gadgets to farming. However, as of December 2014, a year-long drought already has officials mounting desperate ad campaigns for conservation, citizens reporting each other for hosing off the sidewalk, and countless dry, yellowed lawns. The drought even has repercussions for the rest of the country, as California produces nearly all of the U.S.’s almonds, apricots, dates, figs, kiwi, walnuts, and pistachios. In response to this crisis, Governor Brown is pursuing the construction of two large $25 billion water tunnels that will divert water from the Sacramento River to other parts of the state. Many citizens, concerned about California’s current drought and about the damage to the California State Water Project by earthquakes, now view this enormous, costly enterprise as a solution to their water problems. But building these two concrete behemoths would be a mistake; the tunnels’ vulnerabilities and problems greatly outweigh any benefits that they may bring.

For one, the tunnels will harm local fish populations. Many environmentalist and conservation organizations have asserted that the Delta tunnels will have a devastating impact on nearby wetlands and the organisms that inhabit them. By making water at the northern parts of the Delta saltier and warmer, the tunnels will harm fish such as Chinook salmon, Green sturgeon, and endangered Delta smelt and Longfin smelt. The resulting stagnant conditions will kill species fine-tuned to cooler freshwater. Federal officials agree that the current plan directly violates pollution standards, and measures such as modern fish screens are not enough to protect aquatic life from being sucked into the structure and killed. Despite the claims of water companies, the twin tunnels are sure to affect many species of wildlife and further harm the habitats that they live in.

Moreover, at $25 billion, the tunnels are far from cheap. To pay for the Delta tunnels, the Santa Clara Water District has proposed raising property taxes from $36 a year to $60 a year based on the average assessed residential property – a significant increase for many lower-income families. In fact, the $25 billion price tag projected for this ambitious project may in fact be a grave underestimate; similar endeavors in the past have proven to be much more expensive than their original estimates. For example, Santa Barbara’s Coastal Aqueduct was expected to cost $270 million but ended up costing $1.76 billion, over 6.5 times more. The billions spent on this potentially unsuccessful enterprise would better serve the state if directed to areas such as education.

Proponents of the twin tunnels have repeatedly insisted that the project will improve water supplies and increase water allocations. However, these statements are misleading. First, both state and federal water agencies have admitted that the tunnels are simply a way of delivering local water and not of enhancing water supplies. Second, as for increasing water allocations, the average Californian citizen will reap little benefit. Most of the water provided by the tunnels will be sent to a small number of wealthy San Joaquin corporate farmers, who spend as little as $20 for every acre foot of water. Meanwhile, those living in Southern California districts will continue to pay up to $800 per acre foot. In fact, the tunnels could potentially lead to corruption and other injustices on a large scale. Already, wealthy farmers take advantage of water subsidies by engaging in “water farming,” or simply reselling cheap water to thirsty South Californian cities. Supporting the Delta project will only allow these massive agribusinesses to further sway the decisions of water officials in their favor. The proper allocation of California’s water should favor those who truly need water rather than the elite few who want to profit from it.

There are also better ways to address environmental concerns and earthquake safety. Advocates of the Delta tunnels claim that existing systems are vulnerable to earthquakes and that the two tunnels will help reduce the damage that earthquakes could inflict on distribution networks that send water to major cities. Unfortunately, this is not true; the Delta tunnels will be just as susceptible. Instead, reinforcing existing Delta levees could reduce reliance on California’s main water systems and minimize damage in the case of an earthquake, and at a cost far less than $25 billion. Spending money to protect the environment is also a good option. Improving fish screens at existing pumps could drastically reduce fish mortality, as the current antiquated fish screens killed over a billion fish between 2000 and 2011. Finally, sourcing water from other parts of the US could lessen the amount of water that needs to be diverted from the Delta, which is necessary to prevent the total collapse of local ecosystems. Such alternatives are much more affordable because they guarantee water security for California without devastating both the environment and the economy.

While water is an essential resource, especially in California, the twin tunnels are not a feasible way of dealing with our current shortages. If the Delta project were to succeed, the West Coast’s richest estuary would be destroyed and taxpayers would be heavily in debt. Available alternatives are much more affordable and will provide the state with enough water while protecting dwindling fish populations. For these reasons, state politicians need to rethink their stance on the issue: they should prevent the construction of the Delta tunnels and invest instead in more advantageous proposals.