4 ms·

There is one way that is both extremely simple and politically impossible: start charging farmers market rates. They pay too little, use too much, and represent

There is one way that is both extremely simple and politically impossible: start charging farmers market rates. They pay too little, use too much, and represent a gigantic portion of total water consumption.

raverbashing 12y ago
And see the price of food go up, affecting those with the least amount of income.
- acjohnson55 12y ago
  Then subsidize food for the poor.
- Alex3917 12y ago
  I somehow doubt the price of almonds going up is going to affect those with the least income.
mempko 12y ago
I'm confused. You think that those poor people living in that town could afford to pay more for their water than farmers? The water they are getting is DONATED at the moment. Free. The market is not the best way to distribute water if the people in those are willing but cannot pay.
- _delirium 12y ago
  They're also not even on the state water system at all, so what Central Valley farmers do or don't use doesn't affect the particular situation written about in this article. The article is about people in remote areas, off the water grid, who have private wells that draw from shallow aquifers replenished by rainwater. Since there is very little rain, the wells are dry this year, so they have to truck in water in plastic drums. The agriculture vs. residential vs. industrial policy/pricing debate is more about how to split water between entities connected to the big state-run aqueduct system, e.g. Central Valley agriculture vs. LA/SF. Which is also important, but a different situation from this one.
- cpwright 12y ago
  Even if you're poor, I doubt having to drive to the fire house and fill buckets or 55-gallon drums with free water is going to be cheaper than a municipal water system (paying for gas, paying for those buckets, the time that you can't spend working at an hourly job). I would expect that if this persists, a commercial water delivery industry will spring up in the area. Of course, either way, you are very motivated to use much less water than you would if your well worked for actually free.
bkmartin 12y ago
This is a problem of zero rain, not water consumption. These people are living out in an area where there is no municipal water hookup. If you have never lived in a rural area with no municipal water, or never lived on a farm, or never been real poor then I can see how your post might seem like a great solution to you. The fact of the matter is that there has been a drought for 3 years and this area happens to be one of the hardest hit. Their lack of water is because the rain hasn't come to replenish the ground water. You make some very qualifying statements.... Would you like to provide evidence that farmers pay too little for water? That they use too much water? And what is this gigantic portion of water consumption that you are referring to? I mean, they do kind of need to use water to grow their respective foods... sooooo I guess I wonder what world you expect to live in where farmers don't use more water than the average person?
- pjc50 12y ago
  http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21596955-drought-forcing-westerners-consider-wasting-less-water-drying-west http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21596955-drought... "Agriculture accounts for 80% of water consumption in California, for example, but only 2% of economic activity. Farmers flood the land to grow rice, alfalfa and other thirsty crops. By one account, over the years they have paid just 15% of the capital costs of the federal system that delivers much of their irrigation water." Trying to grow rice in California is as ludicrous as the Saudi plans to grow wheat in the desert with oil-desalinated water. I appreciate this is a bad situation for the farmers and in an ideal world the climate change mitigation fund would compensate them for stopping.

raverbashing 12y ago

And see the price of food go up, affecting those with the least amount of income.

acjohnson55 12y ago
Then subsidize food for the poor.
Alex3917 12y ago
I somehow doubt the price of almonds going up is going to affect those with the least income.

mempko 12y ago

I'm confused. You think that those poor people living in that town could afford to pay more for their water than farmers? The water they are getting is DONATED at the moment. Free. The market is not the best way to distribute water if the people in those are willing but cannot pay.

_delirium 12y ago
They're also not even on the state water system at all, so what Central Valley farmers do or don't use doesn't affect the particular situation written about in this article. The article is about people in remote areas, off the water grid, who have private wells that draw from shallow aquifers replenished by rainwater. Since there is very little rain, the wells are dry this year, so they have to truck in water in plastic drums. The agriculture vs. residential vs. industrial policy/pricing debate is more about how to split water between entities connected to the big state-run aqueduct system, e.g. Central Valley agriculture vs. LA/SF. Which is also important, but a different situation from this one.
cpwright 12y ago
Even if you're poor, I doubt having to drive to the fire house and fill buckets or 55-gallon drums with free water is going to be cheaper than a municipal water system (paying for gas, paying for those buckets, the time that you can't spend working at an hourly job). I would expect that if this persists, a commercial water delivery industry will spring up in the area. Of course, either way, you are very motivated to use much less water than you would if your well worked for actually free.

bkmartin 12y ago

This is a problem of zero rain, not water consumption. These people are living out in an area where there is no municipal water hookup. If you have never lived in a rural area with no municipal water, or never lived on a farm, or never been real poor then I can see how your post might seem like a great solution to you. The fact of the matter is that there has been a drought for 3 years and this area happens to be one of the hardest hit. Their lack of water is because the rain hasn't come to replenish the ground water. You make some very qualifying statements.... Would you like to provide evidence that farmers pay too little for water? That they use too much water? And what is this gigantic portion of water consumption that you are referring to? I mean, they do kind of need to use water to grow their respective foods... sooooo I guess I wonder what world you expect to live in where farmers don't use more water than the average person?

pjc50 12y ago
http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21596955-drought-forcing-westerners-consider-wasting-less-water-drying-west http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21596955-drought... "Agriculture accounts for 80% of water consumption in California, for example, but only 2% of economic activity. Farmers flood the land to grow rice, alfalfa and other thirsty crops. By one account, over the years they have paid just 15% of the capital costs of the federal system that delivers much of their irrigation water." Trying to grow rice in California is as ludicrous as the Saudi plans to grow wheat in the desert with oil-desalinated water. I appreciate this is a bad situation for the farmers and in an ideal world the climate change mitigation fund would compensate them for stopping.