4 ms·

California takes 27% of the water from the Colorado River. That's more than Arizona, New Mexico and Nevada combined.

bee_rider 4y ago
Ah, ok. So the idea is pretty fanciful in the first place, but on top of that the author is also being disingenuous by focusing on southwestern states, then?
- SllX 4y ago
  Think of California as the furthest west extent of the Southwest for the purposes of this conversation because the colloquial usage here doesn’t really matter. There are a handful of States that contribute to the Colorado River including Mexican States and that river (or what’s left of it by the time it gets that far) discharges into the Gulf of California. Changing supply anywhere in that basin effectively increases water supply in the whole basin but uh, much like extra RAM and highway lanes, it’ll probably just get used up. So the question is really whether Mississippi River consumers and US taxpayers subsidize our lives out here in the American West? I suppose sucking the government teat is a time honored American tradition, just not one I’m fond of.
- nraynaud 4y ago
  to complete the answer, there are actual pumps to bring the colorado river waters all the way to Los Angeles, this is bonkers. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/Colorado-River-Aqueduct-Map1.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/Colorado... And Los Angeles also gets some water by another gigantic water system coming all the way from northern California collecting the melting snow from the high Sierras. "Los Angeles" is a bit of the loose term because the central valley is connected to the same system for agricultural needs. I think it's really the bleak future to look at as an example, Phoenix is still small enough that it doesn't yet use more than its alotment of the Colorado river. But clearly the article is looking at artificially propping up Phoenix in the future the way Los Angles is right now. Edit: and in the terminator 2 movie, this is not a rain ditch, it’s supposed to be an actual river.

Ah, ok. So the idea is pretty fanciful in the first place, but on top of that the author is also being disingenuous by focusing on southwestern states, then?

SllX 4y ago
Think of California as the furthest west extent of the Southwest for the purposes of this conversation because the colloquial usage here doesn’t really matter. There are a handful of States that contribute to the Colorado River including Mexican States and that river (or what’s left of it by the time it gets that far) discharges into the Gulf of California. Changing supply anywhere in that basin effectively increases water supply in the whole basin but uh, much like extra RAM and highway lanes, it’ll probably just get used up. So the question is really whether Mississippi River consumers and US taxpayers subsidize our lives out here in the American West? I suppose sucking the government teat is a time honored American tradition, just not one I’m fond of.
nraynaud 4y ago
to complete the answer, there are actual pumps to bring the colorado river waters all the way to Los Angeles, this is bonkers. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/Colorado-River-Aqueduct-Map1.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/Colorado... And Los Angeles also gets some water by another gigantic water system coming all the way from northern California collecting the melting snow from the high Sierras. "Los Angeles" is a bit of the loose term because the central valley is connected to the same system for agricultural needs. I think it's really the bleak future to look at as an example, Phoenix is still small enough that it doesn't yet use more than its alotment of the Colorado river. But clearly the article is looking at artificially propping up Phoenix in the future the way Los Angles is right now. Edit: and in the terminator 2 movie, this is not a rain ditch, it’s supposed to be an actual river.