the loons worship the earth without the least bit of understanding as to what it is and how we're to use it.
Posted on 02/11/2014 7:15:56 AM PST by bestintxas
California is in the third year of a drought, but the problem isn’t a lack of water. The snowfall in the Sierra provides enough to help us ride out the years of drought. All we need to do is store it. But California hasn’t built a new dam in 35 years. Worse than that, every year we dump 1.6 million acre-feet of water––about enough to serve 3.2 million families for a year––into the Pacific Ocean in order to protect an allegedly “endangered” 3-inch bait-fish called the Delta smelt. California’s $45 billion agricultural industry, a global breadbasket that produces nearly half of U.S.-grown fruits, nuts and vegetables, is set to take a huge hit, with hundreds of thousands of acres left fallow and the San Joaquin Valley region’s already sky-high 17% unemployment destined to increase.
Meanwhile President Obama continues to dither on approving the Keystone XL Pipeline from Canada. The latest in a string of environmental impact studies since 2008 has determined that the pipeline poses no threat to the environment. Indeed, it will lessen spills and pollution by transporting oil by pipeline rather than by more risky trains.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
The drought is purely a result of water diversion.
If you go back to the 1880s to the 1920s period....looking at California...it’s whole agricultural agenda was tied to massive use of water from somewhere else. The government got involved....pumped in the resources...and helped to bring about the ‘bread-basket’ that exists today.
The only reason why there is so much in the central California region for agricultural development....is this fake system built long ago. Same for San Francisco and it’s water supply....it wouldn’t exist today...without the gov’t intervention.
Thinking that the government now will rush in and fix this next round of requirements? No....they’ve now got the environmental idiots messing with the outcome.
So, my humble advice...if you own a farm in central Cal and rely upon water from elsewhere...sell that property today, and take the profits to the south, and buy a new farm. The next fifty years are going to be miserable years with no improvement.
Idiots don’t think
This number is pretty misleading. Here are some actual facts.
"In a normal precipitation year, agriculture will irrigate about 9.6 million acres of cropland with 34.2 maf of water, equivalent to 41 percent of total applied surface and groundwater usage."
That 1.6 maf (assuming it's accurate) would therefore add <5% to the available water for irrigation, if 100% of it were diverted for this purpose.
http://westernfarmpress.com/irrigation/california-s-water-supply-and-demand
I don’t think that’s entirely accurate.
Agriculture largely was dependent on reasonably local water until the 60s, when the state, possibly with some federal involvement, started the massive diversion of water from the northern Valley to the southern Valley, allowing its west side to be irrigated extensively for the first time. This is the primary area affected by the present drought.
The massive long-distance water projects you’re referring to were mostly for urban use, notably LA.
So what if a few thousand farmers are driven to bankruptcy? It’s for the environment!
Is that applied water or consumed water? The only water crops consume is that which is transpired from the plant. Of the amount diverted or applied for irrigation, some is evaporated, some recharges the aquifer and some may runoff overland to the nearest waterbody. (The portion to the aquifer just takes a bit longer to move underground in the spaces between clay or sand particles to that waterbody.
Most people who decry the amount diverted or applied for irrigation don’t realize that what is actually consumed is a small portion of the water cycle.
Go check the ‘water-wars’ starting up in 1898 in LA. They already knew there were issues brewing the decade prior to that. In 1908...there was the five-year 228-mile project which got folks involved in water control and it’s limitations.
There simply isn’t a real plan for water distribution for urban residents and the farmers. Both are fighting over what is left, and the declining supply. All of this should have come out in the 1960s....I admit....but no political group wants to get in the middle of this lose-lose-lose scenario. Unless you pump hundreds of tons of water per minute from Canada down to the central Cal region....there is no solution to this.
Found a story that irrigation water, in San Diego Cty anyway, is going up to $1400/acre foot.
An acre foot is ~325k gallons. That works out to about $4.30/1000 gallons, as compared to cities that pay ~$2.50 and desal costs of ~$3.50.
OTOH, ran across another place where Imperial Valley water is priced at $20 to $80 per acre foot. Of course, this is irrigated from diverted Colorado River water and is outside the Central Valley. But then so is San Diego.
In the Central Valley, water from the government projects, when available, apparently runs around $150 / acre foot, although it can be purchased on the open market for about $600. All of which is considerably less than paid by cities, who presumably mark it up bunch for their consumers.
For instance, the city of Riverside charges it consumers rates starting at $11.40 per 1000 gallons, or $3705 per acre foot, unless I’ve misplaced a decimal someplace. And the rates go up to almost 4x that, depending on usage.
IOW, farmers are getting massive government subsidies. Why conservatives reflexively support this is a mystery.
I don’t particularly see how that is relevant. The cost of the water is associated with collecting and distributing it, which is similar regardless of the cost.
FTM, water used by city dwellers isn’t “used up,” either. Most goes right down the drain and back into the river or whatever, with some used to water lawns, where it acts much like the water you describe for crops.
I am always amused by the people who routinely claim we’re “using up” our water. We have pretty much exactly the same amount of water on the planet as last year or a million years ago.
It’s just not always where it’s convenient for us, or as clean as we’d like it to be. LOL
Nobody is going to pump water from Canada to CA. The costs would be beyond what anybody would be willing to pay.
The ocean is a lot closer, and desal will be used before such massive long distance transport of water.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.