Live data from Hacker News

The fight against drought in California has a new tool: The restrictor

lite.cnn.com

381–385 of 385 posts

Re: The fight against drought in California has a new tool: The restrictor

#381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someday we will face hunger, because the short term economies of scale associated with “the miracle in the desert” made farming economically unviable elsewhere. Places like New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, etc have and are continuing to permanently lose prime farmland to subdivisions because nobody can compete with growing in the desert.

A recent article local to me, Mid Atlantic Coast USA, that touches on farmers quitting. From the article this one happened to be the largest privately owned farm in the State. https://www.inquirer.com/news/new-jersey/farming-farms-produ... Wonder who bought it? We can certainly anticipate food prices rising as the core needs in life; air, water, and energy become the next hot commodity as the "nice to haves" supply c…

I worked as a teenager for a farm that had been continuously operating since the Dutch colonial era.

There are few continuously operating entities that are 300+ years old in the US. That farm managed to operate for all of that time, but went dormant about 20 years ago. They board horses and lease the land for hay to pay the property taxes, and will probably sell it when the current family owner gets older.

It’s just not possible to compete against scaled agribusiness. To borrow another example in this thread, you can’t sell artichokes from your 500 acre farm when the competition plants 20 square miles of artichokes in a desert with government provided water.

Same with grain. We’re emptying an ancient aquifer in the Great Plains to grow wheat, corn and soy and have eliminated those crops everywhere else as a result. All good until the water runs out.

Re: The fight against drought in California has a new tool: The restrictor

#382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Imagine saying to someone losing weight "don't bother, losing 2 lbs this week is meaningless when you're 100 overweight." You’re not gripping the math here. The correct analogy is, someone is obese and is constantly gaining weight. They are running a 1000 calorie surplus and 100 calories of that comes from breakfast. You’re sitting here arguing about taking 20-30 calories away from breakfast because that’s the only…

You're not gripping reality here. It always helps. Using less water means we have water for longer. Running at a deficit of 10% vs 5% would make an enormous difference. It would extend the water we have now as we identify ways to mitigate the problem. If it's wasted water it's wasted water. That "slight difference" could be 20 extra years. A drought could end in that time frame. That 100 calories saved could mean 20…

Reducing agricultural use by 1% would essentially be equivalent to reducing domestic use to zero.

Which one do you think we should strive for, given that per-capita domestic use has been dropping for nearly 3 decades in cities across the southwest already, by as much as 33% ?

Re: The fight against drought in California has a new tool: The restrictor

#383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure "cities in the desert" the GGP was meaning. Typically this means places like Phoenix, but that's not in California.

All of socal is a desert. So Bakersfield, San Bernardino, etc. pulling from the Colorado river. Sacramento, Fresno, etc pulling from the Sierras. Heat has little relevance here, so LA is just as bad as PHX for residential water consumption (excluding lawns).

I am pretty sure Bakersfield does not pull water from the Colorado river.

Re: The fight against drought in California has a new tool: The restrictor

#384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Imagine saying to someone losing weight "don't bother, losing 2 lbs this week is meaningless when you're 100 overweight." You’re not gripping the math here. The correct analogy is, someone is obese and is constantly gaining weight. They are running a 1000 calorie surplus and 100 calories of that comes from breakfast. You’re sitting here arguing about taking 20-30 calories away from breakfast because that’s the only…

You're not gripping reality here. It always helps. Using less water means we have water for longer. Running at a deficit of 10% vs 5% would make an enormous difference. It would extend the water we have now as we identify ways to mitigate the problem. If it's wasted water it's wasted water. That "slight difference" could be 20 extra years. A drought could end in that time frame. That 100 calories saved could mean 20…

It’s not a deficit by reducing residential. How are you not getting that?

Re: The fight against drought in California has a new tool: The restrictor

#385
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pistachios are a high-value crop, and other places under drought like the La Mancha region of Spain are also switching from olives and wheat to pistachios. Compare this to alfalfa, an ultra-low-value crop the Saudis are growing in California because they bought senior water rights, then shipping to Saudi to feed cows, essentially laundering water. Agricultural water is heavily subsidized in California, and the absurd…

How is that laundering water? Do you mean arbitrage?

There’s not much difference between packing a freighter with alfalfa and filling a tanker with water:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/25/california-w...

Post reply on HN