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

Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?

desertsun.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 347 posts

Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?

#201

Post by rightbyte »

MomoXenosaga wrote: post #163
atoav wrote: post #136

Before looking at the water source, wouldn't doing the bare minimum to control the water sinks would be in order? I mean, we have harder regulations on water useage in the alps, and this is a water rich area where only 3% of the a available water is used. The truth is that the water a land will provide is limited. And of course you could expand this water by also taking the water from another land, but maybe pitting…

Most of the water is used by industry, I always find it amusing when we pretend 5 minute showers will have an impact. And building all those chip foundries in Texas isn't going to help.

Wont foundries circulate the water anyways?

Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?

#202

Post by geraldwhen »

dagw wrote: post #183
jollybean wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So much for the bigotry. Europeans are almost as fat as Americans and White Europeans are basically the same as White Europeans in that regard. I've lived all over both continents and yes, Europeans live in very small flats. Energy is prohibitively expensive. I enjoy European culture a bit more (both have advantages), but in North America you have the choice generally to live big or small. Not everyone needs a big ho…

but in North America you have the choice generally to live big or small How is that different in Europe? For the price of a one room flat in the centre of the nice part of town you can equally get a nice big house with a garden way out of town if that is what you prefer. Sure US houses tend to be bigger on average, but it's not like you can't buy a big house on the cheap if that is what you want. You just have to be…

You can have large homes close to work (I can count on my hand the number of people I know with a commute longer than 30 mins.

Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?

#203

Post by pyrale »

droffel wrote: post #158
dawnerd wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We could also start mandating the use of reclaimed water in more residential settings. Seems most places if they do it only water some planters and medians. Needs to be code to run reclaimed water to new construction so it’s a least an option in the future. A lot of cleaned water is just dumped right to sea. So wasteful.

Is residential water use really the problem? Relative to agricultural use of water in California, residential water use is a drop in the bucket. Agricultural use of water on its own exceeds the maximum use of water the state can support long run. I can understand the desire to make an impact as an individual, but even dropping residential water use to zero won't do much at all for the problem as it stands. It's a dis…

> Is residential water use really the problem?

Having no residential water restriction certainly doesn't help voters understand that water availability is a problem.

Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?

#204

Post by aaaaaaaaaaab »

jollybean wrote: post #171
markvdb wrote: post #162

Let's compare daily average household domestic water consumption: - where I live: 202l [0] - US: >1135l [1] US household consumption share of total water usage: 12% [1]. Just reducing household usage to 50% more than a random wealthy northwestern European region instead of 560%(!) more equals 10% total water usage savings. That's without even touching agriculture or other water hungry sectors. Aligning usage to be a…

Quoted post unavailable.

Cupboards are made of plywood. Who builds their houses from plywood, Americans or Europeans? :-)

Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?

#205

Post by concordDance »

markvdb wrote: post #162

Let's compare daily average household domestic water consumption: - where I live: 202l [0] - US: >1135l [1] US household consumption share of total water usage: 12% [1]. Just reducing household usage to 50% more than a random wealthy northwestern European region instead of 560%(!) more equals 10% total water usage savings. That's without even touching agriculture or other water hungry sectors. Aligning usage to be a…

> - We only have one earth. It's _ours_ you know, not just yours. And our children's. And our children's children's..."

This makes no sense as a response. Water usage is a local issue where water goes through X rather than Y. Water usage in Pakistan has zero effect on Germany, unlike CO2 emmissions.

If an entire river got diverted to lawns then the effects would only be between the divert point and the sea (in the form of the river nor being available for other people to divert from and animal life not having a river to live in) and even those effects are mostly temporary. Heck, lawn water mostly goes back in to the water table, with the rest evaporating to make clouds to then fall back as rain.

Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?

#206

Post by _8j50 »

_8j50 wrote: post #106
space_fountain wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bonds are a way of printing money, debt in general is how money is printed weirdly enough. And look, maybe our big ideas could focus on something that isn't solvable by just not trying to grow food in the desert or if we absolutely must doing it in a place that doesn't have plenty of land that isn't desert

The problem is places that aren't deserts are national parks, what you call the deserts are multiple entire states! I keep hearing your argument, what is this place that isn't a desert people should be farming and building on? Any place west if the missisipi that hasn't already been incorporated, what is it? Why do you insist it isn't solvable?the tech is there, the money is there, the will is there. Do you have a be…

s/dam/same*

Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?

#207

Post by arethuza »

dagw wrote: post #183
jollybean wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So much for the bigotry. Europeans are almost as fat as Americans and White Europeans are basically the same as White Europeans in that regard. I've lived all over both continents and yes, Europeans live in very small flats. Energy is prohibitively expensive. I enjoy European culture a bit more (both have advantages), but in North America you have the choice generally to live big or small. Not everyone needs a big ho…

but in North America you have the choice generally to live big or small How is that different in Europe? For the price of a one room flat in the centre of the nice part of town you can equally get a nice big house with a garden way out of town if that is what you prefer. Sure US houses tend to be bigger on average, but it's not like you can't buy a big house on the cheap if that is what you want. You just have to be…

Indeed - as someone who moved from a (large) flat in central Edinburgh - if you go one hour out of Edinburgh (which is an easy commute if you go somewhere near a train line) then you get an awful lot more for your money.

A nice single bedroom flat in the centre of Edinburgh is about £400K - that'll get you a pretty nice house with a garden somewhere like Fife.

Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?

#208

Post by morsch »

elbigbad wrote: post #178
benj111 wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do Europeans live in small cupboards? There are energy exporting nations in Europe and they're still more energy efficient than the US. Is Europe also food poor because they experience lower rates of obesity? Is eating yourself to death an expression of freedom and the great American dream? >expansive thinking Yes why don't you take your own advice.

I am in Europe now and am an American, I’ve lived in various major cities in USA including east and west coast. I have also lived in a handful of major European cities. So while my opinion is anecdotal still, it’s not uninformed. Comparatively yes, Europeans live in small cupboards by and large. There has to be some data on per capita living spaces between the two though. Largely anecdotally, I’d say people in NYC wh…

Average living area per person in NYC is 50 m2, in Berlin it's 40 m2.

http://urbancalc.com/post/NYC-Residential-Density/

https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/255812/umfrag...

Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?

#209

Post by concordDance »

dagw wrote: post #183
jollybean wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So much for the bigotry. Europeans are almost as fat as Americans and White Europeans are basically the same as White Europeans in that regard. I've lived all over both continents and yes, Europeans live in very small flats. Energy is prohibitively expensive. I enjoy European culture a bit more (both have advantages), but in North America you have the choice generally to live big or small. Not everyone needs a big ho…

but in North America you have the choice generally to live big or small How is that different in Europe? For the price of a one room flat in the centre of the nice part of town you can equally get a nice big house with a garden way out of town if that is what you prefer. Sure US houses tend to be bigger on average, but it's not like you can't buy a big house on the cheap if that is what you want. You just have to be…

Average US housing has 3x the floor space and land space as a British house. The Brits are very poor by US standards.

Re: Time for Army Corps of Engineers to investigate moving water West?

#210

Post by feet »

concordDance wrote: post #205
markvdb wrote: post #162

Let's compare daily average household domestic water consumption: - where I live: 202l [0] - US: >1135l [1] US household consumption share of total water usage: 12% [1]. Just reducing household usage to 50% more than a random wealthy northwestern European region instead of 560%(!) more equals 10% total water usage savings. That's without even touching agriculture or other water hungry sectors. Aligning usage to be a…

> - We only have one earth. It's _ours_ you know, not just yours. And our children's. And our children's children's..." This makes no sense as a response. Water usage is a local issue where water goes through X rather than Y. Water usage in Pakistan has zero effect on Germany, unlike CO2 emmissions. If an entire river got diverted to lawns then the effects would only be between the divert point and the sea (in the fo…

I understand the point you are making about areas that are far apart, but in some cases it really isn't local. The Colorado river is one good example.
Post reply on HN