15 ms·

California's dry season is turning into a permanent state of being

132 points by boshomi 5y ago

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
JohnJamesRambo 5y ago
I don’t live in California but my state is experiencing the same. I love to garden, but summer has just become the dry season here, so it is pointless. You can irrigate, but the vapor-pressure deficit (VPD) when it is 100 degrees and 20% humidity makes plant growth almost impossible for anything but cacti. I think I’ll just have to move. https://www.dimluxlighting.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Leaf-Vapor-Pressure-Deficit-VPD-1.jpg https://www.dimluxlighting.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Le...
- anonuser123456 5y ago
  Try using a biodegradable hydrogel at the base of the roots.
  - masklinn 5y ago
    Changing up the crop would probably be a good idea, either early and late crops or heat-adapted summer stuff.
- agilob 5y ago
  >20% humidity makes plant growth almost impossible for anything but cacti Have you considered planting trees around your fence?
- newsyyswen 5y ago
  Have you considered drip irrigation? It was designed with desert agriculture in mind. Shade can also make a big difference.
  - JohnJamesRambo 5y ago
    My garden has drip irrigation and looks like a burned mess unfortunately. I think it is just the effect of the hot dry air on the leaves.
    - huntertwo 5y ago
      You would need misters on a timer to up your relative humidity throughout the day. Drip irrigation can’t correct an oppressive VPD.
    - akiselev 5y ago
      It might just be the sun burning your plants, which droplets of water would only make worse (by acting as a lens). Try hanging shade cloth above them. It's what I have to do here in California for tomatoes, especially at higher elevations
    - downut 5y ago
      My wife is a master gardener at 5500' elevation in AZ. If the monsoon happens (50% chance) then there are two difficult months, May and June. June is the real bitch. Highs in the high 90s, hot winds out of the southwest everyday, and no clouds. If the monsoon fails (again 50% chance) then every month is difficult. She grows many varieties of tomatoes, okra, blackberries, three kinds of eggplant, basil, cilantro, and many varieties of beans. It's AZ, so of course there is a cornucopia of chiles, and garlic. Peaches and the other stone fruits are more dependent on the weather in Feb. (it snows here). Here are the techniques: partial shade from large trees, shade cloth over seedlings, timers on the drip, and the drip runs three times a day in June. Missing a single irrigation day in June means death to the garden. She does have some spray heads but most of the garden is just drip. Oh, and you can't plant too early, we've lost an entire bed of tomato seedlings to frost in May! That seems like it's a diminishing problem, however. The soil is the kitchen/garden compost + a few bags of water retention garden soil every year. I have seen gardens in Phoenix in the summer and the only possibility is full shade cloth over just about everything. The water is just city water, it's expensive. $100/month May-Sep. Because we're food snobs, and the flavors and textures are so much better, it's worth it. There's a lot of work in the spring getting everything going, and we joke about the "garden nazi" in Sep-Oct, where the harvest pretty much demands constant processing (which I do). But the middle 3 months are less than 1/2 hr/day. If you're curious about your local growing environment and how to deal with it, the local university agricultural extension are the goto folks. They literally exist to help you with this.
- heavyset_go 5y ago
  Would you mind sharing the state?
elevenoh 5y ago
"If you have a string of dry years, that sets you up for low runoff efficiency in the next year," Jones said. "It is going to take above average precipitation to get average runoff." In the short-run, meanwhile, the drier earth can amplify heat waves like the recent record-breakers in the U.S. and Canada. "Droughts lead to drier grounds, which lead to higher temperatures. It's a vicious cycle," Di Liberto said. I didn't really consider this aspect of the climate feedback loop prior to reading this article.
chewz 5y ago
Well, it won’t be not the first time that the center of civilization shifts due to climate change… In Central Europe we are having rainy summers and mild temperatures. I would love having some neighbours from California in my summer house…
- hh3k0 5y ago
  > I would love having some neighbours from California in my summer house… Well, you're in luck. It won't just be Californians, though. You'll have new neighbors pouring in from all over the world, cramming up in the liveable spaces that'll be left. It's gonna be cozy. And who knows, maybe you'll even have to spare a room or two of your house for them? Just as Germans had to when the refugees from the former eastern territories poured in after WW2.
  - chewz 5y ago
    I was thinking more about exchanging gardening tips and salads. But please come over there is a lot of space from Vistula River to Ural and beyond… (we are rapidly depopulating) Just drop the doom and Millenarian attitude… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millenarianism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millenarianism
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - hh3k0 5y ago
      > Just drop the doom and Millenarian attitude… Not sure if you and I read the same IPCC report, tbh.
  - joelbluminator 5y ago
    Doesn't sound likely. You will be able to settle tens of millions of refugees in Greenland, Siberia etc. Former frozen wasteland will become habitable. I don't think Europe or the U.S will volunteer to absorb tens of millions of refugees if there are other solutions.
baby 5y ago
Kind of surreal to read that while living in SF where it’s constantly cold.
eplanit 5y ago
These droughts were anticipated, but here in California preparing for climate change means preaching at others, and setting up a carbon exchange. Not a single new reservoir has been built since 1979. It's impossible to take California seriously about much of anything, but especially not regarding the environment: "In 1979, California’s population was a little more than 23 million. Today, it is more than 39 million. Yet in that entire time, California did not construct one additional, large-scale water storage project – meaning water infrastructure that once suited the state’s irrigation, livestock, and human needs has become chronically inadequate to meet its essential tasks." https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/another-california-drought-with-no-new-reservoirs/ https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/another-california-dro... Not only does the state not prepare, but thanks to the record-setting wildfires of the past decade, the amount of carbon and soot pumped into the air has probably offset any gains that had been made. They're really just stupid out here.
- jeffbee 5y ago
  Our reservoirs are empty. Why would another reservoir help up? The fact is that California's urban water use has been declining since 1976, in absolute terms, not just in per-capita terms. The East Bay Municipal Utility District, for example, now only delivers half the water it delivered in 1976, despite the fact that the population in its service area has increased by 50% over that period. Conservation and efficiency are outpacing population growth. EBMUD now owns double the reservoir capacity it actually needs. People who advocate for new reservoirs in California, especially people who advocate for it in East Coast editorial magazines, are representing the interests of agriculture megabusinesses who want to rip off the tax payers some more. Don't believe them.
  - eplanit 5y ago
    "Our reservoirs are empty. Why would another reservoir help up?" A serious question? More water in reserve = more water in reserve. If you fill 4 glasses with water now, and then then EBMUD turns the water off for the rest of the day due to a broken main (I know EBMUD really well), you'll have 4 more glasses of water to drink than you would have, otherwise. Simple math, really.
telesilla 5y ago
Anyone worrying about what you can regarding climate change, it's nice to stop driving etc but the big issue is fossil fuel consumption. That's in the hands of big money. How that changes is another story but they've been clever to put the blame on domestic, urban consumers when we're a tiny minority of the polluters. Knowing that should help those keen to help out know better where to look. In the meantime, no or little meat and flying is the best you can do.
- scatters 5y ago
  Driving uses fossil fuels, unless you're in an electric car - and even then, depending on electricity mix.
- adrianN 5y ago
  Depending on how much time you're willing to invest, the best thing you can do might be joining lobbying efforts like the citizen's climate lobby: https://citizensclimatelobby.org/ https://citizensclimatelobby.org/
- luckylion 5y ago
  Is "big money" doing it for no particular reason though? My impression is that it's mostly large enterprises that, at the end of the day, serve consumers, so consumers are ultimately deciding, and so far, very few of them care enough. Even among those who are very vocal about climate change and ask for regulation, to many, overseas vacations are more important.
- kart23 5y ago
  Source? At least in the US, cars make up a decent share of our carbon emissions, around 16%. Other greenhouse gases like NOx or Fluorinated gases are mostly produced by industry though. https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-greenhouse-gas-emissions https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-...
  - mkskm 5y ago
    The top source of greenhouse gas emissions in California is passenger vehicles. https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/CkDmyLFljut4y3amem_3slBySxw=/0x0:2155x1366/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:2155x1366):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/9092235/next10_cgii2017_sources.png https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/CkDmyLFljut4y3amem_3slBySxw=... https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/8/22/16177820/california-transportation https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/8/22/1617782...
MiscIdeaMaker99 5y ago
I wonder how long it'll take before California starts to see a decrease in population due to scarcity of water.
- seanmcdirmid 5y ago
  10% of water in California is used for urban needs, it’s more likely agriculture will get hit by water shortages first than population growth. But then again, the permitting process is already limited to an extent by available water resources, it’s part of the infrastructure needed to build.
  - ip26 5y ago
    Agriculture often has the more senior water rights, so I wouldn’t be too sure.
    - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
      Either way they can’t wring any more water from urban users. Rural users will get hit 90% faster than urban users as water becomes more scarce simply because they consume more now.
      - ip26 5y ago
        No- if water becomes more scarce, those with junior water rights don’t get water. The end. Those with senior rights get just as much as always. So the question is not whether you are ag or rural or muni, it’s how senior are the rights you hold?
        seanmcdirmid 5y ago
        The state will simply invest more to bore water down from Northern California. But that won't be enough to satisfy agricultural needs, and farmers will have no access to the water that is brought down. Heck, for urban users, even desalinization is economical, but not for agricultural users.
robomartin 5y ago
One of the things that has puzzled me for a long time is how little thought we have applied over time towards designing and building better homes. Energy and water usage are two elements of this. Regarding water. Every time I wash my hands I wish that water went into a gray water tank instead of being wasted. This water, perhaps with some filtration (or maybe not [0]) could then be used for irrigation. The same is the case for the shower. We try to take walks around the neighborhood every day. I am always amazed at the amount of water almost constantly running into storm drains due to overflowing/unmanaged lawn watering. If we designed homes to store water secondary use we would likely save enough water to make a huge difference. Washing the car or hosing-down the patio or driveway would also benefit from this immensely. This water would most definitely be good for flushing the toilet. Why do we need clean drinking water (that's what's coming into your house) to flush the toilet? !!! In other words, just about the only use for "first generation" water at the home would be drinking or cooking. Why can't I dump the water I used to cook spaghetti into a sink that routes it into a holding tank? Why can't that water be used to flush the toilet? All of this would require a design rethink and creating the incentives necessary to compel people to retrofit. New construction, by default, would come with these enhancements. To go beyond this, imagine the water wasted by large buildings. A 5, 10, 20+ floor building a hotel perhaps or an apartment building with 300 units. The numbers are staggering. As a general comment, everything in government or public infrastructure always seems to be about "more" rather than "more efficient" first. More lanes on the highway, rather than coming up with ways to make traffic more efficient (like punishing the guy doing 45 in the middle of a sea of cars who have to go around him, creating a traffic jam that ripples back for miles). Efficiency never seems to be discussed or even considered. Saving is never a parameter in the public discourse. And so, neighborhoods like mine, built 20-some years ago, have, every day, perfectly good water flowing like rivers down the edge of the street to eventually find a storm drain. Energy is another one. Dark roofs. Unbelievable. A few blocks away someone pained their house black! Wow. Air conditioning systems that do not have the ability or option to bring in cool filtered outside air in the evening in order to cool down the house "for free" (compared to running a 5 ton compressor, a fan would be free). Interesting that cars have had the option to recirculate inside air or suck-in outside air for as long as I can remember but we don't require this from homes by law. Or how about systems that cool down or warm-up walls as required in order to store energy rather than just circulate cold air, which has horrible thermal capacity? Etc. [0] A friend mentioned that hand and dish soap in low concentrations doesn't really harm lawns, trees or plants. I did not research this. If this isn't the case, I'm sure some form of simple filtration could resolve the matter.
frazbin 5y ago
Real quick thing about the water in California: it's important because it is used to make food, which is exported from the state's central plains to the rest of the country. Your mental model should not include the direct water use of humans.. this is and always has been about the economics of food production. So if people leave California, it will be because they can't get jobs in agriculture.. people would be coming from Fresno, not San Francisco. Also the increase in food prices brought about by the collapse of that titanic industry will be borne by everybody in the country, and is therefore the problem of everybody in North America who likes pistachios and such.
- sampo 5y ago
  > people would be coming from Fresno, not San Francisco Yeah. Bay Area is privileged to have the Hetch Hetchy aqueduct to bring them water from a reservoir in the Yosemite national park, independent of the local weather conditions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hetchhetchyprojmap.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hetchhetchyprojmap.jpg
- scrumbledober 5y ago
  it's not just pistachios and almonds, it's a full 1/3 of the country's vegetables and 2/3 of the country's fruits and nuts. California's water problems are everyone's water problems.
  - johnchristopher 5y ago
    In the most extreme scenario, can the US create new agricultural fields in other states, cutting down forests if needed ? The weather will change but surely the US will still have arable land enough to feed its citizens (even if they have to forget some kind of crops (pistachio, etc.) aside) ?
    - lazide 5y ago
      Yup. Or even just build a canal from the Pacific Northwest - which gets so much water they can’t use almost any of it, even damming everything they can - down south. California has always gone through droughts, and the issue isn’t an actual lack of water (from a support of the population, or even support of agriculture in general). It’s the economics of it, what is cost effective where, and prioritization of what makes sense and what doesn’t- which is hard, and there are a lot of incumbents with iffy models (cities, counties, and farmers) that don’t want to adjust or be honest about any of this.
ii550 5y ago
Geologically, that area has ALWAYS been desert, with the only exception being the past 150 years. Not surprised.
- nimish 5y ago
  Exactly. Cadillac Desert is a great account of the water politics of California and it also highlights that the agreements and contracts were set during an unusually wet period. Growing water intensive crops in the high desert is insanity.
- b0tzzzzzzman 5y ago
  Californians seem to be suprised. I know its a different use case. But, it always brings to mind Las Vegas. It strikes me as a gross statment to the sheer will of man to remake resources into its will. Additionally it stands as an example of our current priorities and how power manifests. Don't get me wrong, I love Vegas and also the food California produces. At somepoint in the near future we will need to have difficult disscussions more widely about resources which were bountiful until late. https://wrrc.arizona.edu/publications/arroyo-newsletter/sharing-colorado-river-water-history-public-policy-and-colorado-river https://wrrc.arizona.edu/publications/arroyo-newsletter/shar...
- akomtu 5y ago
  Always is a strong word. Seas become deserts and deserts become seas. Just not within 150 years.
- dredmorbius 5y ago
  Depends. Much of the central valley was an at-least-intermittent lake. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood_of_1862 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood_of_1862
nowherebeen 5y ago
Napa valley is _____.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
azinman2 5y ago
Back in 2015, another drought year, the head of the water board gave a really interesting talk to the MIT Bay Area club: http://techtv.mit.edu/collections/mitcnc/videos/31839-california-water-2015-felicia-marcus-chair-california-water-resources-control-board http://techtv.mit.edu/collections/mitcnc/videos/31839-califo... In it she said that California didn’t have as much a water problem as a water capture and storage problem. All of the capture and storage was built during wet years and if we could capture storm runoff even in places like LA we’d be in a far better situation. It was a really interesting talk I recommend to anyone living in CA.
- dredmorbius 5y ago
  Turns out the video's hosted on YouTube for those prefering to stream audio via mpv (or similar tools): https://youtube.com/watch?v=5z-XIahirdk https://youtube.com/watch?v=5z-XIahirdk
Dumblydorr 5y ago
Sounds like desertification to me. We're going to need some serious geo-engineering to return and maintain earlier climate, lest all our society reorganize all it's components.
tuatoru 5y ago
The descriptive comments here look like they come out of the "Two Degrees" chapter of Mark Lynas's 2007 book, Six Degrees.[1] Lynas summarized climate science as it was in about 2005, and organised the summary by temperature increase. Each chapter is named after its upper bound, so "Two Degrees" describes changes expected with the global temperature increase between 1 and 2 degrees. Lynas gives up after six degrees. Let me repeat the 2007 bit, in case you missed it. We knew this would happen. People were told. If you think actions will be taken now, ask yourself what's different from 2008. 1. https://marklynas.org/books/six-degrees-our-future-on-a-hotter-planet/ https://marklynas.org/books/six-degrees-our-future-on-a-hott...

132 points by boshomi 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

I don’t live in California but my state is experiencing the same. I love to garden, but summer has just become the dry season here, so it is pointless. You can irrigate, but the vapor-pressure deficit (VPD) when it is 100 degrees and 20% humidity makes plant growth almost impossible for anything but cacti. I think I’ll just have to move. https://www.dimluxlighting.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Leaf-Vapor-Pressure-Deficit-VPD-1.jpg https://www.dimluxlighting.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Le...

anonuser123456 5y ago
Try using a biodegradable hydrogel at the base of the roots.
- masklinn 5y ago
  Changing up the crop would probably be a good idea, either early and late crops or heat-adapted summer stuff.
agilob 5y ago
>20% humidity makes plant growth almost impossible for anything but cacti Have you considered planting trees around your fence?
newsyyswen 5y ago
Have you considered drip irrigation? It was designed with desert agriculture in mind. Shade can also make a big difference.
- JohnJamesRambo 5y ago
  My garden has drip irrigation and looks like a burned mess unfortunately. I think it is just the effect of the hot dry air on the leaves.
  - huntertwo 5y ago
    You would need misters on a timer to up your relative humidity throughout the day. Drip irrigation can’t correct an oppressive VPD.
  - akiselev 5y ago
    It might just be the sun burning your plants, which droplets of water would only make worse (by acting as a lens). Try hanging shade cloth above them. It's what I have to do here in California for tomatoes, especially at higher elevations
  - downut 5y ago
    My wife is a master gardener at 5500' elevation in AZ. If the monsoon happens (50% chance) then there are two difficult months, May and June. June is the real bitch. Highs in the high 90s, hot winds out of the southwest everyday, and no clouds. If the monsoon fails (again 50% chance) then every month is difficult. She grows many varieties of tomatoes, okra, blackberries, three kinds of eggplant, basil, cilantro, and many varieties of beans. It's AZ, so of course there is a cornucopia of chiles, and garlic. Peaches and the other stone fruits are more dependent on the weather in Feb. (it snows here). Here are the techniques: partial shade from large trees, shade cloth over seedlings, timers on the drip, and the drip runs three times a day in June. Missing a single irrigation day in June means death to the garden. She does have some spray heads but most of the garden is just drip. Oh, and you can't plant too early, we've lost an entire bed of tomato seedlings to frost in May! That seems like it's a diminishing problem, however. The soil is the kitchen/garden compost + a few bags of water retention garden soil every year. I have seen gardens in Phoenix in the summer and the only possibility is full shade cloth over just about everything. The water is just city water, it's expensive. $100/month May-Sep. Because we're food snobs, and the flavors and textures are so much better, it's worth it. There's a lot of work in the spring getting everything going, and we joke about the "garden nazi" in Sep-Oct, where the harvest pretty much demands constant processing (which I do). But the middle 3 months are less than 1/2 hr/day. If you're curious about your local growing environment and how to deal with it, the local university agricultural extension are the goto folks. They literally exist to help you with this.
heavyset_go 5y ago
Would you mind sharing the state?

elevenoh 5y ago

"If you have a string of dry years, that sets you up for low runoff efficiency in the next year," Jones said. "It is going to take above average precipitation to get average runoff." In the short-run, meanwhile, the drier earth can amplify heat waves like the recent record-breakers in the U.S. and Canada. "Droughts lead to drier grounds, which lead to higher temperatures. It's a vicious cycle," Di Liberto said. I didn't really consider this aspect of the climate feedback loop prior to reading this article.

chewz 5y ago

Well, it won’t be not the first time that the center of civilization shifts due to climate change… In Central Europe we are having rainy summers and mild temperatures. I would love having some neighbours from California in my summer house…

hh3k0 5y ago
> I would love having some neighbours from California in my summer house… Well, you're in luck. It won't just be Californians, though. You'll have new neighbors pouring in from all over the world, cramming up in the liveable spaces that'll be left. It's gonna be cozy. And who knows, maybe you'll even have to spare a room or two of your house for them? Just as Germans had to when the refugees from the former eastern territories poured in after WW2.
- chewz 5y ago
  I was thinking more about exchanging gardening tips and salads. But please come over there is a lot of space from Vistula River to Ural and beyond… (we are rapidly depopulating) Just drop the doom and Millenarian attitude… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millenarianism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millenarianism
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - hh3k0 5y ago
    > Just drop the doom and Millenarian attitude… Not sure if you and I read the same IPCC report, tbh.
- joelbluminator 5y ago
  Doesn't sound likely. You will be able to settle tens of millions of refugees in Greenland, Siberia etc. Former frozen wasteland will become habitable. I don't think Europe or the U.S will volunteer to absorb tens of millions of refugees if there are other solutions.

baby 5y ago

Kind of surreal to read that while living in SF where it’s constantly cold.

eplanit 5y ago

These droughts were anticipated, but here in California preparing for climate change means preaching at others, and setting up a carbon exchange. Not a single new reservoir has been built since 1979. It's impossible to take California seriously about much of anything, but especially not regarding the environment: "In 1979, California’s population was a little more than 23 million. Today, it is more than 39 million. Yet in that entire time, California did not construct one additional, large-scale water storage project – meaning water infrastructure that once suited the state’s irrigation, livestock, and human needs has become chronically inadequate to meet its essential tasks." https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/another-california-drought-with-no-new-reservoirs/ https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/another-california-dro... Not only does the state not prepare, but thanks to the record-setting wildfires of the past decade, the amount of carbon and soot pumped into the air has probably offset any gains that had been made. They're really just stupid out here.

jeffbee 5y ago
Our reservoirs are empty. Why would another reservoir help up? The fact is that California's urban water use has been declining since 1976, in absolute terms, not just in per-capita terms. The East Bay Municipal Utility District, for example, now only delivers half the water it delivered in 1976, despite the fact that the population in its service area has increased by 50% over that period. Conservation and efficiency are outpacing population growth. EBMUD now owns double the reservoir capacity it actually needs. People who advocate for new reservoirs in California, especially people who advocate for it in East Coast editorial magazines, are representing the interests of agriculture megabusinesses who want to rip off the tax payers some more. Don't believe them.
- eplanit 5y ago
  "Our reservoirs are empty. Why would another reservoir help up?" A serious question? More water in reserve = more water in reserve. If you fill 4 glasses with water now, and then then EBMUD turns the water off for the rest of the day due to a broken main (I know EBMUD really well), you'll have 4 more glasses of water to drink than you would have, otherwise. Simple math, really.

telesilla 5y ago

Anyone worrying about what you can regarding climate change, it's nice to stop driving etc but the big issue is fossil fuel consumption. That's in the hands of big money. How that changes is another story but they've been clever to put the blame on domestic, urban consumers when we're a tiny minority of the polluters. Knowing that should help those keen to help out know better where to look. In the meantime, no or little meat and flying is the best you can do.

scatters 5y ago
Driving uses fossil fuels, unless you're in an electric car - and even then, depending on electricity mix.
adrianN 5y ago
Depending on how much time you're willing to invest, the best thing you can do might be joining lobbying efforts like the citizen's climate lobby: https://citizensclimatelobby.org/ https://citizensclimatelobby.org/
luckylion 5y ago
Is "big money" doing it for no particular reason though? My impression is that it's mostly large enterprises that, at the end of the day, serve consumers, so consumers are ultimately deciding, and so far, very few of them care enough. Even among those who are very vocal about climate change and ask for regulation, to many, overseas vacations are more important.
kart23 5y ago
Source? At least in the US, cars make up a decent share of our carbon emissions, around 16%. Other greenhouse gases like NOx or Fluorinated gases are mostly produced by industry though. https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-greenhouse-gas-emissions https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-...
- mkskm 5y ago
  The top source of greenhouse gas emissions in California is passenger vehicles. https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/CkDmyLFljut4y3amem_3slBySxw=/0x0:2155x1366/1720x0/filters:focal(0x0:2155x1366):format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/9092235/next10_cgii2017_sources.png https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/CkDmyLFljut4y3amem_3slBySxw=... https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/8/22/16177820/california-transportation https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/8/22/1617782...

MiscIdeaMaker99 5y ago

I wonder how long it'll take before California starts to see a decrease in population due to scarcity of water.

seanmcdirmid 5y ago
10% of water in California is used for urban needs, it’s more likely agriculture will get hit by water shortages first than population growth. But then again, the permitting process is already limited to an extent by available water resources, it’s part of the infrastructure needed to build.
- ip26 5y ago
  Agriculture often has the more senior water rights, so I wouldn’t be too sure.
  - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
    Either way they can’t wring any more water from urban users. Rural users will get hit 90% faster than urban users as water becomes more scarce simply because they consume more now.
    - ip26 5y ago
      No- if water becomes more scarce, those with junior water rights don’t get water. The end. Those with senior rights get just as much as always. So the question is not whether you are ag or rural or muni, it’s how senior are the rights you hold?
      - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
        The state will simply invest more to bore water down from Northern California. But that won't be enough to satisfy agricultural needs, and farmers will have no access to the water that is brought down. Heck, for urban users, even desalinization is economical, but not for agricultural users.

robomartin 5y ago

One of the things that has puzzled me for a long time is how little thought we have applied over time towards designing and building better homes. Energy and water usage are two elements of this. Regarding water. Every time I wash my hands I wish that water went into a gray water tank instead of being wasted. This water, perhaps with some filtration (or maybe not [0]) could then be used for irrigation. The same is the case for the shower. We try to take walks around the neighborhood every day. I am always amazed at the amount of water almost constantly running into storm drains due to overflowing/unmanaged lawn watering. If we designed homes to store water secondary use we would likely save enough water to make a huge difference. Washing the car or hosing-down the patio or driveway would also benefit from this immensely. This water would most definitely be good for flushing the toilet. Why do we need clean drinking water (that's what's coming into your house) to flush the toilet? !!! In other words, just about the only use for "first generation" water at the home would be drinking or cooking. Why can't I dump the water I used to cook spaghetti into a sink that routes it into a holding tank? Why can't that water be used to flush the toilet? All of this would require a design rethink and creating the incentives necessary to compel people to retrofit. New construction, by default, would come with these enhancements. To go beyond this, imagine the water wasted by large buildings. A 5, 10, 20+ floor building a hotel perhaps or an apartment building with 300 units. The numbers are staggering. As a general comment, everything in government or public infrastructure always seems to be about "more" rather than "more efficient" first. More lanes on the highway, rather than coming up with ways to make traffic more efficient (like punishing the guy doing 45 in the middle of a sea of cars who have to go around him, creating a traffic jam that ripples back for miles). Efficiency never seems to be discussed or even considered. Saving is never a parameter in the public discourse. And so, neighborhoods like mine, built 20-some years ago, have, every day, perfectly good water flowing like rivers down the edge of the street to eventually find a storm drain. Energy is another one. Dark roofs. Unbelievable. A few blocks away someone pained their house black! Wow. Air conditioning systems that do not have the ability or option to bring in cool filtered outside air in the evening in order to cool down the house "for free" (compared to running a 5 ton compressor, a fan would be free). Interesting that cars have had the option to recirculate inside air or suck-in outside air for as long as I can remember but we don't require this from homes by law. Or how about systems that cool down or warm-up walls as required in order to store energy rather than just circulate cold air, which has horrible thermal capacity? Etc. [0] A friend mentioned that hand and dish soap in low concentrations doesn't really harm lawns, trees or plants. I did not research this. If this isn't the case, I'm sure some form of simple filtration could resolve the matter.

frazbin 5y ago

Real quick thing about the water in California: it's important because it is used to make food, which is exported from the state's central plains to the rest of the country. Your mental model should not include the direct water use of humans.. this is and always has been about the economics of food production. So if people leave California, it will be because they can't get jobs in agriculture.. people would be coming from Fresno, not San Francisco. Also the increase in food prices brought about by the collapse of that titanic industry will be borne by everybody in the country, and is therefore the problem of everybody in North America who likes pistachios and such.

sampo 5y ago
> people would be coming from Fresno, not San Francisco Yeah. Bay Area is privileged to have the Hetch Hetchy aqueduct to bring them water from a reservoir in the Yosemite national park, independent of the local weather conditions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hetchhetchyprojmap.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hetchhetchyprojmap.jpg
scrumbledober 5y ago
it's not just pistachios and almonds, it's a full 1/3 of the country's vegetables and 2/3 of the country's fruits and nuts. California's water problems are everyone's water problems.
- johnchristopher 5y ago
  In the most extreme scenario, can the US create new agricultural fields in other states, cutting down forests if needed ? The weather will change but surely the US will still have arable land enough to feed its citizens (even if they have to forget some kind of crops (pistachio, etc.) aside) ?
  - lazide 5y ago
    Yup. Or even just build a canal from the Pacific Northwest - which gets so much water they can’t use almost any of it, even damming everything they can - down south. California has always gone through droughts, and the issue isn’t an actual lack of water (from a support of the population, or even support of agriculture in general). It’s the economics of it, what is cost effective where, and prioritization of what makes sense and what doesn’t- which is hard, and there are a lot of incumbents with iffy models (cities, counties, and farmers) that don’t want to adjust or be honest about any of this.

ii550 5y ago

Geologically, that area has ALWAYS been desert, with the only exception being the past 150 years. Not surprised.

nimish 5y ago
Exactly. Cadillac Desert is a great account of the water politics of California and it also highlights that the agreements and contracts were set during an unusually wet period. Growing water intensive crops in the high desert is insanity.
b0tzzzzzzman 5y ago
Californians seem to be suprised. I know its a different use case. But, it always brings to mind Las Vegas. It strikes me as a gross statment to the sheer will of man to remake resources into its will. Additionally it stands as an example of our current priorities and how power manifests. Don't get me wrong, I love Vegas and also the food California produces. At somepoint in the near future we will need to have difficult disscussions more widely about resources which were bountiful until late. https://wrrc.arizona.edu/publications/arroyo-newsletter/sharing-colorado-river-water-history-public-policy-and-colorado-river https://wrrc.arizona.edu/publications/arroyo-newsletter/shar...
akomtu 5y ago
Always is a strong word. Seas become deserts and deserts become seas. Just not within 150 years.
dredmorbius 5y ago
Depends. Much of the central valley was an at-least-intermittent lake. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood_of_1862 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood_of_1862

nowherebeen 5y ago

Napa valley is _____.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

azinman2 5y ago

Back in 2015, another drought year, the head of the water board gave a really interesting talk to the MIT Bay Area club: http://techtv.mit.edu/collections/mitcnc/videos/31839-california-water-2015-felicia-marcus-chair-california-water-resources-control-board http://techtv.mit.edu/collections/mitcnc/videos/31839-califo... In it she said that California didn’t have as much a water problem as a water capture and storage problem. All of the capture and storage was built during wet years and if we could capture storm runoff even in places like LA we’d be in a far better situation. It was a really interesting talk I recommend to anyone living in CA.

dredmorbius 5y ago
Turns out the video's hosted on YouTube for those prefering to stream audio via mpv (or similar tools): https://youtube.com/watch?v=5z-XIahirdk https://youtube.com/watch?v=5z-XIahirdk

Dumblydorr 5y ago

Sounds like desertification to me. We're going to need some serious geo-engineering to return and maintain earlier climate, lest all our society reorganize all it's components.

tuatoru 5y ago

The descriptive comments here look like they come out of the "Two Degrees" chapter of Mark Lynas's 2007 book, Six Degrees.[1] Lynas summarized climate science as it was in about 2005, and organised the summary by temperature increase. Each chapter is named after its upper bound, so "Two Degrees" describes changes expected with the global temperature increase between 1 and 2 degrees. Lynas gives up after six degrees. Let me repeat the 2007 bit, in case you missed it. We knew this would happen. People were told. If you think actions will be taken now, ask yourself what's different from 2008. 1. https://marklynas.org/books/six-degrees-our-future-on-a-hotter-planet/ https://marklynas.org/books/six-degrees-our-future-on-a-hott...