Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 54 posts

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#31

Post by golergka »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #30
golergka wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If richer exporting industries are richer than hundreds of millions farmers, doesn't it mean that they are more effective, and may be a large industrial farm would be more effective than individual farmers, too?

It does, and it would, but what are you going to do with those 100 million farmers? Their children are rushing to the cities faster than you can possibly imagine. But it takes at least a generation or two to change a country of poor farmers into an industrial, educated, urbanized society. And until then, you have this problem.

In a capitalist, free market economy, we don't have to do anything with people. They're doing anything they want instead.

China might not be there yet, but thankfully, they're already got rid of the central planning.

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#32

Post by Shivetya »

nshepperd wrote: post #9

> Still, in many cases there’s little incentive for farmers to save water. Agriculture uses 62 percent of China’s water, but crops have a relatively low marginal value. So the government bans the sale of agricultural water to industry, which pays 10 times the price, to ensure food supply. This discount on water is effectively a cash subsidy for agriculture that increases with the amount of water wasted instead of use…

See the American West, water was sold cheaply and is still for the most part under priced resulting in waste. throw in laws preventing farmers from one area selling their own well water or stream water to other farmers who merely may be a county line away and it just exaggerates usage from reservoirs

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#33

Post by ihsw2 »

danmaz74 wrote: post #17
nshepperd wrote: post #9

> Still, in many cases there’s little incentive for farmers to save water. Agriculture uses 62 percent of China’s water, but crops have a relatively low marginal value. So the government bans the sale of agricultural water to industry, which pays 10 times the price, to ensure food supply. This discount on water is effectively a cash subsidy for agriculture that increases with the amount of water wasted instead of use…

Did it ever occur to you that pricing hundreds of millions of poor Chinese farmers out of their ability to grow food to eat, so that much richer exporting industries can have more water, while being a "market solution", might not be an acceptable - even a humane - solution?

An appallingly minuscule tax (eg: $0.01/1000L) would encourage appropriate (nay, mandatory) rate monitoring as well as provide a modicum of oversight.

Keyword: rate monitoring, not rate limiting

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#34

Post by wolfram74 »

golergka wrote: post #31
LeifCarrotson wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does, and it would, but what are you going to do with those 100 million farmers? Their children are rushing to the cities faster than you can possibly imagine. But it takes at least a generation or two to change a country of poor farmers into an industrial, educated, urbanized society. And until then, you have this problem.

In a capitalist, free market economy, we don't have to do anything with people. They're doing anything they want instead. China might not be there yet, but thankfully, they're already got rid of the central planning.

They're doing anything they want and can afford, an important additional constraint.

Remember the old cliche, "America: the land of the free, terms and conditions apply"

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#35

Post by WillReplyfFood »

rukittenme wrote: post #18
danmaz74 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did it ever occur to you that pricing hundreds of millions of poor Chinese farmers out of their ability to grow food to eat, so that much richer exporting industries can have more water, while being a "market solution", might not be an acceptable - even a humane - solution?

Did it ever occur to you that by not pricing out poor, upstream farmers that hundreds of millions of poor Chinese workers will die of thirst? I think its perfectly reasonable to value a scare resource at a market rate. If the rate is too high to be tolerable then the government has an incentive to invest in water infrastructure. And people have an incentive to move where resources are under less strain. Or we could j…

Has it ever occured to you, that nature ingrained not only a prison dilemma optimal solution into our behaviours, but also a really nice set of instincts to go full circle in a overpopulated, exausted environment?

We are really savage murdermonkeys once all bananas have been eaten. After that has happened for a few millenia, nothing occurs to nobody..

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#36

Post by Pxtl »

danmaz74 wrote: post #17
nshepperd wrote: post #9

> Still, in many cases there’s little incentive for farmers to save water. Agriculture uses 62 percent of China’s water, but crops have a relatively low marginal value. So the government bans the sale of agricultural water to industry, which pays 10 times the price, to ensure food supply. This discount on water is effectively a cash subsidy for agriculture that increases with the amount of water wasted instead of use…

Did it ever occur to you that pricing hundreds of millions of poor Chinese farmers out of their ability to grow food to eat, so that much richer exporting industries can have more water, while being a "market solution", might not be an acceptable - even a humane - solution?

Yeah, I think some people forget what "farmer" means in China - are we talking about big agribusiness farms or subsistence-farming peasants who haven't made it into China's industrial revolution yet?

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#37

Post by pixl97 »

sremani wrote: post #27
spodek wrote: post #22

Dozens of high-tech and massive public works solutions. None address the root problem: population growth. Globally, not just in China. Everyone will knee-jerk respond about their one-child policy. It doesn't change that population growth is the root problem and all the other solutions only enable more population. The article doesn't even suggest the possibility of lowering the birth rate. It's long past time we put t…

No, population growth is not the biggest problem for China, the median age of China is about 38 years old, their growth has already petered out. The population growth problem is right now mostly Africa and South Asia. China already has less than replacement ration (2.1) child births, what do you want ? People to not have children?

>what do you want ? People to not have children?

If you believe that areas have already overshot their carrying capacity. Then yes.

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#38

Post by spodek »

sremani wrote: post #27
spodek wrote: post #22

Dozens of high-tech and massive public works solutions. None address the root problem: population growth. Globally, not just in China. Everyone will knee-jerk respond about their one-child policy. It doesn't change that population growth is the root problem and all the other solutions only enable more population. The article doesn't even suggest the possibility of lowering the birth rate. It's long past time we put t…

No, population growth is not the biggest problem for China, the median age of China is about 38 years old, their growth has already petered out. The population growth problem is right now mostly Africa and South Asia. China already has less than replacement ration (2.1) child births, what do you want ? People to not have children?

The issue is not what I want.

The issue is that there is not enough water per person.

Efficiency gains and technology will help with the numerator somewhat, though probably swamped by increased material consumption.

We can talk about the denominator or not, but we probably can't do anything about it if we don't.

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#39

Post by chiefalchemist »

nlperguiy wrote: post #19
nshepperd wrote: post #9

> Still, in many cases there’s little incentive for farmers to save water. Agriculture uses 62 percent of China’s water, but crops have a relatively low marginal value. So the government bans the sale of agricultural water to industry, which pays 10 times the price, to ensure food supply. This discount on water is effectively a cash subsidy for agriculture that increases with the amount of water wasted instead of use…

Imagine if farmers were growing luxury vegetables like tomatoes, potatoes, beans, instead of growing several magnitudes more of cheap crappy grains that are then filtered through bodies of animals. Of course issues exist, because inefficiency is subsidized. For example, growing quinoa is a freaking gold mine yet there's still not enough competition. Yet growing corn and wheat is a life living on the edge of bankruptc…

Not to get off topic (but to support your point), I once read an op-ed that made an argument that the increase in obesity (in the USA) was due to farm subsidies. That is, cheap corn is used to make high-fructose corn syrup, and that low cost sweetener in turn ends up in everything.

And of course, as you mentioned, grains make cows, pigs, etc. cheaper. Again, not ideal for the human body and even less so for Mother Nature.

The free-market might lead to the same, but it certainly seems less likely.

Re: World's Largest Water Diversion Plan Won't Quench China's Thirst

#40

Post by mlrtime »

chiefalchemist wrote: post #39
nlperguiy wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine if farmers were growing luxury vegetables like tomatoes, potatoes, beans, instead of growing several magnitudes more of cheap crappy grains that are then filtered through bodies of animals. Of course issues exist, because inefficiency is subsidized. For example, growing quinoa is a freaking gold mine yet there's still not enough competition. Yet growing corn and wheat is a life living on the edge of bankruptc…

Not to get off topic (but to support your point), I once read an op-ed that made an argument that the increase in obesity (in the USA) was due to farm subsidies. That is, cheap corn is used to make high-fructose corn syrup, and that low cost sweetener in turn ends up in everything. And of course, as you mentioned, grains make cows, pigs, etc. cheaper. Again, not ideal for the human body and even less so for Mother Na…

There is also a national security issue to make sure a nation can feed itself. The government's responsibility is towards long term sustainable food supply for it's citizens.
Post reply on HN