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

California's dry season is turning into a permanent state of being

phys.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 193 posts

Re: California's dry season is turning into a permanent state of being

#41

Post by avianlyric »

eplanit wrote: post #11

These droughts were anticipated, but here in California preparing for climate change means preaching at others, and setting up a carbon exchange. Not a single new reservoir has been built since 1979. It's impossible to take California seriously about much of anything, but especially not regarding the environment: "In 1979, California’s population was a little more than 23 million. Today, it is more than 39 million. Y…

> Not only does the state not prepare, but thanks to the record-setting wildfires of the past decade, the amount of carbon and soot pumped into the air has probably offset any gains that had been made. They're really just stupid out here.

This is a little unreasonable and just smacks of victim blaming. The way you write suggests the California has been deliberately setting their own wildfires, rather than just being a early victim of climate change.

With regards to water reservoirs, that does not seem to be a uniquely Californian thing. As an outside observer it seems the entire US is dependent on ageing infrastructure built after WWII, which has seen nothing but neglect since.

Re: California's dry season is turning into a permanent state of being

#42

Post by avianlyric »

eplanit wrote: post #37
aesh2Xa1 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP's point is that you have two glasses now, which are empty. Another two to make four and you'll have four empty glasses. You need to address the reason why they're empty. You said you know the system well, so do you mind explaining?

So 100% of reservoir loss is due to evaporation? In the analogy, filling the glasses before EBMUD turns the water off is like filling a reservoir during (even brief) rainy seasons.

Think you would a better leg to stand on if California’s reservoirs actually filled up during the year.

As it stands California’s reservoirs never seem to fill completely anymore. Adding more reservoirs won’t help store extra water if it simply isn’t falling from the sky.

Re: California's dry season is turning into a permanent state of being

#43

Post by novok »

avianlyric wrote: post #41
eplanit wrote: post #11

These droughts were anticipated, but here in California preparing for climate change means preaching at others, and setting up a carbon exchange. Not a single new reservoir has been built since 1979. It's impossible to take California seriously about much of anything, but especially not regarding the environment: "In 1979, California’s population was a little more than 23 million. Today, it is more than 39 million. Y…

> Not only does the state not prepare, but thanks to the record-setting wildfires of the past decade, the amount of carbon and soot pumped into the air has probably offset any gains that had been made. They're really just stupid out here. This is a little unreasonable and just smacks of victim blaming. The way you write suggests the California has been deliberately setting their own wildfires, rather than just being…

California also reduced or stopped forest management in the 80s, it's a bit deserved.

Re: California's dry season is turning into a permanent state of being

#44

Post by epistasis »

eplanit wrote: post #11

These droughts were anticipated, but here in California preparing for climate change means preaching at others, and setting up a carbon exchange. Not a single new reservoir has been built since 1979. It's impossible to take California seriously about much of anything, but especially not regarding the environment: "In 1979, California’s population was a little more than 23 million. Today, it is more than 39 million. Y…

This isn't a very complete picture of what's going on with water in California.

Even as population has almost doubled, and as agricultural output increases, we have decreased our water usage:

https://www.ppic.org/publication/water-use-in-california/

There's a lot to be said for simply not wasting lots of water.

If California stopped growing alfalfa, a low value product that is the largest agricultural use of water, we could probably house 20-30M more people with that water.

California could have built more reservoirs, but how many more? And how many more natural beauties would we have sacrificed instead of simply using less of a resource?

The stupidest thing California does is treat water rights as economic land for farmers that simply waste obscene amounts of a valuable resource. We need to tax that economic land at the full land rents, to encourage more economically efficient uses.

Re: California's dry season is turning into a permanent state of being

#45

Post by novok »

hourislate wrote: post #25
jeffbee wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our reservoirs are empty. Why would another reservoir help up? The fact is that California's urban water use has been declining since 1976, in absolute terms, not just in per-capita terms. The East Bay Municipal Utility District, for example, now only delivers half the water it delivered in 1976, despite the fact that the population in its service area has increased by 50% over that period. Conservation and efficienc…

Your point could be valid. A quick googling of water demand in CA produces the following. Urban water use is only 10% of total water use in California. Agriculture uses anywhere from 30% (wet year) to 70% (dry year). Just raising cattle in the state uses anywhere from 100-250 million gallons per day.

How much does almonds and rice do? And could you grow plants on the cow land?

Re: California's dry season is turning into a permanent state of being

#46

Post by adrianN »

telesilla wrote: post #18

Anyone worrying about what you can regarding climate change, it's nice to stop driving etc but the big issue is fossil fuel consumption. That's in the hands of big money. How that changes is another story but they've been clever to put the blame on domestic, urban consumers when we're a tiny minority of the polluters. Knowing that should help those keen to help out know better where to look. In the meantime, no or li…

Depending on how much time you're willing to invest, the best thing you can do might be joining lobbying efforts like the citizen's climate lobby: https://citizensclimatelobby.org/

Re: California's dry season is turning into a permanent state of being

#47

Post by eplanit »

epistasis wrote: post #44
eplanit wrote: post #11

These droughts were anticipated, but here in California preparing for climate change means preaching at others, and setting up a carbon exchange. Not a single new reservoir has been built since 1979. It's impossible to take California seriously about much of anything, but especially not regarding the environment: "In 1979, California’s population was a little more than 23 million. Today, it is more than 39 million. Y…

This isn't a very complete picture of what's going on with water in California. Even as population has almost doubled, and as agricultural output increases, we have decreased our water usage: https://www.ppic.org/publication/water-use-in-california/ There's a lot to be said for simply not wasting lots of water. If California stopped growing alfalfa, a low value product that is the largest agricultural use of water, w…

It sounds like there really isn't anything to be concerned about then.

"If California stopped growing alfalfa...we could probably house 20-30M more people". I'm very happy to stop growing crops in the desert, and agree there's absurd waste there (just because something can be done does not mean it should be done). But 10s of millions more people...is that really a goal, or even a good thing?

Re: California's dry season is turning into a permanent state of being

#48

Post by BurningFrog »

eplanit wrote: post #11

These droughts were anticipated, but here in California preparing for climate change means preaching at others, and setting up a carbon exchange. Not a single new reservoir has been built since 1979. It's impossible to take California seriously about much of anything, but especially not regarding the environment: "In 1979, California’s population was a little more than 23 million. Today, it is more than 39 million. Y…

> Not a single new reservoir has been built since 1979

Just one example of the bigger trend/policy:

California is extremely averse to build anything.

FIguring out why that is is the interesting part.

Re: California's dry season is turning into a permanent state of being

#49

Post by epistasis »

eplanit wrote: post #47
epistasis wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't a very complete picture of what's going on with water in California. Even as population has almost doubled, and as agricultural output increases, we have decreased our water usage: https://www.ppic.org/publication/water-use-in-california/ There's a lot to be said for simply not wasting lots of water. If California stopped growing alfalfa, a low value product that is the largest agricultural use of water, w…

It sounds like there really isn't anything to be concerned about then. "If California stopped growing alfalfa...we could probably house 20-30M more people". I'm very happy to stop growing crops in the desert, and agree there's absurd waste there (just because something can be done does not mean it should be done). But 10s of millions more people...is that really a goal, or even a good thing?

People have to live somewhere, and if they live in California they are going to be living a lower carbon life than if they live in Texas, Boise, Phoenix or Atlanta. Those are the places that California has been exporting anybody who doesn't make lots of money. So yes, as a California resident,, I think 20-30M more in California is a fantastic idea compared to the alternatives.

Re: California's dry season is turning into a permanent state of being

#50

Post by pixl97 »

eplanit wrote: post #37
aesh2Xa1 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP's point is that you have two glasses now, which are empty. Another two to make four and you'll have four empty glasses. You need to address the reason why they're empty. You said you know the system well, so do you mind explaining?

So 100% of reservoir loss is due to evaporation? In the analogy, filling the glasses before EBMUD turns the water off is like filling a reservoir during (even brief) rainy seasons.

More reservoirs doesn't make more water in the first place. This is about how much that falls from the sky in the first place.

You should not stop all the water from reaching the ocean in the first place, bad things happen when you do that. We are reaching the point where we just have enough water to keep the rivers flowing so we don't kill all the wildlife that exists in them, we're not adding significant amounts of water to storage.

Post reply on HN