# water **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 17, 2015, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245 "2015-03-17T23:38:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2015, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/121 "2015-04-10T16:34:36Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > Technically, yes they do. If the head of a siphon is higher than the outflow, water will be drawn through it, as long as there are no bubbles. The problem is, the peak of the siphon cannot be more than about ten meters higher than the inflow, otherwise, the weight of the water column will cause the water to boil at the peak, thus introducing bubbles that render the siphon ineffective. If you could cut and tunnel across the country to keep the highest point of the pipe less than ten meters higher than the head, it could maybe work, though that would place the pipe in excess of a mile underground for a significant portion of its run. That is a lot of digging. > > Ok, so how does that article support “… _the enviros don’t like desal._” ? Here is a better example: The Sierra Club: [http://angeles2.sierraclub.org/news/blog/2014/01/ocean\_desalination\_bigger\_picture](http://angeles2.sierraclub.org/news/blog/2014/01/ocean_desalination_bigger_picture) ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2015, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/122 "2015-04-10T16:39:40Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Got bad news and good news. Bad news is that next year, we start drinking sewer water. Good news is, there’s not enough to go around. We do that here in Irvine. Cheaper than de-sal, and other water districts should do the same: > **[Recycled Water](https://www.irwd.com/services/recycled-water)** > > English-subtitles 視頻 비디오 This is drought country. So how does Irvine Ranch Water District keep your home faucets flowing while also keeping the community so gre... ---
**Author:** ![swampspruce](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/swampspruce/32/261_2.png) [@swampspruce](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/swampspruce)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2015, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/123 "2015-04-10T16:55:21Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Canada. Lots of water. Minimal military defense. Just sayin’, is all. Are we going to have to come down there and burn the White House again?😃 I can just see Michelle running around scooping up her favourite items like Dolly Madison. There’s a workout for ya, weights and cardio… Out of curiosity how much of Cal’s ag industry follows best practices to minimize evaporation and run off losses like zero till and underground irrigation? As much as I loathe the whole idea of commoditizing water more than it already has been, it seems the only way people start respecting anything is when they have to pay directly through the nose for it. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2015, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/124 "2015-04-10T17:16:16Z")
David Feldman does some research on how water is controlled. He has a full hour-long lecture here: He also works on researching the impact: [quote] Additional pumping costs come to $454 million. Crop losses will cost the industry $810 million. Losses from livestock and dairy revenues cost will $203 million in 2014. This adds up to $1.5 billion in direct losses, the study reported. The study concludes that the drought this year will have a $2.2 billion economic impact in the industry and displace 17,100 jobs. [/quote] > **[California Drought](https://www.mercurynews.com/tag/drought/)** > > Water restrictions, conservation and drought-resistant landscaping help California cope with its historic drought. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2015, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/125 "2015-04-10T17:37:36Z")
> [@Algher](#): > > Here is a better example: The Sierra Club: > > [http://angeles2.sierraclub.org/news/blog/2014/01/ocean\_desalination\_bigger\_picture](http://angeles2.sierraclub.org/news/blog/2014/01/ocean_desalination_bigger_picture) From that link, > [@](#): > > So keep an eye out for more news on ocean desalination 2014 and information on what you can do to make sure that any project considered is actually needed and uses the best available technology to protect the environment. You can be sure that we will need to weigh in, at both the state and local levels to insure that good science rather than politics decides how desalination moves forward in California. That is not blanket opposition to desal, it is opposition to specific projects (bad desal, as it were). ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2015, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/126 "2015-04-10T18:41:10Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > From that link, > That is not blanket opposition to desal, it is opposition to specific projects (bad desal, as it were). Yeah - but I have been to the meetings and there is one group that will fight anything less than zero impact on the ocean. I fully support the Sierra Club, but they have a strong zero tolerance attitude on certain subjects. Of course, they don’t SAY never, but sometimes their requests / demands make it effectively prohibitive: > [@](#): > > But environmentalists complain that the Santa Barbara plant will damage the marine environment by sucking microorganisms, fish eggs and plankton, which form a critical part of the food chain, into water intake pipes in the open ocean. > > They would rather see intake pipes placed under the ocean floor, which they said would be less harmful to aquatic life. > > The city has agreed to study alternative methods for taking in ocean water, but it is not required under various state permits to change anything. > > “We don’t think desalination is a smart solution to the drought,” said Kira Redmond, executive director of Santa Barbara Channelkeeper. “But if they’re going to do it, we’re asking them to operate it in the most environmentally sound way possible, using modern technology.” > > Redmond said alternatives, such as capturing storm water and recycling wastewater, should be tried first. > > “We completely disagree that they’ve exhausted all their other options,” Redmond said. “We don’t agree that it’s a last resort.” > **[Santa Barbara working to reactivate mothballed desalination plant](https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-santa-barbara-desal-20150303-story.html)** > > California's four-year drought created the statewide mantra: "Conserve, conserve, conserve." ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2015, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/127 "2015-04-10T20:00:48Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Regarding market pricing … > > Water is a bit different than many other products such that you cannot price it such that the poor cannot afford it. … …what many would consider human rights Water is metered and charged by the utility. So you can institute 2 tier pricing (or 4 tier pricing!). Meaning every household gets a set amount at one price, then has to pay more above that. Since the action is with high use consumers (and especially businesses), this works pretty well. You can even have income based programs, like they do with electricity. > [@DrCube](#): > > Dude, [you don’t even have to raise prices on residential usage](http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2015/03/the-california-water-shortage-again.html). Bathtubs and drinking water aren’t the problem. Agriculture is pretty much the entire problem. If farmers had to pay market prices for water, they wouldn’t be flooding the desert to grow rice. I understand it’s a little more complicated. Big ag can respond to new legislation with lawsuits. They also have some sympathy from the public. So it makes political sense and possibly moral sense to crack down on backyard jungle fauna before asking a rice farmer to close up shop. > [@DSeid](#): > > Can someone explain water pricing in California to me? It seems like there [is](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-07-24/california-water-prices-soar-for-farmers-as-drought-grows) market pricing and farmers are paying more. Excellent question. We should look into that. > [@](#): > > Again though, the result of higher prices is to use what they can get and afford to buy to protect the highest value investments - the nut trees. A long switch to drought tolerant almond root stock, for example, or to a greater number of olive trees, does not happen in volatile pricing environment. I suspect rice and alfalfa farmers have greater exit opportunities. It wouldn’t surprise me if many _existing_ almond growers are making among the most productive use of water resources at the margin. Not quite microchip fabbers but still. Also, for those wanting a high tech solution… think about… [icebergs](http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/oceanography/icebergs-as-water.htm). Though frankly I don’t see such options as the first thing we should reach for. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2015, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/128 "2015-04-10T20:28:06Z")
[Here is a place to start](https://www.calwater.com/rates/rates-and-tariffs/stk/), though not comprehensive, and kind of a pain to go through. I looked at residential and non-residential rates the the Visalia and the Stockton areas: in the Stockton district, non-residential rates go _down_ after 30K cu-ft. Visalia has two rates that look like you pay more with a bigger pipe, but the rates are not usage-tiered (paying higher or lower rates after a cut-off volume). Residential rates in both are 3-tiered on usage volume (increasing rates for higher volumes). It looks like CalWater is the private, suburban/rural provider, the big cities (and probably some of the smaller ones) may have their own utility or provider. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2015, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/129 "2015-04-10T21:11:36Z")
[QUOTE=Measure for Measure] Also, for those wanting a high tech solution… think about… icebergs. Though frankly I don’t see such options as the first thing we should reach for. [/QUOTE] Yeah, I always thought why couldn’t we use ships (really REALLY big ones :p) or build a pipeline. I guess the answer is we COULD…but the costs would be huge and so far we haven’t been desperate enough to seriously look at it. I suppose a real high tech solution might be geo-engineering where you re-sculpt the continents to shift gulf streams to bring water to dry parts of the world…or maybe mine water on asteroids, pack it up and drop it somehow to the dry parts of the world without causing catastrophic damage. Or, on the mystic side, you could get the rain god from Hitchhikers Guide to move to California… ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2015, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/130 "2015-04-10T21:57:46Z")
> [@XT](#): > > . . . I suppose a real high tech solution might be geo-engineering where you re-sculpt the continents to shift gulf streams to bring water to dry parts of the world . . . Probably actually feasible. Some sort of satellite umbrella, or periodic dumping of light-absorbent matter into the sky, to change local temperatures, diverting air and water currents. But…if we bring water to California…we’re diverting it away from somewhere else. Awfully close to an act of war. (Bummer when CA’s “El Nino” rains are associated with drought in Australia.) ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2015, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/131 "2015-04-11T14:27:41Z")
If we use my numbers from before (which are probably wrong), and assume 260 W per m[sup]3[/sup]/day. We need 49 km[sup]3[/sup]/year, or 1.342×10[sup]8[/sup] m[sup]3[/sup]/day. So that’s 35 GW of desal power for the entire state. Kashiwazaki-Kariwa is about 8 GW, so all we need is 4-5 gigantic nuclear plants. This enviro will go for that. I suspect others won’t. Of course, you’re not going to have dedicated desal nukes. Let’s emulate the Fujairah plant and pretend it’s nuclear. That plant is expected to use only 16% of its power for desal, 66% goes to the grid, and the rest to transmission losses. So for 35 GW of desal power, we’ll build 220 GW of nuke plants (about 27 Kashiwazaki-Kariwas), which will also supply 140 GW of electrical power. [EIA](http://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA) tells me that California consumes about 7.6 quads, annually, which comes out to average power of 250 GW. However EIA is looking at total energy consumption, which goes to all sorts of other uses. [This](http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/overview.html) website tells me generated + imported comes out at ~300 GW.h in 2009, or 34 GW. So 30 giant nukes, all of the water it needs, and electricity exports to surrounding states. Sign me up. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2015, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/132 "2015-04-11T14:31:52Z")
For importing water by ship, [this](http://www.petrostrategies.org/Learning_Center/oil_transportation.htm#Shipping%20Costs) website lists shipping costs for petroleum. If we look at the longer distances (e.g. not just across the Gulf of Mexico) and assume $2/B, and if I’m correct that one acre foot is 10,345 barrels, that’s ~$21k/acre foot. Never mind that water is dense and corrosive. Since **XT** has “always thought why couldn’t we use ships”, I hope I have lifted a mental burden. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2015, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/133 "2015-04-11T16:38:27Z")
> [@Ruken](#): > > For importing water by ship, [this](http://www.petrostrategies.org/Learning_Center/oil_transportation.htm#Shipping%20Costs) website lists shipping costs for petroleum. If we look at the longer distances (e.g. not just across the Gulf of Mexico) and assume $2/B, and if I’m correct that one acre foot is 10,345 barrels, that’s ~$21k/acre foot. Never mind that water is dense and corrosive. > > Since **XT** has “always thought why couldn’t we use ships”, I hope I have lifted a mental burden. And while I appreciate all the effort you put into this, you should have checked out the 😛 tongue in cheek part of the statement where I said really REALLY big ships. Just to clear things up, I was joking and playing along with Measure for Measure’s link talking about how to putting ice chips in oil tankers. In case you were wondering, I also don’t think we could geo-engineer the earth to bring moisture laden gulf streams to the dry parts of the world or drop water laden asteroids in the Sahara. In case you were going to go there next. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2015, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/134 "2015-04-11T16:58:58Z")
That would be silly! No point in dropping them in the Sahara, gotta drop them on L.A. Gotta think these things through! ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2015, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/135 "2015-04-11T17:02:13Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > That would be silly! No point in dropping them in the Sahara, gotta drop them on L.A. Gotta think these things through! Well, that would certainly take care of at least some of the water issue in California. 😛 If we also dropped some on the Central Valley we may be able to solve the issue outright, even if our asteroids weren’t water laden. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2015, 6:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/136 "2015-04-12T06:21:00Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Regarding market pricing … > > Water is a bit different than many other products such that you cannot price it such that the poor cannot afford it. > > For the cautionary tale look at what happened when [Detroit](http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29697767) tried to shut off water to those who were not paying their bills for it. > > The pricing level that would provoke major agricultural shifts away from high profit water intense crops is likely high enough to impact the poor disproportionately. Those with mansions and pools on the other hand can likely pay the premium. I’ll still buy my almonds at a buck or two more a bag. > > When dealing with items like clean air and access to water a pure market system runs up against what many would consider human rights. > > The solution needs to protect those who are living on the margins, both in terms of cost of the water they need to live, and in terms of employment. > > Market pricing needs to be part of the solution but it needs to be finessed so that the harms do not include pricing the poor out of access to water or causing the loss of many jobs as a consequence. Not exactly sure what that should look like though. Market pricing, but with a generous Basic Income Guarantee? ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2015, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/137 "2015-04-12T06:28:07Z")
> [@Ruken](#): > > If we use my numbers from before (which are probably wrong), and assume 260 W per m[sup]3[/sup]/day. We need 49 km[sup]3[/sup]/year, or 1.342×10[sup]8[/sup] m[sup]3[/sup]/day. So that’s 35 GW of desal power for the entire state. Kashiwazaki-Kariwa is about 8 GW, so all we need is 4-5 gigantic nuclear plants. This enviro will go for that. I suspect others won’t. > [snip] > So 30 giant nukes, all of the water it needs, and electricity exports to surrounding states. Sign me up. 😉 And you’re in DC, so little risk to you if some of those are in geologically sensitive locations. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2015, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/138 "2015-04-12T13:11:29Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > And you’re in DC, so little risk to you if some of those are in geologically sensitive locations. :dubious: 😃 Although I work a lot in CA. But we can build some out here too. The east coast also needs water. And we have our earthquakes too. [North Anna Nuclear Generating Station - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Anna_Nuclear_Generating_Station#2011_Virginia_earthquake) Producing a large percent of an area’s electricity from nuclear power plants has a major issue. They tend to run at high capacity, and they don’t handle cold snaps well if there’s a lot of electric heating (e.g. France, the US South and West.) So you end up having to import or have lots of peakers, which tend to be dirty. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2015, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/139 "2015-04-12T19:48:05Z")
Well we can build desalination plants and nukes to power them (each nuke costing a couple of billion dollars). Or we can stop growing rice on an arid plain. Decisions, decisions. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2015, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/140 "2015-04-12T19:57:43Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > Well we can build desalination plants and nukes to power them (each nuke costing a couple of billion dollars). Or we can stop growing rice on an arid plain. > > Decisions, decisions. I would skip it and go straight for the fusion plants, personally. Then you build some mines and farms right next to it, and a road network and next thing you know you are rolling tanks into Europe! After that it’s beer and asteroids… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245.md?page=8)