3 ms·

It is very frustrating to me that we are dealing with such significant drought, while most of us Californians live within 100 miles of the ocean. Using that wat

It is very frustrating to me that we are dealing with such significant drought, while most of us Californians live within 100 miles of the ocean. Using that water seems like the answer. The problem with desalination is that it's an expensive solution to a sometimes problem. http://www.wateronline.com/doc/santa-barbara-to-reboot-desalination-plant-0001 http://www.wateronline.com/doc/santa-barbara-to-reboot-desal... Santa Barbara built and then shut down an expensive desalination plant in the early 1990's. Desalination is expensive, and when water is abundant, it is more cost effective to use natural water sources than run an expensive plant. A desalination solution must be designed to be inexpensive and easily hibernated/restarted. That way, the state could effortlessly switch between whichever water supply was most abundant.

liber8 12y ago
As with nearly all of our problems, California's water shortage is really an energy shortage. If we had cheap, abundant energy, desalinization isn't expensive anymore. Figure out fusion and our water problems are solved. Of course, in the meantime you think we'd at least consider pricing water as a resource and let supply and demand control the price. Instead, we implement this ludicrous system of encouraging neighbors to tattle on each other.
- TheOtherHobbes 12y ago
  Calfornia's energy shortage is a classic market failure. If markets were capable of intelligent long-term strategy, California wouldn't have an energy shortage in the first place. Fusion isn't required to solve a problem that could have been solved by much simpler means.
- shiny 12y ago
  Fusion is cool, but fission is easy and if used on Thorium in LFTRs[1], would provide us with virtually unlimited, passively safe energy that leaves extremely little waste. Unfortunately it falls under the 'nuclear' umbrella and thus carries with it all of the baggage associated with that. 5 minute elevator pitch for the LFTR: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK367T7h6ZY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK367T7h6ZY Failing that, I don't understand why we can't just connect a pipe (like we do with oil) from one of our water rich states to CA. But for whatever reason the state doesn't seem to be even considering any engineering solutions to the problem. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor
  - cratermoon 12y ago
    You know that California already drains water from the entire Colorado river basin, the Owen Valley, and numerous other sources. No way a state is going to just let California's appetite for clean water drain yet more rivers.
    - shiny 12y ago
      Alaska might be up for it.
te_chris 12y ago
Surely you have to ask yourself, if your proposed solution is energy intensive desalination, perhaps the problem actually is using too much water?
- genwin 12y ago
  or too many people even when each uses a reasonable amount of water
- dkokelley 12y ago
  The unfortunate truth is that we actually need to use that water. Roughly 80% of California's water consumption goes to agriculture. [1] I can't speak to whether that water is allocated or used as effectively as it could be, because I'm not familiar with the agriculture industry. [2] That said, I do know that California is a major food producer for the rest of the country. Assuming agricultural water use is as efficient as can be expected (i.e. not blatantly squandered), the only answers are to reduce food production (to the detriment of California food producers and anyone who buys our food) or maintain/increase the water supply. Limiting residential and non-agricultural water usage will slow the bleeding, but not enough to solve our water problems. 1. http://www.environment.ucla.edu/reportcard/article4870.html http://www.environment.ucla.edu/reportcard/article4870.html 2. I suspect that we would see improvements in the situation if water were priced appropriately, which to my casual knowledge is not the case, especially for our farmers. I believe right now our government picks the "winners and losers" of water allocation, which upsets the losers, and doesn't encourage the winners to explore less water-intensive farming methods. But again, I could be drastically oversimplifying a situation I am not well educated on.
  - waps 12y ago
    So when the governor suggested people should take measures to reduce water usage 20%, it would only help if they reduced their water usage to zero ? Figures.
  - genwin 12y ago
    Reduce food production is the only sustainable option. Best done by reducing the nation's population through attrition.

liber8 12y ago

As with nearly all of our problems, California's water shortage is really an energy shortage. If we had cheap, abundant energy, desalinization isn't expensive anymore. Figure out fusion and our water problems are solved. Of course, in the meantime you think we'd at least consider pricing water as a resource and let supply and demand control the price. Instead, we implement this ludicrous system of encouraging neighbors to tattle on each other.

TheOtherHobbes 12y ago
Calfornia's energy shortage is a classic market failure. If markets were capable of intelligent long-term strategy, California wouldn't have an energy shortage in the first place. Fusion isn't required to solve a problem that could have been solved by much simpler means.
shiny 12y ago
Fusion is cool, but fission is easy and if used on Thorium in LFTRs[1], would provide us with virtually unlimited, passively safe energy that leaves extremely little waste. Unfortunately it falls under the 'nuclear' umbrella and thus carries with it all of the baggage associated with that. 5 minute elevator pitch for the LFTR: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK367T7h6ZY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK367T7h6ZY Failing that, I don't understand why we can't just connect a pipe (like we do with oil) from one of our water rich states to CA. But for whatever reason the state doesn't seem to be even considering any engineering solutions to the problem. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor
- cratermoon 12y ago
  You know that California already drains water from the entire Colorado river basin, the Owen Valley, and numerous other sources. No way a state is going to just let California's appetite for clean water drain yet more rivers.
  - shiny 12y ago
    Alaska might be up for it.

te_chris 12y ago

Surely you have to ask yourself, if your proposed solution is energy intensive desalination, perhaps the problem actually is using too much water?

genwin 12y ago
or too many people even when each uses a reasonable amount of water
dkokelley 12y ago
The unfortunate truth is that we actually need to use that water. Roughly 80% of California's water consumption goes to agriculture. [1] I can't speak to whether that water is allocated or used as effectively as it could be, because I'm not familiar with the agriculture industry. [2] That said, I do know that California is a major food producer for the rest of the country. Assuming agricultural water use is as efficient as can be expected (i.e. not blatantly squandered), the only answers are to reduce food production (to the detriment of California food producers and anyone who buys our food) or maintain/increase the water supply. Limiting residential and non-agricultural water usage will slow the bleeding, but not enough to solve our water problems. 1. http://www.environment.ucla.edu/reportcard/article4870.html http://www.environment.ucla.edu/reportcard/article4870.html 2. I suspect that we would see improvements in the situation if water were priced appropriately, which to my casual knowledge is not the case, especially for our farmers. I believe right now our government picks the "winners and losers" of water allocation, which upsets the losers, and doesn't encourage the winners to explore less water-intensive farming methods. But again, I could be drastically oversimplifying a situation I am not well educated on.
- waps 12y ago
  So when the governor suggested people should take measures to reduce water usage 20%, it would only help if they reduced their water usage to zero ? Figures.
- genwin 12y ago
  Reduce food production is the only sustainable option. Best done by reducing the nation's population through attrition.