{"query_echo":{"q":"","filters":{"geography":["Western Electric Coordinating Council"]},"warnings":[{"code":"facet_value_not_in_vocabulary","message":"Value 'Western Electric Coordinating Council' for facet 'geography' is not in the controlled vocabulary."}]},"total":{"value":1,"relation":"eq"},"page":1,"page_size":20,"self":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/api/v1/search?geography=Western+Electric+Coordinating+Council","stability":"beta","ai_marking":{"digital_source_type":{"uri":"http://cv.iptc.org/newscodes/digitalsourcetype/trainedAlgorithmicMedia","name":"Created using Generative AI"},"notice":"Summary and key insights are generated using artificial intelligence."},"results":[{"id":"sei-001862","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/sei-001862","title":"The Water-Energy Nexus in the Western States: Projections to 2100","publisher":{"name":"Stockholm Environment Institute","organization":"stockholm-environment-institute"},"document_type":"report","language":"en","date_published":"2011-02","source_url":"https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Climate-mitigation-adaptation/Economics_of_climate_policy/sei-westernwater-energy-0211.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The report examines the 'water-energy nexus' in the western United States, specifically the eleven states of the Western Electric Coordinating Council (WECC). It models eight scenarios from 2008 to 2100, varying by carbon emission goals, water conservation mandates, and energy efficiency levels. The primary finding is that while power plants require water, their total consumption is small compared to agricultural and urban use, making the water-energy nexus a secondary concern in the region's broader water crisis. The analysis suggests that carbon pricing (around $70 per ton) is a more likely driver for shifting energy strategies than water pricing, as water prices would need to exceed $4,000 to $7,000 per acre-foot to make water-conserving energy scenarios the least-cost option.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001862#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"The difference in total water consumption between the most and least water-intensive energy scenarios is relatively small, totaling less than 1.2 million acre-feet per year by 2100 for the eleven-state region.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001862#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Energy choices have a minimal impact on total water consumption in California (a fraction of one percent) and a maximum impact of 3 percent in Arizona, which is one of the most water-stressed states.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001862#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology increases water requirements, with CCS plants estimated to use 80% more water than traditional coal-fired power plants.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001862#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"A carbon price of approximately $70 per ton of CO2 makes carbon-reducing scenarios more cost-effective than business-as-usual strategies.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001862#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Aggressive energy efficiency measures could reduce per capita electricity use by approximately 50% by 2100, leading to a total demand that is 14% below 2010 levels by that year.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001862#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"In the 'Carbon and Water Matter' scenario focusing on renewables and efficiency (Scenario 5), carbon emissions are reduced to less than 9% of 2009 levels and water consumption in the electric sector is reduced by 76% by 2050.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001862#insight-6","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["carbon capture and storage","energy efficiency","renewable energy","nuclear power","hydroelectricity","greenhouse gas emissions","carbon price","wind power","photovoltaics","geothermal energy","biomass"],"geography_discussed":["Arizona","California","Colorado","Idaho","Montana","Nevada","New Mexico","Oregon","Utah","Washington","Wyoming"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["scenario analysis","cost-benefit analysis","long-term projection"]}]}