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

61–70 of 249 posts

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

#61

Post by pkaye »

ptaipale wrote: post #57
chadzawistowski wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.)

I'm not sure either but there is an man made aqueduct that stretches form north to south.

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

#62

Post by rhino369 »

BrainInAJar wrote: post #31
wnevets wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

someone has to protect our poor farmers, everyone loves farmers.

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

I used to think this way, but it's a very fertile desert. But the use of the land shouldn't be propped up by externalaties paid for by everyone else.

The water should just be auctioned off each year. Proceeds going to find new sources of water.

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

#63

Post by thrownaway2424 »

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

Yes those of us who did not already know this long-standing fact learned it yesterday. What many of us seem to have failed to absorb is that water supplies are compartmentalized in such a way that saving in one area does not necessarily improve the situation in another area. One city can run out of water while another has plenty. Many cities have dedicated water supplies that are in no way connected to nor shared with agriculture, so saving even 100% of agricultural water provides no benefit for the municipal supplies.

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

#64

Post by [deleted] »

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

[deleted]

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

#65

Post by teamhappy »

The first picture that pops into my head when I think of California is sprinklers on people's lawns. We don't really have them in Germany. I mean, of course we do, but people are hesitant to put them up because the first thing that will happen is your neighbours standing at the fence judging you for being so goddamn wasteful (seriously). Now, I'm not a huge fan of judging people (that's a lie), but I can't help but notice that americans (seem to) completely lack this sense of responsibility/playing your part/restraining yourself for the greater good/whatever. Another thing we don't really have is air conditioning (might be a climate thing). It's insanely wasteful and chances are you'll be sweaty anyway. So we don't use them.

Unfortunately I have a hard time finding numbers on how much water is actually wasted. I.e., with a somewhat reasonable definition of "wasted."

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

#66

Post by thrownaway2424 »

chiph wrote: post #16

I've been hearing this on the news for at least a year now, and they're just now imposing restrictions?

This is on the state level. Most water districts have been imposing restrictions and raising prices for years.

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

#67

Post by tveita »

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…

Of course, even if they're taking from their own well they're draining the groundwater just as effectively. It's hard to see how a market based solution wouldn't turn into a tragedy of the commons without enforcing limits on the extraction.

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

#68

Post by jconley »

pkaye wrote: post #49
jconley wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Do you think if the state gave incentives to use more efficient water usage methods would help. The reality is agriculture is 80% of water consumption while 2% of the state GDP. It would be more efficient for farmers to conserve water and everyone else pitching in to subsidize it.

% of GDP is one lens to look through when thinking about water rights. Having access to affordable/local/healthy food is another.

I think incentives would help, yes. There is also a "use it or lose it" system builtin to many of the water rights contracts that are toxic. Much like big corporate budgets, farmers find a way to use the water just in case they need it the next year.

The reality is it is very expensive to change irrigation systems in established orchards. Incentives to do that would certainly be well received by the tree farmers I know.

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

#69

Post by WalterSear »

BrainInAJar wrote: post #31
wnevets wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

someone has to protect our poor farmers, everyone loves farmers.

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

National meat basket, rather.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-j-rose/how-to-take-long-s...

http://www.onegreenplanet.org/news/californias-drought-whos-...

http://darwin.bio.uci.edu/sustain/global/sensem/MeatIndustry...

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

#70

Post by bduerst »

matznerd wrote: post #17
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.

Why desalination isn't the answer... http://blogs.kqed.org/science/audio/why-isnt-desalination-th...

tl;dr: Desal is too energy intensive and expensive to be feasible while other conservation options haven't been tried yet. Also, massive potential environmental impact for water intake and brine output.
Post reply on HN