As Groundwater Dwindles, a Food Shock Looms • Hacker News Board

Re: As Groundwater Dwindles, a Food Shock Looms

#31

Post by pjc50 » Sun, Dec 25, 2016, 9:37 PM UTC

apsec112 wrote: post #23

"Rising temperatures and growing demands for thirsty grains like rice and wheat could drain much of the world’s groundwater in the next few decades, new research warns." Wait, what? A global water shortage is one problem that global warming would actually help fix. There might be local droughts, but it's meteorologically obvious that higher temperatures = higher evaporation = higher global rainfall. A warm ocean pump…

> higher global rainfall

To adapt a popular saying: All rain is local.

That is, rain is more or less useful depending on where it falls. More to rainforests, mountains and the seas would not be useful.

This is part of why people say "climate change" instead of "global warming", because while the world warms on average local temperatures depend on disruptable weather patterns.

Re: As Groundwater Dwindles, a Food Shock Looms

#32

Post by fulafel » Sun, Dec 25, 2016, 9:37 PM UTC

ianai wrote: post #6

Is anywhere not facing a water shortage? Where is it "best managed" or "least bad"

Human settlements have always been preferentially situated on rivers and other natural freshwater sources. So yes, many places are fine.

Re: As Groundwater Dwindles, a Food Shock Looms

#33

Post by n0b0dythere » Sun, Dec 25, 2016, 9:37 PM UTC

jseliger wrote: post #20

It is surprising to not see desalinization mentioned, here or in the article. Consider https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/israel-proves-the... or https://www.technologyreview.com/s/534996/megascale-desalina... . I have no special knowledge of desalinization apart from a distant relative who has worked on such projects, but the absence of it in the discussion is notable given its recent prominence.

For agriculture, hopefully this would be perfect.

I've drank desalinated water before, many times. It's absolutely awful, tastes soft and doesn't quench your thirst like water normally does.

hard to describe, it's like a mage cast a "create water" spell to make it, and it tastes like something that's wet and should be water, but just really isn't.

Re: As Groundwater Dwindles, a Food Shock Looms

#34

Post by swiley » Sun, Dec 25, 2016, 9:39 PM UTC

ehnto wrote: post #11

taesis wrote: post #3

I wonder if solar/wind/nuclear desalination plants would be better used piping water into existing infrastructure or (somehow) refilling aquifers. ... and that is apparently already a thing XD [1]. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquifer_storage_and_recovery

Hey, it's where I live! I had no idea we were doing such cool work in that area. Australia as you can imagine, while often quite lush in many regions, is quite acutely aware of water as a limited resource. Most places I have lived have been under some kind of permenant water restriction policy and I think that drills into most people that it's a pretty serious matter.

Australia seems to (in a similar way to California) have a difficult time distributing scarce resources because they're afraid of letting market forces do it. California would have more than enough water if its bizarre distribution scheme didn't make it so cheap for people to grow crops like alphalpha.

Re: As Groundwater Dwindles, a Food Shock Looms

#35

Post by 60654 » Sun, Dec 25, 2016, 9:40 PM UTC

cardamomo wrote: post #4

I grew up next to Lake Michigan, a huge source of fresh water. Yet for decades only municipalities within the Great Lakes watershed have been allowed to draw water from them. That pact has only recently started to be challenged by thirsty nearby communities[0]. I fear that groundwater crises in the Midwest will continue to erode what I see as a rational and sustainable restriction on the Lakes' water. [0] http://www.…

Yeah, no doubt there will be challenges, so it's good that the Great Lakes Charter [1] exists to regulate (ie. restrict) access from non-neighboring communities.

But, even further away from the Great Lakes, the midwest seem roughly okay for now - IA, IL, OH, IN, WI, all seem to have okay rainfall and ground water levels. But the great plains states, KS, OK, TX, etc, which were historically less arable, are set to experience greater changes for the worse :(

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Lakes_Charter

Re: As Groundwater Dwindles, a Food Shock Looms

#36

Post by hyperbovine » Sun, Dec 25, 2016, 9:40 PM UTC

jseliger wrote: post #20

It is surprising to not see desalinization mentioned, here or in the article. Consider https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/israel-proves-the... or https://www.technologyreview.com/s/534996/megascale-desalina... . I have no special knowledge of desalinization apart from a distant relative who has worked on such projects, but the absence of it in the discussion is notable given its recent prominence.

Desal can potentially alleviate drought in urban environments -- at a steep energy and environmental cost -- but is simply not in the running for producing food at a large scale. For example, ag in California alone consumes ~30 million acre-feet (MAF) a year [1]. The total installed desal capacity worldwide is around 35 MAF/yr [2].

[1] http://www.ppic.org/main/publication_show.asp?i=1108 [2] https://www.researchgate.net/figure/272756219_fig2_Figure-2-...

Re: As Groundwater Dwindles, a Food Shock Looms

#37

Post by foota » Sun, Dec 25, 2016, 9:42 PM UTC

adekok wrote: post #29

apsec112 wrote: post #23

"Rising temperatures and growing demands for thirsty grains like rice and wheat could drain much of the world’s groundwater in the next few decades, new research warns." Wait, what? A global water shortage is one problem that global warming would actually help fix. There might be local droughts, but it's meteorologically obvious that higher temperatures = higher evaporation = higher global rainfall. A warm ocean pump…

> t's meteorologically obvious that higher temperatures = higher evaporation = higher global rainfall It doesn't help the Southern US if Central America has higher rainfall. i.e. there is no guarantee that the rain falls where it's needed for farming. Much the opposite, as it turns out.

In theory, couldn't agricultural centers move?

Re: As Groundwater Dwindles, a Food Shock Looms

#38

Post by stretchwithme » Sun, Dec 25, 2016, 9:43 PM UTC

mhb wrote: post #30

ehnto wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree, but it is still a scary prospect. Humans need water. We don't need gas, or oil, heck we can even survive without electricity. We can make do. But we die without water, and it is worrying to imagine a scenario where some people can no longer afford water because the price went up due to any number of factors. The price of a resource fluctuates for reasons not always related to the actual resources in…

Should we base (US) water allocation on the electoral college outcome or the popular vote? If you think it's scary having a market determine the allocation of water, the prospect of allocating it with political currency should be terrifying.

Agreed.

If everybody in the Middle East were paying a market price for water, there would be less conflict, not more.

Instead of having to fight for a resource, they compete to sell it to you.

Re: As Groundwater Dwindles, a Food Shock Looms

#39

Post by searine » Sun, Dec 25, 2016, 9:43 PM UTC

fulafel wrote: post #21

tkyjonathan wrote: post #7

"thirsty grains like rice and wheat".. Yet again no mention of animal agriculture. How much water a day does a cow need Vs wheat?

And more widely, much more crops are used as animal feed vs human consumption. We have no food shortage, just a high demand for luxury (meat) foods that competes with basic sustenance.

The solution in a first world economy is not to limit options. That is just regression.

The solution is to make the industrial system sustainable.

If there was a power crisis, you wouldn't make everyone use pocket calculators instead of computers, you'd figure out how power generation alternatives.

Re: As Groundwater Dwindles, a Food Shock Looms

#40

Post by stretchwithme » Sun, Dec 25, 2016, 9:47 PM UTC

mhb wrote: post #30

ehnto wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree, but it is still a scary prospect. Humans need water. We don't need gas, or oil, heck we can even survive without electricity. We can make do. But we die without water, and it is worrying to imagine a scenario where some people can no longer afford water because the price went up due to any number of factors. The price of a resource fluctuates for reasons not always related to the actual resources in…

Should we base (US) water allocation on the electoral college outcome or the popular vote? If you think it's scary having a market determine the allocation of water, the prospect of allocating it with political currency should be terrifying.

If you look at the great resource shortages in the US in the 1970s, they really only happened because the government imposed price controls.

I remember grade school being so cold in the winter because they used gas to heat the school. The US only used domestic natural gas back then, so it couldn't be blamed on some embargo.