5 ms·

You all knew how it was going to end, for decades, and did nothing. https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/location-maximum-land-subsidence-us-levels-1925-and-1977

You all knew how it was going to end, for decades, and did nothing. https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/location-maximum-land-subsidence-us-levels-1925-and-1977 https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/location-maximum-land-subs...

toomuchtodo 3mo ago
I think it’s somewhat fortunate when these aquifers permanently compress, it takes the land out of agriculture production as a sort of forced conservation, because in many ways, humans cannot be trusted to be responsible stewards of such a natural finite resource. https://uttoncenter.unm.edu/resources/2026-06-1-update-paper_final_distribution.pdf https://uttoncenter.unm.edu/resources/2026-06-1-update-paper... https://www.organicproducenetwork.com/organic-growers/california-farmers-face-water-challenges-amid-climate-change-and-regulations https://www.organicproducenetwork.com/organic-growers/califo...
- altcognito 3mo ago
  ? The land isn't conserved if you can't use it?
  - thaumasiotes 3mo ago
    Conservation is basically defined as being unused by humans.
    - Eji1700 3mo ago
      Uh...they're just going to pave it and throw something over it. Edit- To be clear maybe not specifically in this case, but "oops we've ruined this ecosystem to the point we can't farm it" rarely ends with "better move down the road and let nature reclaim it". It's a lot more "cool now we can put strip malls/data centers/whatever here"
      - toomuchtodo 3mo ago
        It’s unlikely strip malls and data centers will be built on the land, but utility solar PV is an acceptable use that requires no water, is beneficial to the local environment, and gives the land 20-30 years to recover from agricultural use. It takes 600 to 3,000 years for 6 inches of topsoil to develop naturally, as it generally requires 100 to 500 years to form just a single inch. Underground water aquifers operate on similar timescales, if they can regenerate at all. The land needs time to recover from the demands of present timeline position humans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrivoltaics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrivoltaics https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301479722019119 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03014... https://cleantechnica.com/2026/01/03/21-gigawatts-of-solar-for-california-land-that-can-no-longer-be-used-for-agriculture/ https://cleantechnica.com/2026/01/03/21-gigawatts-of-solar-f... https://www.goldenstatecleanenergy.com/valley-clean-infrastructure-plan https://www.goldenstatecleanenergy.com/valley-clean-infrastr...
        notabotiswear 3mo ago
        Planting more PV farms isn't better, it just convolutes the equation and hides the true sources of damage behind things with a less negative image, and would eventually just prove Jevon's law, one way or the other. Not preceding "using better" with "consuming less" (on a system-wide basis) would get you the same result as going for recycling while forgoing the first R: empty, marketing points in green-coloured font.
        toomuchtodo 3mo ago
        It gives the land time to recover and requires nothing from it, nor human labor. All racking and conductors can be removed from the land in the future to return it to its original condition. All components can be recycled today, through metal and ewaste streams. It hides no externalities or harm. It quietly produces energy more efficiently than any crop, with no inputs besides the sun shining. As my links demonstrate, California plans on developing 21GW of solar on farmland that no longer has water available for it.
        3mo ago
    - altcognito 3mo ago
      I don't know why you got downvoted. In any case, this makes "sense", but doesn't make sense in that if we nuke the land in some way, distort it from a peaceful balance, I don't think it is "conserved"
  - toomuchtodo 3mo ago
    The land is conserved by not being farmed. https://www.tuletrust.org/land-fallowing-program https://www.tuletrust.org/land-fallowing-program
- boothby 3mo ago
  Sci-fi brings us some optimism on that front. You can build out Brawndo distribution pipes overland.
  - deleted 3mo ago
    [deleted]
cryptoegorophy 3mo ago
What can you realistically do?
- theossuary 3mo ago
  Start by not electing a pedophile who calls climate change a hoax
  - ToucanLoucan 3mo ago
    Right?! Like there’s so much you can do. * Vote for fucks sake. Bare minimum and stop making fucking excuses both for yourself not doing it and for politicians you otherwise support burying their heads in the sand. * Stop buying stupid shit on the internet. Every package you don’t get delivered means less CO2. * Fix shit instead of replacing it. The greenest EV on earth is more CO2 intense than the car you’ve already got (assuming you keep it in good working order) Like yeah global policy needs to get better across the board, and the burden has been unfairly and ridiculously shifted to consumers. True. But at the same time consumers could buy less shit overall, still have very comfortable existences, and promote economic degrowth a little bit every day. Oh yeah and stop using fucking AI for anything besides code because it sucks at everything else, and only use it for code you can’t otherwise complete.
    - kuerbel 3mo ago
      I agree but >Fix shit instead of replacing it. The greenest EV on earth is more CO2 intense than the car you’ve already got (assuming you keep it in good working order) This is not correct at all... https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/are-electric-vehicles-definitely-better-climate-gas-powered-cars https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/are-electric-vehicles-defini... one source of many. Also local pollution is reduced, e.g. nox and particles.
      - ToucanLoucan 3mo ago
        Valid pushback! That said going through the MIT study quickly (and I may be wrong, feel free to correct me further) it doesn't seem to include CO2 from overseas shipping of materials and/or finished vehicles, and it also only seems to factor in tailpipe emissions as opposed to emissions from things like tire wear which is notably worse on EVs due to their weight. But again, I'll concede the point anyway. You could however say exactly what I said about so many other classes of products. Home appliances, electronics, tools, on and on.
bayarearefugee 3mo ago
> You all knew how it was going to end, for decades, and did nothing. And the same is true for global carbon-related climate change, for which the real bill will become increasingly due over the next 10 years. We are all insanely fucked and our response is still just to mostly to ignore it and hope it goes away.
- darth_avocado 3mo ago
  > We are all insanely fucked and our response is still just to mostly to ignore it and hope it goes away. Correction. It’s the next generations who are insanely fucked. People don’t hope it goes away, they think they won’t be around to see the consequences.
  - ares623 3mo ago
    Mother Nature has always been historically very considerate with regards to our schedules.
p-e-w 3mo ago
Doing something about this is the job of the government, not of “you all”. If taking care of such essential matters is somehow the responsibility of society as a whole, we may as well get rid of governments altogether.
- arjie 3mo ago
  Governments are just a structure for people to coordinate collective action. In democracies, it’s not that distinct from “us all”. We exercise this responsibility through representatives but they are our agents not our rulers. Outcomes depend on our ability to direct them, and the ability of our opponents to do so likewise. For the most part, I like to forward evolve solutions so I happily don’t care if Las Vegas runs out of water or whatever. I’ll find a way later. So I take responsibility for my bit. I just don’t care about this particular negative outcome.
  - toomuchtodo 3mo ago
    Funny enough, Las Vegas has been planning for this outcome and won't run out of water. Only agriculture users will be impacted, who consume ~50% of the total annual Colorado River Basin. So, to your point, the ag users responsible for overconsumption for decades will be the ones primarily exposed to the outcome. Municipal water systems will continue to function as they do today with available water reserves and flows.
softjobs 3mo ago
Thank you for posting that, saved me from doing so. Ignorance and stupidity are the greatest threats to human survival - but perhaps it's for the best.

toomuchtodo 3mo ago

I think it’s somewhat fortunate when these aquifers permanently compress, it takes the land out of agriculture production as a sort of forced conservation, because in many ways, humans cannot be trusted to be responsible stewards of such a natural finite resource. https://uttoncenter.unm.edu/resources/2026-06-1-update-paper_final_distribution.pdf https://uttoncenter.unm.edu/resources/2026-06-1-update-paper... https://www.organicproducenetwork.com/organic-growers/california-farmers-face-water-challenges-amid-climate-change-and-regulations https://www.organicproducenetwork.com/organic-growers/califo...

altcognito 3mo ago
? The land isn't conserved if you can't use it?
- thaumasiotes 3mo ago
  Conservation is basically defined as being unused by humans.
  - Eji1700 3mo ago
    Uh...they're just going to pave it and throw something over it. Edit- To be clear maybe not specifically in this case, but "oops we've ruined this ecosystem to the point we can't farm it" rarely ends with "better move down the road and let nature reclaim it". It's a lot more "cool now we can put strip malls/data centers/whatever here"
    - toomuchtodo 3mo ago
      It’s unlikely strip malls and data centers will be built on the land, but utility solar PV is an acceptable use that requires no water, is beneficial to the local environment, and gives the land 20-30 years to recover from agricultural use. It takes 600 to 3,000 years for 6 inches of topsoil to develop naturally, as it generally requires 100 to 500 years to form just a single inch. Underground water aquifers operate on similar timescales, if they can regenerate at all. The land needs time to recover from the demands of present timeline position humans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrivoltaics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrivoltaics https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301479722019119 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03014... https://cleantechnica.com/2026/01/03/21-gigawatts-of-solar-for-california-land-that-can-no-longer-be-used-for-agriculture/ https://cleantechnica.com/2026/01/03/21-gigawatts-of-solar-f... https://www.goldenstatecleanenergy.com/valley-clean-infrastructure-plan https://www.goldenstatecleanenergy.com/valley-clean-infrastr...
      - notabotiswear 3mo ago
        Planting more PV farms isn't better, it just convolutes the equation and hides the true sources of damage behind things with a less negative image, and would eventually just prove Jevon's law, one way or the other. Not preceding "using better" with "consuming less" (on a system-wide basis) would get you the same result as going for recycling while forgoing the first R: empty, marketing points in green-coloured font.
        toomuchtodo 3mo ago
        It gives the land time to recover and requires nothing from it, nor human labor. All racking and conductors can be removed from the land in the future to return it to its original condition. All components can be recycled today, through metal and ewaste streams. It hides no externalities or harm. It quietly produces energy more efficiently than any crop, with no inputs besides the sun shining. As my links demonstrate, California plans on developing 21GW of solar on farmland that no longer has water available for it.
      - 3mo ago
  - altcognito 3mo ago
    I don't know why you got downvoted. In any case, this makes "sense", but doesn't make sense in that if we nuke the land in some way, distort it from a peaceful balance, I don't think it is "conserved"
- toomuchtodo 3mo ago
  The land is conserved by not being farmed. https://www.tuletrust.org/land-fallowing-program https://www.tuletrust.org/land-fallowing-program
boothby 3mo ago
Sci-fi brings us some optimism on that front. You can build out Brawndo distribution pipes overland.
- deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]

cryptoegorophy 3mo ago

What can you realistically do?

theossuary 3mo ago
Start by not electing a pedophile who calls climate change a hoax
- ToucanLoucan 3mo ago
  Right?! Like there’s so much you can do. * Vote for fucks sake. Bare minimum and stop making fucking excuses both for yourself not doing it and for politicians you otherwise support burying their heads in the sand. * Stop buying stupid shit on the internet. Every package you don’t get delivered means less CO2. * Fix shit instead of replacing it. The greenest EV on earth is more CO2 intense than the car you’ve already got (assuming you keep it in good working order) Like yeah global policy needs to get better across the board, and the burden has been unfairly and ridiculously shifted to consumers. True. But at the same time consumers could buy less shit overall, still have very comfortable existences, and promote economic degrowth a little bit every day. Oh yeah and stop using fucking AI for anything besides code because it sucks at everything else, and only use it for code you can’t otherwise complete.
  - kuerbel 3mo ago
    I agree but >Fix shit instead of replacing it. The greenest EV on earth is more CO2 intense than the car you’ve already got (assuming you keep it in good working order) This is not correct at all... https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/are-electric-vehicles-definitely-better-climate-gas-powered-cars https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/are-electric-vehicles-defini... one source of many. Also local pollution is reduced, e.g. nox and particles.
    - ToucanLoucan 3mo ago
      Valid pushback! That said going through the MIT study quickly (and I may be wrong, feel free to correct me further) it doesn't seem to include CO2 from overseas shipping of materials and/or finished vehicles, and it also only seems to factor in tailpipe emissions as opposed to emissions from things like tire wear which is notably worse on EVs due to their weight. But again, I'll concede the point anyway. You could however say exactly what I said about so many other classes of products. Home appliances, electronics, tools, on and on.

bayarearefugee 3mo ago

> You all knew how it was going to end, for decades, and did nothing. And the same is true for global carbon-related climate change, for which the real bill will become increasingly due over the next 10 years. We are all insanely fucked and our response is still just to mostly to ignore it and hope it goes away.

darth_avocado 3mo ago
> We are all insanely fucked and our response is still just to mostly to ignore it and hope it goes away. Correction. It’s the next generations who are insanely fucked. People don’t hope it goes away, they think they won’t be around to see the consequences.
- ares623 3mo ago
  Mother Nature has always been historically very considerate with regards to our schedules.

p-e-w 3mo ago

Doing something about this is the job of the government, not of “you all”. If taking care of such essential matters is somehow the responsibility of society as a whole, we may as well get rid of governments altogether.

arjie 3mo ago
Governments are just a structure for people to coordinate collective action. In democracies, it’s not that distinct from “us all”. We exercise this responsibility through representatives but they are our agents not our rulers. Outcomes depend on our ability to direct them, and the ability of our opponents to do so likewise. For the most part, I like to forward evolve solutions so I happily don’t care if Las Vegas runs out of water or whatever. I’ll find a way later. So I take responsibility for my bit. I just don’t care about this particular negative outcome.
- toomuchtodo 3mo ago
  Funny enough, Las Vegas has been planning for this outcome and won't run out of water. Only agriculture users will be impacted, who consume ~50% of the total annual Colorado River Basin. So, to your point, the ag users responsible for overconsumption for decades will be the ones primarily exposed to the outcome. Municipal water systems will continue to function as they do today with available water reserves and flows.

softjobs 3mo ago

Thank you for posting that, saved me from doing so. Ignorance and stupidity are the greatest threats to human survival - but perhaps it's for the best.