15 ms·

It can be all of the above (though sure technically what you wrote is correct if nit picking the word due to mean solely caused by - but I don't feel like that'

It can be all of the above (though sure technically what you wrote is correct if nit picking the word due to mean solely caused by - but I don't feel like that's the intention / argument made) And yes agriculture is wasting way more water than climate change. But climate change does have an effect. USGS paper showing climate change affects https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.aay9187 https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.aay9187 "Drought and warming have been shrinking Colorado River flow for many years. Milly and Dunne used a hydrologic model and historical observations to show that this decrease is due mainly to increased evapotranspiration caused by a reduction of albedo from snow loss and the associated rise in the absorption of solar radiation (see the Perspective by Hobbins and Barsugli). This drying will be greater than the projected precipitation increases expected from climate warming, increasing the risk of severe water shortages in an already vulnerable region."

lolinder 4y ago
I don't think anyone here is disputing that climate change plays a role, but we live in a world where, if we simply stopped shipping almonds overseas, California would have enough water for three more cities the size of LA.[0] That's just one example of the ridiculous agricultural inefficiencies we're dealing with: 80% of California's water goes to agriculture.[1] Climate change is hurting things for sure, but it's still agriculture that needs to adapt if we stand any chance. Marginal improvements in residential usage will not solve the problem. [0] https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/04/real-problem-almonds/ https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/04/real-problem... [1] https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Water-Use-And-Efficiency/Agricultural-Water-Use-Efficiency https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Water-Use-And-Efficiency/Agric...
- robonerd 4y ago
  > if we simply stopped shipping almonds overseas, California would have enough water for three more cities the size of LA. Only for a while. Things are likely to dry up a whole lot faster and quicker than you're expecting. Paleo-climatology has revealed that this whole corner of the US has historically been much drier than it is presently, particularly during the Medieval Warming Period (which we've blown past.) The same dynamics which dried up California Climate change is going to make the entire region much dryer than it ever has been in recorded history. It's not just the Colorado river of course. A lot of people seem to think the Central Valley will be fine, or could be fine if we got rid of the farms, but the coming droughts will be felt there hardest of all. One way or the other, the agriculture will go. But that won't bring the rain back.
- coryrc 4y ago
  Forget almonds, only alfalfa (a very cheap crop) needs to be stopped. For at least the next decade, there's plenty of water for ever current use.
  - robonerd 4y ago
    > For at least the next decade For the next decade? That's like saying there's a wildfire nearby, but my house will be fine for the next five minutes. What about the next century? California is drying up. It's not happening overnight, but it's happening and can't be stopped. California has had centuries-long droughts far worse than the present, caused by temperature increases cooler than the present. The only way to prevent California from drying up again would be a complete and rapid reversal of global warming. Even if we merely halted climate change completely, the present climate already spells disaster for California in the long run.
- dillondoyle 4y ago
  That's how I read OPs comment (and kind of his reply too just reinforced my perception of it). For sure I don't disagree that ag is the #1 problem. On the same hand can't deny climate change is also a problem. Plus ways to improve ag can also lower emissions. The easiest / biggest one: stop eating cows so we don't have to grow as much alfalfa
jmyeet 4y ago
This is a good opportunity for people to learn some basic media literacy and how to deconstruct propaganda. For the record, I'm o fthe opinion that the evidence for climate change is clear, compelling and undeniable. So don't take this or my previous comment to any kind of denial. Climate change is real. It's just not the primary cause of the problem. So, what we see with an effort to blame this on climate chang eis an effort at misdirection. Climate change as a political issue tends to follow left vs right divisions. If you're left-leaning, you tend to believe in climate change. If you're right leaning, you tend to be a denier. Agricultural industries are, by their nature, rural. Rural voters tend to be conservative. So why is a business that leans conservative blaming climate change for the Colorado River problems? Because it blames the issue that many will deny the existence of and for those that don't deny, many will believe there's nothign that can be done. And on the left, some so want the very real issue of climate change to be taken seriously, they'll latch onto any media coverage that shows the ill-effects of climate change, even when climate change isn't the primary cause. I personally believe this undermines the cause because when people realize it's an unrelated issue it undermines that issue. So agribusiness blaming this on climate change is smart propaganda because people on both sides will latch onto the narrative (for different reasons). But this is propaganda.
- robonerd 4y ago
  Central Valley farmers love to deny climate change and blame the government for all their problems. What they don't want to admit is their "perfect" farmland was bone dry a few centuries ago, and is now reverting back to that state.
- downut 4y ago
  Yes, I agree completely. I once structured a month's unpaid leave in the early '90s around a camping tour partially as an "eye's on the ground" of Mark Reisners "Cadillac Desert"[1]. It was, erm, eye opening to see the built environment for water across Eastern CA (including Owen's Valley), Utah, Colorado, and of course AZ. I have been across Imperial Valley a whole bunch of times on all of the externally connecting roads. Agribusiness is not stupid. Climate change is the perfect wedge issue. (I am also not a climate change denier!) [1] Recent experts seem to dislike that book but at least it provides a nice map for things to see.

lolinder 4y ago

I don't think anyone here is disputing that climate change plays a role, but we live in a world where, if we simply stopped shipping almonds overseas, California would have enough water for three more cities the size of LA.[0] That's just one example of the ridiculous agricultural inefficiencies we're dealing with: 80% of California's water goes to agriculture.[1] Climate change is hurting things for sure, but it's still agriculture that needs to adapt if we stand any chance. Marginal improvements in residential usage will not solve the problem. [0] https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/04/real-problem-almonds/ https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/04/real-problem... [1] https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Water-Use-And-Efficiency/Agricultural-Water-Use-Efficiency https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Water-Use-And-Efficiency/Agric...

robonerd 4y ago
> if we simply stopped shipping almonds overseas, California would have enough water for three more cities the size of LA. Only for a while. Things are likely to dry up a whole lot faster and quicker than you're expecting. Paleo-climatology has revealed that this whole corner of the US has historically been much drier than it is presently, particularly during the Medieval Warming Period (which we've blown past.) The same dynamics which dried up California Climate change is going to make the entire region much dryer than it ever has been in recorded history. It's not just the Colorado river of course. A lot of people seem to think the Central Valley will be fine, or could be fine if we got rid of the farms, but the coming droughts will be felt there hardest of all. One way or the other, the agriculture will go. But that won't bring the rain back.
coryrc 4y ago
Forget almonds, only alfalfa (a very cheap crop) needs to be stopped. For at least the next decade, there's plenty of water for ever current use.
- robonerd 4y ago
  > For at least the next decade For the next decade? That's like saying there's a wildfire nearby, but my house will be fine for the next five minutes. What about the next century? California is drying up. It's not happening overnight, but it's happening and can't be stopped. California has had centuries-long droughts far worse than the present, caused by temperature increases cooler than the present. The only way to prevent California from drying up again would be a complete and rapid reversal of global warming. Even if we merely halted climate change completely, the present climate already spells disaster for California in the long run.
dillondoyle 4y ago
That's how I read OPs comment (and kind of his reply too just reinforced my perception of it). For sure I don't disagree that ag is the #1 problem. On the same hand can't deny climate change is also a problem. Plus ways to improve ag can also lower emissions. The easiest / biggest one: stop eating cows so we don't have to grow as much alfalfa

jmyeet 4y ago

This is a good opportunity for people to learn some basic media literacy and how to deconstruct propaganda. For the record, I'm o fthe opinion that the evidence for climate change is clear, compelling and undeniable. So don't take this or my previous comment to any kind of denial. Climate change is real. It's just not the primary cause of the problem. So, what we see with an effort to blame this on climate chang eis an effort at misdirection. Climate change as a political issue tends to follow left vs right divisions. If you're left-leaning, you tend to believe in climate change. If you're right leaning, you tend to be a denier. Agricultural industries are, by their nature, rural. Rural voters tend to be conservative. So why is a business that leans conservative blaming climate change for the Colorado River problems? Because it blames the issue that many will deny the existence of and for those that don't deny, many will believe there's nothign that can be done. And on the left, some so want the very real issue of climate change to be taken seriously, they'll latch onto any media coverage that shows the ill-effects of climate change, even when climate change isn't the primary cause. I personally believe this undermines the cause because when people realize it's an unrelated issue it undermines that issue. So agribusiness blaming this on climate change is smart propaganda because people on both sides will latch onto the narrative (for different reasons). But this is propaganda.

robonerd 4y ago
Central Valley farmers love to deny climate change and blame the government for all their problems. What they don't want to admit is their "perfect" farmland was bone dry a few centuries ago, and is now reverting back to that state.
downut 4y ago
Yes, I agree completely. I once structured a month's unpaid leave in the early '90s around a camping tour partially as an "eye's on the ground" of Mark Reisners "Cadillac Desert"[1]. It was, erm, eye opening to see the built environment for water across Eastern CA (including Owen's Valley), Utah, Colorado, and of course AZ. I have been across Imperial Valley a whole bunch of times on all of the externally connecting roads. Agribusiness is not stupid. Climate change is the perfect wedge issue. (I am also not a climate change denier!) [1] Recent experts seem to dislike that book but at least it provides a nice map for things to see.