121–130 of 211 posts
Could we feasibly just run desalination stations from the coasts and pipe the water - like oil - to fill up these reservoirs? Setting cost aside for a second, is there any reason not to do something like this?
Why not pipe the water from the pacific northwest, similar to what was done with the Colorado river.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm by no means an expert or a lawyer or someone you should listen to. But this may hint at the complexity. A lot of water rights come from Spanish land grants ~330 years ago. And those were guaranteed by treaty after the Mexican American war. So, the U.S. can do whatever it wants, but treaties are in this weird space below the constitution but above a simple bill through congress to become law. Water rights are gene…
> treaties are in this weird space below the constitution but above a simple bill through congress to become law Treaties have the force of federal law [1]. Not more. Not less. California is bound by them. The Congress is not. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_Clause
Since things haven't reached that level, it's likely the issue isn't super serious (yet).
Could we feasibly just run desalination stations from the coasts and pipe the water - like oil - to fill up these reservoirs? Setting cost aside for a second, is there any reason not to do something like this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Based on USDA data for 2021, only 3.9% of all U.S. hay produced and 6.4% of all alfalfa hay entered the export market. [0] [0]: https://hayandforage.com/article-3825-year-end-hay-exports-s...
Because we grow a lot in the Midwest where water comes from the sky.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> treaties are in this weird space below the constitution but above a simple bill through congress to become law Treaties have the force of federal law [1]. Not more. Not less. California is bound by them. The Congress is not. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_Clause
And the final say rests with the man with the gun, so if necessary the laws will be changed. Since things haven't reached that level, it's likely the issue isn't super serious (yet).
This isn't some some weird theoretical aside. Congressional power to modify and break treaties was debated by the founders [1].
Treaties are laws, full stop. Congress breaking them has political consequences. But it's not illegal, and it's no different from amending an act a prior Congress passed.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_Clause#Repeal_of_treati...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This reference agrees with you in the short/mid term (to your credit, which you explicitly mention), but states in the long term climate change is the most important factor, regardless of demand. Taking action against alfalfa is a sensible thing to do right away, but won't address the looming crisis: > In the near-term (2012 through 2026), water demands are similar across scenarios, and the largest factor affecting t…
Serious question: Have climate scientists previously been able to accurately predict climate changes decades away on a regional basis?
It's hard to quantify, but it does seem like regional predictions are less accurate than continental, and predictions about rainfall are less accurate than temperature. However, predictions of rising temperature are essentially guaranteed.
> There is considerable confidence that climate models provide credible quantitative estimates of future climate change, particularly at continental scales and above ...
> Confidence in model estimates is higher for some climate variables (e.g., temperature) than for others (e.g., precipitation).
> Over several decades of development, models have consistently provided a robust and unambiguous picture of significant climate warming
Sources:
[1] https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/pd/climate/factsheet... [2] https://archive.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/faq...
At least this article notes that the vast majority of water usage is agriculture. This isn't something cities could or should solve by switching to (expensive) desalination to effectively subsidize agriculture. Most notably, alfalfa is mentioned here as farmers are going to have to switch to less water-intensive crops. Decreasing alfalfa production may well impact the ability to feed cattle. In the short term, that's…
> This isn't something cities could or should solve by switching to (expensive) desalination In 2015, the Southern Nevada Water Authority completed a "3rd straw" into Lake Mead to safeguard water availability, at a cost of $817M [1], which is enough to cover the power costs to desalinate Nevada's CO river allotment for ~23 years. It's been a while since I looked into it, but I once ran the numbers and the cost of tha…
The ocean is traditionally the answer to both these needs. Nevada is not a good candidate for a desalination plant.
At least this article notes that the vast majority of water usage is agriculture. This isn't something cities could or should solve by switching to (expensive) desalination to effectively subsidize agriculture. Most notably, alfalfa is mentioned here as farmers are going to have to switch to less water-intensive crops. Decreasing alfalfa production may well impact the ability to feed cattle. In the short term, that's…
A substantial portion of alfalfa is exported to China [0]. So, at the very least that portion can be eliminated without any impact on domestic US cattle feed.
[0] https://hayandforage.com/article-3388-thank-china-for-record...
The answer to this problem lies here: “Entsminger pointed out that roughly 80% of the river’s flow is used for agriculture, and most of that for thirsty crops like alfalfa, which is mainly grown for cattle, both in the U.S. and overseas.” The simple solution would be to raise prices on water such that it disincentivizes growing water hungry crops than alfalfa for example. The west’s water crisis is less about cities…
The reason this doesn’t happen is that farmers/farming lobbies have a lot of political power, especially in rural districts and no politician wants to be painted as anti-farming interests.