3 ms·

Aren't they building a water-hungry semiconductor fab in that state?

Lolaccount 3y ago
Just getting people used to what will be the status quo when the fab arrives!
macintux 3y ago
From previous discussions here I got the impression that while the initial water requirements are quite high, much of it can be recycled and re-used.
ahi 3y ago
They're exporting 70% of their water in the form of agricultural products. That's really the only problem that needs fixing.
- hedora 3y ago
  According to their water data here: https://waterdata.usgs.gov/az/nwis/water_use?format=html_table&rdb_compression=file&wu_area=State+Total&wu_year=2015&wu_county=ALL&wu_category=ALL&wu_county_nms=--ALL%2BCounties--&wu_category_nms=--ALL%2BCategories-- https://waterdata.usgs.gov/az/nwis/water_use?format=html_tab... They are consuming 1195.15 + 987 Mgal/day of groundwater + surface water, and are supplying 963.30 Mgal/day to domestic users. Industrial uses 6.12 Mgal/day, mining uses 68.3, livestock uses 38.8, aquaculture 34.5, and irrigation uses 4528 Mgal / day. So... huh. The more I look at it, the less the data makes sense or adds up. Anyway, it does look like they could just take water away from farmers, and let people elsewhere run out of food, California style.
tomatotomato37 3y ago
If the land it's being built on was previously thirsty farmland it may be a net positive in water usage
- RobotToaster 3y ago
  As long as you don't need food.
  - pfdietz 3y ago
    One can import food from someplace with more water. It's the same way we don't subsidize farmers to grow bananas in Alaska, and then pretend that bananas would disappear if we stopped the subsidies.
  - volkl48 3y ago
    The US overproduces food to an absurd degree and isn't even remotely close to maximizing it's ability to grow it. Anyway, Ag shifted production to the Southwest because when you don't pay the actual value of the water, it's great - lots of sun, long growing season, basically free water = cheapest production. When water costs money....you'll see quite a bit of that production shift back up north.

Just getting people used to what will be the status quo when the fab arrives!

From previous discussions here I got the impression that while the initial water requirements are quite high, much of it can be recycled and re-used.

ahi 3y ago

They're exporting 70% of their water in the form of agricultural products. That's really the only problem that needs fixing.

hedora 3y ago
According to their water data here: https://waterdata.usgs.gov/az/nwis/water_use?format=html_table&rdb_compression=file&wu_area=State+Total&wu_year=2015&wu_county=ALL&wu_category=ALL&wu_county_nms=--ALL%2BCounties--&wu_category_nms=--ALL%2BCategories-- https://waterdata.usgs.gov/az/nwis/water_use?format=html_tab... They are consuming 1195.15 + 987 Mgal/day of groundwater + surface water, and are supplying 963.30 Mgal/day to domestic users. Industrial uses 6.12 Mgal/day, mining uses 68.3, livestock uses 38.8, aquaculture 34.5, and irrigation uses 4528 Mgal / day. So... huh. The more I look at it, the less the data makes sense or adds up. Anyway, it does look like they could just take water away from farmers, and let people elsewhere run out of food, California style.

tomatotomato37 3y ago

If the land it's being built on was previously thirsty farmland it may be a net positive in water usage

RobotToaster 3y ago
As long as you don't need food.
- pfdietz 3y ago
  One can import food from someplace with more water. It's the same way we don't subsidize farmers to grow bananas in Alaska, and then pretend that bananas would disappear if we stopped the subsidies.
- volkl48 3y ago
  The US overproduces food to an absurd degree and isn't even remotely close to maximizing it's ability to grow it. Anyway, Ag shifted production to the Southwest because when you don't pay the actual value of the water, it's great - lots of sun, long growing season, basically free water = cheapest production. When water costs money....you'll see quite a bit of that production shift back up north.