|
etalian posted:Actually real solution is to invade the NW and steal all their extra water by force. The NW is actually in a lot of trouble as well, because they're just as reliant on snowpack as we are and they've been having crazy warm winters just like us.
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 04:25 |
|
|
# ? May 27, 2024 02:42 |
|
Papercut posted:The NW is actually in a lot of trouble as well, because they're just as reliant on snowpack as we are and they've been having crazy warm winters just like us. Yeah, the weather along the Pacific coast, including Alaska, has been stupidly warm the last couple of years. In the end we'll be reliant upon new agriculture technology, changing policies and subsidies (.. in what crops we grow with what water we actually get), and probably letting some more farmland go back to nature. And that's if Climate Change doesn't change our normal patterns for worse.
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 04:33 |
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:Of course, and some smaller communities may up getting such a short end of the stick on water rights that they actually just run out of all water completely and some residents might have to figure out a new solution for drinking water. But big picture it's not as if there's a serious drinking water shortage as the poster jokingly implied. Remember though that ag props up the central valley (Sacramento exempted) and that is already the poorest part of the state. Without at, Fresno, for example, is even more hosed. Residents may be able to drink water, but they'll be less likely to have jobs than even today. This isn't to say at should get a free ride, they waste a lot of water, but we can't just say gently caress ag. Also, most of the food you eat that isn't coern, wheat, or beef is probably from the valley unless it is imported.
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 04:37 |
|
nm posted:Remember though that ag props up the central valley (Sacramento exempted) and that is already the poorest part of the state. Ag water subsidies are probably the least efficient way to battle poverty in the central valley.
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 04:40 |
|
nm posted:Remember though that ag props up the central valley (Sacramento exempted) and that is already the poorest part of the state. I think something that gets missed when talking about ag in the central valley is that by and large, water allocations is the limiting factor in a lot of operations. What I expect to happen and what most economic models (a very speculative endeavor to be sure) have shown, is that even with major cuts to water allocations, ag doesn't up and disappear. There is a shift to crops that are less water intensive, but with a smaller profit margin. This leads to a definite economic hit, but unless things begin to approach Mad Max levels of water shortages, things continue more or less on an even keel. Even then ag makes up less than 5% of California GDP. Yes that's significant and yes that would be increased by a knock-on effect from communities sustained by agriculture losing out, but it's not critical. Water management is definitely a critical issue for the state, and one that I don't think is being handled particularly well. It's not as if I want California's ag to suffer major setbacks from water shortages and climate change, it's just that someone was joking about drinking water and I wanted to make it clear that that usage is not something that even makes a blip in the radar and is not something that will be the major water issue for most Californians. I think you guys are reading some kind of intention in my original post that simply isn't there.
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 04:53 |
|
Pervis posted:And that's if Climate Change doesn't change our normal patterns for worse. Don't worry, it will. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3453503
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 05:21 |
|
doctorfrog posted:http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/03/08/map-the-salary-you-need-to-buy-a-home-in-27-u-s-cities/ quote:The site's calculations assume that a buyer spends 28 percent of gross monthly income on housing, including principal, interest, taxes and insurance, (in line with industry guidelines for standard "front-end" debt ratios) and makes a 20 percent down payment on a house. Lol, 28 percent of gross on housing. If only! Also, this is based on median pricing, rather than the most common price of units, and there are other factors that would skew these numbers too (like total number of units available). The conclusion is still fairly valid - SF Bay Area has the most expensive housing of any metropolitan area in the country - but it's disappointing to see the same flawed methodology used over and over in these reports. -------- Re: the water crisis, what actually has to happen is the cost of fresh water to rise to the point where desalination powered by nuclear power plants is economically feasible. At that point, we will see if there is political will, and someone will have to propose nuke station locations that won't be Fukushima'd in the Big One. Naturally this has to Not be IMBY, so the stations must go in the lowest housing price areas, probably somewhere along The I-5. Perhaps we can get some UC researchers onto the problem? We can't afford to pay them, of course, but maybe with enough delicious burritos they can be enticed into doing a study. ...there. Thread Topic Bingo! I've got power, water, ag, housing prices, the UC system, earthquakes, 'the' before road names, I-5, and burritos.
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 06:52 |
|
Can we table nuke powered desal until after we've instituted toilet to tap?
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 06:56 |
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:Can we table nuke powered desal until after we've instituted toilet to tap? If you live in southern California you probably already do drink toilet to tap.
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 07:32 |
|
Trabisnikof posted:If you live in southern California you probably already do drink toilet to tap. I know a significant portion of Orange County is toilet to tap, but I haven't heard of any other extensive operations outside of that. Most other counties have recycled water, but not for human consumption.
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 07:39 |
|
I keep having visions of pecan trees being torn out and the agribusiness that ship alfalfa to China being forcibly broken up, and as the drought goes on they come more into focus
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 07:47 |
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:I know a significant portion of Orange County is toilet to tap, but I haven't heard of any other extensive operations outside of that. Most other counties have recycled water, but not for human consumption. What do you think toilet to tap is?
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 07:49 |
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:I know a significant portion of Orange County is toilet to tap, but I haven't heard of any other extensive operations outside of that. Most other counties have recycled water, but not for human consumption. If you drink water from the Colorado river it went through a sewage treatment plant at some point. Just because fish and birds then poop in it too, somehow makes it cleaner.
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 07:50 |
|
Zachack posted:What do you think toilet to tap is? Potable reuse, the recycled water is used to augment the drinking water supply. Orange County currently has indirect potable reuse, it's been squelched in the other Southern California counties, mostly because the public thinks it's gross. Even if, as I've previously stated, drinking water is a very small portion of California's overall water use, getting potable water through recycling rather than massive desalinization projects seems preferable. I've never heard the term used in reference to outdoor or industrial reuse. Trabisnikof posted:If you drink water from the Colorado river it went through a sewage treatment plant at some point. Fair enough, as this episode proved people are weird about human waste in their water that's otherwise exposed to the elements. I'd like to see it implemented as explicit policy and end the practice of discharging wastewater into the ocean outside of emergency situations.
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 08:04 |
|
What would be worse? Living in a Fallout-esqe / Mad Max like world where everything is dusty and horrible but lots of land? Or having plenty of water but living on a boat much like Water World with Kevin Costner?
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 09:22 |
|
The fact that Nestle is still pumping water to maximize future profits should have people out with pitchforks and fiery implements. This is from last year, but nothing has changed. http://www.politicususa.com/2014/07/16/corporate-greed-exacerbates-drought-nestle-believes-water-basic-human.html http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/jul/27/water-nestle-drink-charge-privatize-companies-stocks quote:Corporate Greed Exacerbates Drought: Nestle Believes Water Is Not a Basic Human Right quote:At the forefront of this firestorm is Peter Brabeck, chairman and former CEO of Nestle.
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 10:23 |
|
FRINGE posted:The fact that Nestle is still pumping water to maximize future profits should have people out with pitchforks and fiery implements. Abuela Grillo will show up and put things right. https://vimeo.com/11429985
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 15:32 |
|
FRINGE posted:The fact that Nestle is still pumping water to maximize future profits should have people out with pitchforks and fiery implements. Ever since I saw the interview with the CEO of Nestlé where he went on about how water is a product and he owns it and no human deserves it unless they can pay, I have unironically, truly believed the board and CEO of Nestle deserve to be clamped in public stocks, stripped of their belongings, and then told they can only drink what they can afford to buy with their now empty pockets. The dude is like a real life version of the lovely villain from awful movie Tank Girl.
|
# ? Mar 14, 2015 20:53 |
|
There is a good reason to be cautious about using human wastewater for human consumption, and that's because historically, human waste-contaminated water has been a massive health problem. Parasites, bacteria dangerous to humans, and human viruses infecting human hosts wind up in the human drinking water and spread that way. Animal waste is still gross, but isn't as dangerous in terms of the potential for pandemic. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do it, of course. Only that it has to be done with a great deal of caution.
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 00:06 |
|
Which is why we have to let the free market control it. The government would just mess it up!
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 00:11 |
|
I propose that we irradiate the water for everyone's safety.
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 00:14 |
|
withak posted:I propose that we irradiate the water for everyone's safety. Too dangerous. However, by mixing this 60x homeopathic dilution, we can accomplish much the same thing without the danger irradiation poses!
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 01:49 |
|
Or both stupid options could be skipped in favor of strong UV, which actually works.
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 02:31 |
|
Colloidal silver. California:the bluest state Edit: or we can just wait for someone to develop an app to solve our water problems. Shbobdb fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Mar 15, 2015 |
# ? Mar 15, 2015 02:36 |
|
Shbobdb posted:Colloidal silver. California:the bluest state Sadly no one would turn blue. (Unless they went out of their way to achieve that lofty goal.) http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/experiments/1060.html quote:On station, silver is used as a biocidal agent based on its antimicrobial properties in the potable water system. Recent studies have shown the possible toxicity of colloidal silver to humans, including crew members aboard the ISS. Researchers are currently developing and testing a simple technique that will enable crew members to test silver levels in the water system in less than two minutes (Hill et al 2010). http://phys.org/news172133019.html quote:Space is not a fun place to get a stomach bug. To ensure drinking water is adequately disinfected, University of Utah chemists developed a two-minute water quality monitoring method that just started six months of tests aboard the International Space Station. That stuff is another case where the faux-skeptics have gone crazy spreading misinformation. The blue people (the entire handful of them) are crazies that chug the stuff they produce in their garage. Although I think the world needs more blue people.
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 02:56 |
|
SlimGoodbody posted:Ever since I saw the interview with the CEO of Nestlé where he went on about how water is a product and he owns it and no human deserves it unless they can pay, I have unironically, truly believed the board and CEO of Nestle deserve to be clamped in public stocks, stripped of their belongings, and then told they can only drink what they can afford to buy with their now empty pockets. Not that he's not a bit of a fucker, but I'm looking over the interview and he's pretty clear that water for hydration and hygiene is a human right.
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 02:57 |
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:Not that he's not a bit of a fucker, but I'm looking over the interview and he's pretty clear that water for hydration and hygiene is a human right. What a thoughtful humanitarian. "Of course my records here indicate that you have used you allotment for the month. Can you prove otherwise? Would you like to purchase a few milliliters while you gather your evidence?"
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 02:59 |
|
FRINGE posted:The fact that Nestle is still pumping water to maximize future profits should have people out with pitchforks and fiery implements. How is this any worse than using water to grow rice in the middle of a desert?
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 03:57 |
|
b0lt posted:How is this any worse than using water to grow rice in the middle of a desert? The vast majority of California rice is grown in the Sacramento Valley which isn't exactly a desert.
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 04:04 |
|
Trabisnikof posted:The vast majority of California rice is grown in the Sacramento Valley which isn't exactly a desert. Yes. A reminder that before man hosed with it, that part of the sacramento valley was underwater for large periods of the year. That part of the valley only has water issues because of water shipments still going south. The sacramento bypass still flooded this year, a huge swath of land. Also none of the productive parts of the central valley can be accurately termed a desert.
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 04:18 |
|
Depends on whether you count by the amount of rainfall that lands there or the by the amount of water that flows past there.
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 04:22 |
|
Well it's good to know that the farmers who have been blowing through all the water for more profits are also making bank off of the drought.Sacramento Bee posted:As drought worsens, L.A. water agency offers cash to Sacramento Valley farmers
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 05:15 |
|
Kaal posted:Well it's good to know that the farmers who have been blowing through all the water for more profits are also making bank off of the drought. You realize those farmers are in Northern California and as your own quote points out they're selling their water and not growing crops instead. Isn't that what you want? Also farming is insanely low margin in general.
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 05:55 |
|
Trabisnikof posted:You realize those farmers are in Northern California and as your own quote points out they're selling their water and not growing crops instead. Isn't that what you want? Also farming is insanely low margin in general. It's not their water, it's the public's water. Why the heck should they be getting a dime for it? If anyone is going to be selling off public resources, it should be a state utility with the public's interest in mind. Farming is low margin because there's massive farms driving the cost of food so low that Americans throw out 40% of their food. Those farms have engaged in a down-spiraling price war with each other for decades, happily using any means at their disposal to boost profits regardless of the effect on their land or the sustainability of their industry. As a result, the United States spends millions every year in farming subsidies, the environment is at a breaking point, mono-cropping is at an all-time high, and small farmers continue to be forced out of the market. Clearly racing to the bottom while handing out subsidies to the largest farmers does not improve things for agricultural communities. What I want is the creation of a national waterway management agency that oversees all water usage and implements sustainable pricing tiers on all parties that is based on the true value of water and encourages responsible usage. This robber baron/free-market disaster-in-the-making that unites unsustainable real estate development with entrenched corporations doesn't look at all like what anyone should want.
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 06:42 |
|
Kaal posted:This robber baron/free-market disaster-in-the-making that unites unsustainable real estate development with entrenched corporations Going back to: http://www.alternet.org/story/144020/how_limousine_liberals,_water_oligarchs_and_even_sean_hannity_are_hijacking_our_water_supply quote:A group of water oligarchs in California have engineered a disastrous deregulation and privatization scheme. And they've pulled in hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars without causing much public outrage. The amount of power and control they wield over California's most precious resource, water, should shock and frighten us -- and it would, if more people were aware of it. http://exiledonline.com/california-class-war-history-meet-the-oligarch-family-thats-been-scamming-taxpayers-for-150-years-and-counting/ quote:But more than anything, Miller is remembered today for his impact on California’s water economy. Before everybody else, Miller realized that water would become the state’s most valuable and strategic resource. Early on, he and his business partners acquired land on both sides of major California rivers, allowing him to monopolize and control the agricultural water supply. Miller had over 100 miles of the San Joaquin River, one of the largest in the state, sewed up tight. He also controlled 50 miles of Kern River frontage. https://www.nsfwcorp.com/dispatch/oligarch-valley/ quote:My interest in the Oligarch Valley developed purely by accident: I stumbled onto it after moving to the subprime desert suburb of Victorville in 2009. At the time, California was in the grips of a minor drought and the local water agency was forced to augment its dwindling supply by buying $73 million worth of water from a Central Valley family farm. The water, which was to be shipped in from the Bay Area hundreds of miles away via the State Aqueduct, was enough to fill up a kiddie pool the size of San Francisco and sustain up to 30,000 families for an entire year. Just a few snippets. They are all much longer and worth looking through.
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 06:58 |
|
Kaal posted:It's not their water, it's the public's water. Why the heck should they be getting a dime for it? If anyone is going to be selling off public resources, it should be a state utility with the public's interest in mind. It actually is their water because they bought the water rights and are now reselling it. Now if you want to complain that because the farmers bought the water rights a long time ago they paid too little, well that could be a good argument. But the idea that farmers should just give up water they bought for free isn't.
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 07:35 |
|
Groundwater should not be "owned" like a watch or a car is "owned".
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 07:41 |
|
FRINGE posted:Groundwater should not be "owned" like a watch or a car is "owned". This is river water. I'm still not sure sending water down south to wash cars and water golf courses is all that more productive than growing food. Rancho Cucamonga is still prosecuting people who don't water lawns.
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 08:05 |
|
nm posted:Rancho Cucamonga is still prosecuting people who don't water lawns. Of course they are.
|
# ? Mar 15, 2015 08:12 |
|
|
# ? May 27, 2024 02:42 |
|
FRINGE posted:
Eh, actually upland. They have the same city attorney. http://www.dailybulletin.com//general-news/20150116/upland-battle-over-man-not-watering-lawn-heads-to-trial I've seen pgotos of the prior "lawn" it wasn't a mess or anything. Dirt and rocks is what you should replace your lawn with in an acute drought. Drought tolerant plants require more water the first year than an already grown long. Long term, the drought tolerant plants win, but now is not the time to install them. Just let it die, put down some colorful rocks or something. Of course, the time to plant those plants everyone will think "hey, we have lots of water, why plant those plants when I can have a nice green lawn?" I'm sure Rancho would do the same. nm fucked around with this message at 08:21 on Mar 15, 2015 |
# ? Mar 15, 2015 08:17 |