Quite 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.
The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
191–200 of 216 posts
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
Crystal Springs isnt anywhere near Yosemite if that is what you are referencing. That being said it supposedly was gorgeous and almost as amazing before being filled with water
Not Crystal Springs. Hetch Hetchy, the damning of which legendarily caused John Muir, the founder of the Sierra Club, to die of a broken heart.
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
Owens valley, where LA "steals" water from, is on the eastern side of the Sierras. NorCal, including Sacramento, is on the western side of the Sierras. So unless they planned on pumping the water over/under the mountain range that surrounds it in every direction except for towards LA, that water was never available for any NorCal city to use.
they are saying that LA takes water from sources which would otherwise drain into the sacramento and san joaquin river delta. The video from this post mentions the California State Water Project which takes water from the Feather River (Oroville Dam) and distributes it along the Western edge of the central valley South to Bakersfield where it is then pumped over the mountains both towards Los Angeles and further East…
Additionally, if you're focused on the 6% (out of 11% total) water allocation that goes towards supporting the infrastructure of 22million people over the 50% that goes into non-optimal agriculture (almonds, for instance) in-between the two...then you're missing the forest for the trees, my friend.
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#194I was in Owens River Gorge last week, it's a very interesting place. It has some of the tallest single pitch rock climbing in the world, sometimes requiring 80M ropes: https://www.mountainproject.com/area/105843226/owens-river-g...
Not far away are the world's most photogenic boulders, the Buttermilks, and when I visited (from Canada) I was surprised to find that the boulders are on LA municipal property and the pipe that takes Owen's River's water over the Sierras is nearby.
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#195"Well There's Your Problem" on the collapse of the St Francis Dam, mentioned in Grady's video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxLgM1vnuUA Also I love when they refer to it as the "_First_ California Water Wars" in a grim realization of the future of water scarcity in the West
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
> could save up to 63 billion gallons of water annually To put it into perspective, 63 billion gallons is 193340 acre-feet, which is 0.5% of california's water use (a bit under 40 millions acre-feet). That's a tenth the water consumption of lawns, which is 1/15th the water consumption of agriculture.
But how many football fields?
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#197Quite 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.
The graphical aids in practical engineering videos are quite well done, especially when he creates scale models in the garage. You are missing out if you only read it, if you can afford to spend the time watching.
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#198"Well There's Your Problem" on the collapse of the St Francis Dam, mentioned in Grady's video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxLgM1vnuUA Also I love when they refer to it as the "_First_ California Water Wars" in a grim realization of the future of water scarcity in the West
There is no water scarcity in California, only misallocation. The vast majority of our water is heavily subsidized and used for agriculture, and a substantial amount of those crops are grown for export, yet agricultural exports makes up an insignificant part of California's economy. We could end all California water scarcity talk today, with no impact to food availability for Americans, by curtailing the internationa…
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the up-front costs of massive desalination Desalination is dominated by operating costs.
Correct it's massively energy intensive to filter the salt out the newest best ideas still use ~2 KWh/m3 of water and that's a lab system in perdue that batches the process instead of having it run continuously which is why current RO desalination systems require so much energy.
Am I alone in thinking that doesn't sound like a lot? That would be something on the order of 10% of what major cities charge for tap water?
Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild
#200PS: and it is NOT about software engineering LOL!