Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Only 10% of California's water use is urban (aka residential). Almond orchards also use 10% of California's water and half of those almonds are grown for export. See anything wrong with this picture?

No. What’s wrong with exporting almonds? Don’t we want an economy where we make and export some things?

So California residents should be told to shower while standing in a bucket so that we can provide almonds to the world?

No, California should engineer solutions to provide fresh water to everyone who needs it. We have the technology, just have to shove the naysayers out of the way. Showering, swimming pools, almonds, and pistachios are all net-positives for society.

So California needs to engineer solutions so the world can eat almonds?

I hate to throw a wrench into it, but I'd go the capitalism route: money. There is a price to water and the price goes up until supply and demand are balanced.

Perhaps you have a floor where every individual gets 10 gallons per day for free, but after that we let the market rule.

Either that, or do what we do with all "natural" disasters. Blunder ahead with no guardrails and call for the federal government when bad things happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Only 10% of California's water use is urban (aka residential). Almond orchards also use 10% of California's water and half of those almonds are grown for export. See anything wrong with this picture?

No. What’s wrong with exporting almonds? Don’t we want an economy where we make and export some things?

So California residents should be told to shower while standing in a bucket so that we can provide almonds to the world?

No, California should engineer solutions to provide fresh water to everyone who needs it. We have the technology, just have to shove the naysayers out of the way. Showering, swimming pools, almonds, and pistachios are all net-positives for society.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Only 10% of California's water use is urban (aka residential). Almond orchards also use 10% of California's water and half of those almonds are grown for export. See anything wrong with this picture?

No. What’s wrong with exporting almonds? Don’t we want an economy where we make and export some things?

So California residents should be told to shower while standing in a bucket so that we can provide almonds to the world?

Anonymous wrote:Only 10% of California's water use is urban (aka residential). Almond orchards also use 10% of California's water and half of those almonds are grown for export. See anything wrong with this picture?

No. What’s wrong with exporting almonds? Don’t we want an economy where we make and export some things?

Only 10% of California's water use is urban (aka residential). Almond orchards also use 10% of California's water and half of those almonds are grown for export. See anything wrong with this picture?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is plenty of water for people it’s just ag takes it all to grow water intensive crops and there is no incentive for upstream users to conserve really.

God I hate those people who are so selfishly using water to grow our food.

LOL. But it is true (I grew up out there) that California was NOT meant to be built up and green like it is today. It was an arid desert. Man came in and built and built and built. And then came the demand for food from south Orange County and then the middle of the state. Have you ever heard about the water wars to grow pistachios out there? (Pistachios need a lot of water to produce). None of it should be there but it is and people keep coming.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should just make water out of the ocean, would solve all these issues

Desalination through reverse osmosis is very real, and the obvious and ultimate solution. They just have to wait out the environmentalists and the NIMBYs who will throw every wrench they can into the process until the vast majority of people who aren't paying attention are forced to confront the issue.

The ultimate solution is to not use so much water unnecessarily. Yes, desalination can help. But, the oceans have an ecosystem and balance too. You can just start effing with that and not expect to negatively impact the oceans.

You can take a LOT of water out of the Pacific Ocean before you start affecting its ecosystems. I mean...look at it on your kid's globe. It's pretty big, don't you think?

This is so short-sighted, I don't even know what to say.

Short-sighted how? You think we're going to dry out the Pacific Ocean by filling swimming pools in Scottsdale?

NP, do you realize that desalinization plants would require environmental reviews? You think California environmentalists are going allow this? And no, you don't just scoop up salt water and voila- fresh water! It's energy intensive, produces too much brine which changes the chemistry of nearby seawater. Read this: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-environment-brine/too-much-salt-water-desalination-plants-harm-environment-u-n-idUSKCN1P81PX

You want the energy? Keep Diablo Canyon open.

And any complaints about "brine" going back into the ocean are absurd. Literally, you are complaining about salt in the ocean.

This is exactly what I was talking about when I said that the environmentalists will naturally fight the inevitable solution.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should just make water out of the ocean, would solve all these issues

Desalination through reverse osmosis is very real, and the obvious and ultimate solution. They just have to wait out the environmentalists and the NIMBYs who will throw every wrench they can into the process until the vast majority of people who aren't paying attention are forced to confront the issue.

The ultimate solution is to not use so much water unnecessarily. Yes, desalination can help. But, the oceans have an ecosystem and balance too. You can just start effing with that and not expect to negatively impact the oceans.

You can take a LOT of water out of the Pacific Ocean before you start affecting its ecosystems. I mean...look at it on your kid's globe. It's pretty big, don't you think?

This is so short-sighted, I don't even know what to say.

Short-sighted how? You think we're going to dry out the Pacific Ocean by filling swimming pools in Scottsdale?

NP, do you realize that desalinization plants would require environmental reviews? You think California environmentalists are going allow this? And no, you don't just scoop up salt water and voila- fresh water! It's energy intensive, produces too much brine which changes the chemistry of nearby seawater. Read this: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-environment-brine/too-much-salt-water-desalination-plants-harm-environment-u-n-idUSKCN1P81PX

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is plenty of water for people it’s just ag takes it all to grow water intensive crops and there is no incentive for upstream users to conserve really.

God I hate those people who are so selfishly using water to grow our food.

Oh yes, the farmers, sacred tenders of our land who would never do anything that wasn’t in the best interest of the land for seven generations.

Meanwhile they are using flood irrigation to grow alfalfa and rice in California while homes are on water restrictions.

Anonymous wrote:There is plenty of water for people it’s just ag takes it all to grow water intensive crops and there is no incentive for upstream users to conserve really.

God I hate those people who are so selfishly using water to grow our food.

There is plenty of water for people it’s just ag takes it all to grow water intensive crops and there is no incentive for upstream users to conserve really.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should just make water out of the ocean, would solve all these issues

Desalination through reverse osmosis is very real, and the obvious and ultimate solution. They just have to wait out the environmentalists and the NIMBYs who will throw every wrench they can into the process until the vast majority of people who aren't paying attention are forced to confront the issue.

The ultimate solution is to not use so much water unnecessarily. Yes, desalination can help. But, the oceans have an ecosystem and balance too. You can just start effing with that and not expect to negatively impact the oceans.

You can take a LOT of water out of the Pacific Ocean before you start affecting its ecosystems. I mean...look at it on your kid's globe. It's pretty big, don't you think?

This is so short-sighted, I don't even know what to say.

Short-sighted how? You think we're going to dry out the Pacific Ocean by filling swimming pools in Scottsdale?

My coworkers in Utah are removing their lawns . Gov is providing incentives and there are also fines for outdoor watering

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should just make water out of the ocean, would solve all these issues

Desalination through reverse osmosis is very real, and the obvious and ultimate solution. They just have to wait out the environmentalists and the NIMBYs who will throw every wrench they can into the process until the vast majority of people who aren't paying attention are forced to confront the issue.

The ultimate solution is to not use so much water unnecessarily. Yes, desalination can help. But, the oceans have an ecosystem and balance too. You can just start effing with that and not expect to negatively impact the oceans.

You can take a LOT of water out of the Pacific Ocean before you start affecting its ecosystems. I mean...look at it on your kid's globe. It's pretty big, don't you think?

This is so short-sighted, I don't even know what to say.