Ag and business use 90% of the water in CA. If every pool was drained and turning into a sand box, it would have very little effect.
Excatly.
Yes, while people are told to limit showers, toilet flushing, and covert to local landscaping the REALLY big culprit is actually agriculture. There are obvious water-hungry crops like, say, rice but you can forgo planting them for a year if you must (perhaps we could grow that more in the Southeast of the country, where there is too much water this year). Then you have things like almonds - almonds are VERY profitable and VERY thirsty, one of the most water-intensive crops grown in places like California. Problem is, you can’t just turn off an orchard for a year - not if you want orchards rather than lumber.
Lots of orchards in the West… and while not all of them are as thirsty as almonds, all of them want water, and need it to survive.
Yes, that I was. A lot of the mountain West is in a closed basin, and thus, by definition, will lose more water to evaporation than it will gain or else the basin wouldn’t be there. Even though Lake Mead isn’t part of it. Although I guess you can’t extrapolate that water loss to swimming pools within the basin so easily as I guess they could be located in an extremely wet part of it.
This is true. But one must also consider that California’s Central Valley produces 25% of the nation’s food.
Using fewer than 1% of U.S. farmland, the Central Valley supplies 8% of U.S. agricultural output (by value) and produces 1/4 of the Nation’s food, including 40% of the Nation’s fruits, nuts, and other table foods.
We’ve actually been over this before in another thread.
If we lost the Central Valley entirely we’d still have plenty of farmland in which to grow food, even in a drought year. It’s convenience and profit that leads to the CV having such prominence. And it can only produce like that because of water taken from other places or mined from the ground (mined, because it’s not being replenished). If there is no water to pipe to it then the CV goes back to what it actually is, arid scrubland (at best) and we grow food in other places, like we did before the CV had its water artificially boosted.
It will be an uncomfortable year or three until the full adjustment is made, but we might not have a choice. And of course replacing orchards will take even longer, and some types of trees won’t grow many other places in the US.
Yes, it’s wonderful that the CV is so productive, but if the water isn’t there then the crops die. We can’t keep draining rivers and lakes dry for it. We can’t let cities full of human beings die of thirst because almond trees want water.
(In addition to water, the CV also needs a lot of artificial fertilizer to keep the crops growing, and relies on underpaid/illegal labor for work and harvests, which are two other things that are either unsustainable or unethical in the long term, but water is going to reach a crisis point sooner rather than later.)
Agree w all of what @Broomstick just said. But ref this …
it’s worth pointing out that water is also being mined at a ridiculously unsustainable rate from the Ogallala Aquifer. Which underpins the agricultural productivity of much of Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and some of Texas & Colorado.
So those places do not represent long-term backstops to the California Central Valley either. Said another way, several unsustainable chickens will come to roost more or less at once.
I obviously missed that thread. I’d be interested in reading it, if you can remember where it is.
There’s not a whole lot of farmland in this country that’s not already being used to grow crops of some sort or another. Because of the climate, the corn and wheat fields of the Great Plains cannot be easily used for growing fruits and other produce.
Most of the irrigation is used to grow corn, which is primarily used to feed livestock or produce ethanol. Without water, the current high yields of corn are not sustainable. Cheap food may soon be a thing of the past.
Have you looked at the fresh fruit and veggies in the stores lately? Cheap food is already a thing of the past.
Southern Ohio also has a very plentiful fresh water supply. The Miami river system that flows from Dayton southwest to the Ohio near Cincinnati is associated with a huge underground aquifer system–supposedly the Great Miami aquifer is one of the most stable in the country, it supposedly has the same water levels today as it did in 1967–despite increased population in the region. I believe it is considered to be replenishing at a more or less permanently stable rate at present conditions. It’s also my understanding even in long run climate projections the Ohio region would not be projected to lose significant rainfall in the future. The region has actually seen precipitation rates increase in the period 1986-2015.
Bill Maher had a New Rules segment on California water and the effect of agriculture:
Oranges, tomatoes, and strawberries required 10-12 gallons of water per pound to grow.
Almonds: 1900 gallons per pound.
Seems like a place to start is to buy out the almond growers and let the orchards die. Grow almonds where there is actually enough water for them.
Strawberries are plentiful and cheap this year.
Correct. But there are states further east than the ones you name, with more precipitation and thus less need to mine water.
I thought I linked to it earlier: Water From The Great Lakes. It covers the engineering/physics challenges of moving water from the Great Lakes to the arid West, the legal issues, the ecological and ethical issues, at least one link to a prior thread, the Aral Sea disaster, a number of posters admitting to peeing in Lake Michigan, and quite a bit about the California Central Valley starting with the post by @not_alice in post number 64.
Those “corn and wheat fields” can grow vegetables, though. Lots and lots of them. They used to grow them back when long-distance transportation wasn’t as developed or efficient as it is today. They still grow them today even if in smaller numbers. While no comparable patch of that area is going to be as productive as the CV because they get fewer sunny days and have an actual winter, those new fields won’t require major irrigation works, and there’s a lot more land area than the CV so after a period of adjustment (which yes, will not be fun) equal quantities of food can be produced. Vegetables and fruit might become more seasonal than they currently are, but it wouldn’t be the end of the world.
You’re assertion they can’t be used for growing fruit is incorrect. They can’t grow citrus fruit. The “stone” fruits - apples, pears, cherries, etc. all grow quite fine in places like Michigan and Ohio and so forth. We have grapes - both table and wine - growing in Indiana and Michigan and probably elsewhere east of the Mississippi that I’m not aware of. We won’t be growing avocados, either, probably but I’m sure the Mexican cartels will be happy to sell them to us. If we want American grown citrus maybe we should start helping Puerto Rico to rebuild their orchards, which we should have started doing back in 2017 but, well, politics. Come to think of it, we might need to boost the Florida citrus growers as well, at least until the state goes underwater but that’s a few decades off so we have time to plan for it (although, based on past history, I expect humans will ignore the problem until it’s too late).
Replace the almond orchards with dragonfruit - it’s native to the American Southwest and grows just fine in arid regions, it’s a freakin’ cactus after all. It’s what we should be planting in dessert regions.
And, in fact, there IS a lot of farmland that is not growing food right now because agriculture moved west. What you don’t get is individual mega-farms the size of a small country. Yes, adjustments would not be trivial but it could be done.
Cheap MEAT might soon be a thing of the past. Inexpensive meat such as we currently enjoy is actually a historical anomaly (admittedly, an enjoyable one for most). If we gave up meat (not likely, but I’m giving you a hypothetical) that would free up about 80-90% of that farmland for other uses.
Yes, there are annual variation in yields. Also, which fruits and vegees are you buying? Some cost more than others. Seasonal costs less than non-seasonal. Out of season frozen might be less expensive and are just as good for most purposes. Admittedly, frozen lettuce for salad is not a thing. So it’s a good thing that there are people trying to develop greenhouse technology allowing things like fresh lettuce year round, and some of them are operating in urban areas, not traditional farmlands. They use less water, less land, don’t need pesticides, and can operate on the roof of a building or urban “brownsites”, and produce at a regular rate year round.
I’m not advocating plowing up the CV tomorrow. It does have a role in US agriculture, a very large one at present. However, it is NOT essential. A pain in the ass to replace, true, but it could be done. If there is no more water for the CV, or some other disaster takes place, we may have to replace it.
Sorry, my knowledge of Siberian geography is limited! I’ll stay here next to the “Not As Great As I Thought” Lakes! LOL
My prior question still stands. Can’t these almond farmers (and whatever else they grow out there, I don’t mean to pick on the almond growers specifically) grow their almonds somewhere east of the Rockies?
Specifically with almonds, you can grow them in Georgia although probably not as productively due to the relative lack of sunshine. The first few google hits confirm my instincts both that they are grown there to a small degree and that it makes sense because they are related to peaches which also grow there.
California, it’s water situation, and the incredible amount of water that almonds were required was featured in “New Rules”.
This is true, however, ironically, it is an area that is rather quickly replacing what used to be farm from horizon to horizon to suburbs and strip malls.
Just for perspective, here’s a Youtube video from 2015, about 6 weeks later in the year. It shows Lake Mead at 37%. It did recover some (not nearly to full capacity) since then.
There is something to the idea that cycles of dry and wet will continue for a while, and I don’t think this is “the end” of Lake Mead and the southwest. Sooner or later, but none of us can say when.
Today is not the end, but I think the end is not far off. I’d like to think that its at least 10 years off, but I just can’t be that optimistic.
Global Climate Change and Global Warming means three things for sure:
Weather, taken as a whole will get warmer. Not in any one place at any one time, but the average temp will creep up.
Sea levels will rise. Not that much, taken as feet, but so many cities are just about sea-level anyway. About a foot by 2100, some estimates say.
The weather will be more violent- more storms, more and stronger hurricanes, more twisters, even more blizzards, etc.
Some areas will experience drought , some flooding. Overall, the rain will likely slightly increase. But maybe not where we want it.
The West could get wetter- it could get drier. It could get both- extreme drought, followed by flood years. Many models have been set up for the El Niño-Southern Oscillation have said that drought could occur, so plans shoudl be made, but they really do not know.
But GW will not necessarily cause drought in any one given area.
https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2067
Several recently published studies have produced apparently conflicting results of how drought is changing under climate change. The reason is thought to lie in the formulation of the Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) and the data sets used to determine the evapotranspiration component. Here, we make an assessment of the issues with the PDSI in which several other sources of discrepancy emerge, not least how precipitation has changed and is analysed. As well as an improvement in the precipitation data available, accurate attribution of the causes of drought requires accounting for natural variability, especially El Niño/Southern Oscillation effects, owing to the predilection for wetter land during La Niña events. Increased heating from global warming may not cause droughts but it is expected that when droughts occur they are likely to set in quicker and be more intense.
My WAG is both drought and flood. 2020 is a very bad drought year, 2017 had the second wettest year in recorded history in CA with heavy flooding.