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

Big water cutbacks ordered amid Colorado River shortage

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 211 posts

Re: Big water cutbacks ordered amid Colorado River shortage

#61

Post by willcipriano »

vwoolf wrote: post #36
jmyeet wrote: post #6

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…

The desalination plant solutions a "let's do both." https://californiaglobe.com/articles/california-coastal-comm... Charge market prices for water and build desalination. Create abundance.

Idea I've had, solar power a desalination plant, pumping the water into a pumped storage reservoir, then water crops from it at night to reduce evaporation and produce energy when the sun isn't shining.

Re: Big water cutbacks ordered amid Colorado River shortage

#62

Post by bombcar »

newaccount2021 wrote: post #12
no_wizard wrote: post #3

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?

That would take 10-20 years to build out...what will you do next year?

Bottled water. Very big bottles.

Re: Big water cutbacks ordered amid Colorado River shortage

#63

Post by thepasswordis »

ar813 wrote: post #10

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…

Here's the worst part: we aren't even growing this for ourselves. These are farms owned by the saudis, and we're growing it and exporting it.

Re: Big water cutbacks ordered amid Colorado River shortage

#64

Post by swatcoder »

stickfigure wrote: post #53
swatcoder wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The simple solution > The obvious answer This community seems like its at its best when it expresses humble curiosity and its worst when it shuts the door on learning by oversimplifying deeply complex matters as though nobody else had the sense to look straight at them. Water rights carry a legacy of centuries of personal and political history and thousands of competing interests. The levers with which to control p…

> Water rights carry a legacy of centuries of personal and political history and thousands of competing interests. So did slavery, and we managed to get rid of that. Doing the right thing is really not that complicated, it just requires political will.

That may not be the example you want to use for something accomplished completely or without complication.

Re: Big water cutbacks ordered amid Colorado River shortage

#65

Post by shagie »

thehappypm wrote: post #56
ar813 wrote: post #10

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…

How is something a cow eats possibly a cash crop?

Cash crop is defined as something that you sell rather than use yourself.

Corn, harvested and sold as corn is a cash crop. Corn, harvested and used to feed your dairy herd is not.

Re: Big water cutbacks ordered amid Colorado River shortage

#66

Post by bruce511 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #33
joshuaheard wrote: post #28

Too bad the California Coastal Commission just denied the permit for a desalinization plant in Huntington Beach at the site of a decommissioned steam plant and reusing some of its infrastructure. It would have provided water to several Southern California cities. https://californiaglobe.com/articles/california-coastal-comm...

> would have provided water to several Southern California cities It blows my mind that it's simpler to build, in one of the most water-blessed parts of our planet, a desalination plant, than it is to get farmers to quit growing literal fodder. Eighty percent of California's water goes to agriculture. Eighty percent.

80% sounds like a lot, but is it really? Is it a lot based on land area? Ie is 80% of california land dedicated to agriculture? (honest question, I've no idea.)

What about per-species? Sounds like humans are getting a full 20% of the water, all other species (plant and animal) get the rest. And I feel like you're arguing that humans should get a bigger slice?

What should the right % be? Presumably not 0. Agriculture after all produces food for same humans. So it doesn't seem like closing agriculture is the right option.

So perhaps choosing agriculture that consumes less water? That seems reasonable - but there are diminishing returns in that direction. Sure rice seems unnecessary, but what about almonds? I'm no farmer but does it mean they should all grow the most efficient crop? A monoculture?

Ultimately is the real problem just too many humans in a place with little water? Should humans then supplement that water via say desalination? Sure its more expensive but maybe that helps reduce population growth?

Re: Big water cutbacks ordered amid Colorado River shortage

#67

Post by s0rce »

vwoolf wrote: post #36
jmyeet wrote: post #6

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…

The desalination plant solutions a "let's do both." https://californiaglobe.com/articles/california-coastal-comm... Charge market prices for water and build desalination. Create abundance.

Who pays for it though? Market price is way below desalination price.

Re: Big water cutbacks ordered amid Colorado River shortage

#68

Post by pfdietz »

googlryas wrote: post #46
swatcoder wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The simple solution > The obvious answer This community seems like its at its best when it expresses humble curiosity and its worst when it shuts the door on learning by oversimplifying deeply complex matters as though nobody else had the sense to look straight at them. Water rights carry a legacy of centuries of personal and political history and thousands of competing interests. The levers with which to control p…

What is so complex about eminent domain? Just force the sale of water rights back to the government for a fair price. It will sting a little bit, but sting far less than pretending like only 15% of the water in the western US actually exists.

Or, just allow farmers to sell their water to the highest bidder. The Coase theorem to the rescue.

Re: Big water cutbacks ordered amid Colorado River shortage

#69

Post by remarkEon »

stickfigure wrote: post #53
swatcoder wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The simple solution > The obvious answer This community seems like its at its best when it expresses humble curiosity and its worst when it shuts the door on learning by oversimplifying deeply complex matters as though nobody else had the sense to look straight at them. Water rights carry a legacy of centuries of personal and political history and thousands of competing interests. The levers with which to control p…

> Water rights carry a legacy of centuries of personal and political history and thousands of competing interests. So did slavery, and we managed to get rid of that. Doing the right thing is really not that complicated, it just requires political will.

>So did slavery, and we managed to get rid of that.

... with a civil war.

Doing the right thing is often quite complicated, and comes with severe costs and injury to some party somewhere.

Re: Big water cutbacks ordered amid Colorado River shortage

#70

Post by bcrosby95 »

jmyeet wrote: post #6

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…

Desalination isn't that much more expensive than reservoir water. I wish urban areas would just build 'em and look at farmers and the rest of the country and say "OK now what?"
Post reply on HN