3 ms·
California is a great place to grow what is grown there, but it is not efficient in terms of water use, in part because the incentives are screwed up. The end
by zamfi 5y ago
California is a great place to grow what is grown there, but it is not efficient in terms of water use, in part because the incentives are screwed up.
The end result of the existing water rights systems is that for some farms in very arid regions, water is basically free, so they use a ton of it growing e.g., Almonds and Pomegranates, highly water-intensive crops which should probably be grown in less-arid parts of the state.
If water cost effectively reflected water scarcity within the central valley, I suspect things would be quite different. But this is hard to change, because politics (in California but also everywhere) favors incumbents who have a lot to lose, over newcomers who could have a lot to gain, or over a large population that stands to gain a little bit but not enough to vote over it. (See: occupational licensing, Prop. 13, etc.)
- syki 5y agoThis is my understanding too. That the types of crops being grown in a given place (like almonds) is a problem and water use could be much less than it is but we do absolutely need California to grow things because it’s an important agricultural contributor. Other states wouldn’t be able to pick up the slack in California’s absence. Such is my understanding.