4 ms·

And what will be the source of the water for additional California residents to subsist on? We just went through a 7-year drought, and they seem to be becoming

And what will be the source of the water for additional California residents to subsist on? We just went through a 7-year drought, and they seem to be becoming more frequent and longer; never mind that climate change is making it all worse, as the snow-pack gets smaller and melts quicker. We can cut agriculture and build more dams somewhere to buffer more snow melt, but these are politically difficult to pull off, and of course have other negative effects on various constituencies (including migrant workers, like the ones who used to pick the crops where Silicon Valley now sits).

80mph 7y ago
Not too long ago during the Camp/Paradise fires, just about everyone in northern CA was breathing a toxic cloud of burnt drywall, cars, chemicals, etc. for over a week. Think of the millions of gallons of water wasted, flame retardants dumped, and carbon emissions created. Californians need to live in denser construction near jobs. No more sprawling, low-level construction where fires can easily spread and jump from one building to the next.
- drfuchs 7y ago
  The amount of water used in fighting fires amounts less than a drop in the bucket (pun intended), so your advice, while perhaps otherwise worthwhile, wouldn't make a measurable difference in the quest to provide sufficient water for population growth.
- ip26 7y ago
  Californians need to live in denser construction near jobs. No more sprawling, low-level construction where fires can easily spread and jump from one building to the next. I don't necessarily disagree with your conclusion, but you don't exactly solve the problem of fire propagation from house to house by putting everyone all into one building. A given suburban house might propagate and burn down. But if a 500 unit apartment building goes, you're losing 500 units, no ifs ands or buts.
  - imtringued 7y ago
    Denser construction is generally more resistant against fires.

80mph 7y ago

Not too long ago during the Camp/Paradise fires, just about everyone in northern CA was breathing a toxic cloud of burnt drywall, cars, chemicals, etc. for over a week. Think of the millions of gallons of water wasted, flame retardants dumped, and carbon emissions created. Californians need to live in denser construction near jobs. No more sprawling, low-level construction where fires can easily spread and jump from one building to the next.

drfuchs 7y ago
The amount of water used in fighting fires amounts less than a drop in the bucket (pun intended), so your advice, while perhaps otherwise worthwhile, wouldn't make a measurable difference in the quest to provide sufficient water for population growth.
ip26 7y ago
Californians need to live in denser construction near jobs. No more sprawling, low-level construction where fires can easily spread and jump from one building to the next. I don't necessarily disagree with your conclusion, but you don't exactly solve the problem of fire propagation from house to house by putting everyone all into one building. A given suburban house might propagate and burn down. But if a 500 unit apartment building goes, you're losing 500 units, no ifs ands or buts.
- imtringued 7y ago
  Denser construction is generally more resistant against fires.