California's Water Crisis. Why?

I live in the middle of 1/5 of the world's surface fresh water. We have enough fresh water to cover the 48 contiguous states to a depth of 9.5 feet. For us, the cost of fresh water is mostly the cost of running a pump. Even so, we have water meters. Why? Because it costs something to pump that water. I don't water my lawn, I don't leave the faucet running when I brush my teeth. Why waste energy and resources when you don't need too?

Tom

 

And so, without out all those socal tax dollars, sac town would be, what?, modesto?

 

Sounds like you do everything you can to conserve water. And it's axiomatic that the closer you get to the optimum, the less percentage of waste can be made.

Why not the school board? It's a start. Where we live, in the Florida panhandle, you'll see what almost amounts to inbreeding governmentally. People move from post to post because they want to help, so you'll see a county commissioner leave that job, become active in the chamber of commerce or the board of realtors, then do something with other committees (only five city governments in our county). A few go to state legislature or Congress, then come back home and do something else. There are only 177,000 living in the county, so the talent pool is pretty small. But the leaders really are talented and have the best interests of the area at heart (of course, there are a few exceptions but they don't last long). So go ahead and run for the school board; you can make a difference.

 

Yep, ten years... Let's talk again after people have been limited to one shower per week and running their air conditioners for three hours per day for a while, and see whether they think nuclear power is too expensive. God help us if they turn to coal because they think it will cost a little less. Of course we'll have wind and Solar power, but they can't do the whole job. We'll be lucky if they can provide 30% of the energy we need.

This may help others calibrate my opinions:
- I once voted in California to oppose expansion of nuclear power.
- My household has been paying for 100% wind power from Green Mountain Energy for three years.
- I pledge that in the same week that my state requires utilities to buy back domestic Solar power at the prevailing retail rate I will contract to have Solar PV panels installed on my house.

 

Solar is my preference, because the cost is limited to the equipment -- until politicians figure out a way to charge for or tax sunlight. Technically, that may be a long way off. Wind will work individually, but storage becomes an issue. Nuclear is the best general source for now, since it simply supplants coal- and gas-fired generation and leaves distribution intact. Cost will decline as more plants are built and competition (that is NOT a dirty word) allows for lower prices. Spent rod disposal and safety issues can be addressed fairly easily, as long as the politicians either do their job or get out of the way.

 

I think you (CA have a population problem) Can't keep up with the air, water, oil, electric. Going to have to foreclose! Oh ya, they are already doing that. "Where you going to Run?"

Seriously, You might have to consider restricting the farms and amount they use for irrigation. These systems aren't very efficient.

Could put a straw in the artic and pump durring the summer using wind.

 

We have a water meter and were on a metered rate in 1989. We planted a drought-tolerant, native plant front yard (no lawn) that is appropriate to the semiarid climate. Use of water meters was outlawed, then reinstated by federal and state law. Fresno continues to NOT charge a metered rate "because we wouldn't know what to charge." Hogwash. Every user should be on double meters (fresh & used) because even when water is unlimited, it still takes energy to move and treat the water. Fresno substitutes water for knowledge and acts like it is located in Indiana. Absurd.

The California Department of Water Resources, guided by several pieces of legislation is continuously putting on workshops around the state and implementing "Best Management Practices." The first tier of BMPs are the easy one and have been imposed for the most part. Tier two BMPs are coming and DWR is making every effort to write and implement what is mandated by state law as well as offering grants to communities.

Industrial agriculture has controlled 80% of California water since the 1880s. There is a confusing and conflicting mix of federal and state water systems and no one wants to give up anything. The Central Valley Improvement Act (1988, Bush) imposed the Public Trust Doctrine and mandated that the San Joaquin River and associated salmon runs be restored. Despite successful lawsuits and legislation, the "Water Bison" have yet to open a valve. The largest growers are on the west side of the Great Central Valley, in the rain shadow of the coast range, and grow water intensive crops (alfalfa, safflower, cotton, treefruit, maize) that are not climate appropriate. The soils, derived from Coast Range metavolcanics, contain heavy metals and salts. Salts continue to accumulate from antiquated irrigations methods (flood furrow vs. microjet an drip). Summer temperatures produce very high evapotranspiration rates and much irrigation water is lost to the atmosphere. It was recognized in 1890 when west side alkali soils began to be farmed that agriculture had about 100 years. We are now at 120 years. Federal subsidies for land, water and crops encourage wasteful water use and continued growing of water intensive crops.

The Governor declared a "drought" this year in an effort to build more dams (at $3 billion each) and a canal through the Sacramento - San Joaquin estuary. There is no "new" water to fill the dams and the public has repeatedly turned down canal proposals through the estuary. A homeowner in Sacramento was cited and fined $800 for not watering their front lawn this summer - despite pointing out the governor's "drought" declaration.

The present California water system is overly optimistic and was built to serve 20 million people. Primarily the system moves water from the Sacramento River drainage in the north to southern California. California is currently at 38 million. Instead of "build it and the water will come" current law now mandates that the source of water be identified before new homes are built. Most communities live beyond carrying capacity and are dependent on imported or pumped groundwater. Many people now recognize that water is moved south, at the expense of the northern part of the state and the estuary, to support continued southern California development and sprawl.

Federal and state legislation and Best Management Practices are helping to increase water efficiency and ecosystem restoration. The Mono Lake lawsuit and subsequent promulgated law, including the Public Trust Doctrine is bringing change - although at too slow a rate. Global climate change is recognized as adversely affecting California.

Efficiency and conservation is taking hold, but we are "muddling toward frugality." Most people are not sincere in their understanding or use of water in California. Drive through any Great Central Valley community and water runs down gutters and homes have lawns. California is in for a "great awakening" regarding water, resources, food, energy and land. Hang on tight.

 

Back when, we did a water project, Garrison Diversion. It created a series of dams with hydro electric with flood control as a guise. To make a long story short, the southern states got what they wanted, water for barge traffic. We were suppose to get water to the East for irrigation, and drinking. We have neither, we really don't need the irrigation, (Some would ague other wise) but could use it for industry and drinking.

Goes back to Gov!

 

But I will be expected to cut back just like everyone else. They don't look at whose been cutting back all along. They just look at if you're using less than last year and the overall picture.

So far this year we're at about 3% less than last year. The Mayor says it's not enough.

So while some keep watering their lawns (and golf courses) the rest have to make up the difference. The Mayor is talking about "mandatory" cut backs. And still not talk of any new sources such as desalination or recycling. Now how are they going to make it mandatory? Well, they'll look at our bills and whoever isn't using 10% less than last year will probably get fined.

That will be me.

 

You're lucky you have the option to buy green power. I don't.

I've already installed PV. (So have my parents). I put in enough to offset what I use. (So did my parents).

But I will not vote for nuclear. We have enough sun in this state to not only meet all of our needs but to send it out to others. There is no reason for nuclear. If we put money into anything, it should be more solar.

I'll put MORE solar on my roof as soon as I am paid for the excess I produce.

 

There's no doubt we have too many people in California.

We need to reign in the Developers who simply build because they have a piece of land, ignoring the big picture.

Perhaps the foreclosure crisis is a solution. If *I* were Supreme Dictator of the Universe for Life, I'd have the government buy those foreclosed homes, tear them to the ground and then put a 'dead zone' on that parcel that no home could be built on it. This would eliminate housing rather than providing more. Lack of housing would limit migration into the state. California is already one of the least affordable states. Instead of people moving out of the least affordable cities and then using gas to commute an hour or more in to the city for work, people will start looking for jobs somewhere else. Like maybe another state where it's cheaper to live.

And there's nothing wrong with having gaps in neighborhoods. In fact, it would promote neighborhoods. That one empty lot could be a community garden allowing the residents to grow local produce and get to know one another. Or it could be a children's totlot playground. Where you have several parcels connected, that becomes a neighborhood park. And there's plenty of native plants you can put in these parks that can survive just on rainfall.

 

Instead of low flush toilets, how about no flush, as in composting? Very little waste, and zero water consumption.

Actually, no flush works too. Where I first lived, the water came by truck once a week, and that was cause for celebration, let me tell you. And a great education - it took me years to develop the wasteful habit of flushing with every use. (Yeah, I'm long over that. No worries.)

 

"Why are we not looking into legislation that makes lawns illegal? What about tiered structures for water useage at the household level and making it pricey enough that people stop wasting water"

Was that you being interviewd by John Oliver last night on The Daily Show.

Red State Blue State Report - Oil Crisis | The Daily Show | Comedy Central

 

New York City is the most energy- and materials-efficient place to live in the US. No water is wasted on private lawns. Adjoining apartments in large buildings help to heat and cool each other year round. People walk most places, and take a train if the walk would be too far.

We can do this everywhere. Soon we will have to.

 

The enclosed chart shows how water use per person has been lowered in Pinellas County.

There have been some pretty good ideas. One of the best was the utility provided a set of low flow shower heads and water leak detectors for free. All you had to do was ask. They also provide significant rebates for replacing existing bathroom fixtures with low flow. (Not for new construction). Once a year they provide the legally required CCR, but also use this mailing to explain the water well head locations and why reduction efforts will never end. The most stringent enforcement efforts are fining people for watering more than once a week (potable water) or twice a week (reclaimed water). Watering is only allowed during the evening and night. I have been nailed once for a timer that drifted out, so I know that the checks are ongoing.

Rather than making it illegal to water a lawn, I would be quite happy if it was made legal not to water your lawn. Making homeowner associations toothless to enforce green lawns would be a welcome first step.

 

Have low flow shower heads, If it's yellow let it mellow, I think you get the point here. Don't water my lawn, don't own a pool, use sump water-shallow well dug on one corner of my house to water garden. Don't let water run when brushing, (working on my kids) and a few other things.

We have a meter and a tiered system.

During dry years folks in our bigger cities get fined.

I do get PO some years when forced to run the water to clear it of an orange substance, usually the result of a broken pipe etc.

 

This is why I won't live in a "community". I will not have a homeowner's association dictating my life down to what color curtains I can hang in my window.

I'm sure everyone remembers the devastating fires we had in California a few years back. Some of the homes that were lost had cedar shingle roofs. The owners had tried for years to get permission from the homeowner's association to replace them with a more fire-retardant material and were consistently denied. I think they ended up sueing the association after the fires. Don't know how far they got. But after that they were allowed to rebuild using any material they deemed necessary to reduce the chance of the home burning down.

No one mentioned swimming pools. Now I know with a pump you can use a swimming pool to fight fires. But how much water does a swimming pool use? I know it recirculates. But you probably have to add water every now and then. What uses more water? A lawn or a pool?

If you're going to outlaw lawns, why not outlaw pools?

 

For thos in CA hope every one is ok after the little one! Had one when I just got out of the military in SD.

Wish we could help with the water problem, but they need it down south to float their barges! Our reservoirs are at least down about 40' (you can see it one the rocks along the dams) can't imagine how many acre feet of water that is. The lakes are huge still, but have been told this is the lowest since they backed up the water!

I remeber when I lived out there (CA) in the late 70's, reservoirs where quite low even then!

 

sort of related to the thread topic:
i ate a salad last night.
how much water is required to produce one pound of lettuce?

why is it still cheap enough to do so, then truck it 1/2 way across the country to me?

it was 105 yesterday here, so there is no way that was a locally grown salad...