A contentious debate is unfolding in Tucson, Arizona, centered around a newly coined phrase, “water positive,” and its association with Project Blue, a proposed multi-billion-dollar data center near the Pima County Fairgrounds. This term, introduced by Project Blue consultants, aims to suggest that the massive development could somehow generate more water than it consumes, a concept that veteran water experts and long-time residents view with profound skepticism. The invention of such a phrase is widely perceived as an attempt to obscure the true hydrological implications and perpetuate the disproven myth that reclaimed water can support limitless urban development.
Throughout the American West, an enduring maxim about water has consistently proven true: water always gravitates towards money and economic power. This principle, more useful than any newly fabricated terminology, often supersedes even the laws of gravity when it comes to the allocation and control of vital water resources in arid regions. Historically, those with significant financial leverage have dictated how water is distributed, often to the detriment of long-term ecological and community needs, a critical aspect of sustainable water management.
Many elected officials in Tucson appear to favor Project Blue, swayed by its promise to alleviate the City of Tucson’s ongoing budget challenges. Similarly, University of Arizona administrators, facing their own financial shortfalls, have seen some of their leadership, including the Vice President for Research and Chief AI officer, publicly endorse the project. However, critics note that these newer arrivals to Tucson may lack the decades of lived experience observing the dwindling monsoon rains and the disappearance of potential new water supplies, a crucial perspective in understanding local water scarcity.
Reflecting on past experiences, economic experts, such as University of Arizona economist Bill Martin, have previously highlighted the strategic foresight of Arizona farmers in the 1980s. These farmers, despite facing higher costs, willingly entered contracts for Central Arizona Project (CAP) water, recognizing its increasing value and the long-term importance of securing water rights. Their decision, termed “willingness to play,” showcased a shrewd understanding of future economic landscapes and the critical role of water in enabling sustained growth.
Today, the legacy of those strategic decisions is evident, as farmers who secured CAP water rights are now receiving highly favorable offers for their entitlements, often paid for by urban residents. This dynamic underscores the enduring truth: controlling future water supply is paramount for preserving opportunities for growth, job creation, and stable revenue streams within a region. The economic power associated with water ownership dictates much of the urban development trajectory.
A significant concern among community advocates is that this pattern of money and influence will once again prioritize short-term financial gains over the long-term water security of the region. Such decisions could potentially deplete crucial water reserves that might otherwise support sustained construction jobs, larger municipal revenue streams, and a more resilient future for Tucson. The delicate balance of environmental policy and economic drivers is at stake.
The painful historical experiences of water management in Tucson serve as a critical lesson. It is imperative that the community and its leaders collectively reject the newly concocted myth of “water positive” and instead embrace a more realistic and responsible approach to water allocation. Ensuring future water availability for Pima County and the broader Arizona region requires careful planning and a commitment to genuine sustainable practices, safeguarding resources for generations to come, especially in the context of the Colorado River Basin’s challenges.
