What about desalination? Would that be more cost effective?
The states in question don’t have oceans to desalinate.
What is the energy cost of the proposal vs the energy cost of desalination?
Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?
141–150 of 347 posts
Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?
#142I understand that this is mostly for agriculture, but maybe let's stop building and expanding big cities in the desert. Golf courses in Phoenix, for example, seem like an irresponsible use of water.
Golf courses in Phoenix mostly use reclaimed water so their net impact is very low.
That’s not true.
First, that water would be used for other things if it wasn’t used for golf courses. There are lots of other potential uses for reclaimed water. Second, less than 20% of golf course water is actually from reclaimed sources.
Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?
#143Please stay away from our water. I want no part in helping California become more unsustainable. ETA: to westerners- You have enough water to maintain first class lifestyles. Allocate/ration it better or cap population. Stop stealing from others.
80% of water in California is used by agriculture, we’ll stop “stealing” water when you all stop “stealing” Cattle and Dairy, Almonds, Grapes, Lettuce, Strawberries, Tomatoes, and more a that we grow with water. Unless you’d rather buy that all shipped in from South America instead….
[deleted]
Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?
#144Please stay away from our water. I want no part in helping California become more unsustainable. ETA: to westerners- You have enough water to maintain first class lifestyles. Allocate/ration it better or cap population. Stop stealing from others.
80% of water in California is used by agriculture, we’ll stop “stealing” water when you all stop “stealing” Cattle and Dairy, Almonds, Grapes, Lettuce, Strawberries, Tomatoes, and more a that we grow with water. Unless you’d rather buy that all shipped in from South America instead….
Get Iowa to grow your almonds which alone would solve the water problem. Almonds are by far the top crop in California in terms of both acres harvested and production value. The most recent data shows there were about 1.25 million acres of almond trees, the production value for which is more than $5.6 billion. [0]. Almonds make up almost 13 percent of the California's total irrigated farmland using 9 percent of the state's ag water.
[0] https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Less-rice-more-n...
Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, we'll just grow it in the midwest, ie, the rest of the country. Only reason we grow mostly corn is because of subsidies. That can be easily changed. If you're suggesting CA is the only viable farmland in the country, you are mistaken.
You can't grow any of the mediterranean/mid-east fruit or nut trees in the midwest as they are killed by frost. That rules out most of the stuff that California is famous for exporting - almonds, pistachios, citrus. Many of the ones that do grow won't be commercially competitive - the seasons can be short. And of course, unlike corn, you're going to have to find people to pick all this fruit.
Not true. Nuts that can be grown in Iowa include black walnuts, Persian (so-called “English”) walnuts, heartnuts, pecans and other hickory nuts, hazels, almonds, chestnuts, and perhaps a few other minor species. [0]
[0] https://practicalfarmers.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Tom-...
Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?
#146In terms of where the water comes from, sourcing at Old River Control makes a lot of sense. From there the water really does pretty much run into the Gulf of Mexico, and there is no downstream irrigation, power generation, or shipping impact from a 5% diversion. But the writer makes the engineering sound trivial, when it's really not. The first thousand miles are all uphill, so you're not talking about a canal, as th…
> power plants
I was curious, so some rough estimates: About 1m kg of water per second, lifted about 1km implies about 10GW of continuous power, or about 86 TWh annually assuming the scheme runs continuously, which is about 2% of annual generation. So enormous, but on the scale of feasible, a bit to my surprise.
Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?
#147I understand that this is mostly for agriculture, but maybe let's stop building and expanding big cities in the desert. Golf courses in Phoenix, for example, seem like an irresponsible use of water.
Artifical surf parks in Arizona seem a tad excessive. [0] http://www.swellmfg.com/
72% of water used in Arizona is used by Agriculture.. https://www.arizonawaterfacts.com/water-your-facts
Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?
#148Most water use is for agriculture. Most agricultural water use is for meat. Beef is by far the least efficient way to turn water (and other stuff) into protein. I propose we tax meat nationwide according to its water use, instead of dreaming up unrealistic and unnecessary megaprojects.
If you want go to this route, then you might find the cost of your cereal going up. More than 98% [1] of the water usage attributed to beef/cattle (and other animals) is an indirect measurement - it's from the estimated water usage in the production of the feed that's given to them. Cattle themselves directly use next to no water. So you'd need to add your water tax to grains and other such products.
Another interesting datum is that the average head of cattle has a water footprint of 2056 (m^3/year), while it's 2842 [2] for the average American, and 1071 for the average Chinese. There are 94 million cattle in the US, and 332 million people.
[1] - https://waterfootprint.org/en/water-footprint/product-water-...
[2] - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221830102_The_Water...
Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?
#149Before looking at the water source, wouldn't doing the bare minimum to control the water sinks would be in order? I mean, we have harder regulations on water useage in the alps, and this is a water rich area where only 3% of the a available water is used. The truth is that the water a land will provide is limited. And of course you could expand this water by also taking the water from another land, but maybe pitting…
[deleted]
Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?
#150Why? These are states that are literally deserts yet continue to waste water. Take Phoenix, something like 50% of their residential water use is watering lawns. The state also just got a brand new TSMC fab, presumably with a bunch of tax breaks and guaranteed water - given that the large fabs use around as much water each day as 3-400k homes, it’s rich to turn around and say you need federal aid to get more water.
Residential and industrial use combined is still less than 1/2 of agricultural use of water in Arizona... Agriculture that still uses flood irrigation , where they flood a field with water.. instead of sprinklers or more efficient means..
https://www.arizonawaterfacts.com/water-your-facts
but yeah.. it's people and industry.