California Drought

Stuff that’s happening in the world that may pertain to our survival. Please keep political debates off the forum.

Moderator: ZS Global Moderators

Post Reply
zero11010
* * *
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:24 pm

California Drought

Post by zero11010 » Mon May 18, 2015 3:49 pm

This will be an area for discussion and information about the topic of the California drought.

To get a few things out of the way:

How is this a disaster?
More than 10% of the population of the entire United States lives in California. This means more than 10% of the entire US is going through a severe drought if that drought only impacts California (spoiler alert: it impacts much, much more than just California). California has mandatory water rationing with fines being issued (including $500 fines with proposals for $10,000 fines).

Aren't these droughts cyclical in nature? It'll rain more soon.
The community of scientists don't include many seers, though they do use predictive models. Scientists, looking at facts, do not see a high chance that in the coming decade that enough water will fall to bring us back to historically normal levels without also changing other factors. The drought has gone on for so long that the amount of water needed to get to a historically normal state is staggering!

The experts agree that the events are a building catastrophe. There is debate about some of the specifics, which are then interpreted wildly by the public at large.

How much water does California need to end the drought?
11 trillion gallons (10 cubic miles, or 33.7 million acre feet) of water is what the experts are saying. To help visualize that, it's the amount of water that flows over Niagara falls in 170 days if you capture every gallon of water from the falls for that entire time.

That's why when California gets some rain for a week the drought is still an issue after.

Also, keep in mind, that unless we collect those 11 trillion gallons, then continue to get a historically normal amount of water the state will just slide back into a drought.

Who cares about California anyway?
Well, California, as previously mentioned is 10% of the United States' population. Lots of people care about what happens to 1 in 10 US citizens. But, beyond just what is happening in California, we're dealing with a pattern of reduced rainfall across the whole midwest. The way California handles this disaster will likely be the foundation for the plan of other states in the future for how to handle a similar situation. If California's plan succeeds, then, as a country we learn about how to effectively deal with the situation. If California's plan is poor, then, as a country we learn about what not to do.

As reported by USA Today (April 2015), 37% of the US is in some form of a drought.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... /26559955/

Why doesn't California just use sea water? Duh!
San Diego has been building the largest desalination plant in this hemisphere. It's scheduled to go online in the Fall. That plant will deliver 7% of the water used by the people in San Diego (the county has a larger population than many States and, by itself, represents about 1% of the population of the whole US). The cost of that 7% will increase the water bills for people in San Diego by about 25%. That's more than a 300% increase on each gallon of water. Yes, it's better than not having any water at all, but, it's pretty clear that water from almost any other source would be less expensive.

Why do I hear about snowfall?
It does not rain 12 months a year in many places. We still need water during each of those 12 months. This means we need ways to store water when it isn't raining. Water reservoirs are very expensive (though plentiful throughout the state). Fortunately, there is a type of natural water reservoir, snow! When frozen water collects during the rainy season it will sit as snow for months until temperatures warm up and that snow melts. The melting snow will fill rivers and lakes even during months in which there is little to no rainfall. Snowmelt from the Sierra mountains provides water to 24 million people, and some of this snowmelt is transported hundreds and hundreds of miles.

If the snow melts sooner than anticipated then later during dry months there will be much less (or zero) snow melting to fill these rivers and lakes during the months when people need it most.

Where does all of California's water go?
The breakdown is roughly 50% environmental, 40% agricultural and 10% residential. Right now a lot of the focus in water reduction is on environmental water and residential water. The idea, as I understand it, is to keep California's economy as strong as possible by imposing as little as possible upon California's agriculture.

80% of all human water use goes towards agriculture.

What does that mean financially?
This is a difficult question to answer, because it's hard to tell exactly what the impact of a prolonged drought will be.

California agriculture was valued at about 22.3 billion dollars in 2010. If you just look at California's agriculture revenue more is generated from it than from 100% of the state revenue of the following states: Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, Wyoming.

California's economy is about 156 billion dollars (about 50% larger than the next closest state) so a significant hit to the California economy would be a significant hit to the whole country.

How much water do people use per day?
The average households in the US uses about 90 gallons of water per person per day.

Are companies being respectful of the drought?
Largely they are, but generally only as they're be forced by law.

As a single example Crystal Geyser is about to open a bottling plant to take water from the Sacramento River in California, bottle it, and ship it to people around the whole country. Thanks Crystal Geyser!

Historical Rainfall:
Image

Population:
Image

Image

gronch
* *
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 12:09 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: California Drought

Post by gronch » Mon May 18, 2015 8:14 pm

Nicely done.

As a San Diego native, there is a rather large perception problem about living in the desert. I had to water my lawn every other day to keep it green. The only other option was to go drought tolerant, which people don't want to do, because why pay a ton for your house just to put rocks in the front yard. Also, your HOA may not allow such madness.

Desalination requires electricity, and San Diego just lost San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. That will put desalination at the mercy of the wider electrical grid. Any interruption of electricity will impact water production. I think it also puts water prices in lock step with fuel prices, but I haven't researched that.

Another cost of drought is wildfire. Rain makes fuel, drought makes big expensive fires.
Awesome-sauce.

User avatar
Stercutus
* * * * *
Posts: 13267
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Location: Time Out

Re: California Drought

Post by Stercutus » Mon May 18, 2015 8:49 pm

I am curious.
- How many people have died/ been injured due to the drought?
- What are the actual economic impacts to California due to the drought?
- What are the permanent/ long term negative environmental impacts?
- Short term economic impacts (number of US workers who have lost jobs etc)
What does that mean financially?
This is a difficult question to answer, because it's hard to tell exactly what the impact of a prolonged drought will be.

California agriculture was valued at about 22.3 billion dollars in 2010. If you just look at California's agriculture revenue more is generated from it than from 100% of the state revenue of the following states: Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, Wyoming.
While this sounds like a lot of money it is about 1% of the GDP of California. Everything I have read reports minor to no impact.

This article from the LA Times:

http://www.latimes.com/local/political/ ... story.html
California's drought has threatened farmers, ski resorts and golf courses, but it's unlikely to do much damage to the state's overall economy or budget, according to a new report.

“We currently do not expect the drought to have a significant effect,” said the report, released Tuesday by the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office, which provides budget advice to state lawmakers.
Nearly 100% of the workers in the agricultural industry are from Mexico, most illegally. If some of them are out of work I guess they can go home. It isn't far. Or they could just do what they did when the chicken factory here moved 30 miles down the road. They moved with it.

More articles:

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/04/ ... ut-growth/
http://californiawaterblog.com/2014/06/ ... a-drought/
These days of dust
Which we've known
Will blow away with this new Son

But I'll kneel down wait for now
And I'll kneel down
Know my ground

zero11010
* * *
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:24 pm

Re: California Drought

Post by zero11010 » Mon May 18, 2015 9:02 pm

gronch wrote:there is a rather large perception problem about living in the desert. I had to water my lawn every other day to keep it green. The only other option was to go drought tolerant, which people don't want to do, because why pay a ton for your house just to put rocks in the front yard. Also, your HOA may not allow such madness.
You may want to reconsider some of your water usage. Keeping some grass green may not be lawful for much longer.

A lot of the state is offering significant money to help you conserve water. I think something like 50% of people's common water usage (roughly 90 gallons per person per day) goes to landscape maintenance.

It looks like some of your local rebates ran out of funding (which I think is a great sign, as it shows people are taking advantage).
http://www.sandiego.gov/water/conservat ... ndex.shtml

Rebates were available for:
* Rain barrels. Basically, they were giving $1 per gallon of storage potential (up to 400 gallons per property)
* Grass replacement (this can be done in very aesthetically pleasing ways while keeping your yard full of life). The plan was to give people $1.5 per square foot (up to $3600) to replace grass and inefficient irrigation systems.
* Micro-Irrigation. Separate from grass replacement (which includes this sum) San Diego will pay $0.30 per square foot of irrigation changed over to this more efficient system.


As far as I know San Diego is currently using 584 gallons per person per day, while areas of Sacremento are using 380 gallons per person per day, while San Francisco is using 40 (forty) gallons per person per day.

I believe that in addition to the desalination plant in San Diego, San Diego is also pretty much leading the state in recycling waste water for drinking water. I can't find the specifics right now, but apparently you guys are doing great work by reusing a very large amount of water.


Like I mentioned earlier, you're really going to want to consider dumping that grass. Going with low water landscaping can be beautiful.
Image
Image
Image
Image

zero11010
* * *
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:24 pm

Re: California Drought

Post by zero11010 » Mon May 18, 2015 9:44 pm

There's a lot here. It's not my job to defend the topic, but I'll take a stab at this, because I like stabbing things.

Image

Stercutus wrote:I am curious.
- How many people have died/ been injured due to the drought? I do not know, and I don't know what real relevance this has.
- What are the actual economic impacts to California due to the drought? There are too many facets for that. No one has a number that I would trust at this point. The drought hasn't yet really impacted agriculture. Considering that California has a huge industries based around film, and tech and a number of other things, if the state were to start to take a dive economically the impacts may be very far reaching.
- What are the permanent/ long term negative environmental impacts? This cannot possibly be answered. They haven't all occurred yet. We would need to know more about how long the drought will last, how severe it will become, and which areas will get the most relief.
- Short term economic impacts (number of US workers who have lost jobs etc) The plan currently in place is to primarily reduce residential water consumption as outlined in the original post. As the drought continues it will not be possible for the state to limit itself in that way.
What does that mean financially?
This is a difficult question to answer, because it's hard to tell exactly what the impact of a prolonged drought will be.

California agriculture was valued at about 22.3 billion dollars in 2010. If you just look at California's agriculture revenue more is generated from it than from 100% of the state revenue of the following states: Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, Wyoming.
While this sounds like a lot of money it is about 1% of the GDP of California. Everything I have read reports minor to no impact.

This article from the LA Times:

http://www.latimes.com/local/political/ ... story.html

As I've said repeatedly, the current focus to deal with the drought is by leaving everyone who makes money through water alone (for the most part). The reason for that was to leave California's economy alone. That has been the goal. If people are saying the drought hasn't impacted the economy, that means the current plan (which seems like a short term plan) is working short term.

The idea that we shouldn't care about 22 billion dollars because more is out there is silly. If a plane with 50 people on it crashed tomorrow would the nation care? We have hundreds of millions of people. Yeah, the nation would care. It's important to keep the big picture in mind. Nope, losing 22 billion dollars would destroy California overnight. Just like a tornado destroying a few city blocks doesn't destroy a city. It's still a disaster if it happens.

California's drought has threatened farmers, ski resorts and golf courses, but it's unlikely to do much damage to the state's overall economy or budget, according to a new report.

“We currently do not expect the drought to have a significant effect,” said the report, released Tuesday by the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office, which provides budget advice to state lawmakers.
Reports vary, and I don't think many people are under the impression that most politicians understand science. I can certainly point to many government reports about the oil spill in the gulf of Mexico was expected to be no big deal. I can point to any number of other similar reports that sure seemed pretty obvious in hindsight.

The quote above seems to be talking about what the drought has already impacted. Some farms have gone under. There have been issues with ski resorts (significant revenue) and golf courses. Basically, ski resorts don't have enough snow to function, some farms aren't able to ship in the water they could before, and some farms are being fined for their water usage. So far this is small potatoes leading up to larger issues.

Water theft has started to become more common (still not rampant by any stretch, but it's starting to occur more frequently).

38 million people are running out of water in California. Do you honestly think this doesn't have potential to impact the state's economy substantially?


Nearly 100% of the workers in the agricultural industry are from Mexico, most illegally. If some of them are out of work I guess they can go home. It isn't far. Or they could just do what they did when the chicken factory here moved 30 miles down the road. They moved with it.

This is so stupid I don't even know how to respond. You don't know enough about it for you and I to have a meaningful conversation about it, and I don't have the patience to teach someone with this small of a foundation. I'm sure with other topics you're awesome and very knowledgeable. Minority rights and their impact on the economy is a really vast topic, and not one that I'm going to try to get into with you while talking about the drought.

User avatar
Stercutus
* * * * *
Posts: 13267
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Location: Time Out

Re: California Drought

Post by Stercutus » Tue May 19, 2015 4:06 am

There's a lot here. It's not my job to defend the topic, but I'll take a stab at this, because I like stabbing things.
If you are being defensive you are doing it wrong.

The idea that we shouldn't care about 22 billion dollars because more is out there is silly.
It is not $22B that is at risk, only an certain percentage of that amount. And yeah most people won't care because it is not happening to them.
This is so stupid I don't even know how to respond. You don't know enough about it for you and I to have a meaningful conversation about it, and I don't have the patience to teach someone with this small of a foundation. I'm sure with other topics you're awesome and very knowledgeable. Minority rights....
Actually this is not a place to have a conversation about minority rights at all. I didn't even bring it up.
These days of dust
Which we've known
Will blow away with this new Son

But I'll kneel down wait for now
And I'll kneel down
Know my ground

User avatar
crypto
ZS Donor
ZS Donor
Posts: 16637
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 7:37 pm
Location: City of Saint Louis

Re: California Drought

Post by crypto » Tue May 19, 2015 8:01 am

Stercutus wrote: Actually this is not a place to have a conversation about minority rights at all. I didn't even bring it up.
Uh, you kind of did.
Stercutus wrote: Nearly 100% of the workers in the agricultural industry are from Mexico, most illegally. If some of them are out of work I guess they can go home. It isn't far. Or they could just do what they did when the chicken factory here moved 30 miles down the road. They moved with it.
MF'N TEAM LEADER

"Some people think that the best way to stop the leopard is to cut the horns off the gazelle. This, my friends, is insane."

Image
Image

User avatar
Stercutus
* * * * *
Posts: 13267
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Location: Time Out

Re: California Drought

Post by Stercutus » Tue May 19, 2015 11:02 am

crypto wrote:
Stercutus wrote: Actually this is not a place to have a conversation about minority rights at all. I didn't even bring it up.
Uh, you kind of did.
Stercutus wrote: Nearly 100% of the workers in the agricultural industry are from Mexico, most illegally. If some of them are out of work I guess they can go home. It isn't far. Or they could just do what they did when the chicken factory here moved 30 miles down the road. They moved with it.
Exactly, no civil right there at all.
These days of dust
Which we've known
Will blow away with this new Son

But I'll kneel down wait for now
And I'll kneel down
Know my ground

User avatar
duodecima
ZS Lifetime Member
ZS Lifetime Member
Posts: 2951
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 1:18 pm

Re: California Drought

Post by duodecima » Tue May 19, 2015 11:53 am

Right, can we not screw up this thread by gratuitously dragging immigration politics into it? (The inappropriate subject matter did not start with the phrase "minority rights")
"When someone shows you who they are believe them" M. Angelou

User avatar
shrapnel
ZS Global Moderator
ZS Global Moderator
Posts: 5653
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 7:42 pm
Location: Aboard Baron von Counterculture's groovy purple dirigible, glaring down through a monocle.

Re: California Drought

Post by shrapnel » Tue May 19, 2015 11:59 am

Seriously, please stop.
OTTB wrote:"What's that you're wearing?"
"This? Oh, just my rabies hat."
shrapnel wrote:Darling, I would never fondle your sphenoid.
Dr. Cox wrote: People aren't chocolates. Do you know what they are mostly? Bastards. Bastard-coated bastards with bastard fillings.
JamesCannon wrote:Shrapnel, if you were a superhero, you'd be Captain Buzzkill Peener Pain.

User avatar
procyon
* * * * *
Posts: 1101
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 5:56 am
Location: Iowa, USA

Re: California Drought

Post by procyon » Tue May 19, 2015 2:32 pm

For any who would think this isn't a DICE or would down play it, I would seriously disagree.
Saying that folks won't care because it doesn't affect them - only applies to right now.

There are a number of things in the world that concern me.
I see this as one that has the greatest likelihood to impact my family (in the not distant future) that is happening now.

Ebola scared a lot of people silly. It is a problem that has had nearly miniscule impact in the US and has a clear cut method to address it (even if there is no cure).

This situation is current, ongoing, has no human intervention that will correct it, and is impacting at least thousands if not millions of people. At best, we can attempt to compensate or deal with issues as they arise.

But pretending it is a non-issue is (to me) about the same as pretending a wound that is continuing to bleed isn't important.
When you still have plenty of blood, you don't feel to bad. When it finally hits the point where it is a problem - it can be horrendous.
To much of human civilization (even today) requires water to pretend this isn't important.

(Although I will say that the size of the drought concerns me, and not simply CA. No offense to those in CA, as you are definitely in one of the worst hit areas with the largest population that will deal with the effects.)
... I will show you fear in a handful of dust...

User avatar
Stercutus
* * * * *
Posts: 13267
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Location: Time Out

Re: California Drought

Post by Stercutus » Tue May 19, 2015 3:21 pm

It is not so much a non-event as one with poorly defined effects. One of the points of this forum is to figure out how it is going to effect us and what to do about it.

The 2011-13 Texas drought wrought over $20B in damages with even more far reaching effects such as the record high price of beef today. Knowing and figuring that and planning ahead allowed me to go ahead invest in a goat herd. The price of goats has risen correspondingly high so now my goats are worth double what they were three years ago. Now that the drought is over in Texas beef should slowly return to normal prices. If the drought had gone on for a longer period of time I'd be eating more goats.

So back to my original question what are the current and probable future affects and effects? Call me crazy (or stupid if it makes you giggle like a schoolgirl) but I was hoping someone more knowledgeable about CA agricultural could help determine that, cuz I got nothing. Why is this suddenly too much to ask for when just about every other thread in DICE does exactly that?
These days of dust
Which we've known
Will blow away with this new Son

But I'll kneel down wait for now
And I'll kneel down
Know my ground

User avatar
Halfapint
* * * * *
Posts: 3945
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 5:41 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: all?
Location: Central Cascadia

Re: California Drought

Post by Halfapint » Tue May 19, 2015 3:58 pm

From all that I can see Texas is still in drought conditions in most the state. May not be as bad as you say 2-3 years ago but, one bad (can they get much worse?) summer in Texas and you could be right back into full on drought conditions.

Now to Cali, I'm no expert, I wont even try to pretend. But Cali is a large producer of quite a few different foods. Granted short term this means that almonds may go a little higher until another producer can be found and then they'll drop again. But if this drought continues, you could see mass migration..... Think Dustbowl.

Where will these people go? Most will probably more north through Oregon and up to Washington (Just ask Cpt Kirk, we have LOTS of water up here) and Idaho. Well that's going to be a problem because most of the Western states are heavily dependent on snow pack and well. In Washington our Governor stood on a mountain that's usually covered with about 10' of snow. It was bare, grass was starting to grow. Some others may decide that going to Texas is a better idea, well they have lots of money, and can gobble up land (land that has water rights perhaps??).

So no one really knows for sure, no one knew exactly what was going to happen to Texas. We can all agree (ok ok this is the internet so probably not) that droughts are bad. Just because it isn't currently effect you doesn't mean it wont very soon.
JeeperCreeper wrote:I like huge dicks, Halfapint, so you are OK in my book.... hahaha
Spazzy wrote:Tell ya what... If Zombies attack and the world ends I'll hook tandem toddlers to a plow if it means I'll be able to eat...

User avatar
Stercutus
* * * * *
Posts: 13267
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Location: Time Out

Re: California Drought

Post by Stercutus » Tue May 19, 2015 4:41 pm

From all that I can see Texas is still in drought conditions in most the state.

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas ... 271730.php
Big storms washed away the Texas drought, at least for now. For the first time in three years, none of the state falls within the U.S. Drought Monitor's most severe classification.
Maybe a little bit of drought in some places? I think we can agree that Texas is still a little dry, but hell the drought went on for three years. Yeah, droughts are bad. Know what else is bad? Rocks. When you trip over one they can cause ankle injury. Then again nothing might happen.
Where will these people go?
Since they pick crops for a living I imagine they will go wherever crops are being picked. Unless they get put on relief. In which case they will mostly stay wherever they are and watch TV and eat. Back in the 30s, no one had TV so some people moved away out of sheer boredom.
But Cali is a large producer of quite a few different foods. Granted short term this means that almonds may go a little higher until another producer can be found and then they'll drop again.
Wife and kids are allergic. The only almonds I get are in my Hershey Bar with Almonds. I can switch to Peanut Butter Cups. However last I checked almonds grow on fucking trees which don't grow all that quick. So Imagine it might take longer to find alternative sources than say for tomatoes which grow just about everywhere.

So you think they will cut the agro producers off? Because everything I have been reading says they won't. Texas suffered so much because it takes a huge amount of grass to raise cattle. Grass won't grow without water and they could not dump enough on the ground to make the grass grow. CA Agro producers import their water and while it takes a gallon of water to grow a single almond they are actually pretty efficient with what they get.

At what point will they get cut off? If they get cut off what does that really mean? Certainly someone has thought this through. I am looking in the direction of the lenders. Again it is completely pointless to have this thread if the effects are not discussed. It is like pointing at a rock and saying; "Somebody could trip over that".
These days of dust
Which we've known
Will blow away with this new Son

But I'll kneel down wait for now
And I'll kneel down
Know my ground

zero11010
* * *
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:24 pm

Re: California Drought

Post by zero11010 » Tue May 19, 2015 5:25 pm

There are still poor assumptions being made. If the drought continues this won't be limited to damage within agriculture. Those other types of damages are harder to predict. But, the agricultural industry doesn't sit in an isolated bubble and if it collapses or grows nothing outside that bubble is impacted. This means, if the drought continues to get worse the result of the drought's impact on California will be a lot more than the price of food throughout the country.

It wouldn't be as simple as "oh darn, I don't get almonds anymore." or "I guess we'll have to eat lettuce imported from another country."

That being said, I don't think that many people really understand how big of an impact California has on food grown in America. This was the topic for a couple posts in another conversation about the California drought that was moved out of disasters in current events (if I remember right) on the grounds that one aspect of one article was hyperbolic.

Fun fact I learned today: One pound of almonds requires about 416 gallons of water to grow. That's more water than the average 2 person household in San Francisco uses in 5 days.

For several types of fruits and vegetables California grows much more than 90% of what the nation produces.

http://www.netstate.com/economy/ca_economy.htm
"California grows over 200 different crops, some grown nowhere else in the nation. Crops include grapes, almonds, strawberries, oranges, and walnuts. California produces almost all of the country's almonds, apricots, dates, figs, kiwi fruit, nectarines, olives, pistachios, prunes, and walnuts. It leads in the production of avocados, grapes, lemons, melons, peaches, plums, and strawberries. Only Florida produces more oranges. The most important vegetable crops grown in the state are lettuce and tomatoes. Again, California leads the way. Broccoli and carrots rank second followed by asparagus, cauliflower, celery, garlic, mushrooms, onions, and peppers. Only Texas grows more cotton than California. Hay, rice, corn, sugar beets, and wheat are also grown in large quantities.

Livestock and livestock products include milk, beef cattle, eggs, sheep, turkeys, hogs and horses. Dairy products are California's most valuable products followed by cattle and calves and chicken eggs. California is the second ranked producer of livestock products behind Texas."

The web page also has a lot of details about the manufacturing of goods, mining, fishing"

Remember when you were 8 and for special annual occasions you were excited about getting an orange to eat? How exotic, an orange!! No? Your grandparents may. Food becoming abundant has really large impacts on society.

That website left porn out for some reason. California makes a lot of porn, too.
Image

User avatar
Dawgboy
ZS Donor
ZS Donor
Posts: 3072
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:35 am
Favorite Zombie Movies: Shaun of the dead, Fido
Location: San Diego, CA
Contact:

Re: California Drought

Post by Dawgboy » Tue May 19, 2015 6:11 pm

Another thing to add, we are currently in an El Nino year, and because of the Hot blob and the El Nino conditions combining with the (strongest ever recorded)Madden-Julian Oscillation, we are looking at a "Super El Nino" Year, which will most likely ameliorate a lot of the drought conditions if we are lucky. But it will probably also cause torrential downpours, flooding, landslides, and who knows what else...


http://www.iflscience.com/environment/r ... 15-el-ni-o

http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMa ... 938&page=5
shrapnel wrote:Dawgboy, please refrain from stirring shit for the sole purpose of stirring shit.
[ZS/]# .40/Pie/CERT/Wireless...
My homebrew stove kit
IMPROVED Solar Redneck Hot tub
Dawgvan
Chupa Chihuahua
GHB

williaty
* * * * *
Posts: 1635
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 1:50 am
Location: Midwest

Re: California Drought

Post by williaty » Tue May 19, 2015 7:39 pm

Not mentioned is that there's still a surprisingly large amount of semiconductor (computer chip) production out there. Fab lines depend on having access to a surprisingly huge amount of clean water to facilitate production.

zero11010 wrote: Aren't these droughts cyclical in nature? It'll rain more soon.
The community of scientists don't include many seers, though they do use predictive models. Scientists, looking at facts, do not see a high chance that in the coming decade that enough water will fall to bring us back to historically normal levels without also changing other factors. The drought has gone on for so long that the amount of water needed to get to a historically normal state is staggering!
The other thing involved in this is that there's a growing body of evidence that the 20th Century was uncommonly wet in the West and Southwest. In other words, there's evidence that this drought is normal and the water conditions under which the area was heavily populated and farmed are actually the abnormal state. If that's the case, this drought won't end as it's not a drought at all.

User avatar
procyon
* * * * *
Posts: 1101
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 5:56 am
Location: Iowa, USA

Re: California Drought

Post by procyon » Thu May 21, 2015 11:22 pm

Sounds like the senior water rights holders in CA are offering to cut their use by 25% now to prevent deeper cuts later - as they feel cuts on their use are inevitable. So it sounds like agriculture water use is being evaluated for cuts if the news can be trusted.

I have no idea how to link the stories, but it wouldn't take much to find them if you look.
... I will show you fear in a handful of dust...

zero11010
* * *
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:24 pm

Re: California Drought

Post by zero11010 » Fri May 22, 2015 12:17 am

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2015/0 ... watershed/

"SACRAMENTO (CBS/AP) — Regulators are ordering farmers with California’s oldest water rights to stop pumping from the San Joaquin River watershed for the first time in memory.
“We’re in the Delta. So, we’ve never had a situation where we’ve had a lack of water,” wheat farmer Paul Marchini said.
State water board engineer Kathy Mrowka told a public drought hearing that the curtailment orders will be sent to so-called senior rights holders on Friday.
The mandatory conservation orders for rights holders with century-old claims to rivers and streams will be the first anywhere in the state since the 1970s. They would be the first in memory to senior water-rights holders along the San Joaquin River.
“They have the big stick is what it amounts to,” Marchini said.
California officials already have ordered conservation for cities and towns and some other farmers. Friday’s order is the start of expected across-the-board cutsfor the state’s most senior rights holders."



and in other news:
A new type of car wash is able to wash a car with 1 cup (!!!) of water instead of using a more typical 60-200 gallons.

http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/ ... 254674.php


HOW MUCH WATER MUST EACH COMMUNITY SAVE?
Here is a map of the state and how much water different areas are being asked to save.

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/M ... 240882.php

* The county I live in uses about 107 gallons of water per person per day (my household uses 35). The water reduction goal for the county is 20%
* San Francisco uses about 45 gallons of water per person per day. Their water reduction goal is 8%.
* A previous poster was in San Diego. San Diego propper is listed at 217 gallons per person per day (this contradicts a previous quote which provided a very different number!). Their water reduction goal is 36% which is, I believe, as high as the water reduction goals go.

User avatar
Anianna
* * * * *
Posts: 4573
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:54 pm
Location: VA
Contact:

Re: California Drought

Post by Anianna » Fri May 22, 2015 9:49 pm

My kid says we should just load up tanker trucks from the flooded states and just haul all that flood water right on over to Cali. :wink:

That may not be as feasible as it sounds, but right now, several populated arid zones divert water in from elsewhere. Phoenix gets its water from a gully pulling water out of Colorado, for example. There are places we know are more apt to flood and places we know are more apt to dry up. Why not build a gully system that can alleviate flood waters in prone ares by diverting excess water to areas apt to need a little extra? The water doesn't even have to be made potable - just a big greywater system for agriculture and industry to reduce the demand on potable water sources.
Feed science, not zombies!

Failure is the path of least persistence.

“People had more than they needed. We had no idea what was precious and what wasn't. We threw away things people kill each other for now.” ~Book of Eli

∩(=^_^=)

User avatar
RickOShea
ZS Lifetime Member
ZS Lifetime Member
Posts: 9022
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 5:24 pm
Location: Gulf Coast, AL

Re: California Drought

Post by RickOShea » Sat May 23, 2015 3:16 pm

Anianna wrote:My kid says we should just load up tanker trucks from the flooded states and just haul all that flood water right on over to Cali. :wink:
I guess every little bit helps.Image





Image
whisk.e.rebellion wrote: It's not what you say anymore. It's how you say it.

Image ............................................................................................................................................................................................Image

zero11010
* * *
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:24 pm

Re: California Drought

Post by zero11010 » Sun May 24, 2015 11:39 am

Vandalism just cost Alameda county in California (Oakland, Berkeley and such) 50 million gallons of water.

Basically, there was a temporary dam in place, and someone damaged it. The loss of water represents less than 0.5% of the water that county deals with on an annual basis, but it's still a pretty big blow. It sounded like a larger than usual number of law enforcement resources were being put on the case.

User avatar
MacAttack
* * * * *
Posts: 2992
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 11:11 am

Re: California Drought

Post by MacAttack » Sun May 24, 2015 1:50 pm

Sounds like Mother Nature is trying to tell Californians that they are using the land the wrong way.


If the farm output of California went down 50% it would not effect me in the least.

I do not buy any meat from California.
I have tried for years to not buy any fruits from California.
And ALL my fresh vegetables come from local sources. And I can go back to growing my own in the back yard any time.

zero11010
* * *
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:24 pm

Re: California Drought

Post by zero11010 » Sun May 24, 2015 4:21 pm

MacAttack wrote:Sounds like Mother Nature is trying to tell Californians that they are using the land the wrong way.


If the farm output of California went down 50% it would not effect me in the least.

I do not buy any meat from California.
I have tried for years to not buy any fruits from California.
And ALL my fresh vegetables come from local sources. And I can go back to growing my own in the back yard any time.
Your selfish approach to the world is like a breath of fresh air. Wait, not air, methane.

As noted above, California produces a huge percentage of the food that the whole country eats. As a single example roughly 99% of the USA grown garlic is grown here. If less is available, the price goes up and you pay more for it yourself, and you pay more for it at the stores. A large percentage of USA grown meat comes from California, if that industry takes a hit (which it would as each pound of beef requires about 1,847 gallons of water to feed and water the animal before slaughter, even chickens requires over 500 gallons of water per pound).

But, let's just say that everything you eat is grown within 100 miles of your house, and you don't ever eat out at restaurants where the rising cost of ingredients would impact prices (which we saw with the Texas drought and the cost of beef both in stores and on menus). You give the impression that if it doesn't impact you personally, then you don't care about it. That sounds like a really short sighted way to go through life, man. People who are not you matter, too.

Post Reply

Return to “Disasters in Current Events”