8 ms·

I live in Arizona. The people commenting here suggesting anyone living in a desert should be 'punished' and forced to live without toilets are completely out of

I live in Arizona. The people commenting here suggesting anyone living in a desert should be 'punished' and forced to live without toilets are completely out of touch with reality. Golf courses, lawns, and toilets are not the issue. Rural Arizona, in the middle of nowhere in a cotton field? Yeah, you might not have well water. And that's definitely an issue. But Arizona is not going to run out of water anytime soon. We're likely in a far better water-diverse situation than CA is already, because we've been thinking about water for a _long_ time and have some of the best water infrastructure in the U.S. Where does it go? Arizona has 26 _million_ acres of farms and ranches, that is where: - 70% of our water is directed towards agriculture. - We produce 90% of the USA's leafy greens. - Our cattle industry alone produces 8 _million_ meals annually (pop. 7.1 million). - 360 million eggs annually - Our agriculture industry is $23.3bn, supporting 162,000 workers (40% of which are women, and 18k indigenous farmers/ranchers), We aren't conserving water, we're spending it because it is a valuable industry for the (unfortunately) extremely poor immigrants and others here. But there aren't signs in our bathrooms to use less water washing our hands. You don't have to ask for a glass of water at restaurants -- because these things _don't matter_. Want to conserve water in Arizona? You'd be talking about gutting the entire state's agriculture industry and destroying millions of people's lives. We can diversify our water supply, and we do. It's not stupidity and lax regulation, it's a calculated risk and choice by the people living here whose lives are built on agriculture.

gwynn 7y ago
This is an incredibly shortsighted outlook on Arizona's reckless water usage. The bulk of our water comes from the Colorado River which is a lifeline for not just us, but for over 40 million people across six different rapidly growing states. Snowpack for the river is at its lowest level in 30+ years and is projected to decrease an additional 30% due to climate change over the next two decades. As a lower-basin state, we are "investing" water which we don't actually own. Sooner or later lake Mead is going to hit an elevation of 1,075ft and the federal government will mandate that lower-basin states such as our own face the music. Will it be our blood or the state's billions that suffer? To avoid this future, all we must do is work together to scale-down our agricultural industry in favor of other economic avenues. This pointless "calculated risk" which threatens the future of America's fifth largest city and its surrounding neighbors can be undone. Sadly, I fear that the current administration under Doug Ducey cares more about leafy greens than our children's future.
- Finnucane 7y ago
  The obvious solution is build more housing.
  - gwynn 7y ago
    I agree with your point that there's blame to go around. I believe that Bobby from King Of The Hill said it best "This city should not exist. It is a monument to man's arrogance."
    - hueving 7y ago
      That's idiotic. Phoenix makes as much sense as Los Angeles and there is plenty of water from the Colorado River feeding both cities. It takes less energy to air condition Phoenix during the summer than Minneapolis takes to heat in the winter (temperature gap desired maxes 50F vs 100F). Additionally, the energy it does take is much more amenable to being fulfilled by cheap solar than the cycle required by heating at night. The only people who find it arrogant are ones who do not understand air conditioning is cheaper than heating and that water can be moved in aqueducts. Nobody claims that Chicago should not exist, nor Minneapolis, nor New York. The only difference is that they depend on older heating methods instead of air conditioning.
      - dragonwriter 7y ago
        > Phoenix makes as much sense as Los Angeles This is true, but in the exact opposite sense you intend it.
        hueving 7y ago
        You don't know my intent. My point is that most of the people that bitch about Phoenix are fine with the existence of Los Angeles. The remaining bit are too dumb to realize it's more energy efficient than the heat suckers of the North.
- slimsag 7y ago
Whatarethese 7y ago
I know that SRP has over 100 years of water in reserve. They are actively planning for decades in the future.
Spooky23 7y ago
Meanwhile in the northeast, where water is plentiful, agriculture is grinding out of existence as its unable to compete with subsidized, scaled up desert agriculture. Leafy greens can be grown with tunnels nearly everywhere, we shouldn’t be stuck with such a concentration in a place that is so obviously strategically dumb to put 90% of production.
niftich 7y ago
Arizona produces approximately 1/4 to 1/5 of the leafy greens grown in the US, by weight, depending on the exact commodity [1]. Meanwhile, California produces roughly 3/4 of such products grown in the US. The two states participate in a seasonal rotation, where California's temperate valleys produce most of the summer crop, and in the winter production is shifted to inland desert locales in both Arizona and California. [1] https://cals.arizona.edu/arec/sites/cals.arizona.edu.arec/files/publications/FINAL%20leafy%20greens%20september%202017.pdf https://cals.arizona.edu/arec/sites/cals.arizona.edu.arec/fi... [2] https://californiaagnet.com/2017/11/03/a-look-at-year-round-lettuce-production-from-californias-leafy-greens-marketing-agreement/ https://californiaagnet.com/2017/11/03/a-look-at-year-round-... [3] https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/93033/vgs-362.pdf?v=1958.8 https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/93033/vgs-362.... [4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18535425#18536045 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18535425#18536045
- ldoughty 7y ago
  And both have massive water problems where people need to drill down further and further to find water because we pump it out faster than it can refill most because gigantic farms can pump out as much water as they want for free or for a tiny fee.. basically profiting today at the cost of our children
jelliclesfarm 7y ago
AZ doesn’t produce 90% of leafy greens. That would be California and especially Salinas valley. Yuma in AZ is just insurance for Salinas greens Ag companies re weather and water.
patagonia 7y ago
You don't address CAP or Active Management Areas. You can't talk about Arizona water without talking about CAP and AMAs. There is a real issue of water usage outside of the AMAs. There has been since I left AZ in 2007. But yes, it is correct that the vast majority of water in AZ goes to agriculture. California has a similar issue. Developers are required to provide 100 year water plans before moving forward. Another thing at play that would surprise a lot of people is that just 18% of land is private. I guess I would say... True, Arizona and California produce massive amounts of produce and other agricultural output for the US (it's sunny, the climate is great, other than the lack of water). But what is it costing the environment? We all know what it is costing the environment. No one is protesting. Sadly. To say that Arizona shouldn't exist (that we shouldn't have population centers in the middle of the desert) is laughable. Ok, Las Vegas is cancelled. Cities north enough that require massive amounts of fossil fuels to stay warm enough to be livable are cancelled. While where at it, flying for vacations (or anything not of existential importance) is cancelled. Ocean freight is cancelled. My first job out of college was as a management and lobbyist assistant in Coconino County (Flagstaff). I read this from cover to cover when I started my job (I still have the marked up copy on my bookshelf): https://portal.azoah.com/oedf/documents/08A-AWS001-DWR/Center_et_al/Exhibit%20404%20Arizona%27s%20Water%20Future.pdf https://portal.azoah.com/oedf/documents/08A-AWS001-DWR/Cente... Water use is very, very carefully considered and scrutinized in AZ. > "...it's a calculated risk and choice by the people living here whose lives are built on agriculture. " Sorta. It's calculated by a subset of all stakeholders. Water rights in Arizona are slowly being purchased by developers to meet the 100 year water plan requirements. This reflects the state's move from primarily agricultural toward a more common mixture of agriculture, industry and residential. That mix doesn't have any impact on the amount of water available for use. The legal rights to CAP water, the legal rights to ground water, are already fixed and are now just being transferred from one party to the next. As AZ becomes less agriculturally productive, you can no longer argue that "we've chosen this to farm". And the shortcoming of lack of regulation of water usage outside of AMAs is still not addressed. Which I think is the point of the article.
rayiner 7y ago
Arizona and California are the folly of big government infrastructure building. Enabling unsustainable economies in places that should be desert. Unfortunately no way out except bailouts, probably.
hollerith 7y ago
>You'd be talking about gutting the entire state's agriculture industry and destroying millions of people's lives. I am curious why you care whether the agriculture stays in Arizona or moves to Illinois or Iowa or some such. Do you have family in agriculture? (AZ's climate might be particularly advantageous for growing leafy greens, but cattle and eggs can be grown / produced in many places.)
jayd16 7y ago
You have a disdain for conservation because "it doesn't matter" in the face of industrial use. While I agree we need to look at the industrial use, these things are inherently different. Reducing usage in the city preserves the city reservoir. Unless you're talking about industrial use from that same reservoir, it might not be immediately relevant.
- hueving 7y ago
  Water from the city comes from the CAP. The reservoir is filled as needed from that and there isn't a crisis there. You can ban as many glasses of water from restaurants as you want and it won't make the slightest difference. Just slightly more CAP water will be flooded out to farmland.

gwynn 7y ago

This is an incredibly shortsighted outlook on Arizona's reckless water usage. The bulk of our water comes from the Colorado River which is a lifeline for not just us, but for over 40 million people across six different rapidly growing states. Snowpack for the river is at its lowest level in 30+ years and is projected to decrease an additional 30% due to climate change over the next two decades. As a lower-basin state, we are "investing" water which we don't actually own. Sooner or later lake Mead is going to hit an elevation of 1,075ft and the federal government will mandate that lower-basin states such as our own face the music. Will it be our blood or the state's billions that suffer? To avoid this future, all we must do is work together to scale-down our agricultural industry in favor of other economic avenues. This pointless "calculated risk" which threatens the future of America's fifth largest city and its surrounding neighbors can be undone. Sadly, I fear that the current administration under Doug Ducey cares more about leafy greens than our children's future.

Finnucane 7y ago
The obvious solution is build more housing.
- gwynn 7y ago
  I agree with your point that there's blame to go around. I believe that Bobby from King Of The Hill said it best "This city should not exist. It is a monument to man's arrogance."
  - hueving 7y ago
    That's idiotic. Phoenix makes as much sense as Los Angeles and there is plenty of water from the Colorado River feeding both cities. It takes less energy to air condition Phoenix during the summer than Minneapolis takes to heat in the winter (temperature gap desired maxes 50F vs 100F). Additionally, the energy it does take is much more amenable to being fulfilled by cheap solar than the cycle required by heating at night. The only people who find it arrogant are ones who do not understand air conditioning is cheaper than heating and that water can be moved in aqueducts. Nobody claims that Chicago should not exist, nor Minneapolis, nor New York. The only difference is that they depend on older heating methods instead of air conditioning.
    - dragonwriter 7y ago
      > Phoenix makes as much sense as Los Angeles This is true, but in the exact opposite sense you intend it.
      - hueving 7y ago
        You don't know my intent. My point is that most of the people that bitch about Phoenix are fine with the existence of Los Angeles. The remaining bit are too dumb to realize it's more energy efficient than the heat suckers of the North.
slimsag 7y ago

Whatarethese 7y ago

I know that SRP has over 100 years of water in reserve. They are actively planning for decades in the future.

Spooky23 7y ago

Meanwhile in the northeast, where water is plentiful, agriculture is grinding out of existence as its unable to compete with subsidized, scaled up desert agriculture. Leafy greens can be grown with tunnels nearly everywhere, we shouldn’t be stuck with such a concentration in a place that is so obviously strategically dumb to put 90% of production.

niftich 7y ago

Arizona produces approximately 1/4 to 1/5 of the leafy greens grown in the US, by weight, depending on the exact commodity [1]. Meanwhile, California produces roughly 3/4 of such products grown in the US. The two states participate in a seasonal rotation, where California's temperate valleys produce most of the summer crop, and in the winter production is shifted to inland desert locales in both Arizona and California. [1] https://cals.arizona.edu/arec/sites/cals.arizona.edu.arec/files/publications/FINAL%20leafy%20greens%20september%202017.pdf https://cals.arizona.edu/arec/sites/cals.arizona.edu.arec/fi... [2] https://californiaagnet.com/2017/11/03/a-look-at-year-round-lettuce-production-from-californias-leafy-greens-marketing-agreement/ https://californiaagnet.com/2017/11/03/a-look-at-year-round-... [3] https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/93033/vgs-362.pdf?v=1958.8 https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/93033/vgs-362.... [4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18535425#18536045 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18535425#18536045

ldoughty 7y ago
And both have massive water problems where people need to drill down further and further to find water because we pump it out faster than it can refill most because gigantic farms can pump out as much water as they want for free or for a tiny fee.. basically profiting today at the cost of our children

jelliclesfarm 7y ago

AZ doesn’t produce 90% of leafy greens. That would be California and especially Salinas valley. Yuma in AZ is just insurance for Salinas greens Ag companies re weather and water.

patagonia 7y ago

You don't address CAP or Active Management Areas. You can't talk about Arizona water without talking about CAP and AMAs. There is a real issue of water usage outside of the AMAs. There has been since I left AZ in 2007. But yes, it is correct that the vast majority of water in AZ goes to agriculture. California has a similar issue. Developers are required to provide 100 year water plans before moving forward. Another thing at play that would surprise a lot of people is that just 18% of land is private. I guess I would say... True, Arizona and California produce massive amounts of produce and other agricultural output for the US (it's sunny, the climate is great, other than the lack of water). But what is it costing the environment? We all know what it is costing the environment. No one is protesting. Sadly. To say that Arizona shouldn't exist (that we shouldn't have population centers in the middle of the desert) is laughable. Ok, Las Vegas is cancelled. Cities north enough that require massive amounts of fossil fuels to stay warm enough to be livable are cancelled. While where at it, flying for vacations (or anything not of existential importance) is cancelled. Ocean freight is cancelled. My first job out of college was as a management and lobbyist assistant in Coconino County (Flagstaff). I read this from cover to cover when I started my job (I still have the marked up copy on my bookshelf): https://portal.azoah.com/oedf/documents/08A-AWS001-DWR/Center_et_al/Exhibit%20404%20Arizona%27s%20Water%20Future.pdf https://portal.azoah.com/oedf/documents/08A-AWS001-DWR/Cente... Water use is very, very carefully considered and scrutinized in AZ. > "...it's a calculated risk and choice by the people living here whose lives are built on agriculture. " Sorta. It's calculated by a subset of all stakeholders. Water rights in Arizona are slowly being purchased by developers to meet the 100 year water plan requirements. This reflects the state's move from primarily agricultural toward a more common mixture of agriculture, industry and residential. That mix doesn't have any impact on the amount of water available for use. The legal rights to CAP water, the legal rights to ground water, are already fixed and are now just being transferred from one party to the next. As AZ becomes less agriculturally productive, you can no longer argue that "we've chosen this to farm". And the shortcoming of lack of regulation of water usage outside of AMAs is still not addressed. Which I think is the point of the article.

rayiner 7y ago

Arizona and California are the folly of big government infrastructure building. Enabling unsustainable economies in places that should be desert. Unfortunately no way out except bailouts, probably.

hollerith 7y ago

>You'd be talking about gutting the entire state's agriculture industry and destroying millions of people's lives. I am curious why you care whether the agriculture stays in Arizona or moves to Illinois or Iowa or some such. Do you have family in agriculture? (AZ's climate might be particularly advantageous for growing leafy greens, but cattle and eggs can be grown / produced in many places.)

jayd16 7y ago

You have a disdain for conservation because "it doesn't matter" in the face of industrial use. While I agree we need to look at the industrial use, these things are inherently different. Reducing usage in the city preserves the city reservoir. Unless you're talking about industrial use from that same reservoir, it might not be immediately relevant.

hueving 7y ago
Water from the city comes from the CAP. The reservoir is filled as needed from that and there isn't a crisis there. You can ban as many glasses of water from restaurants as you want and it won't make the slightest difference. Just slightly more CAP water will be flooded out to farmland.