Some California cities seek water independence

Associated Press ^ | Mar 16, 2014 11:41 AM EDT | Alicia Chang

[Olog-hai]

… California is gripped by historic parched conditions that have desiccated farmland, dried up reservoirs and forced rural communities to ration water. A welcome dousing late last month did little to break the arid spell.

Even before this latest drought emergency, some agencies that historically draw their water from the overtapped Colorado River and Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta have taken steps to slash their dependence on water from outside sources and boost their own supplies.

Past drought woes, particularly in the late 1980s and early 1990s, have forced some communities to rethink where their water comes from, and they’re increasingly realizing local sources are insurance against future dry weather. …

[dfwgator]

“Forget it, Jake, it’s Chinatown.”

[Paladin2]

"future dry weather. …"

Or Climate?

[Slyfox]

You would think that some of those enviro-geniuses in Silicon Valley would figure out the best way to desalinate the water in the Pacific Ocean on a scale that would benefit humanity.

We have enough cell phones and I-pads.

[Leaning Right]

You would think that some of those enviro-geniuses in Silicon Valley would figure out the best way to desalinate the water in the Pacific Ocean on a scale that would benefit humanity.

Excuse me. Large-scale desalination of the Pacific Ocean might annoy the jellyfish. We can't have that. Better that large areas of California farmland go to ruin. It's the EPA way, dontcha know?

[Dilbert San Diego]

Agreed. The ultimate solution to California’s water problems is desalination. If San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego, all coastal cities, got their water from the ocean, it would free up huge supplies for other parts of California. It would also free up supplies drawn from places such as Hoover Dam, so that those supplies could go to other parts of the of the western United States.

[Slyfox]

Lack of common sense is costing us bigtime.

[Norm Lenhart]

No, lack of guts to tell the libs/eco nits to KMA. I will never understand the lack of right wing will to force the issue.

[Bernard Marx]

Excuse me. Large-scale desalination of the Pacific Ocean might annoy the jellyfish. We can't have that.

Worse, it requires huge amounts of electricity and we can't have that! Now that coal is on Obama's "kill" list the options are natural gas and nuclear. Gas pipelines might obscure some NIMBY's view and nuclear? Perish the thought! The Sahara Club people would go into catatonia.

[no-s]

Santa Monica, population 92,000, has perhaps the loftiest goal: to completely wean itself off outside water by 2020. The city long depended on its groundwater wells, but supplies became polluted in the mid-1990s from underground gasoline storage tank leaks and the addition of a fuel additive.

Say, wasn't that due to the California Air Resources Board forcing the statewide adoption of the additive MTBE at the instigation of Jerry Brown appointee Mary Nichols? Alas, her state bio fails to mention her NRDC involvement, but fortunately Carrie_okie researched it a while back.

[blueplum]

I see two itty bitty problems with tunnels. First, Mom Nature relies on floods to clean all the crap and nasties and sediment deposits out of streams and rivers. Eliminating flood conditions entirely would have a huge environmental impact. Second, almost all the land needed for water tunnels would have to be seized under eminent domain. To get an idea of how popular that would be with the Calif. locals, who’ve funded massive canals already, you might want to look into the issues involved with California’s water tunnel project. The jobs already created by our irreplaceable farms would be lost forever, for what? the gain of a few temporary jobs that would last less than a decade? It’s hard to feed the world when there are fewer and fewer farms to do it. Desal plants are a lot more logical for California coastal cities than adding tunnels to an existing canal system. imo