It’s not especially thrifty if the water would just run off anyway. In fact, if turning off the faucet produces more wear on the faucet than leaving the water on produces on whatever upstream mechanisms bring the water to the faucet, it may be less thrifty.
Okay.
Modern faucets are good for so many hundreds of thousands of operating cycles I’m sure we must be talking thousandths of a mill per use, so you have a point. :rolleyes:
I haven’t done any research on this, but I have a question that must have an obvious answer. Why don’t the farmers in California growing almonds and avocados and similar crops begin moving operations to some place like Florida or Louisiana or somewhere else in the southeastern US where water is more plentiful? The fact that they haven’t done so suggests their must be an obvious reason for why they haven’t, but I don’t know what that reason might be.
One reason is more sunshine in CA. Perhaps the real estate is cheaper in the growing valleys since no one wants to actually live there but I haven’t looked into that.
Violence is not even a possibility here. California is already building desalination plants along the coast. One by me opens later this summer or early fall. In That sense, California is quite lucky for having an unlimited supply of seawater within reach.
My restrictions are now limited to watering landscaping 2x a week,washing cars from a bucked (and then rinsing) and not hosing off sidewalks and driveways. It’s not like this hasn’t happened before. In a couple years, there’s be so much rain that they have to open the check valves at the dams and let water out.
There hasn’t been a reason for them to move before now. California didn’t even have groundwater regulations on the books until last fall - when surface water wasn’t available for irrigation, farmers could just pump more. Since there’s never enough surface water, every operation had wells. As long as those wells were deep enough to reach the water table, the farm had water. It wasn’t sustainable water, but that doesn’t make a difference to almonds or alfalfa.
Yeah, the reservoirs will fill again if you give it enough time. But current California agriculture isn’t sustainable long-term from just surface irrigation. Give the reservoirs enough time and they’ll fill; give them more time and they’ll be empty again. Surface water availability is too variable to provide the reliable water supply that the current agricultural scheme depends on.
For decades, groundwater has made up for that variation. In dry years, the deficit between the available surface water and the required irrigation has been made up by pumping groundwater. But the total amount of groundwater withdrawn from the aquifers has been much greater than the total amount of water that made its way back to recharge the groundwater system. Something has to give there, because there’s not going to be enough groundwater in the future to make up for that deficit.
And, I suppose, an unlimited supply of energy as well? Because desalinated gallonage is a product of time and energy, and The Pacific Ocean x 2 D-Cells = Glass Of Water, Please.
The energy requirements for significant amounts of desalinated water are immense… and we have so much to spare, these days.
There is hope… our drought was just kicked firmly in the ass (and then some) by Mother Nature, and it was generally a more severe drought than California’s.
Something similar will happen out there before too long, and you’ll go from hand-wringing about drought, to hand-wringing about mudslides and flooding.
Given the age of the aquifers being drained, that’s about like saying if we wait long enough the oil reserves will fill up again. 
Are you seriously saying that weather extremes like this somehow balance out? That a four-year drought is of no concern if a century storm blows through?
Yeah, we don’t have any wind or sunshine in California, especially near the beaches.
What Amateur Barbarian said. Municipal water users can get by on surface resources, because reservoirs can be sized to provide enough storage to wait out a years-long drought (assuming towns don’t grow faster than the reservoir designers anticipated).
Agriculture (the primary consumer of water in both states) can’t. Just like in California, Texas aquifers are still being mined - i.e., water is being withdrawn faster than it’s being replenished. In the panhandle, water levels in parts of the Ogalalla aquifer have fallen more than 40 feet between 1980 and 1995; water levels have fallen even faster since then. Texas has done a better job at regulating groundwater withdrawals than California has, but that just doesn’t mean the ship isn’t sinking. Texas is just sinking slower.
Or mathematicians, I gather. Or powerful HOAs of beachfront communities. Or a Shoreline Commission. Or tourism. But mostly, of those who can do the math and calculate how many windmills fit into a gallon of Dasani.
Oh, I didn’t know they had to go on the shore line.
Mathematicians only grow within 920 feet of the ocean. I thought you knew that?
Seriously, the problem has been under consideration for at least a half-century. With the rejection of fission power and the failure of fusion to materialize, the picture is static. Other power sources can only provide a fraction of what fossil and nuclear options do, and things like hydro power are effectively maxed out even if we write off a few national parks and nature preserves.
Wind and ocean power, and solar, just don’t add up to enough even if we commit them entirely to desalinization. Take off the blinkers, put away the Greenergy t-shirt, pull out a solar calculator, and do the math. You can even set aside the economics if you like, although they’re a huge stumbling block all their own.
The most optimistic plan and project I can recall seeing cost trillions - that’s a TR - sprawled across a lot of what are now protected lands and reserves, needed a truly staggering amount of power… and produced less water than ag wastes.
ETA: Maybe someday that will seem like a good deal. It doesn’t seem like one now.
We have pretty similar water restrictions in Central Florida, and our groundwater levels are also getting worryingly low. So moving agriculture to Florida probably isn’t the best idea anyway.
When Calli sacrifices a woman to end the drought, it will be news (and not before).
Hydro power in California isn’t just maxed out–it’s going to become a mite problematical if the reservoirs run dry. No hydro, no power. Granted, California gets most of its power from natural gas, but a good chunk is hydro (about 20%).
I meant more across the whole northwest, where it’s dominant. But yeah, hydro is a tad dependent on not just water, but regular rainfall… so.
Maybe we can turn Texas into a reservoir and catch the annual century storm rains there?