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

California Imposes First-Ever Water Restrictions to Deal with Drought

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 249 posts

Re: California Imposes First-Ever Water Restrictions to Deal with Drought

#51

Post by ptaipale »

mjhoy wrote: post #27
dasfw wrote: post #22

Why isn't california using the same technology people use for almost every other scarce resource? Markets. If you raise the price of water, people will start using less. I suspect there are some political reasons why this is not happening.

There's a good post on marginal revolution that puts California in some perspective. http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2015/03/the... > As David Zetland points out in an excellent interview with Russ Roberts, people in San Diego county use around 150 gallons of water a day. Meanwhile in Sydney Australia, with a roughly comparable climate and standard of living, people use about half that amount. Trust…

That is indeed quite cheap if water is supposed to be scarce. (I don't quite see why you're downvoted.)

78 cents per 150 gallons is $1.37 per cubic meter. Here in North Europe, where we have no shortage of water whatsoever, we pay €1.34 per cubic meter. In addition to that we pay €1.66 per cubic meter as "wastewater management fee" (and yes, you have to pay wastewater management fee even for water that you use for watering plants, something that doesn't need wastewater management at all).

So, San Diego residents pay less than half the price of here? Wow.

(Not that the more than double cost would be a problem here, as the average consumption per person is 100-150 litres depending on whether people live in detached houses or blocks of flats. People in blocks of flats consume much more water on average, and even that is only about a quarter of the San Diego figure you quoted.)

Re: California Imposes First-Ever Water Restrictions to Deal with Drought

#54

Post by macspoofing »

3pt14159 wrote: post #37
sandworm wrote: post #34

There are limits to the governor's powers here. Much of the agricultural water comes from "rights" or easements attached to specific land. Ownership of farm X comes with the right to water from river Y. This is the "free" water often mentioned in news reports. Any reduction in these rights is viewed as a legal "taking" or condemnation of a property right by the state. Lawsuits for compensation will result. And they w…

You can't give away what you down own. When the state gave rights to water to land holders it was well before we had the technology to meaningfully impact water levels and thereby impact other peoples access to water. Since Roman times land ownership went from the highest heavens to the the deepest deeps, but the law was changed after blimps and other aircraft needed it and they certainly didn't need to pay off milli…

That's a good argument that may or may not stand-up in court.

Re: California Imposes First-Ever Water Restrictions to Deal with Drought

#55

Post by jff »

trhway wrote: post #44
BrainInAJar wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

food shortage leads to revolution. The real problem here is we tried to turn a desert in to our national bread basket.

>The real problem here is we tried to turn a desert in to our national bread basket. or may be that our national bread basket is turning into a desert? One needs 3 components - soil, sun and water. We're loosing the 3rd component : http://www.mercurynews.com/drought/ci_27070897/california-dr... "The last three years of drought were the most severe that California has experienced in at least 1,200 years" Everybody can…

> Everybody can just only guess why...

NOAA says it isn't because of climate change, if that's what you're implying.

Re: California Imposes First-Ever Water Restrictions to Deal with Drought

#56

Post by baddox »

joshstrange wrote: post #3
jstalin wrote: post #2

We learned yesterday that 80% of water consumption in California is by agriculture[1]. Yet this executive order does nothing to reduce agriculture's use of water[2]. It only refers to use of urban water, lawns, landscaping, and cemeteries. Agricultural users just need to submit vague "plans." 1. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/30/how-growers... 2. http://gov.ca.gov/docs/4.1.15_Executive_Order.pdf

Yeah it seems pretty crazy that they are targeting the smallest sliver of water use for restrictions. I'd think we would want to limit the restrictions on everyday citizens and focus on the farmers who are fewer in number and, I would assume, easier to control as a whole than every citizen in CA...

Residential users are a dispersed interest group. Industrial users are (mostly) concentrated interest groups. These results are exactly what you should expect.

Re: California Imposes First-Ever Water Restrictions to Deal with Drought

#57

Post by ptaipale »

chadzawistowski wrote: post #12
krisroadruck wrote: post #10

I simply do not understand california's water shortage problem. They are by a frickin ocean. It's sunny nearly all year round. Solar powered or wave powered desalination is a fairly straight forward solution to this problem.

It's technically possible, but not at the right prices. California has been supplying water to agriculture at below market prices.

> California has been supplying water to agriculture at below market prices.

Is that actually "supplying", or is it that farms have been located at rivers precisely for the reason that they have access to water there, and water rights are part of property rights?

(Honest question, I don't know California system.)

Re: California Imposes First-Ever Water Restrictions to Deal with Drought

#58

Post by bottled_poe »

MrZongle2 wrote: post #40
tibbon wrote: post #35

Wait, they just imposed water restrictions? Wouldn't have that made sense to start like... near the beginning of all of this?

That would require somebody with intelligence and conviction to lead the push for change. We don't have those people in politics in America any more.

Remind me, is change compatible with re-election?

Re: California Imposes First-Ever Water Restrictions to Deal with Drought

#59

Post by lkbm »

jconley wrote: post #43
olliej wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trees they're trying to keep alive have ridiculously high water consumption, almonds for instance consume 10s of litres of water for each _individual_ almond. They need to stop growing trees like that in a desert, which is what they're doing. The wells they are digging are tapping into the underlying aquifers that are the last resort, so they are in fact getting _free_ water while complaining about the cost. In e…

I know this is all straw man, but interesting stuff... Many crops use much more water than Almonds [0], I guess they're just fun to pick on. It'd be interesting to see a calorie/water comparison of many foods. Also, my family's farm spends more money on well water than the government supplied water due to the high cost of electricity for pumping. I do agree that a real market for water might help. The root of the pro…

This article seems to be suggesting that drip irrigation is the norm in California. While it may be for his/her farms, it's still a ways away from being a majority: http://www.mullerranch.com/making_news/sacbee_drip_2_2014.ht...

Re: California Imposes First-Ever Water Restrictions to Deal with Drought

#60

Post by pkaye »

tibbon wrote: post #35

Wait, they just imposed water restrictions? Wouldn't have that made sense to start like... near the beginning of all of this?

It was already done done mostly in the state/county level. For example, in my part of the bay area, they have raised rates especially if you have disproportionate usage. Also you cannot water your lawn more than once per week.
Post reply on HN