Drought in the West

when i was in vegas in the 90's, you'd go into a restaurant and there would be a sign on the table, 'to conserve water, please ask if you would like a glass'.
meanwhile, the streets were rivers of sprinkler water runoff from islands and dividers, and it was potable

 

Besides looking at all those large numbers, we ought to have a map

 

I remembered Colorado as having lots of water diversion tunnels to carry water through the mountains, rather than over, but the map link on this page is broken:

RFC | Not All Water Flows Downstream

"Today, Colorado has 24 major tunnels that move water from western Colorado to eastern Colorado under the Continental Divide."

But these involve much lower volumes and shorter distances than the OP proposal.

This system is just for Denver:
From high in the Rockies to the South Platte, here's where Denver gets its water - Denverite, the Denver site!

 

I tried to click RFC also It must be one of those tunnels that feeds the town mentioned in #1 post here.

Puerto Rico hydro system has tunnels also. Which is odd because it rains everywhere there, except in SW corner where nobody lives.

 

As a long time California resident, I can assure you that the problem is not so much as shortage of precipitation as much as it is a matter of how it's used.

We have sent massive amounts of water from northern California to arid central valley areas that are naturally deserts. We have a lot of nut orchards throughout California that use a lot of subsidized water to grow nuts like almonds that are then shipped to other countries. I like this statistic about almonds: California supplies about 80% of the United States almonds, and dedicates 10%, or 80 million gallons, of its state’s water to grow the nut. To grow one almond requires 1.1 gallons of water, and to grow a pound takes 1,900 gal/ lb. ** They could grow other crops but that's much more profitable. There are those who maintain that we would not have a shortage if we simply stopped growing nuts for export/

Several of our population centers are in deserts that are only habitable due to imported water. San Diego. Los Angeles. Those areas seem to be growing every year. I know that the San Diego metro area has expended by may square miles in the last 20 years.


** How much water does it really take to grow almonds? - PAESTA Podcast Series: Episode 43 | PAESTA There are other places that say the same thing.

 

Yeah almonds are radioactive which is why I gave them a smiley. Yet they are but a fraction of state total ag. activity.

Residential water use is high even compared to other affluent areas.

Calif. wins in that it uses a relatively small part of water in electricity generation. That is a real killer in other sometimes-dry places.

 

RE: almonds

I've read similar for alfalfa, a lot of which is exported to other countries. In a sense, they are exporting (cheap subsidized) water in a solidified form.

In previous discussions, I saw that per capita residential water use varied considerably by metro area. Some cities got serious about efficient use long ago, while others vigorously clung to their historic pattern of unmetered water as a birthright.

 

Crops export but a little of the irrigation water. Most of it floats away to atmosphere as evapotranspiration.

Interestingly enough, part of that falls as rain (maybe also snow?) in Calif. Sierra Nevada Mtns. Central valley has this as a downwind water trap, and there may not be many similar. Dang, we need a way to measure than. Tritium is out

 

Another page has the map here, on page 9:

https://watercenter.colostate.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/33/2019/02/Colorado-Division-of-Water-Dave-Nettles.pdf

See also the stream flow map on page 8. Exiting generally eastbound, less than half the South Platte water flow, and less than a quarter of the Arkansas river flow, makes it to the state border. Southbound, less than half the Rio Grande gets to the state border.

======
See also here for CO tunnels and ditches, with annual flows:
https://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/admin/publication_files/resource-647-wwa_map_3.pdf.

 

30,000+ wells have gone dry in the western US

A human can survive on 1/100 the water an average Californian lives on

If water availablity goes to 1 gallon a person per day move or go to paper plates, smell like a frenchmen and use a composting toilet?

Maybe piped saltwater in the future or perhaps use the fact there is fresh water under every ocean, drill baby drill

 

Folks ought to worry more about the hundreds of acre feet of water used to irrigate golf courses in the desert - regardless whether it's California, Nevada, Utah, or Arizona. At least nuts, being a food crop, helps towards commerce - more then playing a game. Many of those tree-nut farmers are being squeezed, and shutting down all together. 18 hole golf courses? Not so much.
It's nuts

.

 

Like the great old growth forest that were cut down all over Europe prior to the Age of Exploration, the Europeans did the same to North America,

For a century and a half water was pumped out of our aquifers and used unwisely. These will take centuries to recharge. Artisian aquifers like the Ogallala my take more than a thousand years.

In the meantime, with groundwater removed, the land will subside on account of isostatic adjustment. Combined with melting of glaciers due to global warming, sea inundation of coastal areas will get worse.

 

It looks like California uses almost 1000 gallons per person per day, overall. But five years ago, only 85 of those gallons were piped to residences, including for their residential outdoor use. That was a significant improvement over just a few years earlier.

The other 90-ish% goes elsewhere. Agricultural use is huge.

Residential water use varies drastically by city, from just 44 gallons/person/day in San Fran, 56 in San Diego, to over 100 in Sacramento, and over 200 in Malibu and a handful of other places.

 

Airing of the grievances

 

Sometime in the later part of the previous century, there was talk of diverting a good portion of the Columbia River to California. This resource requisition theft proposal went over extremely poorly up here. The warfare to implement such a project would have more than just political. Subsequent 'shortages' down there have driven significantly efficiency improvements.

Throughout the country, there remains considerable potential for improvements in both efficiency and reuse. I still feel that these will prove cheaper than both the direct project costs, and the collateral environmental consequences, of diverting existing water across enormous distances.

 

Done “the hard way” a person only needs a little over 2 gallons a day for hygiene + consumption though your hair will be grease without another gallon

I had been under 6 gallons a day for years but most areas want composting systems that make ash to remain illegal even though they could literally save the planet

Californians may have to make actual sacrifices unless as stated they start using salt or brackish water (need new pipes)

Or if they like New Jersey are considering “mining” for fresh water a few miles off the coast deep under the ocean floor that is created by powerful forces within the earth. would be like oil exploration to find where though.

The only benefit of mined fresh water is that if you can keep it from getting spoiled by the ocean above its naturally pressured to sea level reducing pumping loss.

Atlantic freshwater aquifer has enough water to fill 1 billion Olympic swimming pools | CNN

my belief is that we are in a 10-20+ year cycle that will get far worse and people aren’t taking this permanently changed situation seriously .
It has been known for over 40 years that Cali would most likely run out of water at some point but continue to ignore the obvious that we shouldn’t be growing gross water wasting crops, animals and industry in a desert.

AKA People don’t care until the water shuts off.
My main frustration is what happens when we start getting an attempted mass migration in 5 years and there isn’t anywhere to put 1/3 of the country in the rest, Canada is looking better but is also on fire

Cali will likely need to reinstate nuclear to keep a small supply of distilled water which costs nothing extra to generate since the plant consumes a steady diet of water salty or not

Can’t fix dillusional

Effiency yes, reuse for drinking water is just as tough as desalination as there are non removable/ reactable horrifying compounds that are in sewage
Despite this we commonly spread treated water on golf courses and sometimes much worse tree farms, this practice is resulting in drugs and VOC/ solvents getting into other things like water bodies and even into food.

A common cause of ecoli contamination in Mexican vegetables is due to their practice of “composting sewage “ for farm use, real rocket science going on there.

 

This thread is why, even if the "A" in AGW isn't being overblown, humans should be completely out of the loop in trying to "solve" these sorts of issues.
....MOST ESPECIALLY humans whose work email ends with dot.gov

Southern California isn't a "desert"...although pictures from before its primate infestation might suggest otherwise. Besides....they're all (necessarily) in black and white, so it's hard to tell that there wasn't much green.
They didn't have 'fire tankers' 100 years ago either.

SO....
SoCal is enjoys a Medeterranian climate, which for those who don't get out much, is a type of dry subtropical climate.
There ARE ways that you can conserve the roughly 10-percent of the water that's not dedicated to Ag.....but some of them are sorta counter-intuitive.
There's a Nautical term that applies here that's called (aptly) "local knowledge"

For example:
Letting your lawn die off and installing astro-turf....or going for the Southwest desert 'rocks and sand' look MAY actually HURT much more than it helps, if you're into the whole UIE thing.
Besides....many people think that they have to wash the dust OFF OF the artificial turf....otherwise it "looks funny."

Mulch beds and plants are a proven UIE fighter...
HOWEVER (comma!)

There are competing theories that planting native species of trees either provide for a net SAVING of water or a net LOSS...and I read...IN THE SAME DAY, papers from both.
Sadly, I've lost the one from the "pro-tree" camp, but this may be of some interest:
australiangeographic.com.au/news/2010/02/could-planting-20-million-trees-increase-drought/

So....in a world that can't even agree about fighting a 100-year-pandemic.....WHAT is the "right" answer?

Maybe we should stop listening to people whose work emails end in dot.edu too....BUT since humans are necessarily IN the loop, we have to do something.

1. California is, depending on who you're talking to, in something like a 100-year-drout.
It's probably a different number than that, but we have ten fingers....so we do base 10.
MAYBE.....we could look down at Oz (Australia...the driest continent with a significant primate infestation) and see what they're up to since THEY are in a 1,000 year drought!
West of the Rockies, your biggest contribution to the "water shortage" isn't taking 'Hollywood showers*' but rather it's from the expectation that you should be able to buy pretty, organic, fresh vegetables down at the Food Whole at unsustainably low prices grown in part by mega-farms that get their water from REALLY unsustainably low prices.
(*) a Navy term, meaning luxuriously long. Squids de-sal their water aboard ships, so they're used to water shortages...at sea.....ON (or in) the water!
GOD's irony.

B. MAYBE....we shouldn't try to "fix" this by changing the continent that we're on.
Example: Aquifers to fix a problem in-part created by damn dams.
Perhaps let just a few cooperate mega farms go fallow and save twice the amount of water that you gain by being a 'Lawn Karen' in town.
Maybe grow meat nuts in places where it ALREADY rains 60" a year.
Maybe also plant more solar panels and commission some desal plants...BEFORE electro-cars hog up all of the generation capacity..

Either way?
It's fun to watch from this side of the Rockies.
Some of the fun leaks out when funny talkin ferigners side-eye you for washing your car when you live where it rains 60+ inches a year!!

 

i'm starting to like the pipeline idea again. henri is headed our way with a boat load of moisture for california

 

Considering the vast gap between this minimum you give, vs current residential use nearly everywhere in the U.S. (not just California or Denver), I'm not seeing any need for true sacrifice anytime soon. More humdrum efficiency improvements should suffice for a very long time.

Those brine residues can damage agricultural lands and soils quite rapidly. Instead, discharge those salts back into the oceans, which are being very slightly diluted by massive freshwater inflows from the melting glaciers and ice caps.

Some active dilution measures may be necessary at the discharge points, to prevent excessively high local salinity.

The story suggests that it wasn't "created by powerful forces within the earth", but instead by melting ice overhead from the most recent Ice Age. No similar ice sheets reached anywhere near California, so they are unlikely to find such a treasure along their coast.

They aren't actually running out of water. They have plenty of it. Like many other places, they are only running out of water sufficiently cheap and plentiful to continue past wasteful practices.

And they have made substantial progress in efficiency improvements over those decades, at least within the residential slice. Including big progress in the most recent drought phase a handful of years ago.

Don't ignore that grey water and black water can be handled / treated / re-used separately.

 

How many of you have a toilet that has two water amounts for the two options we humans deposit into it? My son just got one.