3 ms·
They redirect water from Northern to Southern California. Why not from rural Wyoming to, say, Colorado? We may have 5M people here, and are chronically short of
by SomeCallMeTim 13y ago
They redirect water from Northern to Southern California. Why not from rural Wyoming to, say, Colorado? We may have 5M people here, and are chronically short of water.
The water from Colorado (via the Colorado River) also supplies Utah, Arizona, Southern California, Nevada, and Mexico with water. All of those areas need more water; even if Colorado stays at its current demand level, you could imagine one or more of those areas funding a well in Wyoming to divert water to Colorado to either send directly down the river or to take the place of water that would otherwise be removed from the river, so that their allocation could be correspondingly increased. (Pretty much every drop of the Colorado River is owned by someone. [1])
Water is life. :)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_River https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_River
- cbr 13y agoPretty much every drop of the Colorado River is owned by someone. The river is actually overcommitted: When the Colorado River Compact was drafted in the 1920s, it was based on barely 30 years of streamflow records that suggested an average annual flow of 17.5 million acre feet past Lee's Ferry. Modern studies of tree rings revealed that those three decades were probably the wettest in the past 500 to 1,200 years – and that the natural long-term annual flow past Lee's Ferry is probably closer to 13.5 million acre feet, as compared to the natural flow at the mouth of 16.3 million acre feet. This has resulted in more water being allocated to river users than actually flows through the Colorado.
- SomeCallMeTim 13y agoI had heard that, but I didn't find the reference quickly, and I had to post. Didn't want to make unsubstantiated claims. Thanks for the follow-up. :) As a result we've been in violation with a treaty with Mexico over the lack of promised water volume over most of that time as well. Again, too busy to find the link.
- dllthomas 13y ago"Why not from rural Wyoming to, say, Colorado?" Or also to Southern California? So what if there's a few mountain ranges in the way?
- gwern 13y ago> Why not from rural Wyoming to, say, Colorado? I think pretty much any other solution will work better than digging a well in rural Wyoming and building a pipeline somewhere. For example, getting water from all the other places around Colorado. Why is this one particular spot in Wyoming so important?
- SomeCallMeTim 13y agoAll of these aquifers are finite. There may come a time when every one in Colorado is drained -- if there are any at all.
- gwern 13y agoSo then one doesn't have to live there, if there's truly no source of water whatsoever. There is no divine mandate that people have to live there, and given the constant urbanization of the world, it's not clear people even want to live in rural areas.
- SomeCallMeTim 13y agoUmm....I think Denver would resent being referred to as a "rural area." And Boulder. And Colorado Springs. Ignoring the "rural" aspect of what you're saying, the same can be said of Vegas. And most of Arizona. Not to mention, ahem, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. You suggesting that the 20M+ people in SoCal should pick up and leave because there isn't enough water? Because there isn't, except if you count the water imported from COLORADO. Colorado actually has PLENTY of water; it's just that legally we're bound to give it to others. Aside from which point, infrastructure costs money. "Pick up and move elsewhere" isn't reasonable if "elsewhere" doesn't have the infrastructure for millions of people. Did you actually read the comment thread before replying?