5 ms·

The vast majority of the water consumption in the state is from agriculture. Agriculture is only a tiny sliver (~2%) of the state's GDP. California could easily

The vast majority of the water consumption in the state is from agriculture. Agriculture is only a tiny sliver (~2%) of the state's GDP. California could easily afford to halve its agriculture output (and severely curb water consumption in the process) and while this would be a hit to the state's 17th largest sector, it would not be the end of the world.

itbeho 12y ago
And where would we get our fruits and vegetables? And at what cost?
- sliverstorm 12y ago
  You seem to view cheap year round access to fresh vegetables of all varieties as some kind of basic right. We are used to that luxury now, but a mere fifty years ago...
- jfb 12y ago
  We'd pay more. And? Out of season access to fresh fruits and veg is even more recent a development than dense human settlement in LA.
  - declan 12y ago
    Yep. When I go to my neighborhood grocery store in the SF bay area, half of the fruits and vegetables tend to be arriving from Mexico or elsewhere in Latin America or Washington state already. The percentage is even higher in the off-season. Put another way: Where do Maine or Texas or Hawaii get fruits and vegetables that aren't local? (And why are we growing rice in drought conditions?) Also: desalination puts a floor on the cost of water for drinking purposes. Modern desalination techniques are very electricity-bound, though, in terms of cost.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - rdl 12y ago
      Alfalfa and other animal feed grown in CA due to senior water rights seems even crazy, even relative to California's baseline level of crazy. Whenever I see a restaurant (usually in the Central Valley) which has signs out that they don't serve water on the table by default due to the drought, it's hard to take anything seriously.
  - danudey 12y ago
    Fittingly enough, Mexico has also been suffering a drought, meaning that our unlimited supply of out-of-season tomatoes, coupled with insufficient regulation, is causing huge problems for the general populace.
- cynicalkane 12y ago
  From other places, at a slightly higher cost. Most food Californians eat (or any American) doesn't come from there to start.
- AnimalMuppet 12y ago
  Would you rather have the rice, but not have any water to cook it in? Or to brush your teeth afterwards? In what sense is that better?
- TowerGardens 12y ago
  Wouldn't it be beautiful to see kids grow their own produce in a very fast, efficient way without herbicides or pesticides. Schools who have some of the best teachers throughout the United States are doing just that with www.TheTowerGardens.com it is an aeroponic/hydroponic system that allows you to grow vertically, so that you can grow a tremendous amount of produce in a small space. Tower Gardens grow fruits, vegetables, and herbs vertically with no soil, just air, water and food base minerals. Tower Garden™ is more nutritious than almost any conventional or organic produce commercially available. Grow in your backyard, year round, and “there is no weeding, tilling, kneeling, or getting dirty!
declan 12y ago
> The vast majority of the water consumption in the state is from agriculture Well put. 80 percent of the developed water supply in California is used by agriculture. About 6 percent is industrial and commercial. That leaves 7 percent residential landscaping, and 7 percent residential non-landscaping (showers, washing machines, etc.). Source: http://www.kcet.org/updaily/socal_focus/commentary/where-we-are/in-a-season-of-drought-where-does-the-water-go.html http://www.kcet.org/updaily/socal_focus/commentary/where-we-... Even if residential landscaping water usage dropped by a quarter immediately, which seems rather unlikely, that's close to a rounding error compared to the amount of water to turn our near-desert into an agricultural breadbasket. Put another way, more water is used for almond farming in California than all residential landscaping or residential non-landscaping: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/05/_10_percent_of_california_s_water_goes_to_almond_farming.html http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/0... But instead of addressing the 80% problem, and the fact that some cities like Sacramento still don't have everyone on metered water* (it's unlimited! flat rate! use as much as you like!), we'll have hydrotheater restrictions on drinking water at restaurants. Hydrotheater is, of course, a cousin of TSA-style security theater, and approximately as effective. * Water meters won't even be fully installed by 2025. http://portal.cityofsacramento.org/%20Utilities/Conservation/Water-Meters http://portal.cityofsacramento.org/%20Utilities/Conservation...
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > Well put. 80 percent of the developed water supply in California is used by agriculture. How else are we going to grow rice in a desert?
  - Shivetya 12y ago
    the problem isn't that agriculture is using the water or where they are, the problem has been the federal government not charging properly for it, they have so vastly undercharged for water for any use that waste and excessive use was guaranteed. that and some districts are pretty much immune to water conservation rules, depending of course who your representatives are
  - jsilence 12y ago
001sky 12y ago
Never heard of the LA acqueduct? or the hecth-hetchy? The civilization centers are equally the problems. Just look at the transport / storage logistics to keep LA from being un-inhabitable. The orange groves are long gone in the OC. The farming/food is to feed these people...so the logic of this post is prett much ass-backwards.
- seanflyon 12y ago
  > so the logic of this post is prett much ass-backwards. If see a flaw in their logic please point it out. The existence of the LA aqueduct, hetch-hetchy or any other water logistics is not a counter point. When the vast majority of people are using 20% of the water that does not mean that "civilization centers are equally the problems" > The farming/food is to feed these people This would be a good point, but it's not really true. California exports lots of food and is perfectly capable of importing more food than it currently does. When water is scarce we don't need to use it to grow rice. Water is a valuable resource. If farmers want to grow rice in the desert they should pay for that valuable resource just like anyone else.

itbeho 12y ago

And where would we get our fruits and vegetables? And at what cost?

sliverstorm 12y ago
You seem to view cheap year round access to fresh vegetables of all varieties as some kind of basic right. We are used to that luxury now, but a mere fifty years ago...
jfb 12y ago
We'd pay more. And? Out of season access to fresh fruits and veg is even more recent a development than dense human settlement in LA.
- declan 12y ago
  Yep. When I go to my neighborhood grocery store in the SF bay area, half of the fruits and vegetables tend to be arriving from Mexico or elsewhere in Latin America or Washington state already. The percentage is even higher in the off-season. Put another way: Where do Maine or Texas or Hawaii get fruits and vegetables that aren't local? (And why are we growing rice in drought conditions?) Also: desalination puts a floor on the cost of water for drinking purposes. Modern desalination techniques are very electricity-bound, though, in terms of cost.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - rdl 12y ago
    Alfalfa and other animal feed grown in CA due to senior water rights seems even crazy, even relative to California's baseline level of crazy. Whenever I see a restaurant (usually in the Central Valley) which has signs out that they don't serve water on the table by default due to the drought, it's hard to take anything seriously.
- danudey 12y ago
  Fittingly enough, Mexico has also been suffering a drought, meaning that our unlimited supply of out-of-season tomatoes, coupled with insufficient regulation, is causing huge problems for the general populace.
cynicalkane 12y ago
From other places, at a slightly higher cost. Most food Californians eat (or any American) doesn't come from there to start.
AnimalMuppet 12y ago
Would you rather have the rice, but not have any water to cook it in? Or to brush your teeth afterwards? In what sense is that better?
TowerGardens 12y ago
Wouldn't it be beautiful to see kids grow their own produce in a very fast, efficient way without herbicides or pesticides. Schools who have some of the best teachers throughout the United States are doing just that with www.TheTowerGardens.com it is an aeroponic/hydroponic system that allows you to grow vertically, so that you can grow a tremendous amount of produce in a small space. Tower Gardens grow fruits, vegetables, and herbs vertically with no soil, just air, water and food base minerals. Tower Garden™ is more nutritious than almost any conventional or organic produce commercially available. Grow in your backyard, year round, and “there is no weeding, tilling, kneeling, or getting dirty!

declan 12y ago

> The vast majority of the water consumption in the state is from agriculture Well put. 80 percent of the developed water supply in California is used by agriculture. About 6 percent is industrial and commercial. That leaves 7 percent residential landscaping, and 7 percent residential non-landscaping (showers, washing machines, etc.). Source: http://www.kcet.org/updaily/socal_focus/commentary/where-we-are/in-a-season-of-drought-where-does-the-water-go.html http://www.kcet.org/updaily/socal_focus/commentary/where-we-... Even if residential landscaping water usage dropped by a quarter immediately, which seems rather unlikely, that's close to a rounding error compared to the amount of water to turn our near-desert into an agricultural breadbasket. Put another way, more water is used for almond farming in California than all residential landscaping or residential non-landscaping: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/05/_10_percent_of_california_s_water_goes_to_almond_farming.html http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/0... But instead of addressing the 80% problem, and the fact that some cities like Sacramento still don't have everyone on metered water* (it's unlimited! flat rate! use as much as you like!), we'll have hydrotheater restrictions on drinking water at restaurants. Hydrotheater is, of course, a cousin of TSA-style security theater, and approximately as effective. * Water meters won't even be fully installed by 2025. http://portal.cityofsacramento.org/%20Utilities/Conservation/Water-Meters http://portal.cityofsacramento.org/%20Utilities/Conservation...

dragonwriter 12y ago
> Well put. 80 percent of the developed water supply in California is used by agriculture. How else are we going to grow rice in a desert?
- Shivetya 12y ago
  the problem isn't that agriculture is using the water or where they are, the problem has been the federal government not charging properly for it, they have so vastly undercharged for water for any use that waste and excessive use was guaranteed. that and some districts are pretty much immune to water conservation rules, depending of course who your representatives are
- jsilence 12y ago

001sky 12y ago

Never heard of the LA acqueduct? or the hecth-hetchy? The civilization centers are equally the problems. Just look at the transport / storage logistics to keep LA from being un-inhabitable. The orange groves are long gone in the OC. The farming/food is to feed these people...so the logic of this post is prett much ass-backwards.

seanflyon 12y ago
> so the logic of this post is prett much ass-backwards. If see a flaw in their logic please point it out. The existence of the LA aqueduct, hetch-hetchy or any other water logistics is not a counter point. When the vast majority of people are using 20% of the water that does not mean that "civilization centers are equally the problems" > The farming/food is to feed these people This would be a good point, but it's not really true. California exports lots of food and is perfectly capable of importing more food than it currently does. When water is scarce we don't need to use it to grow rice. Water is a valuable resource. If farmers want to grow rice in the desert they should pay for that valuable resource just like anyone else.