41–50 of 242 posts
Can't wait for all the climate change deniers to have a field day with this.
Maybe people should stop claiming normal patterns of precipitation variability are unstoppable catastrophic results of climate change then?
And yet we won't be building any more water storage. As a result, we have about the same water capacity to survice the next drought as we had in the 1970s. There were half as many residents then, and climate change wasn't a concern...
Los Angeles has a system of cement washways that move large amounts of rainwater to the ocean to prevent flooding that used to happen semi-regularly. If they stored that water in reservoirs, they wouldn’t need to get so much of their water from the various aqueduct systems used today. Such a system could effectively buffer the negative impact of droughts, while still serving the purpose of flood prevention during wet…
Tell that to my water bill, the drought surcharge is still over 50% of the bill...
The water company asked us to reduce, reuse and recycle. We complied.
We did such a great job, that they increased rates because we weren't using enough water and they weren't making enough money.
It's insane.
The experience here in Orange County over the last few months has been nuts. Being able to hang out down near the ocean and see the San Gabriel mountains just decked out in snow is surreal: https://i.redd.it/kueaye5p6si21.jpg Another photo: https://i.redd.it/vy7dlavrh0f21.jpg Anaheim hills, an area that rarely gets snowed on: https://i.redd.it/trbf198kb6i21.jpg Then we roll right into the poppy/wildflower superbloom…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The changes in behavior those surcharges are intended to cause remain important, especially as future droughts are quite likely.
Oh the quality of life behaviors of residents that use a very small percentage of the water? Residents use 10% of the water, 50% of the water is "environmental" and is dumped into the ocean for the smelt, etc.[0] [0] https://www.ppic.org/publication/water-use-in-california/
That's a funny way of saying "we didn't want to dry up the rivers", isn't it?
And yet we won't be building any more water storage. As a result, we have about the same water capacity to survice the next drought as we had in the 1970s. There were half as many residents then, and climate change wasn't a concern...
Residential water use is minimal. Most water is used for irrigation. Further, cheap water storage results in increased evaporation, it’s a net loss over time.
And what happens to that lost evaporated water?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The changes in behavior those surcharges are intended to cause remain important, especially as future droughts are quite likely.
Oh the quality of life behaviors of residents that use a very small percentage of the water? Residents use 10% of the water, 50% of the water is "environmental" and is dumped into the ocean for the smelt, etc.[0] [0] https://www.ppic.org/publication/water-use-in-california/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh the quality of life behaviors of residents that use a very small percentage of the water? Residents use 10% of the water, 50% of the water is "environmental" and is dumped into the ocean for the smelt, etc.[0] [0] https://www.ppic.org/publication/water-use-in-california/
> 50% of the water is "environmental" and is dumped into the ocean for the smelt That's a funny way of saying "we didn't want to dry up the rivers", isn't it?