You can have almonds, or the Great Lakes. Tough one. Could go either way.
But what you are proposing is exemplary socialism in action.
Why not extend that principal to healthcare or summat useful?
I’m not proposing anything. I don’t really care either way, we’re not dependent on California for our almonds and I’m probably never casting eyes on the Great Lakes either.
In north-eatern Finland it is estimated that the ground water could satisfy the worl´d consumption 3 times with it’s current replacement rate. Problem is that it is so unaccsessable place that price of water must rise a lot before shipping it out will be profitable.
I wouldn’t be suprised if future finns must defend it against aggressors.
Build a canal/pipeline from the Pacific Ocean to flood Death Valley and create a salt lake which would cause increases evaporation and cloud formation, given a lake effect rain/snow?
But this kind of is a factual answer, ablit a tongue in cheek response but it generally desribe the Great Lakes Charter policy on sharing water. It would of course have helped if he had provided a link.
I think the wisdom of Sam Kinison applies here “You live in a desert! Move to where the water is!”
It wouldn’t work out well for Death Valley. That would turn into a disgusting mess. Of course, it already is, so maybe who cares?
That pipeline/canal isn’t going to be all that easy to build either.
It’s also to the south east and on the wrong side of the mountains to naturally get water to the California growing areas. May promote some rain in Nevada, but that’s not where it is needed.
Because whatever could go wrong with that?:
Stranger
The evaporation rate in Death Valley is around 150 inches per annum (figures vary).
How are you going to increase that?
Methinks one Salton Sea is enough for any continent
(there you go, was late to the party with that perspective., 
Death Valley is a thing of beauty, a relatively balanced desert environment, not made too wonky yet by the actions of humanity. I care a lot about any plan that messes with Death Valley.
Quite a lot of grapes are grown around the Great Lakes and the Finger Lakes. Almonds, not so much; but many other crops do grow well here.
All the species currently living there and those using it as an essential part of their migration routes?
One major food stuffs in California wasting a lot of water is Dairy. No need for all that extra sunshine and a fairly significant water user if I remember correctly.
It seems to me that Detroit is due for a rebirth. Massively underpopulated given the existing infrastructure and real estate and has access to sufficient freshwater.
Is that the current evap rate? If so it seems like the answer would be obvious, add more water, which is what the pipeline/canal would be for.
Grapes aren’t too terrible in terms of water usage, California data shows average grape growers use around 2-actre feet of water. It is less water intensive than growing corn, rice, or tomatoes for example. Location also matters, in California’s North Coast it takes around 75 gallons of water to produce 1 gallon of wine, in the Central Valley it’s around 430 gallons of water–water is used in frost protection in vineyards in areas that get frosts, which can make it less efficient.
The most economically valuable California wine growing regions, while certainly impacted by the ongoing California drought, aren’t nearly in as much trouble as a number of other major California crops. A single almond, I’m not talking a bushel of them, but a single fucking almond, requires up to three gallons of water to end up on a store shelf, so that can of Blue Diamond almonds represents probably more than 500 gallons of water.
It’s worth noting that grapes grow very well in the Midwest FWIW, grapes for juice or for eating, specifically. The conditions in the Midwest aren’t amenable to great wine grapes (there are vineyards in all the Midwestern states where the proprietors will tell you otherwise, trust me they are wrong and lack taste.)
California has a number of serious water issues, Southern California has historically relied on its share of water from the Colorado river, which is basically drying up. The rest of the state and particularly the Central Valley has historically been very dependent on a couple really big rain storms per year to fill up the aquifers. These storms have either been not coming each year, or come in way weaker than is needed. There is some evidence to suggest that even beyond the climate change related causal elements to this, the Southwest and California may have a long history of very prolonged periods of drought. I think there’s evidence of multiple-century long droughts in some of these regions in the last 1000-2000 years of geological records.
So it’s particularly “bad luck” that so many extremely water-intensive crops have been grown at massive scale there.
Piping water in is not a serious option for solving the drought issues in California and Arizona. Desalination is also not a solution. While several UN bodies have released reports advocating for more work using desalination in specific scenarios for communities that don’t have significant fresh water access, particularly in the third world, it isn’t a “solution at scale.” Desalination can have local viability particularly for supplying drinking water to alleviate specific, limited scale problems for seaside communities. A classic example of this is many of the Gulf petrostates for example get most of their potable water from desalination. They have almost limitless access to cheap energy and a concentrated, urban population and little farming, so desal for drinking water makes sense for them.
Aside from a few limited urban areas on California’s coast where desal might make sense to alleviate pressure on the drinking water system, it is not a solution at scale for the whole state. Agriculture is a much more massive user of water and desal cannot supply water at scale for that purpose in California. The only real fix is changing the mixture of crops grown to reduce water usage, and other conservation efforts. What the farmers want is to not have to change anything and to keep raising their cash crops, this desire is probably not in line with reality.
I guess it didn’t come across well, but the “maybe” was supposed to indicate sarcasm over the “who cares” bit.
I also pointed out the logistical and meteorological problems with the idea.
All well and good, it’s only a though experiment, I’m not getting the shovel ready.
Re: The Salton Sea
The major difference as I’m sure you must realize is the Salton Sea is fed by fresh water which does have agricultural runoff, the Death Valley proposal would use sea water.
Additionally this is not the first time a proposal to use sea water in this way. as some serious consideration is being made to use the Med to help recharge the Dead Sea and that is a project we may see, and some have speculated about doing the same with the desert in N Africa.
The problem is that you are going to be concentrating the salt in your new Death Valley lake. Along with everything else in the ocean. Your inlet would be near the coast, so would have a substantial amount of that agricultural runoff as well.
I’ve seen “proposals” to do such projects. I don’t think I’ve seen serious proposals, however.
That’s why I said “aren’t going to grow nearly as well”, not “won’t grow”. I’m aware that there are native grapes from the region (although you’d have to pay me to ever eat another Concord), as well as some great crosses. But “quite a lot” is relative.
Grape production in California dwarfs that in all other states combined - 84% of the wine, and more than 90% of the table grapes.
That’s the problem.
Saying they grow much better there when they only grow there with the aid of mined water, sold for much less than its worth, drawing down irreplaceable aquifers and taking other water from where it’s needed and also is not being replaced, is not IMO accurate.
[ETA: quite a lot of people like Concords, Concord juice, and/or Concord jelly. Tastes vary, of course. Many other grapes are grown here, with a considerable range of flavors.
When I say they grow much better there, I’m merely saying that you will not get anything like California production in the Midwest. I’m not making a judgment on the morality of California grape growing.