# 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:** 18\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2015, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/141 "2015-04-12T21:31:21Z")
So Nestle’s permit to pump water into the Arrowhead water bottles expired in 1988, but nobody at the federal government has done anything about it. > **[Forest Service: Expired Nestle water permit a priority](https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/environment/2015/04/11/nestle-bottled-water-california-drought-water/25621915/)** > > Forest Service officials plan to review an expired water permit that Nestle uses. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2015, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/142 "2015-04-12T22:25:40Z")
> [@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. Transitioning to lower water intensity agriculture should be a given, but that does not mean that desal will not also be part of the solution. Which in turn does not mandate nukes in an earthquake prone region near coastline. (Sound like a familiar combination?) The coastline of California is [rich in wind resources](http://www.energy.ca.gov/maps/renewable/wind.html) and intermittency is no problem for desal as water stores just fine. ---
**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 12, 2015, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/143 "2015-04-12T23:01:40Z")
> [@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. Two billion? Are you buying your [nuclear power plants](http://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/nuclear-power/cost-nuclear-power) at, like, W\*\*-Mart or something? ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2015, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/144 "2015-04-13T00:15:33Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > Desalination is not a panacea for overuse of native water sources. Setting aside the energy-intensive and waste-production issues of large scale desalination, taking a quick look at a topographic map shows that the Central Valley (consisting of the San Joaquin and Sacramento valleys, where the bulk of agriculture is performed) are separated by the Coastal Ranges with an average ingress height over over 1000m AMSL. The energy to pump the water up to this altitude, notwithstanding various losses, is about 2.8 kWh/liter or 920 MWh/acre-foot of water. Theoretically the energy could be reclaimed on the way back down, but practically speaking that energy and more will be needed to pump water from the base of the mountains to the actual irrigation site. Water hungry crops like cotton require about five acre-feet of water to produce 2-5 tons of yield. That means, at optimum (again, ignoring any inefficiencies in the delivery stream) the energy cost of a ton of cotton is nearly a 1 GWh in water delivery cost alone, or about US$46/lbm using 2014 industrial energy rates of ~$0.11 per kWh. The current comodity spot price for cotton, by comparison, is US$58.40 for Upland cotton. Other water hungry per net yield crops such as rice, nuts, et cetera would face similar burdens notwithstanding the need to generate a large amount of additional energy that does not currently exist. Except for the Salinas Valley Agricultural Region, which enjoys its own enclosed watershed seperate from the main Central Valley and has ongoing efforts at water conservation and reclamation, the only low elevation ingress into the Central Valley is via Suisun Bay east of San Francisco. The approximately 80% of ariable land in California that is in the Central Valley is essentially cut off from direct access to water delivered to the coast and is dependent upon watershed of the Sierra Nevada mountains. > > The technical solution to all of this is to limit the production of water-intensive crops in California, use modern irrigation and water reclaimation methods, and most importantly, stop implicitly subsidizing water use and set prices at true replacement cost. Yes, there will be an economic and social impact from this which will shift production to areas that can better afford such crops, but the alternative is to continue to use water beyond sustainability. Handwaving fairy tale solutions such as building desalination plants up and down the coast and somehow teleporting water hundreds of miles inland, a scheme warned against by examples of projects such as Libya’s Great Man-Made River Project and our own Colorado River Aquaduct have cost grossly more than original projections and have consistently experienced maintenance and seepage issues. > > Stranger A couple of nits to pick here. Nit#1 you do not have to pump water over a mountain range to get from sea level to the Central Valley. Cite: the Sacramento River Delta. Stockton which is in the San Joaquin Valley is a deep water sea port. Freighters as a rule don’t climb mountains worth a damn. So you plumb the water up the delta. Nit#2 Los Angeles has been pumping water up and over the Tehachapi Mountains from the California Aqueduct for years. Desal water for use in LA and you can turn those pumps off and have more water for use in the SJ Valley. ---
**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 13, 2015, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/145 "2015-04-13T02:03:31Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > Desalination is not a panacea for overuse of native water sources. Setting aside the energy-intensive and waste-production issues of large scale desalination, taking a quick look at a topographic map shows that the Central Valley (consisting of the San Joaquin and Sacramento valleys, where the bulk of agriculture is performed) are separated by the Coastal Ranges with an average ingress height over over 1000m AMSL. The energy to pump the water up to this altitude, notwithstanding various losses, is about 2.8 kWh/liter or 920 MWh/acre-foot of water. While I agree with your basic premise, that desalination, done properly, is not a realistic solution, I ask you this: if some form of vapor distillation method is used, for example, nuclear steam generation, would you not be left with steam/vapor, which would require somewhat less energy to carry it to altitude, where it could be condensed into liquid water and run into the valley, perhaps also generating more electricity? Can you guesstimate or calculate what the secondary energy requirement of transporting water vapor to 1000m would be, as compared to liquid water? That aside, the other issue is the very desal itself. The steam/vapor distillation process leaves you with very pure water. Humans and crops are not exactly fond of really pure water, we need to have something like .1‰ salinity, most plants are happy with about 5 times that much, so if desal is to be practical, at some point we have to drizzle a little bit of the left-over brine back into the water supply, which becomes an added expense. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2015, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/146 "2015-04-13T02:08:41Z")
A lot of soils contain some salt already - if there is sufficient in the soil you don’t need to add it to the water. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2015, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/147 "2015-04-13T02:32:35Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > While I agree with your basic premise, that desalination, done properly, is not a realistic solution, I ask you this: if some form of vapor distillation method is used, for example, nuclear steam generation, would you not be left with steam/vapor, which would require somewhat less energy to carry it to altitude, where it could be condensed into liquid water and run into the valley, perhaps also generating more electricity? Can you guesstimate or calculate what the secondary energy requirement of transporting water vapor to 1000m would be, as compared to liquid water? > > That aside, the other issue is the very desal itself. The steam/vapor distillation process leaves you with very pure water. Humans and crops are not exactly fond of really pure water, we need to have something like .1‰ salinity, most plants are happy with about 5 times that much, so if desal is to be practical, at some point we have to drizzle a little bit of the left-over brine back into the water supply, which becomes an added expense. How far do you think the vapor would get before it condenses? (Unless you intend to keep heating it.) Anyway the current desal state of the art of not steam/vapor distillate but reverse osmosis using pressure to force water through tiny holes that salt cannot fit through. According to [an article in today’s NYT](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/12/science/drinking-seawater-looks-ever-more-palatable-to-californians.html?hpw&rref=science&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=well-region®ion=bottom-well&WT.nav=bottom-well) this technological advances has halved the energy cost (and they mention the fit with renewable energy as well). > [@](#): > > The technological approach being employed here, and in most recent plants, is called reverse osmosis. It involves forcing seawater through a membrane with holes so tiny that the water molecules can pass through but larger salt molecules cannot. > > A huge amount of energy is required to create enough pressure to shove the water through the membranes. But clever engineering has cut energy use of the plants in half in 20 years, as well as improving their reliability. > > Future desalination plants also have the potential to blend well with the rising percentage of renewable power on the electric grids in California and Texas. Since treated water can be stored, the plants could be dialed up at times when electricity from wind or solar power is plentiful, and later dialed down. Finally you seem to be ignoring **Rick** ’s point: this water gets used locally allowing less to be pumped there and more therefore available for other uses closer to the source. Still desal remains energy intense (and guess what, producing energy, including with nuclear, uses lots of water); the more that can be accomplished by better fresh water management strategies the better. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Strangelove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr.strangelove/32/6613_2.png) [@Dr.Strangelove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Strangelove)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2015, 4:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/148 "2015-04-13T04:08:12Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > and intermittency is no problem for desal as water stores just fine. Yeah; I wonder if any plants are built with this in mind. They could be used as load-levelers. If your production is intermittent, you need more core reverse osmosis units so that the peak rate is higher than the average rate (so that they can cover idle times). However, some parts of the system only need to be sized for average production–the intakes and brine outputs, for instance, which can be buffered with local pools or tanks. Same with pre- and post-treatment units, which I’d expect use minimal power. Seems like doubling peak capacity for the energy-intensive units would cost much less than double for the whole plant; perhaps only 25-50% more. But I really don’t know what the expensive parts are. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2015, 10:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/149 "2015-04-13T10:27:09Z")
Does anyone know if [forward osmosis](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_osmosis) is being used anywhere commercially for drinking water or irrigation? The wiki article doesn’t have an energy breakdown. I haven’t talked with the guys who developed it (refs 13-14) in a while, but they paint such a shiny halo on it it’s hard to know what’s real. The advantage is it requires relatively low-grade heat and minimal electrical power. So you could even hook it up after a combined cycle plant’s ORC, not that we’re seeing much of that. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2015, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/150 "2015-04-16T22:45:10Z")
> [@Mr.Milton](#): > > I refer you to _ **Cadillac Desert** _ > [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkbebOhnCjA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkbebOhnCjA) Very interesting documentary. How many remember today that L.A. once sent 600 cops to the Owens Valley to thwart residents who were dynamiting its aqueduct? ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2015, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/151 "2015-04-17T23:48:37Z")
It’s our water. We stole it fair and square 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2015, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/152 "2015-04-19T05:27:42Z")
> [@Lamar\_Mundane](#): > > It’s not really a national problem. California and Arizona and Las Vegas have to get their shit together. I read somewhere recently that California (at least parts of it) have never had mandatory watering restrictions. That’s crazy. Add in Arizona with their golf courses and fake lakes. It’s a disaster in progress but it has to be fixed by the people there, unless Wisconsin or Michigan decide to let them build a pipeline from the Great Lakes. Actually it is a national problem. Immigration to the U.S., in general, has tapered off since the Great Recession, but over the past generation it has been a big driver of national population growth, especially in the Southwest. As the economy improves I expect immigration will pick up again. If we’re going to have large scale immigration as a national policy, then perhaps more of the newcomers should settle where the water is, rather than in our driest region. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2015, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/153 "2015-04-19T06:08:56Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > If you want a promo, do some research on what’s happened in Australia due to their droughts. In each instance, water for ag is _hugely restricted_. > > [Continuing drought in South Australia](http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/oct/07/drought-fears-across-southern-australia-after-months-of-below-average-rainfalls), [Restricted water use resulting therefrom](http://www.climatehotmap.org/global-warming-locations/sydney-australia.html). > > Citizens are also allotted very restricted personal use. I saw this up close when I was visiting relatives there and saw how they washed their dishes in 2 inches of water and didn’t rinse them, only dried them before putting them back into their cupboards. Showers were limited to five minutes. Five minute showers wouldn’t faze me, but how do you wash dishes without rinsing them? ---
**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 19, 2015, 6:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/154 "2015-04-19T06:47:33Z")
> [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](#): > > Actually it is a national problem. Immigration to the U.S., in general, has tapered off since the Great Recession, but over the past generation it has been a big driver of national population growth, especially in the Southwest. As the economy improves I expect immigration will pick up again. If we’re going to have large scale immigration as a national policy, then perhaps more of the newcomers should settle where the water is, rather than in our driest region. 80% of the California water use is by agriculture. Agriculture makes up 2% of the California economy. We don’t have a population problem vis a vis water. We have a failure to apply ordinary market pricing to a scarce resource. 14% of CA water use goes to alfalfa, some of which is exported. 7% goes to rice. Neither is a high margin crop. Eliminate both and they won’t be missed. Together they use more water than residential and urban areas do. The politics of all of this is difficult. Very. But we don’t really require nuclear powered de-salinization plants, relocated icebergs, or errant asteroids. We just need to treat water as if it was, you know, scarce. > **[A guide to California's water crisis — and why it's so hard to fix](https://www.vox.com/2015/4/10/8379221/california-drought-water-crisis)** > > Vox is a general interest news site for the 21st century. Its mission: to help everyone understand our complicated world, so that we can all help shape it. In text, video and audio, our reporters explain politics, policy, world affairs, technology,... Or adopt fusion power. I can get behind that. **DSeid** : In practice de-salinization will play a role. But recall that those plants are expensive (as in $1 billion), so leaving them at half capacity isn’t good. I understand that Australia has a number of shuttered plants, because they became too expensive to run after the rains returned. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2015, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/155 "2015-04-19T12:55:06Z")
> [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](#): > > Five minute showers wouldn’t faze me, but how do you wash dishes without rinsing them? We’ve had threads on this. Apparently it is a thing. ---
**Author:** ![drachillix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/48db29/32.png) [@drachillix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drachillix)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2015, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/156 "2015-06-16T22:44:54Z")
> [@Lamar\_Mundane](#): > > It’s not really a national problem. California and Arizona and Las Vegas have to get their shit together. I read somewhere recently that California (at least parts of it) have never had mandatory watering restrictions. Fresno has been on the front lines of this fight for decades. Restrictions on car washing, lawn watering, etc with hefty fines and aggressive enforcement. We actually have water dept people running around and citing people for watering during restricted times. There are tons of billboards, commercials, and other signage promoting water conservation. I am surprised we have not seen any of the “if its yellow” kind of stuff. I just recently started doing that myself as I can see where skipping a few flushes a day x 700,000 people adds up in a hurry. [http://www.fresno.gov/Government/DepartmentDirectory/PublicUtilities/Watermanagement/Conservation/default.htm](http://www.fresno.gov/Government/DepartmentDirectory/PublicUtilities/Watermanagement/Conservation/default.htm) It has actually hit crisis levels in at least one town. Porterville, CA has had several city well bottom out to where there is no functional water service to some parts of the town. The city has set up large tanks for residents to tap off of for bathing and clothes washing. > **[East Porterville Residents Without Water As Wells Go Dry During California...](https://www.cbsnews.com/sacramento/news/porterville-residents-without-water-as-wells-go-dry-during-california-drought/)** > > "We can't shower. We're wearing dirty clothes. My kids had to wear dirty clothes to school this morning," said Elizabeth Baker. "I had to go across the street last night to get water for my kids from the fire department." Its an old article but it is an ongoing and growing problem. ---
**Author:** ![Razncain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@Razncain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Razncain)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2015, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/157 "2015-06-17T19:12:58Z")
> [@razncain](#): > > Wichita Falls, TX and surrounding area is also in dire straights, and has been for some time now. Had major flooding in 2007 and 2008, but have had annual below average rainfall ever since. Stage 5 water restriction for about a year, with combined lake levels around 20%. Had conservation measures not been in place, we would have already been completely dry, so that has helped considerably. Things still look bleak though, we probably have more people moving out than ever before due to this. There is no lake activity any more in these parts. Kind of makes for a depressing mood year after year and makes summer not near as much fun. We’ve tried most everything, some things the city has done right, other things just plain stupid. Desperate people do desperate things. That was my post #18 in this thread. What a difference the month of May made. Our local meteorologist, Ken Johnson, summed it up best, we replaced one natural disaster (extreme drought) with another natural disaster (flooding). Now all of our major lakes are 100% filled up, and have been going over the spillway for some three weeks, and will continue to do so for a good while longer. They said this is enough water to last our area for at least the next 10 years, even if we didn’t receive another drop of rain. Here is [water data for TX](http://waterdatafortexas.org/reservoirs/statewide) on what percentage its lake levels are at. This [cite](http://mashable.com/2015/05/30/35-trillion-gallons-texas-floods/) is a figure I have been hearing a bit lately, which says that TX for the month of May received 35 trillion gallons of water. That’s enough to cover the entire state a depth of 8”, they said. It has certainly turned the mood of this town around for the better, despite the flooding, hail, tornadoes, etc, we’ll gladly take it. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Lowry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e95f7d/32.png) [@Sam\_Lowry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Lowry)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2015, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245/158 "2015-06-18T18:27:20Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > More seriously, [Greywater - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greywater) > > It’s different from blackwater. You don’t drink it (yet! bwhahahaaha). It’s used for irrigation and in toilets in Europe, Australia and other places that have adopted the International Plumbing Code. > > ETA: That said, in Orange County they go full circle: [http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jan/02/local/me-reclaim2](http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jan/02/local/me-reclaim2) As \*\*razncain \*\* mentioned, Wichita Falls, Texas isn’t under drought conditions anymore, but [has been working on a plant to process wastewater back for reuse](http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2014/02/26/texas-city-working-to-turn-sewer-water-into-tap-water/): > [@](#): > > “This reuse system will put five million gallons [of water] back in the distribution system a day,” explained Mayor Glenn Barham. “So, it saves us taking five million gallons out of the lake.” > > The city, no stranger to droughts, started planning for the water to run out about two years ago. A plan which had years earlier been previously suggested, and dropped, was now back on the table: take water straight from the waste treatment facility and send it to the water treatment plant for extra cleaning, and then distribution into the water system. > > Now there’s a big black pipe that snakes through town connecting the city’s waste water facility to the water treatment plant. Currently the city is in the process of completing 45 days of testing. They send the results to the state environmental quality department. Once there the department will take 30 days to decide whether the water is safe enough to put directly into the tap. > > The program could go online as early as April. As far as the testing is concerned — folks there say so far, so good. I wouldn’t be surprised if some California towns started trying similar programs. > [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](#): > > Five minute showers wouldn’t faze me, but how do you wash dishes without rinsing them? I read something the other day about a California restaurant setting up some sort of an air compressor to use to pre-clean dishes before putting them in a dishwasher, and that it saved tons of water. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/water/715245.md?page=7)