Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get that it is neat but it's hardly the Hoover dam is it?
No, it's significantly more complex.
More complex for less benefit is just losing two different ways.
The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
181–190 of 216 posts
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are environmental and financial concerns https://calmatters.org/environment/2022/05/california-desali... I don't understand the financial concern at all. How could increasing the water supply increase the price? It only makes sense to me if the price is artificially low right now. Environmental damage by a desalinization plant couldn't possibly be worse than overdrawing the acquifer -- the defacto solution.
Water is normally "free" from mother nature. Desalinated water is not free as it cost energy to get the clean water. Even if there's a pump to get water from aquifers into the water system, that still rounds to free compared to the cost of running a desalination plant.
That is why I said "artificially low." As there is a water shortage, the current price should justifiably be higher. Instead we will simply run out or damage the acquifer by saltwater intrusion.
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#183Am curious, how have the shade balls been working out in terms of maintenance, coating wear, leeched microplastics, containment (so they don't wind up in oceans), etc? In retrospect, did it make sense compared to the $250M or so uplift it would have taken to build a conventional roof?
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm wondering why california isn't investing in more desalination for SoCal, especially for LA. Because California has plenty of water for residents. What California doesn't have is plenty of water for agribusiness. And the agribusinesses do NOT want people paying close attention as all the valid solutions to water problems are basically "shut down agribusinesses in arid areas".
people are always trying to conserve water, and droughts have been a plague for the past few decades. Even if the agriculture is taking up all the water, it doesn't change how water scarcity is a a very real part of socal life. You don't have to shutdown agriculture elsewhere, and it is a vital part of california's economy, that's just a lazy solution. I can get behind getting the agriculture industry to finance part…
> In the unlikely event california becomes independent, water rights will be a big deal too
This is all hypothetical of course but the logical eastern border of an independent state centered in what's now California would be near Denver for precisely this reason.
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#185Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think you're wrong. Every time someone says we can't do high speed rail it makes me very sad. And as far as Seattle goes... my commute is substantially affected by the I-5 closures. It's somewhat shocking to me that we allow infrastructure to decay as much as we do. I'd be happy about the light rail expansion if they weren't talking about delaying the Ballard line indefinitely. :(
Can't do highspeed rail because it's too impractical and expensive, while we're spending a west coast highspeed rail network worth of money on the least popular war in US history.
There are no environmental impact studies on wildlife when you drop a bomb.
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#186Why is that picture an extreme recolor of the original? https://images.nebula.tv/5ba7e541-f57c-44cc-a91d-6a89bad158d...
Thank you, I was so confused by the obvious clickbait! I love Grady's videos, but yikes.
I said this in another comment, but I feel it's edited to look like water he uses in his garage demos with that blue glitter.
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#187Looking at what Tehran is facing (not related to the war, water shortage), I'm wondering why california isn't investing in more desalination for SoCal, especially for LA. I see some here: https://lynceans.org/all-posts/status-of-desalination-plants... But there are only a few in SoCal and they're for smaller communities like carlsbad or santa barbara. So it is there and it is working for some, why not more? naturally…
Because the economics of desalination require locking in long term purchase/production rates at prices that dwarf current and other sources of water.
SD's Poseidon desal is projected at ~$3.7k per acre ft for 2026 whereas SDCWA SWP water is ~$1.5-1.9k acre ft.
Leak fixes, groundwater recharge, local aquifers, water banking, potable reuse, etc. are all more economical means of bolstering water supply.
A big factor in determining desalination placement in the region are the groundwater basins. Limited size and availability makes the case for desalination as means for resiliency. Another is that situating adjacent to power plants so as to use their already coastally degraded intakes/outfalls. Doheny is to use subsurface slant wells for intakes, but it's also lower output too.
As for LA. they're working on getting their potable reuse plants/projects up and running. The largest indirect potable reuse plant in the world has been operating in OC for ~18 years. Lower operating costs than desalination, reduced wastewater discharge, and reduced coastal impact.
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#188Reminds me of when I was talking to friends about the film Chinatown and I referred to it as a movie about the California water war and someone else said “dude, that’s not what that film is about”.
We were both correct.
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#189NYC aqueduct from the Catskills is wild too, especially if you like the effect on NYC pizza and bagels.
Great articles have been written on the engineering but I like this one from 1909 showing the perspective of the time:
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#190Quite interesting.
This is also why every video needs a transcript: that took me 6min to read, about 1/4 of the video's running time.