REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Lake Mead water ... What will California do when it's gone??
- Thread starter PPK96754
- Start date
We've been monitoring the situation for at least 7 years. We'll keep monitoring it, that way it'll stay monitored. When we try action it ends in failure.
Brother if it ain’t the floods that get ya, the fires and dehydration will
funnysad how this thread mirrors the inherent dichotomy of the human vs nature dilemma. being of the earth our thought processes and decisions should be rooted in what best for the earth, but we all know that is hardly the case.
human civilisation has flourished in what has been a relatively rainfall abundant period in geologic history. perhaps the pendulum has begun to swing the other way. perhaps aided by elevated co2 levels. perhaps not. but when talking heads freak on last years drought or the past 3,4 or 5 dry years its hard not to roll your eyes at the lack of prrspective humans display when the environment runs counter to human needs.
i think balidiot pretty much nails here-
human civilisation has flourished in what has been a relatively rainfall abundant period in geologic history. perhaps the pendulum has begun to swing the other way. perhaps aided by elevated co2 levels. perhaps not. but when talking heads freak on last years drought or the past 3,4 or 5 dry years its hard not to roll your eyes at the lack of prrspective humans display when the environment runs counter to human needs.
i think balidiot pretty much nails here-
Last edited:
Except it’s not 3-5 years. It’s a 20 year trend only getting worse.
Drought Makes its Home on the Range – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet
Climate change is making droughts more frequent, severe, and pervasive. NASA satellites provide data about water availability to the U.S. Drought Monitor, which helps farmers prepare for drought, determining where and what to feed their livestock.
Last edited:
We need to get control of our emotions here. First of all, Brian Fuchs' project can't really tell you anything about drought from groundwater levels unless you know the rate of human consumption of groundwater, which has to be calibrated and measured. You can tell the rate of rainfall in an area from those other satellites (Aqua and Terra) if you carefully carve-out irrigated agricultural zones, and then the uncertainty would be large. If you used the rate of human consumption in agricultural areas along with the rate of rainfall, the With that large uncertainty, you might be able to calculate something about drought from GRACE-FO but - again - the uncertainty would be large/huge.Except it’s not 3-5 years. It’s a 20 year trend only getting worse.
Drought Makes its Home on the Range – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet
Climate change is making droughts more frequent, severe, and pervasive. NASA satellites provide data about water availability to the U.S. Drought Monitor, which helps farmers prepare for drought, determining where and what to feed their livestock.climate.nasa.gov
How long have they had satellites like this in orbit to train their climate model?
What are we waiting for? Wouldn't this get bi-partisan support? The right gets to save a few golf courses and the left a few endangered species?
We could fill Lake Powell in less than a year with an aqueduct from Mississippi River
Such a project would be less difficult than other aqueducts and pipelines already built.
www.desertsun.com
This is good.
To me, killing off agriculture is foolish in the extreme. We're already seeing global competition for food and famine is a regime-ending event. That said, I don't see how there's enough water to keep watering all of those fields unless we switch to crops that grow in almost a desert. Way above my pay grade.
To me, killing off agriculture is foolish in the extreme. We're already seeing global competition for food and famine is a regime-ending event. That said, I don't see how there's enough water to keep watering all of those fields unless we switch to crops that grow in almost a desert. Way above my pay grade.
As a native Californian, I suggest we reexamine the crops that we grow - duh. Any crop that is super water intensive - like onions, potatoes and almonds, .. figure out plan B for these and other thirsty crops. More so, shut down all the massive marijuana grows.
Desalination plants have a litany of issues, but are needed.
Desalination plants have a litany of issues, but are needed.
I'm surprised with all the federal infrastructure dollars floating around and the governors constant chatter about California having a budget surplus no one has come up with a plan to fund the repair, expansion, or new reservoirs. This is one of those things that should be a federal priority given the countries reliance on California for things like food, tech, transportation.
The last thing this state should worry about is water and power. It's almost like neglecting both is a purposeful act for a ends justifies the means equation.
Question, can the California govt really dictate to farmers what they can and cannot grow? A future without almonds does sound a hell of a lot better than a future without showers.
Hypothetically, if we doubled the reservoirs, how long could we supply California under current usage and for how many years? Seems like we don't know how long this drought is going to last.
Cue the talking points about the
Probably not. "Right to Farm" acts are pretty much universal across the states and would be a legal shitshow to challenge. However they can certainly tax water extraction from wells and divert deliveries to those who do not have established water rights.
"we" don't grow crops, sole proprietors llc's and corporations ( ie private enterprises) grow crops. and while california govt has some serious entitlement issues, dictating ag what crops they can grow shouldn't become the next expression of sacramentos overreach.
what a farm decides to grow is a private business decision balancing production costs and potential gains. farmers dont grow almonds because they love growing almonds (though i am sure some do) they grow them because it yields the most profit for their acreage.
