OT: CA drought

[Louis]

Sounds like things are going from bad to worse.

Californians, how have you been affected, if at all, and are you reducing water usage in any way (either involuntarily or by choice)?

We had about three super-dry months a few summers ago and it did lots of damage to gardens and trees, but nothing as long as out west.

Good luck in the coming months and during fire season.

[akelman]

Have you seen this (http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2014/01/case-californias-disappearing-snow/8108/), Louis? A picture is worth a thousand words.

As for personal impact, the riding has been fantastic. But unless it rains all of this month and next, we're in for a very hard summer: severe water restrictions, lots of fires, etc.

[jtakeda]

Have you seen this (http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2014/01/case-californias-disappearing-snow/8108/), Louis? A picture is worth a thousand words.

As for personal impact, the riding has been fantastic. But unless it rains all of this month and next, we're in for a very hard summer: severe water restrictions, lots of fires, etc.

+1.

The riding has been phenomenal but I'm sure we're all going to pay for it soon enough.

[hummus_aquinas]

if it's yellow, I am personally letting it mellow.

[MattTuck]

Yeah, this would have been the year for a winter cycling trip to CA. If you believe in 'reversion to the mean', I would not be booking a cycling vacation there next winter.

[MattTuck]

And that is not to say that this isn't serious. Just an observation related to cycling. The reality is that we'll probably all pay for it, since a huge percentage of US agriculture happens in CA, not to mention the risk of wildfires and damage to the environment and property.

[oldpotatoe]

And that is not to say that this isn't serious. Just an observation related to cycling. The reality is that we'll probably all pay for it, since a huge percentage of US agriculture happens in CA, not to mention the risk of wildfires and damage to the environment and property.

Not a hydro engineer but what's involved in very large scale desalinization?

Pocket nuke powerplants providing the power? Isn't a lot of the water in the Middle East from desalinization? Ain't gonna help this year tho.

[blessthismess]

Rained a little last night and off and on this morning. Dry forcast for the next few days but hey it's a start

[ecsnsmb]

Raining here is Napa as I type. Finally. Been super interesting to see the responses to the draught from the wineries out here. We desperately needed the rain. Things are starting to bloom already... Going to be an odd harvest if this keeps up. Our cattle are also completely grass fed, which up to this point hasn't been an issue but we've needed to purchase grass now, so expect some of the beef prices to rise!

[fogrider]

Not a hydro engineer but what's involved in very large scale desalinization?

Pocket nuke powerplants providing the power? Isn't a lot of the water in the Middle East from desalinization? Ain't gonna help this year tho.

when you consider how long it took to rebuild the bay bridge after the '89 earthquake, and they pretty much knew where it had to go. what do you think it would take to just get the public on board with a new nuke power plant? oh yeah, there is a couple of earthquake faults that run through parts of California.

then the desal plant needs to be by the coast...pretty much the high valued properties and national parkland all up and down the coast. so this is not a technical response but just the politics would make it pretty challenging.

we'll see how the high speed rail goes.

[oldpotatoe]

when you consider how long it took to rebuild the bay bridge after the '89 earthquake, and they pretty much knew where it had to go. what do you think it would take to just get the public on board with a new nuke power plant? oh yeah, there is a couple of earthquake faults that run through parts of California.

then the desal plant needs to be by the coast...pretty much the high valued properties and national parkland all up and down the coast. so this is not a technical response but just the politics would make it pretty challenging.

we'll see how the high speed rail goes.

I get all that but it doesn't rain and some communities lose their drinking water source, what happens then? Not arguing, just don't know.

Truck it in? Bunch of bottled water? It sounds like a 100 year drought.

[Louis]

It sounds like a 100 year drought.

The phrase I saw in the NYT was "500 year drought."

Edit - here it is:

"We are on track for having the worst drought in 500 years,” said B. Lynn Ingram, a professor of earth and planetary sciences at the University of California, Berkeley.

[Elefantino]

Yellow/mellow/brown/down, of course.

Buckets in the shower and a barrel on the deck, for watering the plants.

Brick in the toilet that isn't low-flow.

Navy showers.

Rain dances.

[Saxon]

One of the local communities here has gone over to tapping wells for city water and they say they can get about 30% of local water needs from the wells. Folsom lake is alarmingly low and nor cal has already let some southern cal areas know water won't be forthcoming. The storm door does seem to be opening with a larger storm due (hopefully) later in the week. I can see the Sierras from my balcony and there is snow up there now (but not much). When the water runs out, we all pack up and head east! :eek:

[paulh]

Recycling. Toilet to tap. Get used to it.

[Scooper]

San Francisco averages 50 gallons per capita per day, half of the 100 gallons per capita per day average for California overall. We're doing our share.

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/California-drought-S-F-leads-state-in-water-5194523.php

San Diego per capita consumption is 143 gallons per day, Fresno is 211, and Sacramento is a whopping 280.

People need to get a clue.

[Louis]

Overall, I bet agriculture uses way more than households. (don't know what the actual numbers are)

[cookietom]

I used to work for Water Dept/Cloud Seeding for many years. I started used the rain gutter for grey water last year. I am sure there are many people in Ca do not know what the word " Drought" means. So just pray for rain,,,

[Louis]

I am sure there are many people in Ca do not know what the word " Drought" means.

One way to fix that would be to have a sliding scale for the price of water - not too expensive for small quantities (so poor folks can afford it) but then jack it up once you get past, say, 25 gal per person in the household per day.

[cat6]

for OP...here in LA my GF and I are doing what we can but still see sprinklers running around the hood at night when we're out walking our dogs. Have made some complaints for water waste (there's an iPhone app to report).

Now for slight thread drift.

I used to work for Water Dept/Cloud Seeding for many years.

cookietom, I've seen some folks on social media talking about geo-engineering responsible for causing drought. Basically opposite-cloud seeding. you'd prob have some good insight. Some of the videos and information circulating are kind of interesting in a conspiracy theorist kind of way. any opinion?

[vqdriver]

Not a hydro engineer but what's involved in very large scale desalinization?

Pocket nuke powerplants providing the power? Isn't a lot of the water in the Middle East from desalinization? Ain't gonna help this year tho.

It's already been proposed and I believe an EIR is already in the works for the San onofre location. Co located power and existing inlet/outlet makes this much more real. Israelis are supposed to be real good at this and I believe the engineers on their systems are advising. Fingers crossed.

[Steve in SLO]

Here on the Central Coast, we have been having fantastic ridiing weather, but precious little rain. We are finally getting our second day of rain in about three months. As far as our groundwater is concerned, agriculture, esp vineyards take a huge amount of water from the aquifers, and are our biggest water users. I foresee a lot of brown plants yards, and increasing water costs. Large scale desalinization is not really an option, so if we get to that point I imagine large-scale importation of potable water would be our best bet. Let's hope we don't get to that point. It was worse than this in the 70s, at least so far...

[Louis]

for OP...here in LA my GF and I are doing what we can but still see sprinklers running around the hood at night when we're out walking our dogs.

I'm not really a Milton Friedman "free-market only" type, but this tells me that the price of water is too low, especially given the circumstances. They need to jack that up during a drought.

[Louis]

As far as our groundwater is concerned, agriculture, esp vineyards take a huge amount of water from the aquifers, and are our biggest water users.

If the drought continues much longer there's probably going to be a massive battle over how this is allocated. You can only pump so much from the ground, especially if you aren't getting any rain to replenish the aquifers.

[Scooper]

Overall, I bet agriculture uses way more than households. (don't know what the actual numbers are)

In California, urban water use is ~10 million acre-feet while agricultural water use is between 30 and 35 million acre-feet. The time period isn't specified, but I think it's per year.

http://www.lao.ca.gov/2008/rsrc/water_primer/water_primer_102208.aspx

Based on estimates and the studies by the United States Census Bureau, the population of California in 2013 is estimated to be 38,041,430, which makes it the state with the largest population.

[Louis]

http://www.lao.ca.gov/2008/rsrc/water_primer/water_primer_102208.aspx

Interesting link - thanks.

As one might expect for something this big, it's a complicated topic.

[Scooper]

Interesting link - thanks.

As one might expect for something this big, it's a complicated topic.

Yes; it's very complex with lots of special interest lobbyists trying to get a bigger share of a scarce resource at a cheaper price for their clients.

[joosttx]

Nothing is cheap in California.....

[bikingshearer]

California has been through this before, and will go through it again. I recall the drought in the late 70s, and some of the incredible divisiveness it caused (i.e. NorCal types doing some serious conserving while too many - not all but too many - SoCal types continued to use hoses to wash off their driveways. The political fallout was something to behold; the Peripheral Canal issue became a referendum on Southern California here in the Bay Area. While SoCal voted on it for its perceived merits, NorCal and especially the Bay Area took as a chance to say a giant "f--- you" to our, er, friends to the south, with SF and Alameda Counties voting something like 90% "no" on the ballot intiative. (For those of you not familiar with SF, Oakland and Berkeley politcs, it is pretty much impossible to get 90% of the populace to agree that the sun comes up in the east, so this was a very rare moment of unity.)

It is not at all clear about the political fallout this time, other than urban/suburban users, agribusiness and environemtalists will all fight like hell for their share. But there will be rationing, more severe in some places than others, and we will muddle though. Within five to ten years, and probably less, we will have two or three El Nino winters of monsoon-like rains with dramatic video of seaside houses falling into the ocean, flooding on a number of the state's rivers, some idiots drowning trying to kayak the Los Angeles River (it happens pretty much every time the water flows in that concrete-lined, catch-basin marked watercourse) and the like. Such is the cycle in most of California.

I do not to mean to make overly-light of the situation, and I certainly believe that improved conservation measures are the order of the day. My point is that this kind of pattern is nothing new out here, it has been dealt with before (sometimes well, sometimes not so well) and it will end. Not this year, though, and maybe not for a couple more years. But it will end, and while some people will be badly hurt (especially what few small farmer/agriculture operations still exist), but the vast majority of Californians will be no worse than inconvenienced.

[beeatnik]

Short memories. Drought and rolling blackouts. Once they pass, they fade from memory. At this point, the media is finally beginning to address the issue mainly because politicians (Gov Brown) are finally responding. That said, very few people care and very few people have changed their daily habits. Fortunately, during the last great drought, most homes went to low flush toilets. True story.

[Jaq]

San Francisco averages 50 gallons per capita per day, half of the 100 gallons per capita per day average for California overall. We're doing our share.

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/California-drought-S-F-leads-state-in-water-5194523.php

San Diego per capita consumption is 143 gallons per day, Fresno is 211, and Sacramento is a whopping 280.

People need to get a clue.

Yes, people need to get a clue: that human beings living in hot, dry cities with more lawns, agriculture, and industry (like Sacramento, Fresno, and San Diego) use significantly more water than people living in cool, wet, concrete jungles like Frisco.

The only thing people in Frisco really seem capable of doing with extraordinary consistency is being holier-than-thou.

[saab2000]

My first post here on this thread: Can someone tell me why CA doesn't have solar powered water desalination plants?

They need water. There's an endless supply of water. There's an endless supply of sunshine. This seems like the biggest no-brainer ever.

[Climb01742]

i grew up in portland oregon, and though we got lots of rain for 9 months of the year, summers could be essentially rainless. as a consequence, most people had yards with not so much grass but lots of ground covered by bark mulch. many yards were, basically, zero moisture gardening.

i mention this just to raise a question: i've always been baffled by our country's seeming love affair with huge, green, grassy lawns that have sprinklers running even when it's raining.

i'd bet in the not too distant future, lawn watering will be one of the first things to go in many, many places. here, for example, lawn watering was restricted to alternate days.

[PQJ]

My first post here on this thread: Can someone tell me why CA doesn't have solar powered water desalination plants?

They need water. There's an endless supply of water. There's an endless supply of sunshine. This seems like the biggest no-brainer ever.

Technology not quite there, I think. Yields on solar panels are getting much better but still a ways to go.

(Someone who actually knows something about solar power should feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.)

[Mr. Pink]

i grew up in portland oregon, and though we got lots of rain for 9 months of the year, summers could be essentially rainless. as a consequence, most people had yards with not so much grass but lots of ground covered by bark mulch. many yards were, basically, zero moisture gardening.

i mention this just to raise a question: i've always been baffled by our country's seeming love affair with huge, green, grassy lawns that have sprinklers running even when it's raining.

i'd bet in the not too distant future, lawn watering will be one of the first things to go in many, many places. here, for example, lawn watering was restricted to alternate days.


First time I ever flew into Vegas, I found the sight of little green lawns suddenly appearing as we descended over the distant burbs near the airport very comical. You know, stinking desert, stinking desert, nothing, nothing, then, suddenly, little houses with their little square of green. Visiting aliens would be confused.

[Mr. Pink]

Short memories. Drought and rolling blackouts. Once they pass, they fade from memory. At this point, the media is finally beginning to address the issue mainly because politicians (Gov Brown) are finally responding. That said, very few people care and very few people have changed their daily habits. Fortunately, during the last great drought, most homes went to low flush toilets. True story.

Doubtful it will last long. Denver had a brush with severe rationing and worst case scenarios just recently, but, since that drought pretty much ended, especially after this big snow winter, which will fill their supplies for a year or two, I hear nothing about plans to use water responsibly now. Unfortunately, when the next drought hits, that massive sprawl in the foothills up and down 25 will be even larger, with that many more MacMansions with five bathrooms in each and a pool in every backyard.

Most don't react well to natural disasters (which this is) with future planning. Come to the Jersey Shore. Building has continued in all towns, and many are building back up on the shifting sands that Sandy inundated and are extremely vulnerable to the next storm, which will hit eventually. And Congress just rolled back the modifications to Federal flood insurance they just passed after Katrina, so you and I will be supporting beachside development with our tax dollars paying for cheap insurance for those that are rich and/or foolish enough to build there. SanFrancisco immediatly started building right back up after the 1906 earthquake with no thought for the next one, which will hurt that place, sooner or later. Collective amnesia.

[CunegoFan]

Technology not quite there, I think. Yields on solar panels are getting much better but still a ways to go.

(Someone who actually knows something about solar power should feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.)

It does not seem to me that solar panels would be necessary. A lot of California is in a unique position. Not far beyond the mild climate of the coast is fiery inland. So some sort of solar powered evaporator/condensor would be effective. It would have to be done on an immense scale with canals to bring sea water and reservoirs to hold fresh water. Environmentalists would freak out about the area where salt was reintroduced into the ocean.

A question I had about cloud seeding: How are the effects on states to the east handled? If California is made artificially wetter by forcing rain then states to the east will be made artificially dryer, and those states are already very dry.

[Mr. Pink]

Yes, people need to get a clue: that human beings living in hot, dry cities with more lawns, agriculture, and industry (like Sacramento, Fresno, and San Diego) use significantly more water than people living in cool, wet, concrete jungles like Frisco.

The only thing people in Frisco really seem capable of doing with extraordinary consistency is being holier-than-thou.

Sorry, but cities, wherever they are, are much more efficient users of energy and water than the suburban sprawl that so many in America now live in. That's why they won't die.
Look what just happened in Atlanta. Two inches of snow, and paralyzed. The politicians and voters have just been concerned with establishing their little suburban paradises, bit by bit, with no regard to how they should plan for a simple little weather event like that. Sad.

[Saint Vitus]

It's already been proposed and I believe an EIR is already in the works for the San onofre location. Co located power and existing inlet/outlet makes this much more real.

Forget anything to do with SONGS, the site is mothballed and awaiting decommissioning. I can pretty much guarantee nothing will happen there for the next 50 years. I think you are thinking of the old plant in Carlsbad maybe?

Desalination is not the answer and here's some cogent reasons: http://www.yesmagazine.org/planet/dirty-pricey-and-obsolete-why-desalination-is-not-worth-its-salt

The problem with desal is the energy needed to make it happen, realize that energy requires gobs of water:

http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/images/ce/10-Things-Figure-2.PNG

And then there's the problem of the salt and what to do with it all...

Its conservation, reclamation and recycling that are what's needed. The morons in San Diego that labeled water recycling "Toilet to Tap" should be taken to task. 10 years of effort to bring it a reality here were thrown away, now it'll take another 10 years to bring it online when the A-OK is given (whenever that'll be...).

A far as the issue of SoCal water use, I blame all the people moving here from places where lawns are the norm, it's a f$%@#g desert here keep that 5h!t back in Kansas or New Jersey!

[bart998]

I'm letting my lawn die and only drinking beer from out-of-state.

[vqdriver]

Forget anything to do with SONGS, the site is mothballed and awaiting decommissioning. I can pretty much guarantee nothing will happen there for the next 50 years. I think you are thinking of the old plant in Carlsbad maybe?




looks like you're right. got it mixed up with this http://carlsbaddesal.com/

[1centaur]

I mention this just to raise a question: i've always been baffled by our country's seeming love affair with huge, green, grassy lawns that have sprinklers running even when it's raining.
.

I read many people similarly baffled, but the conversations would go better if we just accept that this is what people prefer. The people have voted and lawns won. To my eyes, zero moisture gardens are hideous and don't exactly work for kids or dogs playing. Big lawns have been emblematic of wealth and leisure for hundreds of years in Europe, so it is not surprising that Americans aspire to that. Whether they can continue to enjoy their lawns is doubtful. It will take a lot of teeth gnashing to change infrastructure around to support gray water irrigation and many (especially those without the means for lawns) will not vote to support such expenditures. If politicos try to capture all that in pricing they will have a fight in wet years and will be tempted to spend the proceeds on their favorite vote getters.

I think I have noted before on this forum that both Massachusetts and California manage to be short of water even though Massachusetts has a lot more precipitation, a lot shorter hot season, a lot fewer pools, much less agriculture, and much less population density. Voters are willing to pay only for the bare minimum of water infrastructure. So as populations we will be dragged to the point of either using less or paying more, slowly and fitfully. Anger about lawns, from both sides, is inevitable in that process.

BTW, those sprinklers are running in the rain because people are too cheap to pay for moisture sensors. That would be an easy first step.

[Anarchist]

Yes, people need to get a clue: that human beings living in hot, dry cities with more lawns, agriculture, and industry (like Sacramento, Fresno, and San Diego) use significantly more water than people living in cool, wet, concrete jungles like Frisco.

The only thing people in Frisco really seem capable of doing with extraordinary consistency is being holier-than-thou.

Some people would see this as a problem.

[Scooper]

Yes, people need to get a clue: that human beings living in hot, dry cities with more lawns, agriculture, and industry (like Sacramento, Fresno, and San Diego) use significantly more water than people living in cool, wet, concrete jungles like Frisco.

The only thing people in Frisco really seem capable of doing with extraordinary consistency is being holier-than-thou.

When commodity pricing is low, it discourages conservation. It's not so much San Franciscans being "holier-than-thou" as it is resenting subsidizing low water rates in SoCal. You're living in a desert, yet you put in thirsty grass lawns instead of planting low water consumption ground covers, and we're paying for it.

San Francisco residential water costs consumers $4.20/100 cu.ft. for the first 300 cu. ft./month, and $5.50/100 cu.ft. for all water over 300 cu.ft.

MWD of SoCal customers pay a flat ~$1.75/100 cu.ft. (varies somewhat depending on SoCal location).

So we're paying more than twice as much for our water as you are even though most of your water comes from up here.

Just sayin...

[merlinmurph]

Has anybody tried skiing in the Tahoe area or elsewhere? I understand it's pretty bleak.

Bad skiing by itself is no big deal (except to the businesses), but the lack of snowpack is a big deal.

[Climb01742]

I read many people similarly baffled, but the conversations would go better if we just accept that this is what people prefer. The people have voted and lawns won. To my eyes, zero moisture gardens are hideous and don't exactly work for kids or dogs playing. Big lawns have been emblematic of wealth and leisure for hundreds of years in Europe, so it is not surprising that Americans aspire to that. Whether they can continue to enjoy their lawns is doubtful. It will take a lot of teeth gnashing to change infrastructure around to support gray water irrigation and many (especially those without the means for lawns) will not vote to support such expenditures. If politicos try to capture all that in pricing they will have a fight in wet years and will be tempted to spend the proceeds on their favorite vote getters.

I think I have noted before on this forum that both Massachusetts and California manage to be short of water even though Massachusetts has a lot more precipitation, a lot shorter hot season, a lot fewer pools, much less agriculture, and much less population density. Voters are willing to pay only for the bare minimum of water infrastructure. So as populations we will be dragged to the point of either using less or paying more, slowly and fitfully. Anger about lawns, from both sides, is inevitable in that process.

BTW, those sprinklers are running in the rain because people are too cheap to pay for moisture sensors. That would be an easy first step.

i fully accept that the vast majority of homeowners love their green lawns. but the future of water everywhere is going to change our lives. maybe it's because i'm not a lawn guy but given the options of what to do with water (drinking, watering the food we eat, bathing) letting our lawns go brown seems one of the less painful things to give up. And, my dogs will pee anywhere so grass is a non-issue for them.;)

it will be fascinating as time passes and america must face rationing of various things we now view as almost god-given aspects of the american dream how we cope. or don't.

[54ny77]

Certain areas of CA are among the nation's foremost authorities of doing as they say but not as they do.

I know plenty of folks who will pay whatever the market will offer for plenty of acre-feet to keep their lush tropical landscapes looking 100% contrary to the natural scrub desert that would otherwise be there...

And for the record, a few weeks ago I just ripped up the lawn at a family member's house, installed hardscape and river rock in place of it, and planed a bunch of succulents that can subsist on a few cups of water a year.

[redir]

As Edward Abbey said, "Bricks to all greenhouses! Black thumb and cutworm to the potted plant!"

In context I have always admired this quote. In other words don't try and grow a lawn in a desert, what's the matter with the plants that naturally occur there?

[Anarchist]

Certain areas of CA are among the nation's foremost authorities of doing as they say but not as they do.

I know plenty of folks who will pay whatever the market will offer for plenty of acre-feet to keep their lush tropical landscapes looking 100% contrary to the natural scrub desert that would otherwise be there...

And for the record, a few weeks ago I just ripped up the lawn at a family member's house, installed hardscape and river rock in place of it, and planed a bunch of succulents that can subsist on a few cups of water a year.

This is exactly what I will be doing this spring with my front yard, once the snow leaves.

[1centaur]

As Edward Abbey said, "Bricks to all greenhouses! Black thumb and cutworm to the potted plant!"

In context I have always admired this quote. In other words don't try and grow a lawn in a desert, what's the matter with the plants that naturally occur there?

Why do we live where it is warm but use air conditioning? Why do we get blueberries from Chile in the winter? Man tries to adapt nature to his taste.

[malbecman]

Interesting in-depth article on the drought over at the NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/02/us/severe-drought-has-us-west-fearing-worst.html?src=me&ref=general&_r=0


(it's behind a paywall but you can usually read 10 articles/month for free).

[redir]

Why do we live where it is warm but use air conditioning? Why do we get blueberries from Chile in the winter? Man tries to adapt nature to his taste.

To his own detriment though?

[verticaldoug]

You can go online to look at the Kay Bailey Desalination Plant in El Paso. It gives you an idea about the size of desalination plant that can produce 27million gallons of water per day. Since it can't run at 100% all the time, maybe this gets you about 4% of Los Angeles daily water supply. Kay Bailey cost was $87million to build in 2002. Guadalupe, Texas is looking to build a similar plant and cost estimates now are $200million and 10 yrs. The plant in Tampa about the same size cost was $158million and took 12 years (1996-2008) to build but had all sorts of issues which delayed completion.

Desalination is part of the solution, but the time frame is probably for your grand children. Conservation has to come first.

[Saint Vitus]

You can go online to look at the Kay Bailey Desalination Plant in El Paso. It gives you an idea about the size of desalination plant that can produce 27million gallons of water per day. Since it can't run at 100% all the time, maybe this gets you about 4% of Los Angeles daily water supply. Kay Bailey cost was $87million to build in 2002. Guadalupe, Texas is looking to build a similar plant and cost estimates now are $200million and 10 yrs. The plant in Tampa about the same size cost was $158million and took 12 years (1996-2008) to build but had all sorts of issues which delayed completion.

Desalination is part of the solution, but the time frame is probably for your grand children. Conservation has to come first.

The company building the facility here has had similar issues at other locations and they may be behind the Tampa plant, and of course it's the rate payers that get stuck with the bill with all the cost over-runs. As I mentioned prior, desal uses lots of energy which in turn needs lots of water and then there's the issue of the salt. Desalination has it's purposes (small scale for one), but on the scale people are considering it becomes questionable, the one here in SD is projected to produce 50m/g/day!

So yes, conservation/reclamation/recycling.

[verticaldoug]

The company building the facility here has had similar issues at other locations and they may be behind the Tampa plant, and of course it's the rate payers that get stuck with the bill with all the cost over-runs. As I mentioned prior, desal uses lots of energy which in turn needs lots of water and then there's the issue of the salt. Desalination has it's purposes (small scale for one), but on the scale people are considering it becomes questionable, the one here in SD is projected to produce 50m/g/day!

So yes, conservation/reclamation/recycling.

Poseidon Water is probably some iteration of the same firm. The problem with the Tampa plant was they did not have long term financing in place and the engineering firm went into bankruptcy. For Carlsbad, it looks like they learned from the past mistakes and have a nice fat $922 million of financing in place for the project. I love the lead on the website, after 12 years of planning and 6 years of budgeting, the plant has all approvals in place for operation in 2016. That is a long lead time.....

But considering California is planning to spend $24 billion on the delta tunnel water transport plan, maybe desalination is not so expensive.

[1centaur]

To his own detriment though?

In the long run, yes. Hubris + tools = death. In the short run (short being maybe thousands of years from beginning to end), not so much. There are various yes/no mixes along the way.

[rperks]

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3754/11356777855_c71279ccb2_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rperks1/11356777855/)
Home (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rperks1/11356777855/) by rperks1 (http://www.flickr.com/people/rperks1/), on Flickr

Great riding, but not pretty in the immediate 30 feet if you are out of the suburbs. All the arguing aside about where the water will come from, we are screwed with impending fire. The wild fires are not an if, but when and where. The brush has gone from green to brown to a weird gray color. Some of my photos this year have actually looked like some odd color select black and whites the landscape is so color de-saturated. I keep having weird dreams about the whole damn place going up in a puff of smoke like one of those old time gunpowder camera flashes from the cartoons.

Even if the whole damn place burns down people will rebuild and stay here, it is that much nicer in the winter

[goonster]

A lot of California is in a unique position. Not far beyond the mild climate of the coast is fiery inland. So some sort of solar powered evaporator/condensor would be effective. It would have to be done on an immense scale with canals to bring sea water and reservoirs to hold fresh water.

As a chemical engineer, it is my professional opinion that getting water to flow downhill, both ways, in those canals will present a challenge. Even on an immense scale. :)

But seriously, solar distillation is inefficient, and does not scale well. The condenser would need to hold an enormous volume of non-saturated vapor for when ambient temperature drops.

[Steve in SLO]

Super Bowl Sunday brought us a much-needed 1" of rain. A drop in the bucket, but something unless. It was good to see standing water along my ride on Monday.

[jimcav]

It does not seem to me that solar panels would be necessary. A lot of California is in a unique position. Not far beyond the mild climate of the coast is fiery inland. So some sort of solar powered evaporator/condensor would be effective. It would have to be done on an immense scale with canals to bring sea water and reservoirs to hold fresh water. Environmentalists would freak out about the area where salt was reintroduced into the ocean.

A question I had about cloud seeding: How are the effects on states to the east handled? If California is made artificially wetter by forcing rain then states to the east will be made artificially dryer, and those states are already very dry.

Lots of water there--of course I have no clue on the energy requirements to desalinate it, but it eliminates the need to get the ocean inland. Definitely windy out there--lots of wind farms nearby on I-8 so possibly combo of solar/wind.

[velotel]

Looking on the bright side of things, the drought will provide lots more sand for people to bury their heads in, which they'll need to do more of as the days roll by.

[SoCalSteve]

Not sure if I am a forward thinker, cheap or just like succulents and cactus...But, I pulled out 3000 sq ft of lawn last summer ( I live on a corner lot) and planted succulents, cactus, mulch, rocks, etc...

The city of LA gave me a $3,000.00 rebate to help defray the costs. $1.50 a sq ft to a max of $3,000.00 if you pull out the lawn and sprinklers and install drought tolerant landscaping with a drip irrigation system.

First 2 months my water bill dropped by 50%. I also installed 3 low flow toilets that also netted me a $300.00 rebate from the city as well.

Doing my part or just being cheap??? Doesn't matter, I am helping out.

Steve

[Louis]

Not sure if I am a forward thinker, cheap or just like succulents and cactus...But, I pulled out 3000 sq ft of lawn last summer ( I live on a corner lot) and planted succulents, cactus, mulch, rocks, etc...

Sounds more site-appropriate. Will the new setup be more time-consuming for maintenance?

[Ken Robb]

Sounds more site-appropriate. Will the new setup be more time-consuming for maintenance?

We don't have to mow our succulents, rocks, mulch and cacti. :banana:

[Louis]

We don't have to mow our succulents, rocks, mulch and cacti. :banana:

Yeah, but if you have to weed that takes ages and is truly back-breaking.

Lawns are simple if all you have to do is mow.

[SoCalSteve]

Yeah, but if you have to weed that takes ages and is truly back-breaking.

Lawns are simple if all you have to do is mow.

The mulch and ground cover keep the weeds at a minimum. The maintenance is pretty non existent compared to lawn care.

[54ny77]

when you have a "lawn" that is a rock garden, if weeds pop up all you have to do is douse it with roundup.

30 seconds of maintenance every once in awhile is back-breaking....;)

Yeah, but if you have to weed that takes ages and is truly back-breaking.

Lawns are simple if all you have to do is mow.

[Elefantino]

No lawns on our balconies, but we are thinking of fake grass on one, complete with Adirondack chairs.

[merlinmurph]

I just got an email from Squaw Valley saying it's snowing and "forecasters are calling for several more feet in the next few days".

That's a start, anyway.

[Scooper]

We've had almost an inch of rain in San Francisco over the past 24 hours and more is on the way.

We're still in a big hole, though.

[Steve in SLO]

We got about an inch today along the central coast. If it rains again tomorrow, people will start complaining.

[cookietom]

We got about an inch today along the central coast. If it rains again tomorrow, people will start complaining.

Very true, very true!

[Louis]

Be careful what you wish for... (St Louis area in 1993)

http://water.weather.gov/ahps2/images/hydrograph_photos/vllm7/fl1.jpg

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQoS5lgZ_6MfuLluSAQaebK72tMu5QG-Mv5bCFEQ_Lj9EviPAVncQ

http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/stltoday.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/b/7b/b7b6b4d4-22ea-54be-98e2-cd4818637d67/51f2cf4592057.preview-620.jpg

[Scooper]

Seeing those two sad Lockheed JetStars is enough to make me cry.

[Louis]

Seeing those two sad Lockheed JetStars is enough to make me cry.

I drive by the western end of the runways of that airport nearly every day. Here's some more info:

Spirit Airport Web Site (http://spiritairport.com/spiritairport/history.jsp)

Edit: After the water receded, lots of the roads in the MO river flood plain were still closed. I used to ride down there even before the flood, but with the roads closed it was even better. Unfortunately, one day I was stopped and given a ticket for trespassing in a closed area. The cop was really, really pissed that I didn't have any ID, but of course I didn't have to have one, so there was nothing he could do about it. (small moral victory for me)

The flood of 1993 was a defining moment for Spirit of St. Louis Airport. With rains increasing and the chances of flooding becoming real, everyone’s eyes were on the water level on the Monarch levee. Spirit Airport Administration decided that when the water reached 3 feet below the edge of the levee, that the airport would be evacuated.

On July 30th, it reached that mark and was rising at a rate of three inches per hour.

There were 720 aircraft on the field when the decision was made to evacuate. The levee broke at 10:30 that night, unleashing a wall of water moving towards the airport. Evacuation and repositioning of aircraft continued until 11:30 pm that night. The last of the aircraft took off as water enveloped the end of the runway. In all, 705 aircraft were evacuated. Lambert Field closed down one runway so that most of Spirit’s jets could be parked there. Of the 15 aircraft left on the field, only one was flyable and the owner couldn’t make arrangements to get it out. The rest were without engines or were in non-flyable condition because of maintenance.

At the height of the flood, the airport was 10-12 feet underwater and the water level stayed that high for 2-3 weeks. In all, 15 airports in the Midwest region were flooded. When the water finally did begin to recede, the daunting task of beginning to clean up was still at hand. More than 150 people from various recovery agencies set up shop on the terminal ramp. Tents housed a mess hall, sleeping quarters and portable restrooms, as the recovery became a 24-hour a day effort.

Thanks to the remarkable recovery effort, the airport was reopened with limited capacity 80 days after the levee broke. 13 months later the airport was back to 100%. In the weeks and months to come after the flood, Chesterfield Valley saw an influx of new businesses and companies relocating to the valley. The result of this massive expansion has led to the very different, very developed Chesterfield Valley you see today.

[velotrack]

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5523/12397771483_711b89ffd3_z.jpg

Well... the rain is coming, for now. :)

[cookietom]

Finally rode after 5 days of rain. Just a little dent in drought

[AnthonyC]

No rain in SoCal, still. We had 3/10 of an inch last week, which made for better MTB riding, but it's still dry as heck here.

[mgm777]

In addition to cycling and running, my winter passion is alpine skiing. Accordingly, I pay attention to snow reports. I used to live in Socal and frequently skied at Mammoth Mtn. My best friend cancelled his annual Super Bowl ski trip because they were reporting a 15 inch base with several lifts not open because of coverage issues. That was February 3rd. Today, I checked Mammoth's snow and saw they're now reporting a 70 inch base. That's a huge change.

[joosttx]

Mount Tam received 21 or so inches this weekend. It'll take about 10x the amount of rain from this weekend to fill the reservoirs in the watershed to full capacity.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3754/12420907794_63c1a5c1aa_z.jpg

[SpokeValley]

when you consider how long it took to rebuild the bay bridge after the '89 earthquake, and they pretty much knew where it had to go. what do you think it would take to just get the public on board with a new nuke power plant? oh yeah, there is a couple of earthquake faults that run through parts of California.

then the desal plant needs to be by the coast...pretty much the high valued properties and national parkland all up and down the coast. so this is not a technical response but just the politics would make it pretty challenging.

we'll see how the high speed rail goes.

Seems to me that desal would have a higher priority for long term growth...

And OP: I was in Dubai this year...you're correct...100% of their water is desal from the Persian Gulf. Of course, they don't worry about where the money comes from over there.

[Scooper]

There's a front page article in today's San Francisco Chronicle on desalination.

Desalination plants a pricey option if drought persists (http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/Desalination-plants-a-pricey-option-if-drought-5239096.php#page-1)

[BdaGhisallo]

When commodity pricing is low, it discourages conservation. It's not so much San Franciscans being "holier-than-thou" as it is resenting subsidizing low water rates in SoCal. You're living in a desert, yet you put in thirsty grass lawns instead of planting low water consumption ground covers, and we're paying for it.

San Francisco residential water costs consumers $4.20/100 cu.ft. for the first 300 cu. ft./month, and $5.50/100 cu.ft. for all water over 300 cu.ft.

MWD of SoCal customers pay a flat ~$1.75/100 cu.ft. (varies somewhat depending on SoCal location).

So we're paying more than twice as much for our water as you are even though most of your water comes from up here.

Just sayin...

Water pricing is a huge part of the problem I think. Here in Bermuda, there are no natural sources of potable water other than rain. Every building catches rain on its roof and stores it in a cistern under the structure. They range in size from 8K gallons on older houses to 45K gallons for newer and larger houses, to many hundreds of thousands of gallons for commercial buildings. Folks here conserve and use water very wisely. Few ever water their grass. It'll go brown and crunchy and die and most folks will do nothing about it. We do get lots of rain but we can get month long droughts.

We are very careful about using water because having to buy it here is not cheap. For a load of 1,000 gallons brought to your house by tanker, we pay $100 USD! Now 1K gallons is about 133 cuft of water. Compare that pricing to that which prevails in CA and the rest of NA. If water were not so cheap, consumers would use it a lot more carefully. There have been years when I have had to purchase up to 15 loads of water. Ouch! I also found out once that I had a hole in my tank when it ran dry. I purchased 6000 gallons to refill it, and the tank ran dry again three days later!! $600 poured into the ground, literally!

I am not advocating inflating the price of water artificially to change usage patterns, but as with electricity during the early 2000s, the prices charged for cannot approximate market clearing prices judging by the behavior of consumers of it. Let the market work and change will happen.

[Seramount]

I work for my state govt in the water supply division and have some insights to the issues posed by drought.

a good example of people's skewed priorities was brought to view last year when our agency had to intervene in a particular town's water crisis...their municipal supply system was unable to maintain adequate capacity and was seeking state assistance in trucking water to critical users (hospitals, etc.).

while we were mobilizing resources for them, it was discovered that the local authorities were still allowing residents to water landscaping with no restrictions...huh? they explained that it would be an 'undue hardship' for people to have to replant their yards. heated discussions ensued...

the best and easiest thing homeowners can do is to abandon the addiction to expansive green lawns and heartily embrace xeriscaping. putting treated drinking water on grass is ridiculous.

personally, I've removed a couple thousand square feet of grass and replaced it with mulched beds and low-moisture native species (NOT cactus). it requires virutally no maintenance is much more visually appealing than the old monoculture grass yard.

[Louis]

the best and easiest thing homeowners can do is to abandon the addiction to expansive green lawns and heartily embrace xeriscaping. putting treated drinking water on grass is ridiculous.

personally, I've removed a couple thousand square feet of grass and replaced it with mulched beds and low-moisture native species (NOT cactus). it requires virutally no maintenance is much more visually appealing than the old monoculture grass yard.

+ a bunch

And price the water accordingly.

[PQJ]

+ a bunch

And price the water accordingly.

But but but, that would require us to think about tomorrow. Here, all that matters is today!

[slidey]

they explained that it would be an 'undue hardship' for people to have to replant their yards. heated discussions ensued...

What was the resultant of the discussions? Status Quo, or did someone summon up the guts to actually drive this message across to the grassy residents?

A couple of afternoons back, my attention was drawn by an elderly man passing by with the aid of a walker asking a lady across the street to refrain from watering her sprawling garden. The lady crossed the street, shouting ensued with the lady telling this man about how much water the neighbours were wasting. Went back, spent another 30 mins in the garden. :help:

At these times, the concept of garden fires suddenly become appealing.

[Seramount]

What was the resultant of the discussions? Status Quo, or did someone summon up the guts to actually drive this message across to the grassy residents?

depending upon drought stage, most municipalities have tiered restrictions for watering landscaping ranging from twice per week to none and only between certain hours.

because the town had not implemented any residential watering restrictions, they were not adhering to agency guidelines for drought contingency measures.

the bottom line was that to receive state assistance, the town had to demonstrate that it was taking all available measures to ensure supplies for critical purposes.

they assured us that they would do this, but based on our field operations reports, there was only a very low-key attempt to notify customers to conserve water and no enforcement program in place if residents did not comply.

the town's mayor contacted his Tea Party state rep who contacted the Tea Party governor's office and we got some less-than-subtle directives to 'play ball'...

so, they paid some lame lip service and got water hauled at taxpayer expense.

[verticaldoug]

What was the resultant of the discussions? Status Quo, or did someone summon up the guts to actually drive this message across to the grassy residents?

A couple of afternoons back, my attention was drawn by an elderly man passing by with the aid of a walker asking a lady across the street to refrain from watering her sprawling garden. The lady crossed the street, shouting ensued with the lady telling this man about how much water the neighbours were wasting. Went back, spent another 30 mins in the garden. :help:

At these times, the concept of garden fires suddenly become appealing.

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/one-home-tops-cobbs-water-hog-list/nJWsm/

Do any of you remember this story when Georgia was in the horrible drought in 2007? The home was using 400,000 gallons of water per month....during restrictions. You have to go to punitive pricing at some point.

D

[Saint Vitus]

There's a front page article in today's San Francisco Chronicle on desalination.

Desalination plants a pricey option if drought persists (http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/Desalination-plants-a-pricey-option-if-drought-5239096.php#page-1)

Not one mention of the brine effluent produced as a result...

[Anarchist]

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/one-home-tops-cobbs-water-hog-list/nJWsm/

Do any of you remember this story when Georgia was in the horrible drought in 2007? The home was using 400,000 gallons of water per month....during restrictions. You have to go to punitive pricing at some point.

D

I love the last line, the water bill will go from $1200 to $2150 per month. I doubt anyone using that much water will notice that. Real penalties are called for.

Out of curiosity I looked up the address on Google Maps, it is a house on a golf course in Marietta, GA. You have to wonder if the golf course are getting water from a residential meter where the rates are cheaper, because the house isn't that big.

[Louis]

so, they paid some lame lip service and got water hauled at taxpayer expense.

Oh, the irony.

[Saint Vitus]

Out of curiosity I looked up the address on Google Maps, it is a house on a golf course in Marietta, GA. You have to wonder if the golf course are getting water from a residential meter where the rates are cheaper, because the house isn't that big.

Ding-ding-ding! Hence the reason the homeowner would speak with the reporter...

[Saint Vitus]

Something that had slipped my mind (not sure why, it pissed me off to no end when I first learned a few years back:

http://www.sacbee.com/2014/02/02/6119201/dan-morain-a-call-long-ago-to.html

Politics... Such a waste of time.

[Scooper]

Love it; 20/20 hindsight.

[Lanternrouge]

Something that had slipped my mind (not sure why, it pissed me off to no end when I first learned a few years back:

http://www.sacbee.com/2014/02/02/6119201/dan-morain-a-call-long-ago-to.html

Politics... Such a waste of time.

Water meters are considered offensive to people in Sacramento and areas that normally get plenty of water "naturally" for their own needs because the people view that water as "theirs" versus water that gets diverted to other places.

[Louis]

Yup, we'll always have an infinite amount of resources, whether they be water, oil, or clean air.

[Saint Vitus]

Water meters are considered offensive to people in Sacramento and areas that normally get plenty of water "naturally" for their own needs because the people view that water as "theirs" versus water that gets diverted to other places.

Tell that to Mullholland, Otis and Chandler!

[Lanternrouge]

Tell that to Mullholland, Otis and Chandler!

All a matter of perspective. I always think of Hetch Hetchy when it comes to water disputes as opposed to Mulholland.

[MattTuck]

New restrictions announced.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/01/us/california-water-restrictions-drought/index.html

[Louis]

How long does something have to continue for it to truly be the "new normal?"

Ag and cattle are going to eventually have to take a big hit.

How much fracking do they do in CA (if any)? That also uses tons of water.

[oldpotatoe]

How long does something have to continue for it to truly be the "new normal?"

Ag and cattle are going to eventually have to take a big hit.

How much fracking do they do in CA (if any)? That also uses tons of water.

Jerry(brown) said most of their fracking was vertical and used less water. He also said to not frack means oil shipped via rail and truck, making it more 'expensive'.

[Peter B]

All a matter of perspective. I always think of Hetch Hetchy when it comes to water disputes as opposed to Mulholland.

Owens Valley.

[Peter B]

New restrictions announced.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/01/us/california-water-restrictions-drought/index.html

Its gonna be a long, dry summer...

"The Sierra snowpack is a crucial barometer of how much water the state will have available in the current year. California is in its fourth year of drought, and with the Sierra snowpack recording new lows not only in the depth but in the water content of that snow, little runoff is expected to replenish the state’s reservoirs. The water content was 5 percent of normal on Wednesday — the lowest it’s been since records were compiled starting in 1950.

Snow melt makes up 60 percent of the water that is captured in California’s reservoirs and, during a normal year, it provides about 30 percent of the state’s overall water supply.



The state’s largest reservoir, Shasta Lake, has 74 percent of what it normally holds at this time of year. Lake Oroville, the second-largest reservoir and the most important source for the State Water Project, is carrying 67 percent of what it normally holds at this time of year. Some reservoirs serving farming communities are perilously low, such as the McClure Dam on the Merced River, which stands at 16 percent.

Snow surveyors take manual measurements at more than 230 places to record the Sierra snowpack. Gehrke said an “astounding” number of the sites have been bare this year — as much as 60 to 70 percent. The statewide snowpack average is 63 inches on April 1, the date water resources officials use as a benchmark because it is when the snow normally begins to melt and fill up the state’s reservoirs. Last year, the snowpack was at 33 inches.

This year’s statewide average is 1 to 2 inches."

[Ken Robb]

It surely won't be a great year to see the waterfalls in Yosemite. OTOH it's still a beautiful place to visit.

[Louis]

I'm by no means a huge "free-market above all else" economist, but only when the price of water accurately reflects the supply and demand will users truly start to conserve.

That can't be the only way to price it, because otherwise little old retired ladies won't be able to compete with the billionaires with three swimming pools and back-yard golf-courses, but you have to do something so the massive agricultural users are forced to improve conservation. If it take zillions of acre-feet of water to produce one almond, then let the price of almonds reflect that.

[GuyGadois]

Sounds like things are going from bad to worse.

Californians, how have you been affected, if at all, and are you reducing water usage in any way (either involuntarily or by choice)?

We had about three super-dry months a few summers ago and it did lots of damage to gardens and trees, but nothing as long as out west.

Good luck in the coming months and during fire season.

I installed a recirculating pump that preheats our water in the AM for shower time, updated our RO to a 'zero' waste system, keeping watering of plants to a minimum (we haven't had a lawn in 7 years), replacing dead plants with succulents and replaced drinking water with beer. We are a fairly light water use family. I still see people in the neighborhood installing new lawn :no:.

GG

[Anarchist]

There was some mention, I believe earlier in this thread, as to the pricing of water in Southern California vs Northern California.

Would be very interesting to see what those updated figures are, along with what the pricing is to agriculture.

I know at is blamed for much water waste but would be very interesting to see things like per capita use in Southern California as a for instance.

[VonTrapp]

I installed a recirculating pump that preheats our water in the AM for shower time, updated our RO to a 'zero' waste system, keeping watering of plants to a minimum (we haven't had a lawn in 7 years), replacing dead plants with succulents and replaced drinking water with beer. We are a fairly light water use family. I still see people in the neighborhood installing new lawn :no:.

GG

I'm a new homeowner and this idea sounds fabulous to me!! Did you go off of a pre-laid-out design? Any website to guide you? I'm sure there are resources out there, but sometimes asking someone who's gone through it can help you weed through the less-than-stellar sources.

Thanks for your help and time!

[Louis]

I know at is blamed for much water waste but would be very interesting to see things like per capita use in Southern California as a for instance.

This is a slippery number. There's such a massive difference between what an apartment dweller uses vs a farmer, and since so much CA water is used for agriculture, per capita doesn't mean a whole lot.

[Peter B]

No lawn, no garden, brief showers--wash/rinse no repeat, and hoping my well doesn't run dry. If/when it does, buying a tanker to fill my 1500gal tank. And repeat that when I have to. I'd fetch extra drinking water from the local spring a few miles up but it's already running dry.

Came close to getting burned out by a wildfire last summer. They spread real quick in these conditions and hills. The helio-fighters are running out of local spots to dip and refill. I'm just hoping folks are super careful mowing, burning, smoking, etc. One spark and all...

[Louis]

Peter, do you find it at all stressful, and does it cause you to think about leaving?

I also have a well and as more folks build houses out here the water level is going down relative to the pump. If that happens I'll have to have it dug deeper. I'm pretty frugal with water, and keep track of how much I use. Unless I do two loads of laundry in a given week (which happens maybe once a year - I average about 3 loads / month) my usage is less than 100 gal / week.

[Peter B]

The fire was scary last year. Mandatory evacs stopped 1/4 mile away. VLATs & Sikorski's were flying overhead dumping loads all afternoon. My truck was loaded with what seemed right to grab. So worried, stressed, yes, and ready to leave that day/night if forced to, but no plans to leave permanently.

You're doing well on your usage (no pun intended).

[GuyGadois]

I'm a new homeowner and this idea sounds fabulous to me!! Did you go off of a pre-laid-out design? Any website to guide you? I'm sure there are resources out there, but sometimes asking someone who's gone through it can help you weed through the less-than-stellar sources.

Thanks for your help and time!

You can purchase the pump at Home Depot. Takes about an hour and a half and can be adapted to basically any system.

http://t.homedepot.com/p/Watts-Hot-Water-Re-Circulating-Pump-with-Timer-500800/100426993

Cheers,

GG

[verticaldoug]

In times of crisis, people show their true colors. This one is just getting started.

I recall a NYT article about a homeowner in Georgia in 2007 who consumed 14,700 gallons a day during the drought and state rationing. He just did not give a ···· until after the news became public.

California will have to instigate some kind of public shaming and fining to hopefully change douchebag behavior.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATLANTA, Nov. 14 — A day after Gov. Sonny Perdue asked God to forgive Georgia for being wasteful with its water, county officials in the wealthy suburbs northeast of Atlanta confirmed Wednesday just how profligate one consumer had been.

Enlarge This Image

Google Maps
Chris G. Carlos, whose home is at center, consumed 440,000 gallons of water in September.
A homeowner in Marietta, Ga., used 440,000 gallons in September, or about 14,700 gallons a day. By comparison, the average consumption in the United States is about 150 gallons a day per person, and in the Atlanta metropolitan area about 183 gallons.

Month after month during a record-setting drought, the two-story, five-bedroom home owned by that consumer, Chris G. Carlos, a wealthy investor who is a member of one of Atlanta’s most well known and philanthropic families, has topped Cobb County’s list of residential users.

Robert Quigley, a spokesman for the Cobb County Water System, said Mr. Carlos had used an average of 260,000 gallons of water a month for the last year, about twice as much as the consumer next-highest on the county’s list. Mr. Carlos has apparently been using the water not only to flush nine toilets and maintain a swimming pool but also to refresh nearly four acres of lush landscaping around his white-columned, red brick home.

When his consumption figures were disclosed this week by WSB-TV in Atlanta, there was an immediate outcry from other homeowners, thousands of whom have been trying to conserve in the face of a drought that is draining the region’s reservoirs. Many are following state suggestions to reuse bath water to feed plants, or to flush toilets a bit less often.

“We’ve had a lot of people calling to gripe about this particular man,” said a woman who answered the phone for the Cobb County Water System. “He’s not real popular right now.”

The furor led Mr. Carlos to refer all inquiries to a public relations specialist, Joseph M. A. Ledlie, who said Wednesday that Mr. Carlos had only recently become aware of the severity of the water crisis and was now taking steps to conserve.

Mr. Ledlie said his client had cut water use by 73 percent from September to October and had vowed to work with water experts to cut it still further. Indeed, Mr. Quigley, the water system’s spokesman, said that for the last six days, Mr. Carlos had used an average of 2,000 gallons a day, which, at a rate of 60,000 gallons a month, is about 10 times the average for a Cobb County household but quite a reduction for Mr. Carlos.

In a written statement, Mr. Carlos himself, whose monthly water bills during the last year have averaged about $1,200 a month, said Wednesday, “I honestly didn’t realize the extent of my water use and regret I didn’t act sooner.”

For months, with the Southeast struggling through the worst drought it has endured in 100 years, governors from North Carolina to Alabama have called on residents and businesses to cut their water use. On Tuesday, Governor Perdue led several hundred people at the State Capitol here in a prayer for rain.

Many fellow homeowners say they do not see how Mr. Carlos could have missed news of the drought. But while he seems to have run afoul of public opinion, Mr. Quigley is quick to point out that he has broken no laws. An exception to mandatory restrictions that Cobb County has adopted on outdoor water use allows licensed professional landscapers to water new plantings for 15 days after installation.

“We understand that Mr. Carlos had engaged full-time landscaping services” in which planting was occurring continuously, in exploitation of the loophole, Mr. Quigley said.

Legal or not, that does not please his neighbors.

“With the water crisis that we’re in down here, I just think it’s ridiculous that he would take advantage of the situation,” said Ken L. Scott, who lives across the street from Mr. Carlos.

“It’s tragic for everybody down here,” Mr. Scott added, “because if you look at the lakes, they’re bone dry.”

The drought has already taken a severe toll on the region, economic and otherwise.

Since August, the town of Orme, Tenn., which has run out of water completely, has had to use an old fire truck to ferry about 20,000 gallons of water a day from nearby Alabama.

Last month, in the face of a mandatory 50 percent reduction in water use, chicken processors in North Carolina began trucking in water to run their operations.

A survey in the Atlanta area found that businesses that depended on outdoor planting and watering had laid off almost 14,000 workers in the last six months, and that number is expected to double before the end of the year, said Mary Kay Woodworth, executive director of the Metro Atlanta Landscape and Turf Association.

And on Wednesday, Pike Nursery, which runs a chain of 22 gardening stores in Georgia, North Carolina and Alabama, filed for bankruptcy in an Atlanta court, blaming the water shortage.

[classtimesailer]

Half a million acres of California rice is PART of the problem. From 558,000 last year to ONLY 420,000 acres this year.

[Saint Vitus]

And then of course there is the oil industry's use of fracking in the Central Valley that wasn't apparently mentioned by Brown. They use a lot of water. With oil prices what they are and as I understand the glut we have, why should they continue? I'm not going to debate the pollution controversy here, just the bare facts of water usage.

http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2014/10/they-fracked-califronias-most-productive-and-drought-stricken-ag-region-you-won

And they want me to conserve?

[verticaldoug]

I am not a fan of fracking. However, in the big picture, fracking is a small part of the problem.

25,000 injection wells.
avg well uses 166,000 gallons of water.
4,150,000,000 gallons.

This is a big number but...
Almonds in California use 1.1trillion gallons of water per year. Fracking is less than 0.5% of the total water used by almonds.

With the fall in energy prices, E&P companies have put a lot of pressure on oil services companies to get more efficient. I think the water usage is one of the things they are addressing. (pollution is always a problem and really the state needs to spend more on enforcement)

[Louis]

It's a good thing sea water can't be used for much (other than as a dump for trash) and desalination is so expensive, because if it weren't we'd dry up the oceans if we could.

[goonster]

However, in the big picture, fracking is a small part of the problem.

Consider also, beyond the volume of injection water used, the groundwater at risk for potential contamination.

[verticaldoug]

Consider also, beyond the volume of injection water used, the groundwater at risk for potential contamination.

This I understand and is why I wrote the state needs to budget more money for enforcement. The issue is not about which regulations, and it is always about enforcing existing regulations. Typically a state will pass regulations (see we are doing something moment) but never budget for enforcement (nothing gets done moment when you aren't looking)

Lobbyist worth their salt realize it is easier to kill budgets for enforcement agencies than public fight regulations.

This is why in an earlier post, public shaming high water users is probably most effective. Just passing water restrictions will result in only a marginal savings unless enforcement is upped.

[russ46]

On a more serious note, all cyclists will be limited to carrying one (1) water bottle.

[Spdntrxi]

Is there a lot of fracking in CA?

[fuzzalow]

There was a quote I had read in the NYTimes in their coverage of the drought situation in California that said "Water traditionally flows uphill towards money". It is getting worse that even money can't glom what may not be available enough to horde. At least not outwardly. Truly a bad development.

Makes the fire season most worrisome, all hope that things go lucky or God brings rain. Not to inject religion so much as playing on the saying that there are no atheists in foxholes - this drought is like being under attack.

Is there any optimism for desalinization? Big project underway in SoCal.

Desalination out of Desperation (http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/533446/desalination-out-of-desperation/)

[MattTuck]

If I'm reading it right, even a wet year wouldn't be enough to solve the issue. This is a multi-year phenomenon that won't be solved by a good storm, or even a single year of good rain. The photographs of the reservoirs are scary.

[sokyroadie]

What is sad is that I live on a 10,000 acre lake that was built for flood control, in the late Fall early Winter it is drawn down to around 4300 acres. This involves releasing the following amount of water for approx. 6 weeks (24 hours/day), the water eventually flows into the Ocean (Barren river to Green river to Ohio river to Mississippi river)

4000 CFS =29,922.00 GALLONS per SECOND x 60 sec. x 60 min. =
107,719,200 GALLONS per HOUR.

Many times the lake in the spring is 20+ ft above pool so the same scenario as above.

There is not even a Hydro plant :mad:

Jeff

[Elefantino]

Drought hits home: Brown orders 25 percent mandatory reductions, Pardee Reservoir starts releasing smelly, foul tasting water to East Bay customers.

[Elefantino]

Snow surveyors take manual measurements at more than 230 places to record the Sierra snowpack. Gehrke said an “astounding” number of the sites have been bare this year — as much as 60 to 70 percent. The statewide snowpack average is 63 inches on April 1, the date water resources officials use as a benchmark because it is when the snow normally begins to melt and fill up the state’s reservoirs. Last year, the snowpack was at 33 inches.

This year’s statewide average is 1 to 2 inches.

This is what's scary. We are beyond mere drought conditions. We are in the meteorological equivalent of nuclear holocaust.

[Spdntrxi]

Get outta here... Don't go that far..
Little rain in the forecast too.. Maybe even a little snow for norcal

[slidey]

I was catching up on one of my well-liked radio shows yesterday, so it was the turn to listen to this: http://onpoint.wbur.org/2015/03/23/california-drought-desalination-los-angeles-rain-snow-water

Good discussion, but what struck me most that there were at least a couple of callers who brought up the issue of population explosion, which was not confronted head on by the expert (with good reason).

Yesterday, on another radio show (http://www.kcrw.com/news-culture/shows/which-way-la/angelenos-react-to-hbo-documentary-on-scientology/#) I heard the interviewer posing the same Q that has become a talking point for many - the almond/walnut debate. Apparently, walnuts/pound take 5x more water to grow. The expert here was saying that while it is true that there are some really thirsty crops being grown, there are only 4 more places in the world which have mediterranean climate which can grow these crops at all. Moreover, apparently 90% of the fruits/veggies that USA consumes comes from CA.

So, very complicated issue it'd seem but one thing's for sure - the status quo can't continue.

[54ny77]

Blended, that's probably about right.

Some crops lower, some higher.

Most productive farmland in the world.

Lush landscaping of those who can afford it won't care, until the delivery just plain stops.

Moreover, apparently 90% of the fruits/veggies that USA consumes comes from CA.

So, very complicated issue it'd seem but one thing's for sure - the status quo can't continue.

[Louis]

What % of CA's state GDP attributable to agriculture and water-intensive stuff like that?

If it isn't that high maybe it's time to move on to other less thirsty products. If it is high it's definitely time to find something else to grow. Either way, farmers can't simply assume that the water's going to continue to flow at the current or even somewhat reduced rate for the rest of time. They might be in denial, but Climate Change is real.

Folks need to shower and flush their toilets, and if it means no longer eating almonds and walnuts they'll stop buying them.

[carpediemracing]

It's hard thinking of drought when I worry about Junior's shoes getting sucked off by the mud next to parking lots and such. It's like it was hard thinking about flooding during Katrina. At the same time I know people who want to move to CA. Like why now? Isn't it hard enough with everyone that's already there?

One thought I vocalized the other day. "Maybe I shouldn't buy California Raisins. They grow grapes, which must use a lot of water because they're full of water, then they dehydrate them. Seems pretty wasteful as far as water goes."

They're labeled "California raisins", it's not like I went out of my way to buy them, but that's what the cardboard cylinder reads.

The picture of the rice paddies was shocking. I guess one good thing is no mosquitoes?

[oldpotatoe]

What % of CA's state GDP attributable to agriculture and water-intensive stuff like that?

If it isn't that high maybe it's time to move on to other less thirsty products. If it is high it's definitely time to find something else to grow. Either way, farmers can't simply assume that the water's going to continue to flow at the current or even somewhat reduced rate for the rest of time. They might be in denial, but Climate Change is real.

Folks need to shower and flush their toilets, and if it means no longer eating almonds and walnuts they'll stop buying them.

Is a US water grid in the future? A way to collect/store/transport places with lots(flood) to places that need it?

[nrs5000]

What % of CA's state GDP attributable to agriculture and water-intensive stuff like that?

If it isn't that high maybe it's time to move on to other less thirsty products. If it is high it's definitely time to find something else to grow. Either way, farmers can't simply assume that the water's going to continue to flow at the current or even somewhat reduced rate for the rest of time. They might be in denial, but Climate Change is real.

Folks need to shower and flush their toilets, and if it means no longer eating almonds and walnuts they'll stop buying them.

Something like 1-2%.

[djg21]

If I'm reading it right, even a wet year wouldn't be enough to solve the issue. This is a multi-year phenomenon that won't be solved by a good storm, or even a single year of good rain. The photographs of the reservoirs are scary.

It is a major problem thought the western US that has been anticipated for many years. Read Cadillac Desert by Marc Reisner. http://www.amazon.com/Cadillac-Desert-American-Disappearing-Revised/dp/book-citations/0140178244. I read this for the first time more than 25 years ago and it remains one of the best books I've ever read. The Western US is a desert which cannot indefinitely support its current population given the lack of water.

[slidey]

What % of CA's state GDP attributable to agriculture and water-intensive stuff like that?

If it isn't that high maybe it's time to move on to other less thirsty products. If it is high it's definitely time to find something else to grow. Either way, farmers can't simply assume that the water's going to continue to flow at the current or even somewhat reduced rate for the rest of time. They might be in denial, but Climate Change is real.

Folks need to shower and flush their toilets, and if it means no longer eating almonds and walnuts they'll stop buying them.

Boy oh boy! I started searching for the numbers for some of the above Q's, since I had some time now.

Agriculture, forestry, fishing, hunting combined contributed to 1.39% of CA's GDP in 2013. (http://www.statista.com/statistics/304869/california-real-gdp-by-industry/)

Employment by industry: Out of a total of 18.94 million employed people in CA as of Feb 2015, only 2.2% are farm-related. (http://www.calmis.ca.gov/file/lfmonth/cal$spds.pdf from http://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/LMID/Employment_by_Industry_Data.html)

An estimated, 80% of water in California goes to agriculture. (http://www.kcet.org/updaily/socal_focus/commentary/where-we-are/in-a-season-of-drought-where-does-the-water-go.html)

This is weird stuff, really.

[slidey]

Is a US water grid in the future? A way to collect/store/transport places with lots(flood) to places that need it?

This is what crossed my mind too. I think this will have to be a very big part of any proposed solution.

[Louis]

Something like 1-2%.

In that case, it shouldn't be terribly hard to find alternatives.

Tough for the folks directly affected by it, but as a whole not a massive impact on the entire local economy.

[sjbraun]

Not a large impact on the economy? I disagree. what percent of our food comes from CA's fields? Its one thing to say that 1-2% of the CA population will have less or no work, but let's remember, that's the same population that fills tables for the rest of us.

Decreased water for agriculture in CA is a big deal.

[Louis]

Not a large impact on the economy? I disagree. what percent of our food comes from CA's fields? Its one thing to say that 1-2% of the CA population will have less or no work, but let's remember, that's the same population that fills tables for the rest of us.

Decreased water for agriculture in CA is a big deal.

I agree it's a big deal, but the first alternative should be to find crops that are more appropriate for the local environment.

I can live without almonds and walnuts, and given the impact they have in CA I may go out of my way to not buy or eat them. The producers have to somehow get the message that they need to change.

(I'll be the first to admit that I know very little about the problem as a whole and I'm more than willing to listen to objective experts who do.)

[verticaldoug]

I'd argue the reason California dominates some food crops is because of subsidized water. If you take away the water, year one will be tough- probably hard or impossible to get artichokes, spinach, celery, walnuts, plums. But for overall calories people will just switch and eat more grains. After year one, farmers will begin to adapt. With higher prices for some veggies, farmers in other parts of the country will switch crops.

[Louis]

I'd argue the reason California dominates some food crops is because of subsidized water.

I suppose I could search for this, but it's easier to ask here:

Does anyone know how water is allocated (and priced) to the various "stakeholders" in CA?

[carpediemracing]

On people working in agriculture, I have to imagine that many are paid under the table, i.e. not counted in any official capacity. I'm making an assumption, but based on the various laws designed to allow illegal aliens to contribute something/anything it's got to be a reasonably big chunk of people.

Overall I'm surprised at the low contribution. Or not, based on the fact that a farmer (or at least his employees) aren't pulling in the coin necessary to buy and live in a $1m house, like the folks around the hearts of the IT industry do.

A good friend lives in SoCal and he occasionally fills me in on some of these questions (since I ask him) but I cant' really contribute to the answers since I don't remember specifics.

I do know that there's some concept of the water belonging to some state board or something like that, like all the water that falls out of the sky belongs to this board. This is why things like gutter water collector things don't work in CA (like around here you can hook a 50-100+ gal tank to a gutter and water your garden from that tank). I asked him about a gutter collector to wash his bike and he was like, yeah... no.

Right now they collect the initial cold water in the shower and use it elsewhere (fill toilet tank? water a couple plants, etc, I forget the exact things but the wife listed them once). It's 2-3 gallons for the first shower in a bit, after that the water is warm. They also shut off the shower water, or turn it super low, while not actually rinsing. They live in North County, north of San Diego. I don't know if their miniscule lawn (co-op stuff, maybe 30 square feet, no kidding) is being watered or not. I do know their "backyard" was converted to a no-watering kind of thing, that was maybe 50'x10'.

I would tell him I felt guilty for being a human when I visited there, like I was taking something unreturnable by existing in that ecosphere. I suppose that's the case everywhere in the world but in SoCal I really, really felt that way. I felt bad for drinking water on rides, although I did.

[Louis]

I bet the total % of water used that is actually used for drinking is less than 0.00000000000000000001% of the total. (random number of zeroes, but a lot)

[1centaur]

Water for almond growing in California is more than the water used by SF and LA combined, is a stat I read yesterday. More economic allocation would solve a ton of problems.

[nrs5000]

I suppose I could search for this, but it's easier to ask here:

Does anyone know how water is allocated (and priced) to the various "stakeholders" in CA?

The answer to that question is very complex.

[slidey]

I'd argue the reason California dominates some food crops is because of subsidized water.

This specific point (inexpensive cost of water) was discussed in this show today: http://www.kcrw.com/news-culture/shows/to-the-point/a-parched-west-struggles-to-adapt-to-the-realities-of-drought (click the 2nd link on the page)

They were also discussing about a 12 year drought in Australia, which led them to drastic water saving measures, and didn't affect their agricultural productivity either - apparently the productivity of agriculture in Australia in drought succeeding years have gone past the preceding years a few times breaking the argument that treating water like a free-economy commodity for everyone (no subsidies for farmers) will ruin agriculture. I think its about time for the free-economy proposal to kick in, maybe efficiency will seep in.

[Louis]

The answer to that question is very complex.

And rightfully so. It's like taxes - there really no one "fair" way to do it, and the process of how it gets done today is messy and probably highly inefficient (however you choose to define efficiency).

[Climb01742]

Water for almond growing in California is more than the water used by SF and LA combined, is a stat I read yesterday. More economic allocation would solve a ton of problems.

The numbers I've seen for water per almond acre are insane. Unless I'm missing something, almonds aren't exactly crucial to life on earth. I'd begin there with either rationing or scarcity pricing.

As an aside, our national love of a green lawn and golf courses may, thankfully, be coming to an end. Zero water gardening makes, like, a million times more sense.

[rnhood]

One has to take a fly-by-night medial outlet like Mother Jones with the usual grain of salt but, here is some interesting data on water usage in CA. The per capita use in Palm Springs is a staggering 700 gallons per day (not including any water used in agriculture). I assume this is to water those golf courses and keep the pools full. And being in the desert, it obviously takes a lot. And the almond, well it doesn't take so much comparatively speaking. Fracking is so low its apparently lost in noise. Agriculture is the biggest water user by far.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/02/wheres-californias-water-going

[ptourkin]

I agree it's a big deal, but the first alternative should be to find crops that are more appropriate for the local environment.

I can live without almonds and walnuts, and given the impact they have in CA I may go out of my way to not buy or eat them. The producers have to somehow get the message that they need to change.

(I'll be the first to admit that I know very little about the problem as a whole and I'm more than willing to listen to objective experts who do.)

Everyone has picked up on the statistics for almonds, but the largest percentage of California's agriculture water goes to alfalfa, which humans do not eat. Animal agriculture requires far larger amounts of water than almonds. Nearly 400 million gallons of water are required to produce a ton of beef. The average water footprint of beef is 20 times larger than grains and vegetables.

If we want to address our personal impact, the answer is unattractive but clear.

[Elefantino]

One has to take a fly-by-night medial outlet like Mother Jones with the usual grain of salt but, here is some interesting data on water usage in CA. The per capita use in Palm Springs is a staggering 700 gallons per day (not including any water used in agriculture). I assume this is to water those golf courses and keep the pools full. And being in the desert, it obviously takes a lot. And the almond, well it doesn't take so much comparatively speaking. Fracking is so low its apparently lost in noise. Agriculture is the biggest water user by far.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/02/wheres-californias-water-going


Mother Jones as been flying by night for decades now. I still remember reading (and driving) "Pinto Madness."

[Louis]

As an aside, our national love of a green lawn and golf courses may, thankfully, be coming to an end. Zero water gardening makes, like, a million times more sense.

My closest neighbor had a sprinkler system put in a few years ago. So you move out to the woods, with trees all around, but then insist on having a green lawn. It's nuts. Every time I see it running I think of how he's taking water from the same source as my well.

The guy on the other side of me burned out his well pump because he was using so much water on his lawn that at least one of his zones was going 24/7. When they tried to pull the pump to replace it, it got jammed in the hole so they had to drill a whole new well. I hope the expense taught him a lesson.

If we want to address our personal impact, the answer is unattractive but clear.

Yet another reason why I'm a vegetarian...

[joosttx]

What % of CA's state GDP attributable to agriculture and water-intensive stuff like that?

If it isn't that high maybe it's time to move on to other less thirsty products. If it is high it's definitely time to find something else to grow. Either way, farmers can't simply assume that the water's going to continue to flow at the current or even somewhat reduced rate for the rest of time. They might be in denial, but Climate Change is real.

Folks need to shower and flush their toilets, and if it means no longer eating almonds and walnuts they'll stop buying them.

Around $45 Billion per year. Just compare that to some country's GDP or consider that Bill Gates would be broke if he bought all the Ag products produced in California in a year. Usually the top 10 counties for agricultural sales are in California. at least they get 9 or 8 out 10 annual. Practically all of the global supply of almonds come from California too. agriculture is huge here. Cotton and alfalfa are disappearing because of the drought. But it's hard to pull up trees.

[likebikes]

bought almonds last night, ~a pound and a half, because they were on sale for $5/#. now i feel bad. :(

[Louis]

bought almonds last night, ~a pound and a half, because they were on sale for $5/#. now i feel bad. :(

The water shortage is all your fault! :no:

[MattTuck]

On the Almond issue, I'd like to know if there are technological solutions that can mitigate the water used. I could see some sort of hydroponics and/or underground drip irrigation being useful. I appreciate that these are long lived trees, that cannot be started/stopped in a single season like other crops.

All that said, I'd like to see the cost of water internalized into the price of those crops. If all that matters is senior water rights, and no one is worried about the true price of water, it is hard for the market to allocate the scarce resource of water.

[saab2000]

The sun shines pretty much all the time in places alone the west coast. Why is there no solar powered desalination?

Seems like a no brainer. Lots of water. Lots of sun.

[Louis]

The sun shines pretty much all the time in places alone the west coast. Why is there no solar powered desalination?

Seems like a no brainer. Lots of water. Lots of sun.

I bet you'd need tons of acres of solar for just one plant.

(They aren't idiots - I'm sure they'd do it if it were that simple.)

[93legendti]

The sun shines pretty much all the time in places alone the west coast. Why is there no solar powered desalination?

Seems like a no brainer. Lots of water. Lots of sun.

Help is on the way.

http://www.israel21c.org/news/israels-ide-to-design-and-operate-new-us-desalination-plant/
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-02-13/israel-desalination-shows-california-not-to-fear-drought
http://blogs.kcrw.com/whichwayla/2015/03/israel-a-model-for-california-in-desalination

I helped my cousin grow plants and flowers in the Sinai desert. We were grafting and doing interesting stuff...Anything is possible.

The issue isn't the price of rain water, it's the budget priorities that prevent the purchase of enough plants to make droughts a minor nuisance.

[efuentes]

Everyone has picked up on the statistics for almonds, but the largest percentage of California's agriculture water goes to alfalfa, which humans do not eat. Animal agriculture requires far larger amounts of water than almonds. Nearly 400 million gallons of water are required to produce a ton of beef. The average water footprint of beef is 20 times larger than grains and vegetables.

If we want to address our personal impact, the answer is unattractive but clear.

This!

I hate all the damn politics of it, here in Sinaloa plus a couple of states in central Mexico could supply all of the vegetables for the US and Mexico and the grain belt could supply grains for both and be done with it. The Almonds should be grown in the most appropiated place and we should all stop eating so much incredible resource intensive meat. California water problem resolved :banana:

[93legendti]

http://www.sco.ca.gov/state_finances_101_state_spending.html

Only 2% on natural resources. Everyone makes their own choices.

[Saint Vitus]

I do know that there's some concept of the water belonging to some state board or something like that, like all the water that falls out of the sky belongs to this board. This is why things like gutter water collector things don't work in CA (like around here you can hook a 50-100+ gal tank to a gutter and water your garden from that tank). I asked him about a gutter collector to wash his bike and he was like, yeah... no.


He's mistaken, you can totally do this in San Diego. The problem is nothing falls from the sky! The city was offering rebates on collection barrels recently, a co-worker took advantage and has a hundred or so gallons for her garden.

[bart998]

I got rid of my 8000 gal. (above ground) pool and last year cut watering to once a week. This year I will probably let my back yard die.

[BSUdude]

I'd argue the reason California dominates some food crops is because of subsidized water. If you take away the water, year one will be tough- probably hard or impossible to get artichokes, spinach, celery, walnuts, plums. But for overall calories people will just switch and eat more grains. After year one, farmers will begin to adapt. With higher prices for some veggies, farmers in other parts of the country will switch crops.

I would add to this that the climate of California allows some areas of the state to grow crops for a big portion of the year, which makes it great for the supply chain delivery of grocery stores/produce suppliers. They know they can get any of the things you list above any time of year and they price is probably relatively stable. Lots (not all) of the veggies grown in CA could be grown in other areas of the country, but with an shorter growing season it would be hard to get carrots in January.

[Louis]

it would be hard to get carrots in January.

+1 to that.

Going back to a more seasonal supply of stuff, and not being able to get 100% of what we want 100% of the time at the prices we prefer doesn't seem to me to be too high a price to pay if it allows us to have an agricultural system that's more in tune with our available resources.

[Elefantino]

We need to rid ourselves of lawns. (At least the real kind.)

When water becomes more expensive than gasoline there will be no more lawns, just like in the "Mad Max" world.

[Spdntrxi]

Almond butter is like 8-9 bucks a jar.. $$$

[Louis]

There are some interesting pictures in the NYT here: http://nyti.ms/1DKkfab

I realize that much of California's water is not used by individual homes, but the contrast in the pictures sure makes you realize that people will try to do stuff (like live or farm) in the most inappropriate places.


http://static01.nyt.com/images/2015/04/05/us/DROUGHTjp7/DROUGHTjp7-master1050.jpg

More craziness:

http://static01.nyt.com/images/2015/04/05/us/05DROUGHT5websub/05DROUGHT5websub-master1050.jpg

[Ken Robb]

bought almonds last night, ~a pound and a half, because they were on sale for $5/#. now i feel bad. :(

That's nuts! Groan.:banana:

[Climb01742]

It'll probably never happen but, imagine if rather than trying to dominate or change an environment, we tried to live within its natural limits? As the saying goes...nature always bats last. Las Vegas is another example of insanity amid a desert.

[ptourkin]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/23/1372642/--Almost-half-of-the-average-Californian-s-water-footprint-is-due-to-consumption-of-meat-and-dairy#

"Almost half of the average Californian's water footprint is due to consumption of meat and dairy"

[Spdntrxi]

Sand for bunkers are easy to get

[FlashUNC]

I'm afraid fire season is going to be a bad one.

[pbarry]

The 25% restrictions are only half way there. 50% is doable.

[pbarry]

It'll probably never happen but, imagine if rather than trying to dominate or change an environment, we tried to live within its natural limits? As the saying goes...nature always bats last. Las Vegas is another example of insanity amid a desert.

Well said.

Humans colonize, and will continue to do so unless our survival is threatened and we are forced to compromise. That's paraphrasing something Yvon Chouinard said recently about companies behaving in a "sustainable" way.

[daker13]

If we want to address our personal impact, the answer is unattractive but clear.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say, the answer is actually awesome.

[Louis]

The 25% restrictions are only half way there. 50% is doable.

But the restrictions are on residential usage (and maybe industrial, I haven't heard) not agricultural, which as has been pointed out above take the lion's share of water.

Doctor: "We really need to address that paper cut on your pinkie."

Patient: "Oh good, that means we don't have to worry about my 3-pack a day cigarette habit? I can live with that."

Reality: "Not for long, you won't."

[carpediemracing]

One thing I read in some long article in Mother Jones (http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/02/california-water-system-drought) is that 1/2 of the "agricultural" water use is to fill rivers and streams and creeks and such, so that fish/etc can live in a natural habitat.

The other half actually gets sprinkled onto farmland.

To me that "80% goes to agriculture" seems misleading. It really should say 40%, and 40% goes toward stuff like "environmental stuff".

It's amazing how everyone has a pool out there. Here they're definitely less common. Okay, shorter season, etc, but water is basically free if you are on a well, and almost free with city water.

Our water bill for 15-20 years was about $15/quarter, with about $13 due to fees. Our city had an agreement with the watershed whatever, fine, but still, water was basically free. I considered running cold water through a radiator and blowing air through it to cool down my non-AC house in the summer. Stupid waste of water (and so I didn't do it) but it would have cost next to nothing and it probably would have worked.

[Spdntrxi]

And a whole heck of a lot of water ends up in the ocean

[false_Aest]

I stopped peeing in the toilet.
Now I pee on people's lawns.

[Louis]

I stopped peeing in the toilet.
Now I pee on people's lawns.

One of the benefits of my having a gravel driveway...

[oldpotatoe]

I stopped peeing in the toilet.
Now I pee on people's lawns.

"If it's brown, flush it down, if it's yellow, let it mellow"

AND No Hollywood showers please...

[sailorboy]

"If it's brown, flush it down, if it's yellow, let it mellow"

AND No Hollywood showers please...

spoken like a true military man

[oldpotatoe]

spoken like a true military man

'sailor boy'..you know what that is. I was on the Independence, first cruise, ship went on water hours before it cleared the breakwater. Great fun for the next 6 months. PLUS during oil embargo, not a lot of $ to fly..so we didn't much. Lots of 'training anchorages'...went to anchorage and swung on the hook for a couple of weeks..

[likebikes]

Is the drought over? Just wondering, seems like every 4th news article was about the drought in early 2015, haven't heard nearly a peep since then.

[Steve in SLO]

In a word, no. Although Northern California had its reservoirs fill back up here in central and southern California we are still in pretty sad shape. Aquifers are still low everywhere. Our local reservoir is at 26% capacity, which is as low as I've ever seen it.
Also, it has been a heck of a bad fire season already.

[CampyorBust]

spoken like a true military man

https://youtu.be/_IbCHgJjZ60

Used to live in Cali, really breaks my heart to see this.