• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

California's water

Dittohead not!

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
52,009
Reaction score
33,944
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
As Mark Twain once observed: "Whiskey Is for Drinking; Water Is for Fighting Over. "

That was true in Mark Twain's time, and it's true now.

California uses more water than nature gives us every year, including wet years. Wet years, meanwhile, are getting fewer and further between.

Historically, the five southernmost rivers flowing from the Sierra Nevada flowed not to the ocean, but to the biggest freshwater lake in the country outside of the Great Lakes. Now, every drop of those rivers is used, and the lake is dry.

The second largest river in the state, the San Joaquin, that used to accommodate ocean going vessels over a hundred miles inland now goes dry. Every drop is used.

The difference between what falls as rain or snow and what is needed is made up by pumping ground water that has accumulated over thousands of years. No one really knows just how much is left, but everyone knows that the supply is diminishing. Eventually, it will be gone.

That water is used mostly for a multi billion dollar ag industry. Some of it goes to coastal cities that could build desalinization plants, and should, but most of it grows food.

There are about seven billion reasons why it is important to keep the world's food supply going. Only about 0.5% of them live in California.

Sooner or later, the State of California will run out of water and will no longer be able to support agriculture without importing water from somewhere else.

That, in a nutshell, is the situation that faces the state of California, along with anyone who likes to eat.

Just thought you might like to know.
 
Dittohead not! said:
As Mark Twain once observed: "Whiskey Is for Drinking; Water Is for Fighting Over. "

That was true in Mark Twain's time, and it's true now.

California uses more water than nature gives us every year, including wet years. Wet years, meanwhile, are getting fewer and further between.

Historically, the five southernmost rivers flowing from the Sierra Nevada flowed not to the ocean, but to the biggest freshwater lake in the country outside of the Great Lakes. Now, every drop of those rivers is used, and the lake is dry.

The second largest river in the state, the San Joaquin, that used to accommodate ocean going vessels over a hundred miles inland now goes dry. Every drop is used.

The difference between what falls as rain or snow and what is needed is made up by pumping ground water that has accumulated over thousands of years. No one really knows just how much is left, but everyone knows that the supply is diminishing. Eventually, it will be gone.

That water is used mostly for a multi billion dollar ag industry. Some of it goes to coastal cities that could build desalinization plants, and should, but most of it grows food.

There are about seven billion reasons why it is important to keep the world's food supply going. Only about 0.5% of them live in California.

Sooner or later, the State of California will run out of water and will no longer be able to support agriculture without importing water from somewhere else.

That, in a nutshell, is the situation that faces the state of California, along with anyone who likes to eat.

Just thought you might like to know.
Click to expand...


The more we feed water to LA, the less water there is to go to agriculture.

Then we have subsidized farms growing cotton fer christ sakes... a water hungry, low value crop.
And Gov Brown plans to drain the delta so as to salinate the Delta farmer's water table to eventually kill off farming to build subdivisions for bay area labor.
California's problem is too many people, and of those too many people too many of them are not working. They are living of the sweat of others.

And there is no solution other than to pipe water from the Mississippi to California. (actually to the Rockies to dump into the Colorado River.) plan for a major **** storm.
 
Dittohead not! said:
That water is used mostly for a multi billion dollar ag industry. Some of it goes to coastal cities that could build desalinization plants, and should, but most of it grows food.
Click to expand...

Excellent post.
California's problems are monumental, and to some extent, unique.
They're also very expensive, and should California decide that it wishes to continue on its path, it is going to have to make some long overdue commitments. Those commitments are also extremely expensive as well. But, the return on that expense is massive.

It is no longer thought foolish to say that California has no choice but to desalinate ocean water. There is no avoiding this certainty, except among crackpots who want the crops without planting seeds, or the power of the waves without hearing the roar of the ocean.

California needs several things in order to continue a realistic path of existence:
Desalinated water, a high speed rail corridor and plenty of alternative power.
All three are interdependent upon one another, because without all three, not one of them is possible.

It is within our technological grasp to develop thorium nuclear power and solar power.
Thorium is the safer version of nuclear power which the federal government shelved in the Cold War days because it was believed that it was impossible to pursue both thorium and uranium fuel cycles simultaneously, and the military needed the uranium fuel cycle to produce weapons. Solar's potential is obvious and needs little introduction because in large parts, it is already here, together with wind power.

High speed rail turbocharges our business sector, takes strain off car and air travel and makes exurbian commutes realistic and thus eases strain on housing issues.
Desalinated ocean water provides the much needed backup to our water demands.

All three are high dollar investments but all three are capable of producing enormous returns once they are established.
We should have begun making these investments a long time ago.
 
chuckiechan said:
And there is no solution other than to pipe water from the Mississippi to California. (actually to the Rockies to dump into the Colorado River.) plan for a major **** storm.
Click to expand...

No other solution? :lamo
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
Excellent post.
California's problems are monumental, and to some extent, unique.
They're also very expensive, and should California decide that it wishes to continue on its path, it is going to have to make some long overdue commitments. Those commitments are also extremely expensive as well. But, the return on that expense is massive.

It is no longer thought foolish to say that California has no choice but to desalinate ocean water. There is no avoiding this certainty, except among crackpots who want the crops without planting seeds, or the power of the waves without hearing the roar of the ocean.

California needs several things in order to continue a realistic path of existence:
Desalinated water, a high speed rail corridor and plenty of alternative power.
All three are interdependent upon one another, because without all three, not one of them is possible.

It is within our technological grasp to develop thorium nuclear power and solar power.
Thorium is the safer version of nuclear power which the federal government shelved in the Cold War days because it was believed that it was impossible to pursue both thorium and uranium fuel cycles simultaneously, and the military needed the uranium fuel cycle to produce weapons. Solar's potential is obvious and needs little introduction because in large parts, it is already here, together with wind power.

High speed rail turbocharges our business sector, takes strain off car and air travel and makes exurbian commutes realistic and thus eases strain on housing issues.
Desalinated ocean water provides the much needed backup to our water demands.

All three are high dollar investments but all three are capable of producing enormous returns once they are established.
We should have begun making these investments a long time ago.
Click to expand...

Organic agriculture is inherently less water intensive. Proper soil as opposed to synthetically-amended nitrogen-burnt sand holds much more moisture. Canopies or wind-breaks provide shade in addition to mulch.

Unfortunately, water consumption is not an aspect of organic certification last I checked. So while the inherent properties exist, a farmer is not certification-inclined to conserve input.

Water Management in Organic Agriculture | TECA
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
No other solution? :lamo
Click to expand...

Yes there is, and it's not the muddy Mississippi. We have pipelines that bring great quantities of oil from Alaska and Canada. Both areas have an abundance of fresh water that could be piped into California the same as they do oil. The difference is it would not be as difficult to pump as oil and even if one did have a leak, it's just water not oil.
 
:roll::roll::roll:
Checkerboard Strangler said:
Excellent post.
California's problems are monumental, and to some extent, unique.
They're also very expensive, and should California decide that it wishes to continue on its path, it is going to have to make some long overdue commitments. Those commitments are also extremely expensive as well. But, the return on that expense is massive.

It is no longer thought foolish to say that California has no choice but to desalinate ocean water. There is no avoiding this certainty, except among crackpots who want the crops without planting seeds, or the power of the waves without hearing the roar of the ocean.

California needs several things in order to continue a realistic path of existence:
Desalinated water, a high speed rail corridor and plenty of alternative power.
All three are interdependent upon one another, because without all three, not one of them is possible.

It is within our technological grasp to develop thorium nuclear power and solar power.
Thorium is the safer version of nuclear power which the federal government shelved in the Cold War days because it was believed that it was impossible to pursue both thorium and uranium fuel cycles simultaneously, and the military needed the uranium fuel cycle to produce weapons. Solar's potential is obvious and needs little introduction because in large parts, it is already here, together with wind power.

High speed rail turbocharges our business sector, takes strain off car and air travel and makes exurbian commutes realistic and thus eases strain on housing issues.
Desalinated ocean water provides the much needed backup to our water demands.

All three are high dollar investments but all three are capable of producing enormous returns once they are established.
We should have begun making these investments a long time ago.
Click to expand...

Greetings, Checkerboard Strangler. :2wave:

Excellent post! :thumbs: My sister lives near Placerville in Northern California, and she has said the same thing for a long time. She agrees that its going to be costly -what isn't in Calif? - but it will be well worth it, IHO! Every time I visit her, she takes me to see new places, and it is always an exciting trip for me! NE Ohio where I live just doesn't have the variety that CA has, unfortunately! *sigh*
 
:roll::roll::roll:
Checkerboard Strangler said:
Excellent post.
California's problems are monumental, and to some extent, unique.
They're also very expensive, and should California decide that it wishes to continue on its path, it is going to have to make some long overdue commitments. Those commitments are also extremely expensive as well. But, the return on that expense is massive.

It is no longer thought foolish to say that California has no choice but to desalinate ocean water. There is no avoiding this certainty, except among crackpots who want the crops without planting seeds, or the power of the waves without hearing the roar of the ocean.

California needs several things in order to continue a realistic path of existence:
Desalinated water, a high speed rail corridor and plenty of alternative power.
All three are interdependent upon one another, because without all three, not one of them is possible.

It is within our technological grasp to develop thorium nuclear power and solar power.
Thorium is the safer version of nuclear power which the federal government shelved in the Cold War days because it was believed that it was impossible to pursue both thorium and uranium fuel cycles simultaneously, and the military needed the uranium fuel cycle to produce weapons. Solar's potential is obvious and needs little introduction because in large parts, it is already here, together with wind power.

High speed rail turbocharges our business sector, takes strain off car and air travel and makes exurbian commutes realistic and thus eases strain on housing issues.
Desalinated ocean water provides the much needed backup to our water demands.

All three are high dollar investments but all three are capable of producing enormous returns once they are established.
We should have begun making these investments a long time ago.
Click to expand...

Greetings, Checkerboard Strangler. :2wave:

Excellent post! :thumbs: My sister lives near Placerville in Northern California, and she has said the same thing for a long time. She agrees that its going to be costly -what isn't in Calif? - but it will be well worth it, IHO! Every time I visit her, she takes me to see new places, and it is always an exciting trip for me! NE Ohio where I live just doesn't have the variety that CA has, unfortunately! *sigh*
 
Sabre said:
Yes there is, and it's not the muddy Mississippi. We have pipelines that bring great quantities of oil from Alaska and Canada. Both areas have an abundance of fresh water that could be piped into California the same as they do oil. The difference is it would not be as difficult to pump as oil and even if one did have a leak, it's just water not oil.
Click to expand...

I’ve been saying this for years; is it feasible, not sure. Build the inlet where there are annual floods or high water and have taps where needed along the way; end point, the dry lake in CA. And as you point out, if it leaks, no harm no foul. Maintenance and upkeep would be critical.
 
polgara said:
Greetings, Checkerboard Strangler.

Excellent post! My sister lives near Placerville in Northern California, and she has said the same thing for a long time. She agrees that its going to be costly -what isn't in Calif? - but it will be well worth it, IHO! Every time I visit her, she takes me to see new places, and it is always an exciting trip for me! NE Ohio where I live just doesn't have the variety that CA has, unfortunately! *sigh*
Click to expand...

It's going to be RIDICULOUSLY expensive. There will be delays, cost overruns, there will be corruption, every nightmare scenario advanced by the hysterics. All of that is true, as it is with every single large project ever attempted in the history of this and any other country.

The Tennessee Valley Authority's Rural Electrification Program was beset by the same. The Hoover Dam, same thing, the Interstate Highway Project - SAME, the Golden Gate Bridge - SAME, Boston's Big Dig - SAME...all of these projects were historically beset by problems.

And the alternative is unthinkable - - translation: UNIMAGINABLY worse.
Can you imagine what the Southern United States would have been like if we hadn't brought electricity to the region in the 1930's?

TVA_map.png
 
ecofarm said:
Organic agriculture is inherently less water intensive. Proper soil as opposed to synthetically-amended nitrogen-burnt sand holds much more moisture. Canopies or wind-breaks provide shade in addition to mulch.

Unfortunately, water consumption is not an aspect of organic certification last I checked. So while the inherent properties exist, a farmer is not certification-inclined to conserve input.

Water Management in Organic Agriculture | TECA
Click to expand...

Also see "BIOCHAR", something else the entire country needs to get into big time.
 
Sabre said:
Yes there is, and it's not the muddy Mississippi. We have pipelines that bring great quantities of oil from Alaska and Canada. Both areas have an abundance of fresh water that could be piped into California the same as they do oil. The difference is it would not be as difficult to pump as oil and even if one did have a leak, it's just water not oil.
Click to expand...

There are other solutions that don't involve importing any water at all.
 
All the more reason to invest in and improve desalination technologies; about that $1.5 trillion in infrastructure spending we were supposed to get?
 
Surrealistik said:
All the more reason to invest in and improve desalination technologies; about that $1.5 trillion in infrastructure spending we were supposed to get?
Click to expand...

That's only if Donnie's criminal friends get to OWN it.
 
Desalinization is possible for urban use. Los Angeles and San Francisco should have such plants for municipal water supplies.

It is not practical for water needed for agriculture. It would cost more than the crops would be worth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom