California AT folks, you okay? Governor issues historic drought restrictions:

[Muse]

I will take recycled water at 1/2 the cost.

Much of potable water nowadays is essentially recycled sewage water. Read Water 4.0, it came out just recently, was written by a professor/consultant in the field, is very readable, follows the history of water and sewage and explains in pretty good detail the processes that are being developed and used to convert previously unused effluent/sewage/waste into usable products, particularly potable water. There are plants doing this in CA right now.

 

[Muse]

nah, we just won't have as many almonds.

It is sad. CA is the world's almond producer, nowhere else comes close. Almonds require a whole lot of water. Trees take a long time to grow. Water them and they will produce, don't water them and they will die... it's going to take a while for a replacement tree to grow.

I read an article in today's paper that the weather folks now say that the odds of a heavy precipitation year in CA have been steadily increasing. It's looking more and more likely. It's not for sure, things could change over the next few months, but right now, conditions suggest that there could be a big rainy season ahead. Meantime, we are stupid if we don't prepare for more years of drought. Myself, I've developed very good water saving habits, it's not that hard, it's habit stuff.

 

[Harabec]

Semi-necro.
Just read an article about a yearly water issues conference in jerusalem. Apparently lots of folks from california came to listen and israeli teams will be helping with advisors and technologies.

There were some numbers and it looks like cali's system is just totally inefficient. Perhaps now they'll be on a path similar to ours and have more water than things to use it on, one day.
Oh found it

 

[ControlD]

I wish California could come take some of our water from this summer (Ohio). We had a little over 17 inches of rain in June and have had just north of 10 inches so far in July. It looks like a damned jungle around here. Walking around my yard is like walking on a sponge.

 

[kranky]

Didn't I just hear on the news that they are expecting heavier than normal rain in the West because of El Nino? I think it was mentioned in the story of that bridge collapse on I-10 between CA and AZ.

 

[K1052]

Didn't I just hear on the news that they are expecting heavier than normal rain in the West because of El Nino? I think it was mentioned in the story of that bridge collapse on I-10 between CA and AZ.

Yep. CA needs a reprieve from drought but mudslides and washouts are going to be a huge problem.

 

[NutBucket]

We've had record rain this month which is great...but still doesn't amount to a whole lot. I think the bigger benefit is milder temps so less water is needed for landscaping.

 

[zinfamous]

Didn't I just hear on the news that they are expecting heavier than normal rain in the West because of El Nino? I think it was mentioned in the story of that bridge collapse on I-10 between CA and AZ.

It still isn't certain whether El Nino will produce significant water or not, but it looks like it will at least form this year.

In fact, El Nino is historically associated with average or weak rainfall; it is only the event in the early 90s and, I think 70s, that produced insane amounts of rain that people remember and associate with El Nino.

http://ggweather.com/enso2014/

 

[cabri]

An issue with a lot of rainfall is people then forget or do not care about conservation anymore. They will punt the ball as a result.

Short term memories

 

[Fenixgoon]

An issue with a lot of rainfall is people then forget or do not care about conservation anymore. They will punt the ball as a result.

Short term memories

it's truly sad

 

[NutBucket]

Perhaps, but behaviors are changing. People are ripping out lawns (albeit because of subsidies) and changing landscaping. That's probably the easiest way to save significant amounts of water. I doubt many people will revert to thirsty landscaping just because the drought ends.

 

[AznAnarchy99]

It still isn't certain whether El Nino will produce significant water or not, but it looks like it will at least form this year.

In fact, El Nino is historically associated with average or weak rainfall; it is only the event in the early 90s and, I think 70s, that produced insane amounts of rain that people remember and associate with El Nino.

http://ggweather.com/enso2014/

1997. I clearly remember that growing up. The rain was crazy.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Any plans to build more reservoirs?

 

[NutBucket]

Nope, just more bullet trains to nowhere....

 

[Aikouka]

I see FAR more cars with temp license plates (which I assume = buying a new car) these days then previously. If anything people are CLEARLY buying cars WAY too fucking often and more than before.

As a technophile, I just hate that you can't easily upgrade stuff in cars without sacrificing other features. I would've been happy with my old Altima if I could've just replaced the stereo with a properly-integrated one. I have a 2013 Ford now (I bought it used at a huge discount over new), and Ford announced a huge overhaul of their infotainment system a few months ago. Naturally, I asked if there would be an upgrade available, and their response was not surprising -- no.

 

[Ns1]

1997. I clearly remember that growing up. The rain was crazy.

those were excellent years for skiing.

 

[NutBucket]

Can I put a 1 year old on skis? Too young?

 

[quikah]

1997. I clearly remember that growing up. The rain was crazy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvmeUStFvz8

This drought is kind of a good thing, get CA to finally fix their archaic water infrastructure (maybe).

 

[Phoenix86]

Perhaps, but behaviors are changing. People are ripping out lawns (albeit because of subsidies) and changing landscaping. That's probably the easiest way to save significant amounts of water. I doubt many people will revert to thirsty landscaping just because the drought ends.

I don't think you understand what easy, or significant is. That's tons of work for moderate gain.

Depending on where you get your numbers residential use is about 25% of total usage. Exterior landscaping is about 20% of that, which means exterior landscaping accounts for about 5% of the total usage (in CA).

This image seems mostly in line with the %s I have seen.

It's basically the largest pie slice that isn't business. So yeah, rip up those yards, because they shouldn't be there in the first place, but let's not act like that's going to fix much of anything.

If you somehow reduced exterior water usage by 50% (which will never happen), you only conserve 2.5 of total use.

 

[NutBucket]

I know that. But it doesn't mean everyone shouldn't do their part.

 

[Phoenix86]

I know that. But it doesn't mean everyone shouldn't do their part.

Yes and no, which is my point. Yes, people should reduce obvious waste. No people shouldn't avoid flushing the toilet (yellow let it mellow, brown flush it down), it's not even a drop in the proverbial bucket.

edit: low flow showers, reduced capacity toilets... all relative bullshit when you look at total usage. Again, yes, reduce obvious waste, but come on...

It also means, don't fucking stop at lawns. If you want to actually conserve you go after the big fish FIRST. People act like "omg, if we conserve agriculture we won't produce enough to feed anyone!!!"

There are very sensible approaches to conserve ag use. Firstly, stop allowing flood irrigation. It's actually more inefficient than it sounds.

It's use is common.

Replacing it's use is expensive for the industry (almost all expense, little return) and the water is so cheap it's just easier and cheaper to flood. Make it not cheaper, subsidize it's replacement.

This should have happened a decade or two ago.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Yes and no, which is my point. Yes, people should reduce obvious waste. No people shouldn't avoid flushing the toilet (yellow let it mellow, brown flush it down), it's not even a drop in the proverbial bucket.

edit: low flow showers, reduced capacity toilets... all relative bullshit when you look at total usage. Again, yes, reduce obvious waste, but come on...

It also means, don't fucking stop at lawns. If you want to actually conserve you go after the big fish FIRST. People act like "omg, if we conserve agriculture we won't produce enough to feed anyone!!!"

There are very sensible approaches to conserve ag use. Firstly, stop allowing flood irrigation. It's actually more inefficient than it sounds.

It's use is common.

Replacing it's use is expensive for the industry (almost all expense, little return) and the water is so cheap it's just easier and cheaper to flood. Make it not cheaper, subsidize it's replacement.

This should have happened a decade or two ago.

bolded for truth. if you don't go for the big hitters, you'll barely make an impact. and agriculture isn't some sacred cow - the world doesn't live on almonds or strawberries.

when i told my SIL that ~80% of CA's water usage was agriculture and cutbacks were needed, she went off the rocker (she grew up on a farm).

 

[Ruptga]

I know that. But it doesn't mean everyone shouldn't do their part.

I don't think anyone is going to argue against that, but until the ag sector starts doing its part nothing else is going to amount to much.

That won't happen though, between the pervasive ag lobby and our government's fear of any possibility of any food scarcity there is no will to enforce efficiency requirements or real water restrictions. Even just removing grandfathered water rules and price agreements would be political suicide, they'd burn you on a pyre of picket signs. You'd be a socialist that hates small farmers, free enterprise, America, Jesus, working families and their grocery budgets, and you'd definitely want everyone to starve to death.

edit: whelp, that horse looks beaten to death. These comments will probably get repeated in a couple pages though, since nobody reads whole threads. Even this is a repost.

 

[NutBucket]

The problem is most farmers only pay for wells. The water is "free".

 

[Phoenix86]

bolded for truth. if you don't go for the big hitters, you'll barely make an impact. and agriculture isn't some sacred cow - the world doesn't live on almonds or strawberries.

when i told my SIL that ~80% of CA's water usage was agriculture and cutbacks were needed, she went off the rocker (she grew up on a farm).

See I specifically didn't touch that side of the argument. It's extremely reasonable to say "cut back on XYZ crops" but holy hell the farmers are simply impossible to talk to. You can't even begin those talks, so fine... Let's go for the even lower hanging fruit of irrigation.

Farmers don't have a good argument for flood irrigation. I don't give a fuck if your costs go up, charge more. If you're producing such a high percentage of the market (80% for almonds) the market will have to accept those increases.

The only reason I mention subsidies is because it's needed NOW. Not 10 years from now when they get around to actually implementing it.