Earlier quoted context omitted.
What can you realistically do?
Start by not electing a pedophile who calls climate change a hoax
[dead]
A California aquifer may have crossed the point of no return
41–50 of 183 posts
Re: A California aquifer may have crossed the point of no return
#42You all knew how it was going to end, for decades, and did nothing. https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/location-maximum-land-subs...
Thank you for posting that, saved me from doing so.
Ignorance and stupidity are the greatest threats to human survival - but perhaps it's for the best.
Re: A California aquifer may have crossed the point of no return
#43Unfortunately, determining a sustainable groundwater yield is rarely straightforward. It typically requires extensive long-term monitoring, detailed hydrogeological investigations, and often sophisticated numerical groundwater models to understand aquifer recharge, storage, hydraulic connectivity, and environmental water requirements. These assessments then inform groundwater management areas, allocation limits, and licensing frameworks designed to keep extraction within sustainable bounds.
Even then, there is significant uncertainties. Many sustainable yield estimates are based on historical climate conditions and recharge rates. As rainfall declines and droughts become more frequent or prolonged, aquifer recharge may decrease, reducing the volume of groundwater that can be sustainably extracted. In some regions, the number of licensed users may ultimately exceed future sustainable allocations identified through updated modelling and monitoring. This creates a difficult policy challenge, as regulators may be required to reduce allocations or revoke licences from existing users, often with substantial social, economic and political consequences.
Groundwater management is further complicated by the fact that aquifers are not homogeneous reservoirs. They are complex geological systems, with groundwater availability and flow behaviour controlled by local stratigraphy, structural features, recharge mechanisms, hydraulic connectivity, and ecological dependencies. Effective management therefore requires aquifer-specific assessments rather than broad, one size fits all approaches.
There are probably very few hydrogeologists browsing HN so hello to any colleagues that are out there.
Re: A California aquifer may have crossed the point of no return
#44Why can't we work up the political outrage over water-wasting agriculture in California that we managed to gin up over data centers: https://finance.biggo.com/news/202508220112_Data_Centers_vs_... > Alfalfa irrigation (Colorado River): 1.6 trillion gallons annually > Google data centers (global): 6.4 billion gallons in 2023 > Thermoelectric power plants: 41% of total US water use EDIT: that page has a correction to s…
[dead]
Re: A California aquifer may have crossed the point of no return
#45For anyone interested in the history of water in the American West (what's different about the west, and how did we get here?), I recommend the extremely interesting and readable book Cadillac Desert, by Marc Reisner.
Re: A California aquifer may have crossed the point of no return
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Start by not electing a pedophile who calls climate change a hoax
Right?! Like there’s so much you can do. * Vote for fucks sake. Bare minimum and stop making fucking excuses both for yourself not doing it and for politicians you otherwise support burying their heads in the sand. * Stop buying stupid shit on the internet. Every package you don’t get delivered means less CO2. * Fix shit instead of replacing it. The greenest EV on earth is more CO2 intense than the car you’ve already…
I agree but
>Fix shit instead of replacing it. The greenest EV on earth is more CO2 intense than the car you’ve already got (assuming you keep it in good working order)
This is not correct at all...
https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/are-electric-vehicles-defini... one source of many. Also local pollution is reduced, e.g. nox and particles.
Re: A California aquifer may have crossed the point of no return
#47Why can't we work up the political outrage over water-wasting agriculture in California that we managed to gin up over data centers: https://finance.biggo.com/news/202508220112_Data_Centers_vs_... > Alfalfa irrigation (Colorado River): 1.6 trillion gallons annually > Google data centers (global): 6.4 billion gallons in 2023 > Thermoelectric power plants: 41% of total US water use EDIT: that page has a correction to s…
Probably because food and agriculture (in the region that produces a quarter of America’s domestic food supply) are required for life, while data centers aren’t?
Re: A California aquifer may have crossed the point of no return
#48Why can't we work up the political outrage over water-wasting agriculture in California that we managed to gin up over data centers: https://finance.biggo.com/news/202508220112_Data_Centers_vs_... > Alfalfa irrigation (Colorado River): 1.6 trillion gallons annually > Google data centers (global): 6.4 billion gallons in 2023 > Thermoelectric power plants: 41% of total US water use EDIT: that page has a correction to s…
[deleted]
Re: A California aquifer may have crossed the point of no return
#49There are some reasonable books by William T Volleman called 'Carbon Ideologies' it is all about Nuclear and Coal power. Regardless of that, they are written focusing on the people that would be reading those books in a few hundred years time. The justification being that those that read it today already understand the issues. As such they are focused on a world that is deeply resource depleted and much hotter. But i…
Why would any of us care what people 200 or 500 years in the future think of us?
Peak irrelevance.
Re: A California aquifer may have crossed the point of no return
#50>In an aquifer that’s permanently collapsed, artificial recharge—pumping water forcibly back underground—is the only option, according to Shirzaei. That’s expensive and carries the risk of triggering earthquakes. I have spent most of my life in the San Joaquin Valley and what I have been wondering about over the past few years is what is the effect removing all that water from the faults. Specifically, does this wate…
Toward the end it briefly discusses a possible solution - expensive injection of water into aquifers that might have the side effect of triggering earthquakes like fracking for petroleum or some types of geothermal - there’s no winning.
It has more possible side effects than just earthquakes (not my expertise in a geological stable country). One such side effect of mixing two types of groundwater is the potential to release minerals in the geological medium that can be above beneficial use criteria (and ultimately contaminate the groundwater). There is a USGS program called PHREEQC that is used for this specific type of modelling.