13 ms·
How California Is Winning the Drought
- bradleyjg 11y ago>> Last fall, prodded by Gov. Jerry Brown’s administration, the California Legislature passed a sweeping groundwater law, taking California from having the least regulated groundwater in the country to being a model. Unfortunately by the time the law envisions the new rules being fully implemented — 2040 — aquifers across the state are likely to be permanently damaged or destroyed by over-pumping.
- e40 11y agoI'm curious if you have more information about that.
- akanster 11y agoThis 60 mins segment touched on it: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/depleting-the-water/ http://www.cbsnews.com/news/depleting-the-water/
- twsted 11y agoJust seen, thanks. Well done and... much less optimistic.
- dccoolgai 11y agoNot really more information about that, per se, but if you have ever seen Ken Burns' documentary on the Great Dustbowl it is interleaved with a lot of really fascinating things about how groundwater/water effects the overall affluence and economy of America as a whole - enough to cause Great Depressions and so forth. At the end, if memory serves, they discuss the Oglala aquifer and how it is at currently dangerous levels that could potentially cause another Dustbowl/Great-Depression like chain of events.
- bradleyjg 11y agoThis is a good article on subsidence (caused by collapsing aquifers) and saltwater intrusion: http://www.desertsun.com/story/news/environment/2013/12/21/calls-grow-for-more-oversight-of-californias-groundwater/4161653/ http://www.desertsun.com/story/news/environment/2013/12/21/c... And here's an article with the timeline for the law's implementation: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/09/140917-california-groundwater-law-drought-central-valley-environment-science/ http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/09/140917-calif...
- ehvatum 11y agoSubsidence is a huge issue associated associated with aquifer depletion. http://geochange.er.usgs.gov/sw/changes/anthropogenic/subside/ http://geochange.er.usgs.gov/sw/changes/anthropogenic/subsid... http://geochange.er.usgs.gov/sw/changes/anthropogenic/subside/ http://geochange.er.usgs.gov/sw/changes/anthropogenic/subsid... That fact alone tells you a lot. Some formations are more resilient; these tend to experience less subsidence. In systematic terms, sticky bag vs rigid tank.
- ChuckMcM 11y agoAs a number of folks have commented when water is removed too quickly from the aquifer it subsides and can't be refilled by percolation. In a sad, and very close to home, way Sunnyvale has been drawing more heavily on wells in the area to back fill water allocations and that appears to have created some subsidence near my home. But from a technical point of view, one wonders if it would be possible to build replacement aquifers underground. I'm imagining something related to a tunnel boring machine but leaves behind a structure capable of holding water and supporting the ground above itself when "empty" sort of a loose lattice network of structures.
- bradleyjg 11y agoIt might be possible, but I don't think it would be practical. It's easy to forget how big the numbers are when dealing with water. For example, all three Chunnel tunnels add up to less than 4500 acre-feet in volume.
- mapmap 11y agoI remember reading about Sun Valley in LA County that built cisterns to regulate flooding and then use that water for irrigation during dry periods.
- whyenot 11y agoThe relationship between subsidence and groundwater pumping was actually discovered in the Santa Clara Valley in the 1940s. As a result, percolation ponds were built in the 1960s to recharge local aquifers and ground water pumping by the Santa Clara Water District (which serves Sunnyvale) was reduced to sustainable levels. Subsidence basically stopped in 1969. If it has returned, that would be a sad development.
- bduerst 11y agoOverdrafting and dropping water tables can cause the following: - Land subsiding (sinking) which permanently lowers the capacity of the aquifer - Chemical and pH composition changes, which can limit the usefulness of water drafted in the future - Irreversible damage to native aquatic ecosystems, where the water table reaches the surface, which would have normally survived the drought.
- bsder 11y ago> Unfortunately by the time the law envisions the new rules being fully implemented — 2040 — aquifers across the state are likely to be permanently damaged or destroyed by over-pumping. I view the law more as a warning to the agribusinesses than anything else. Up until now, the agribusinesses assumed they had free rein. The fact that laws are now on books is a warning that if they don't start taking action, more laws are coming that will be far more immediate. California has a proposition system. If the people aren't getting water, they will vote to shut down farming.
- xigency 11y ago"At least as clean tap" really reads as "almost as clean" without an adequate explanation.
- kbenson 11y agoWhat? How do you read the opposite meaning because there isn't an explanation?
- xigency 11y agoBecause there's no source cited for the information and it's provided in editorial journalism. What's described is a large polluted source of water and presumably it's being filtered with microscopic screen filters. While I'm sure if I were aware of the engineering behind it, that I would agree that it was potable and sanitary, just reading it sounds kind of iffy.
- dlevine 11y agoFor anyone interested in this, I would recommend checking out The Water Knife (fiction) and Cadillac Desert (non-fiction).
- eitally 11y agoAnd I suggest reading Cadillac Desert without first looking at the publishing date. It's shocking that we have been so lackadaisical about water consumption for so long.
- oconnore 11y ago-- spoilers -- The Water Knife is interesting to the extent that it creates a new sort of dystopian world, but then it doesn't do anything with it. I wanted to see characters evolve, the balance of power shift, or a meaningful escape. Instead it was just competing actors chasing a shiny object, a silly miscommunication, and then everything goes back to normal.
- wmil 11y ago> 70 percent more tomatoes per 1,000 gallons of water Am I reading this wrong? The "1000 gallons" seems superfluous since we're already talking about percentages. Replace it with "gallon of water" or even "amount of water" and the 70% doesn't change.
- Mz 11y agoI think it is kind of a standard measure when talking large scale water usage. He's a farmer. It is probably habit to speak of water in those terms. His mental space is different from someone dealing with household usage.
- cdr 11y agoIf the measurement was originally per 1000 gallons it makes sense to preserve the unit. It may be rounded from acre-foot/year, which is 893 gallons/day.
- SilasX 11y agoBecause "70 percent more tomatoes per unit of water" is too abstract for most people.
- cjensen 11y agoYes, it's mathematically superfluous. Real human communication is an evolved trait which often is logically or mathematically weird. Ask a person how many brownies to bake for a party and they might say "at least 10 to 20." The "to 20" is mathematically without meaning, but it seems to communicate something.
- prewett 11y agoInteresting article, but I feel like I am missing something here. According to the article, California can accommodate maybe another year or two of drought, so beyond that would be a problem? Also, the drought it causing the farmers to further deplete the depleting aquifers. So I'm not seeing how this is "winning the drought." It sounds more like maintaining the current unsustainability through better irrigation and depleting aquifers, but when the aquifer is gone it's going to be bad.
- ianlevesque 11y agoBut "the state’s economy grew 27 percent faster than the country’s economy as a whole", and that's all that matters!
- allendoerfer 11y agoAnd says exactly nothing. Say the US economy has barely grown by 0.1 %. If California's economy would have grown by 0.2%, it would have grown 100% faster than the country's economy.
- oaktowner 11y agoGDP growth for the US has been at 2.2-2.4 for the last 3 years[1]...if California is growing 25% faster, it isn't huge but it isn't negligible, either. [1] http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG
- kbenson 11y agoI think the article is trying to point out the things being done right, while also acknowledging the problems that still exist. You can only operate at a loss for so long before you need to fold up shop, no matter the ways you minimize that loss.
- azinman2 11y agoFor those wanting real info, watch this video from the state's water board's director to the MIT NorCal alumni club. It's super fascinating. http://ttv.mit.edu/videos/31839-california-water-2015-felicia-marcus-chair-california-water-resources-control-board http://ttv.mit.edu/videos/31839-california-water-2015-felici...
- sandworm101 11y agoWin a drought? This isn't chess. The wording should be 'survive', cope with or even struggle through. (Take that nature!) There is no winning. I was in California six months ago and was taken aback by the lack of worry. Nobody seemed to be doing anything. The lawns and fields were green, the backyard pools all full and people were washing cars like normal.
- TYPE_FASTER 11y ago> I was in California six months ago and was taken aback by the lack of worry. Exactly. I was there in April. It was surreal to me how normal everything seemed to me. I do not think reality sets in until you run out, which has happened to some towns in the Central Valley. Edit: also, the fact that some residential areas are not metered seems nuts: http://www.mercurynews.com/science/ci_25303957/california-drought-more-than-255-000-homes-and http://www.mercurynews.com/science/ci_25303957/california-dr...
- mikegioia 11y agoI'm not sure why you're being downvoted, but I saw the same thing in Palo Alto earlier this year. I walked through the neighborhood and twice saw hoses left on leaking water on the home's front walkway. That doesn't count the 10-20 sprinklers that were running mid-day. I understand that personal use is nothing compared to agricultural use, but it's as if everyone will continue business as usual until all the water is gone, and then it feels like "shrug oh well guess we'll move".
- buckbova 11y ago> it's as if everyone will continue business as usual until all the water is gone This has happened before and in the past the state made a big deal about it and everyone panicked. But before we ran out of water, the biggest deluge of water hit California in decades and the populous prayed for sun instead.
- lbaskin 11y agoInteresting. Very different from Israel, which is in a part of the world that has long suffered from chronic droughts - the culture is very much that water needs to be preserved and not wasted (e.g., by taking long showers, etc). And I would say this is true even after Israel "beat" the drought with desalination plants (http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/05/30/world/middleeast/water-revolution-in-israel-overcomes-any-threat-of-drought.html http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/05/30/world/middleeast/water-...).
- giltleaf 11y agoHydroponic farms, vertical farms, and agroecology could all do even better. Unsustainable food production is more of a contributor than personal consumption (though people's obsession with meaningless green lawns is also ridiculous). I wish the article did a better job of exploring various agricultural solutions - drip irrigation is just a baby step when compared to something like hydroponics. Hydroponic production uses anywhere (and I'm just trying to remember the various claims I've seen in both studies and articles without going back to them) from 75%-90% less water than conventional ag, beating drip irrigation off the low end. Agroecology challenges the monoculture system that (I think) caused this over-consumption. By planting thirsty crops like corn and polluting the existing aquacultures with the pesticides needed to preserve an area lacking any sort of biodiversity, monocultures have created a fragile food supply that increasing prices (and terrible subsidies) continue to highlight. Agroecology, on the other hand, encourages a system of farming that takes into account the cultural/social context of a region while suggesting methods (grounding those suggestions in data) of production that respect local ecology and agricultural practices for increased production.
- trhway 11y agoEfficiency? What efficiency?! CA farmers are increasing nut trees acreage because nut trees require a lot of water, and thus nut prices are going up in the current drought, and thus the farmers are rushing to increase the production of such profitable product. (Heard on NPR)
- abandonliberty 11y agoSimple: Charge appropriately for water.
- thaumaturgy 11y agoHere's a print version of the NPR story you're talking about: http://www.npr.org/2015/08/06/430077437/the-twisty-logic-of-the-drought-grow-thirsty-crops-to-dig-deeper-wells http://www.npr.org/2015/08/06/430077437/the-twisty-logic-of-... I looked it up because I thought there was no way that it could be true, you must've missed some important detail. But no, the article says exactly what you said it does. What a perfect example of the intersection of the free market and the tragedy of the commons.
- Mz 11y agoFor a century, California has pioneered innovations that have changed the way we all live. For probably over a century in fact. And California has pioneered environmental laws for decades as well, going back to about (or "at least"?) the 1960's. Salt Dreams is a fascinating book about the history of water usage, the Colorado River and the Salton Sea going back hundreds of years, to before the existence of the Salton Sea. I also recently read a history of another water use district in the Central Valley. I cannot recall the name of that book, but the history of water usage and water law in California is rich and fascinating and a lot of pioneering things have happened out here.
- brightball 11y agoNecessity is the mother of invention
- russell 11y agoCambria, where I live, halfway between San Francisco LA, is particularly hard hit. Cambria is supplied completely by well water. We had been trying since 2008 to build a desalinization plan, but had been blocked at every turn by the Coastal Commission and other regulatory bodies, because we would have had to dig a pipeline across the beach to get to the salt water. As a result draconian conservation measures were put into place. We were allocated only 50 gallons per person per day. If you exceeded your allotment, you were fined, two periods in a row your water was cut off. There was an immediate 40% drop in water usage. That wasnt enough. Last year with only a 6 months water supply left. The Community Services District decided to build a brackish water treatment plant. Treated water from the sewage treatment plant was to be pumped into the aquifer and withdrawn and treated by a reverse osmosis purification plant. Even then there were a whole bunch of regulatory hassles including that the $3 million plant be used only for the current drought without being recertified again. EDIT: Cambria is in one of only three Monterrey Pine forests in CA, essentially an urban forest. The drought has exacerbated the pitch canker and beetle infestations. Forty per cent of the pine trees died last year. I lost four of the five on my property. Another four had died earlier. We are in danger of an explosive urban fire like the Oakland hills fire of 1991. One huge problem is the pines are protected. You cannot cut down one without a permit at $125 + $25 for each additional tree, plus restoration requirements. Most lots are small and close together so it may cost up to $2000 to cut down a tree. I had only four and I said screw the permit. But my neighbor has hundreds. It will cost millions to clear out the dead trees in town, but no state or federal grants seem to be forthcoming, but if you dont cut down your trees, after all the red tape, you get fined.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- danieltillett 11y agoStories like this make me glad that I don’t live in California.
- bsder 11y agoWe're glad you don't live here either. We have enough people moving in without you.
- russell 11y agoThe article was wrong in stating that pretty much all the agricultural was usage was for food. 15-20% of the water is for growing alfalfa. That may be cow food, but it is a huge waste of water. A lot of press is given to the fact that 10% of the water is used for almonds, but they are at least a a high value crop. Another high water usage crop is cotton, again not food. Give it back to the South. And rice; you have to be nuts to grow rice in the desert. It's not worth destroying the aquifers for such crops.
- xraystyle 11y agoAlmonds aren't that high-value. Agriculture in total accounts for 2% of the state's GDP. I'm guessing less than 5% of all ag in the state is almonds. The California economy is expanding at faster than 2% per year currently. I'm pretty sure we could tell the almonds to take a hike and not even notice.
- greeneggs 11y ago"I'm guessing less than 5% of all ag in the state is almonds." Based on what? Are you just making up numbers? By round numbers, it seems to be around 10% of agriculture. This report states that it is 15%, but the report is funded by the Almond Board and is probably making generous assumptions [1]. [1] http://aic.ucdavis.edu/almonds/Economic%20Impacts%20of%20California%20Almond%20Industry_Full%20Report_FinalPDF_v2.pdf http://aic.ucdavis.edu/almonds/Economic%20Impacts%20of%20Cal...
- tbabb 11y agoLet's not forget that orchards represent many years of investment. Killing an orchard has a much, much higher cost than simply choosing to grow a different yearly crop.
- tn13 11y agoThis is a classic example of post-hoc analysis. It like American presidents who are always there to claim credit for any minor economic or job growth but quick to blame the job loss and any other negative effect on economy on "someone else who is evil". So California had water shortage and they decided to use the resource wisely? Everyone except federal government knows that you can spend the resource you dont have. I would like to know why California as a state and other cities have not invested in increasing number of reservoirs, not allowed desalination and other things despite the population of California has doubled in last 30 years. Part of this is the bone headed environmentalists who would rather save few trouts than saving human beings but I think the the local bodies arent putting up a fight either.
- bro-stick 11y agoIt's hard for most people to accept that the situation is often beyond immediate and total human control, and instead use blame as a shortcut and abdication of responsibility and power. It's like sociolological bikeshedding instead of working on positive solutions to modify lifestyles toward prevention. Such is human nature, but thankfully it's not an universal condition.
- bcheung 11y agoNo mention of aquaponics? I'm growing food in the backyard with it and it is awesome. It uses much less water and is much less of a hassle. Better yields too.
- bro-stick 11y agoIn the '80s California, I had some nudist, hippie neighbors. And of course they did hydroponics (not just for pot), but did grow some vegetables including tomatoes in both horizontal vats and vertical trellises. I really think it's a lot more efficient because it uses less far less land than current methods. (Btw: don't buy products which contain palm oil due to the prevalence of "green washed" intermediaries lying to downsteam suppliers, which in turn leads to persistent forest -clearing fires and land theft in places like Borneo and Indonesia to grow massive palm oil plantations to make cheap, Western consumer goods.)
- rebootthesystem 11y agoA perfect example of just how fucked out society/government/agencies have become. I am not particularly crazy about the guy but this is one of the reasons Trump is doing so well in his bid for the Presidency. He is saying thing politicians don't dare say because their survival depends on being liked rather than saying things people don't like to hear. I think Trump said (I don't follow him, not sure) that in today's messed-up system we would not be able to build any of our great cities. From Los Angeles and San Francisco to Boston and Manhattan. If you wanted to undertake projects of that magnitude you could not get it done in a thousand years. That says a lot. Here's a town, Cambria, where building a pipeline to the ocean was stopped by environmental nazi's. The fanatics think they are doing earth good and feel self-righteous about opposing such a thing. What's the situation now? Nearly HALF of the forest is dead, with more to come. And they are not even sensible enough to allow for common sense removal of the dangerous dead trees. Which means there's great potential for a massive fire that will take out the forest and the town --and probably cost lives. Real fucking smart. Look, we don't have to destroy our environment but we also don't have to destroy ourselves. Nobody wants to live in an industrial dilapidated mess. Yet here's a perfect example of environmentalists-gone-wild effectively destroying a complete ecosystem. It will take a massive amount of time to have this forest recover from the death of half it's trees (or, worst, as this isn't over yet). In the end, it's sad. Last night I had dinner with my parents. It was my Dad's birthday, he is 87 and in great health. A life-long entrepreneur who taught me a lot. He has voted Democrat all his life. He is so sick of the bullshit that last night he told me he is definitely voting for Donald Trump if he gets the nomination. So said my Mom, also a life-long Democratic voter. There were another five dems at the table, from 60 to 75 years of age, who said exactly the same thing. I was blown away. Could not believe it. That's how bad things have gotten.
- kbenson 11y ago> Here's a town, Cambria, where building a pipeline to the ocean was stopped by environmental nazi's Is that what was said? I don't think it was. Unless you want to just assume the Coastal Commission and "other regulatory bodies" are "environmental nazi's [sic]". The laws and/or regulations causing problems here may or may not be originally linked to environmental efforts, but either way, blanket sentiments that regulation is bad, or good, don't really help and just add to the rhetoric noise that detracts from people getting the useful information needed to institute change, whther that be small scale and local, large scale and federal, or somewhere in-between. There are of course many instances where regulations have become too complex and rigid and actually are detrimental to the public or environment, even if that's what they were meant to protect, but there are also many cases where the lack of regulation causes severe problems. Noting the cases that affecting you or that you've been exposed to and extrapolating a pattern exposing a problem with regulation or lack of regulation as a whole for the nation is rarely useful.
- quinndupont 11y agoYou had me up until "morning coffee brewed matter-of-factly with recycled water." HELL NO.
- known 11y agoWe can learn from Israel dip irrigation system;
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- plicense 11y agoOr how the drought is loosing to California..