Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Feb 19, 2014 - 09:07pm PT
|
LADWP has to pump their water over a really big hill (more than once) and then treat it to drinking water standards.
CVWD just has to let it run downhill and the only treatment is to kill the Quagua mussels. A good chunk of the Imperial Valley is well below sea level.
In fact the Salton Sea owes it's existence to a flood event+earthquake induced break in the canal back in 1905
(then there's the LADWP, union embezzlement of tens of millions, maintenance of an extensive ancient distribution network, etc.)
Apples and oranges.
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Feb 19, 2014 - 10:10pm PT
|
Yah,
I killed the Quagua mussels
(for MWD too)
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
|
|
|
Feb 19, 2014 - 10:33pm PT
|
TGT is in the business of watering down the truth...
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 12:26am PT
|
Mr Milktoast writes:
"I know if built they will be used to divert more water to SoCal and that water will be consumed to capacity."
The naïve part of me wants to think that one day maybe the water supply will catch up to the demand, but I'm afraid Mr Milktoast's observation is a lot closer to reality.
The first drought I remember was in '77. I was 14. We got a kick out of "if it's brown, flush it down - if it's yellow, let it mellow". I was living in Fontana ( CA ) then, and the population there in '77 was 24,000.
We endured a hot summer ( A/C was something damn few houses in '77 had, and ours wasn't one of them ) of warm pots full of piss, only clearing when someone crapped. It wasn't pleasant, but we were saving water, and that's all that mattered.
Now, I have a low-flow toilet that requires three flushes to clear a #2, and a low-flow shower head that more than doubles the time I need to get a shower. My truck hasn't been washed since it was in the Pacific Northwest, where it rains more-or-less constantly. I've let the lawn die, and go to dirt. I never wash the driveway with water, even though my goat pisses all over it every day. I go outside to piss, because using X-quarts of water to wash a pint of piss down to the septic tank makes less sense than simply walking out to where the septic tank is buried, and pissing there. So my toilet only gets flushed three times a day ( for the #2 in the morning ).
So today, after a lifetime of conserving water, what do I see? Right down the street, where once stood a vacant lot filled with weeds and rocks, there's now a housing development going in. Big billboard, reading "KB Homes. Here Comes The Neighborhood!" Several dozen houses, ALL of them hooking into the same water supply we've spent the last few decades saving and conserving. The same water supply for years we were told wasn't enough for those of us who were already here.
When we were conserving water, I assumed it was so I would have enough for later. Not for K.B. Homes to show up, buy low, sell high, f*#k everything up, and move on.
Remember I mentioned living in Fontana? In '77, there were 24,000 people living there. Then the Big Drought Of '77 hit, so we conserved water. Let the yellow mellow, and all that. Now, Fontana has a population over 200,000! That's right, a better than eight-fold increase, with no new sources of water. We weren't letting the piss stew without flushing so there would appear to be enough water to justify jamming tens of thousands of new people where they have no business being, but that's that what happened.
Today, after 35+ years of finding new ways to conserve water, I'm out of new things to do. This current drought will not alter my water use at all, because after a lifetime of cutting back, I'm through trying.
Because I live by myself, on a large ( five acre ) lot, my water use base-line, allotment, or whatever it's called, is about ten times what I'm using right now. Two showers, three flushes ( for one #2 ), and washing one pot, one pan, and one plate a day doesn't add up to a hell of a lot of water use.
Late last year, Governor Brown was crowing about all the new housing starts, after a few years of almost no new houses being built in California. Where the f*#k did he think they were going to get water? From like a flying unicorn, or something? Maybe he thought Jesus would bring us water for all those new houses. Or Obama.
Now, Brown says we need to conserve. Why? So we can cram even more people and more houses into an already depleted environment? Because that's exactly what happens when we behave like Good Germans, and conserve water. Every time. Without fail
Someone in government needs to have the balls to stand up to K.B. Homes and the rest, and say "the god damn boat is full here, go build somewhere else". And it should have been done forty years ago. Until then, I'll follow their lead, and keep planting avocados ( 40 new trees in 2013! More than that are planned for 2014 ).
I'll be re-planting the lawn this year, too. The dogs like it ( and they miss it now that it's gone ), its monetary cost will be small, and besides, grass in the desert has the Presidential Stamp Of Approval.
|
|
couchmaster
climber
pdx
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 04:57pm PT
|
Chas said: "Late last year, Governor Brown was crowing about all the new housing starts, after a few years of almost no new houses being built in California. Where the f*#k did he think they were going to get water? From like a flying unicorn, or something? Maybe he thought Jesus would bring us water for all those new houses. Or Obama."
That's a funny line!!! In fact, yesterday governor Brown announced a $678,000 upcoming bill for investment into water conservation (perhaps it's mostly spent on new ads that pitch the new motto: "if it's yellow and not jello walk away, if it's brown, don't frown") and it won't cost you a nickel. See? Jesus is listening and you get helped No Charge, voters already approved the borrowing it just wasn't borrowed yet. See? Free money?
http://www.kcra.com/news/gov-brown-to-announce-emergency-drought-legislation/24558278
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 07:05pm PT
|
Remember I mentioned living in Fontana? In '77, there were 24,000 people living there. Then the Big Drought Of '77 hit, so we conserved water. Let the yellow mellow, and all that. Now, Fontana has a population over 200,000! . . . Today, after 35+ years of finding new ways to conserve water, I'm out of new things to do. This current drought will not alter my water use at all, because after a lifetime of cutting back, I'm through trying. . . . I'll . . . keep planting avocados . ... I'll be re-planting the lawn this year, too. The dogs like it ( and they miss it now that it's gone ), its monetary cost will be small, and besides, grass in the desert has the Presidential Stamp Of Approval.
All fine with me, except that even with all the new urban populations, more than 70% of Cali water goes to agriculture. There are individual water districts where residential growth is an issue, but statewide, new housing starts and pops aren't the problem.
The problem is farming. We spend 70-80% of our water subsidizing 3-7% of our economy.
Are you MWD? I'm fine with you planting avos or whatever. If you're MWD, you're paying 5 times what corporate almond growers pay for the same water. If we just charged agribusiness the same rates we charge urban/residential users, the "drought" would melt. There's more than enough water in Cali for residential use up to and including old-skool Fontana big lots with some avos and maybe a chicken coop.
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 07:12pm PT
|
The orange groves were here before the suburbs.
Southern California was already overdeveloped by 1960.
Why should the latecomers usurp the rights of those that were here first?
Just because you outnumber the farmers?
The cost structure of a Semitropic, Imperial Irrigation District etc, bear no resemblance to MWD's
|
|
the albatross
Gym climber
Flagstaff
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 07:14pm PT
|
I was reading on a fire fighter forum earlier today and one of the weather folks was suggesting that next week it looks as if the SoCal area may get a little precipitation. Not enough to put much of a dent into the drought, but should ease fire concerns for a couple weeks if it occurs.
Check out the US Drought Monitor for a startling pic of CA (and much of the Western US):
http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 07:17pm PT
|
Everyone knows water conservation efforts never work. Just another one of Jerry's pipe dreams. Can one of you smart anti-science types explain this graph to me... it has numbers and lines and stuff on it, so it is very confusing...
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 07:24pm PT
|
Good illustration of a lose-lose scenario there, Weschrist.
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 07:28pm PT
|
The orange groves were here before the suburbs. Why should the latecomers usurp the rights of those that were here first? Just because you outnumber the farmers?
If Chaz is MWD< that's actually incorrect, at least partly-- much of the westwisde SJ went in later. Most of the almonds have been last 20 years.
So far as rights go, sure-- you want us to maintain the rights structure we have now w/o modification. That's fine, so long as we quit subsidizing water exporting and speculation.
Charge all rights holders the same per acre foot. Not a free market, but a lot closer than what we have now. Charge the Resnicks and Paramount the same as we're charging MWD and Chaz.
Then step back and watch the drought melt.
Even an egalitarian cost structure would still include a huge urban/residential subsidy for farming. I'm not against subsidizing certain kinds of farming. It's just that our current method is insane.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 07:29pm PT
|
+1 million people accompanied by a REDUCTION in water use is not a lose lose... unless you are a fuking idiot.
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 07:49pm PT
|
Everyone knows water conservation efforts never work. Just another one of Jerry's pipe dreams. Can one of you smart anti-science types explain this graph to me... it has numbers and lines and stuff on it, so it is very confusing...
well, i'm not an anti-science type, but i'll take a wild stab.
that's a bit of agit-prop.
most of the reductions with pop growth come from conversion of ag land to urban/residential. as pop grows, so deos demand for real estate. residential property is vastly more valuable than ag property, with occasional exceptions. urban/residential also uses way less water. so pops rise, ag land goes out of producetion, and total water use remains stagnant or declines.
urban/residential conservation can make a huge difference in individual districts. since most urban areas spend about 50% of their water on landscaping, there are significant savings to be had within urban districts. but those efforts represent a statistically insignificant chunk of statewide water use.
put another way, that chart is almost entirely useless.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 08:03pm PT
|
Makes sense. Still a net reduction in water use. All farm land should be converted to suburbia... resistance is futile.
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 08:35pm PT
|
All farm land should be converted to suburbia... resistance is futile.
yeah, never thought i'd say this, but we need more chaz.
and less mega-dairy and corporate almonds.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 08:46pm PT
|
If those are the options, I'm voting to send Lake Tahoe to SoCal.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 09:27pm PT
|
Someone in government needs to have the balls to stand up to K.B. Homes and the rest, and say "the god damn boat is full here, go build somewhere else". And it should have been done forty years ago. Until then, I'll follow their lead, and keep planting avocados ( 40 new trees in 2013! More than that are planned for 2014 ).
And there you have it: agriculture is the problem. You conserved water, but you planted trees that have required more water than your home will in 100 years.
How about someone stands up to YOU, and tells you to stop planting?
Oh, because it is your God-Given Right to plant whatever you want, and use as much water as you want, whenever you want. Because it is YOUR land.
In the meantime, the land owned by KB Homes, building a development that will use LESS water than you currently use on your land, should for some reason be told that they should not be able to do what they want with their land?
I say get rid of you and your avocados first.
Oh, and get rid of your ancient inefficient model of toilet for the newer, much better designed ones. The water company will pay you to do it. Or even better, connect to the sewer instead of contaminating the land. Or even better, get a composting toilet.
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 09:52pm PT
|
ken, commercial agriculture uses all the water.
it's true that the kind of land use chaz says he practices uses more water than, say, a hi-rise apartment with no landscaping. but at the moment, the water conservation jerry brown and others are demanding is going to subsidize corporate ag in the lower san joaquin.
there are good historic and environmental reasons for supporting a mix of large lots with productive landscape-- prolly even including avos as well as veggie gardens -- in metropolitan landscapes. without those chunks of open (and probably irrigated) ground in the urban/metro mix, you have even worse problems.
concrete doesn't absorb water, so you get less water absorption (and aquifer replenishment), worse runoff, and flood problems. without those larger plots of open productive ground and plants, you have no support for the bugs and birds that we need to have other stuff, including productive agriculture. since most urban/residential areas in cali have displaced what used to be seasonal wetlands, bigger lots with veg are the best actionable substitute.
and historically speaking, that kind of landscape use was predominant in the late 19th to late middle 20th century. the kind of landscape that mixes ag/urban/residential use, is something we should encourage in stead of the hard urban/industrial farm nexus we're currently subsidizing.
it's also racially neutral, chaz's inclinations aside. compton used to be (early 1940s) like fontana, lots of small homes with chicken coop ands gardens and maybe a milk cow. many of the new immigrants to cali come from rural areas--- that's the great demographic transition of the last century, country folks forced to move to the metropole. lots of them would like to have decent family gardens and a couple of animals if zoning and the economy allowed.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 09:55pm PT
|
Everyone knows water conservation efforts never work. Just another one of Jerry's pipe dreams. Can one of you smart anti-science types explain this graph to me... it has numbers and lines and stuff on it, so it is very confusing...
A number of people have misinterpreted the graph.
It is NOT a graph of the state, it is a graph of LOS ANGELES.
when we look at LA, or more largely, the South Coast Region, the situation is very different than it is for the State as a whole:
California Department of Water Resources California Water Plan Update 2005, December 2005. http://www.waterplan.water.ca.gov
Note that for this urban region, which includes LA, OC, San Diego, that agriculture only makes up 16% of the usage! 54% of the total is by residential users! (in the slide, "MF" refers to multifamily housing, "SF" to single family housing)
|
|
Gene
climber
|
|
|
Feb 20, 2014 - 09:56pm PT
|
What is "commercial" and "corporate" agriculture?
Not trolling.
Thanks,
Gene
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!