California's water challenge

[WATU2]

It really would be nice if we could all stop thinking and working together as a society and just let short term market self interest drive all our societal decisions, but reality keeps intruding. Economics has long identified some of the limits; one in particular is the concept of the Tragedy of the Commons which is now playing out in California. Water has replaced the grass of the English commons, but that's the only change. Agricultural interests have prevented regulation of water supplies (unlike every other state), so water was considered 'free" leading more and more people to tap into it. The same as putting more and more sheep into the 'free' grass of the village common. Eventually the grass is over grazed and the sheep die. Or in this case the water is overused and crops fail.

The "market" is fine as far as it goes, but when prices do not reflect the true long term costs, societal action should intervene of make sure those costs are considered.

PS Each almond requires more than a gallon to water to reach maturity? Yikes.

California's Wet Dream

 

[WATU2]

More on Short Term thinking...may require free registration on McKinsey & Co site.

Chairman of Blackrock on Short Termism

 

[lawpoke87]

Sounds like it's time to stop growing water thirsty crops like almonds in the California desert.

 

[TUMe]

This is obviously a real problem. It has always been a problem and as stated when surface water runs short ground water has been the back up. Now the problem has grown more severe the back up doesn't cover it either. We are being told, correctly, that nuts, fruits, berries, and vegetables are good for us. Several members of that list are water hungry. But also, Las Vegas, in the dessert is a huge drain on the surface water from Lake Mead. That lake was last at capacity in 1983.

Lets look for the root cause of the problem. These villainous crops are not just sold, they are eaten...by people. People go to a city in the dessert and watch pretty water shows at casinos. People go to the dessert because of allergies then plant lawns and trees and still have allergies. There are or were more swimming pools in Los Angeles than in Chicago. Many things exist in the dessert that logic would say should not.

But that, by itself is still not the root cause. Most people dodge the real problem. It's is too many people. Yes, management can help and a fairer allocation is vital. A couple of rainy years would easy the problem. Again, as the one article talks about, short term. California seemed a paradise 50-60 years ago [albeit one which will always be effected by droughts.]

Three hundred and fifty million Americans have to eat as do 7+ billion people on this planet and many are "out there having fun in the warm California Sun." Almonds are pretty good nutritionally, the fact is proteins and fats come from plant sources as do minerals. But ban Almonds and the problem is still there. We have ignored this problem for generations. It's the population explosion. We probably can't solve it, but the planet can. There were too many dinosaurs.

 

[TUMe]

Furthermore, the article includes the obligatory remarks about global warming. [Of course if global warming is caused by people then more people means more warming.] But water problems in California are not a new problem. Steinbeck's East of Eden has a nice discussion about the value of land being determined by water and the destructive power of droughts. It's set between 1900 and the end of World War I and refers to it as an old problem. He was born is Salinas in 1902 and should have known of where he speaks. The "Salad Bowl of the World" averages 12 to 13 inches of rain a year.

Man can cheat nature for awhile with damming the Colorado River and tapping groundwater but in the end he delays and doesn't stop problems from ever increasing water use.

.
This post was edited on 4/6 6:26 PM by TUMe

 

[rabidTU]

Bingo! When you populate a desert with almost 40,000,000 people, there might be a problem with drinking water at some distant point. Duh!

 

[noble cane]

California is such an interesting place...

They are dying of thirst and yet their environmental lobby wont let them build more dams and create more reservoirs in the Sierra Nevada to store more of the snow pack runoff...

I enjoy the time I spend in Napa every year.. I am always amazed by the lip service the left leaning vintners pay to the whole "sustainable" farming culture while at the same time they are digging up the hillsides and planting more and more vines in areas previously considered unsuitable for agriculture... but the terroir in those areas make some damn good wine for the 1 percent.

 

[lawpoke87]

Las Vegas is in at least as bad if not worse shape then California. Water is about to get expensive on the west coast.

 

[TUMe]

They say residential use is 53% outdoors and 47% indoors. Seems maybe farming should get priority. You can't eat your lawn, your trees and shrubs, or your swimming pool. Besides, agriculture is a great first job for illegals.

 

[TUBballJunkie]

Originally posted by WATU2:
PS Each almond requires more than a gallon to water to reach maturity? Yikes.

That is kind of insane.

 

[TUMe]

Some interesting facts.

An almond tree requires 30-33 inches of rain a year. Many of the growing areas is California average 12-17 inches/yr.

About 60%l of the worlds almonds come from California where they were not native.

California has for years used more than it's assigned quota of Colorado River water with the consent of the other states involved. These states are now wanting to reclaim their full quota.

 

[Clong83a]

Originally posted by TUMe:
Some interesting facts.

An almond tree requires 30-33 inches of rain a year. Many of the growing areas is California average 12-17 inches/yr.

About 60%l of the worlds almonds come from California where they were not native.

California has for years used more than it's assigned quota of Colorado River water with the consent of the other states involved. These states are now wanting to reclaim their full quota.

"Water, water, water....There is no shortage of
water in the desert but exactly the right amount , a perfect ratio of
water to rock, water to sand, insuring that wide free open, generous
spacing among plants and animals, homes and towns and cities, which
makes the arid West so different from any other part of the nation.
There is no lack of water here unless you try to establish a city where
no city should be."
- Ed Abbey

I lived in San Diego for a few years. The truth is, without agriculture, there is probably more than enough water for people to go about their daily lives. Ag uses something like 80% of the water in the state.

I always resented that I was asked to make significant sacrifices in my water usage. Things like not watering the grass, not washing my car, not flushing pee in the toilet, and turning the water off in the shower while I was lathering, etc, etc. And yet there was no pressure on agriculture to change anything, and they kept on planting high-water intensive crops. I get that the soil out there is essentially magic, and almost anything will grow. But it angered me to no end that almond trees were continually being planted and the farmers were essentially looking to me, and saying "Hey! Stop using all our water! Why do you need to flush the toilet when you pee, anyways?"

One major reservoir, the Salton Sea, was created early in the 20th century when the Colorado River flooded, jumped its banks and then it actually fully changed course and ran into southern California. It was a fascinating thing, certainly once-in-a-lifetime, for a major river to fully change its course in a major way. My memory is spotty on the details, but I think it took the engineers a few months to divert the river back to its original course. It was actually a major impetus for building the Hoover dam, to try and prevent that sort of thing in the future. Meanwhile, an ENORMOUS inland 'sea' filled up, and is still there to this day. But it wasn't there before and it will probably disappear again within my lifetime. I don't see anything wrong with this, it is the natural order of things. The people who study such things believe the Colorado should naturally oscillate between its current track, and a track through southern California once every few hundred years. So on a millenium-level time scale, the Salton Sea is a giant intermittent pond. The inland farmers there have had a great ride the last hundred years, and refuse to believe that the general way of life of there involves a barren, water-less landscape.

 

[TUMe]

Originally posted by Clong83a:

I lived in San Diego for a few years. The truth is, without agriculture, there is probably more than enough water for people to go about their daily lives. Ag uses something like 80% of the water in the state.

I always resented that I was asked to make significant sacrifices in my water usage. Things like not watering the grass, not washing my car, not flushing pee in the toilet, and turning the water off in the shower while I was lathering, etc, etc. And yet there was no pressure on agriculture to change anything, and they kept on planting high-water intensive crops. I get that the soil out there is essentially magic, and almost anything will grow. But it angered me to no end that almond trees were continually being planted and the farmers were essentially looking to me, and saying "Hey! Stop using all our water! Why do you need to flush the toilet when you pee, anyways?"





I agree that almonds are a tough case to make. However, agriculture on a wider scale is actually producing something needed and valuable. Neither agriculture nor cities seem completely logical in dessert. But your lawn produces neither something that people eat nor revenue. Many arid states have rock yards. People do manage to live without swimming pools. When plans were made for the Hoover Dam, they used as a base period the 1920's which was far from typical in rainfall from the last 500-1200 years.

With respect to water, California is like someone who starts with a checking account and each year withdraws more than he deposits. I like San Diego from the few trips that I have made. I love almonds. Can you imagine Peter Paul Peanut Joy? Vegas is neat. But like someone who is now overdrawn at the bank all three have to make sacrifices.

Finally, it is California's and Vega's problem. We've got tornadoes and a crisis in the oil industry. Coal areas are facing their problems. Arkansas has a lot of chickens but they are polluting our scenic rivers and creeks.

 

[Clong83a]

Thankfully, I don't live there anymore. I am still in a desert, but people here are more practical and I don't know anyone in town that does something as foolish as keep a lawn.

I don't want to obliterate the CA agriculural industry. I recognize that it adds a lot of value to the state and nation as a whole, and that the state wants to preserve it. But I also think its current form is untenable.

I was always amenable to reasonable requests to conserve water. I didn't wash my car. I didn't plant a lawn. I took short showers and installed low-flow fixtures. But I was constantly asked to use less. When you start to get things in the mail asking you to voluntarily not flush your pee, it is hard not to look out at your neighbor's lawn or pool, the golf courses, and the massive Ag industry and think, "Bull". They are trying to squeeze blood from a stone.

If the drought and water shortage is really that severe
(And I believe it is), then EVERYONE should make sacrifices. I won't stop flushing the toilet so
some guy can refill his pool, an almond farm can expand a couple
acres, or a golf course can keep their fairways green. I would do it for the common good if the state really got serious and asked EVERYONE to make meaningful sacrifices, and not just people like me that they feel they can bully around.

How about mandating all new toilets sold in CA have two flush options? One lower flow option for pee, and a "normal" flush for number 2? If not a mandate, how about giving a generous tax credit for installing one? This is the kind of thing they should do if they are really serious. The results from something like that would be far better than the water savings they get from some 1% of the state voluntarily not flushing their pee.

 

[TUMe]

Originally posted by Clong83a:
Thankfully, I don't live there anymore. I am still in a desert, but people here are more practical and I don't know anyone in town that does something as foolish as keep a lawn.

I don't want to obliterate the CA agriculural industry. I recognize that it adds a lot of value to the state and nation as a whole, and that the state wants to preserve it. But I also think its current form is untenable.

I was always amenable to reasonable requests to conserve water. I didn't wash my car. I didn't plant a lawn. I took short showers and installed low-flow fixtures. But I was constantly asked to use less. When you start to get things in the mail asking you to voluntarily not flush your pee, it is hard not to look out at your neighbor's lawn or pool, the golf courses, and the massive Ag industry and think, "Bull". They are trying to squeeze blood from a stone.

If the drought and water shortage is really that severe
(And I believe it is), then EVERYONE should make sacrifices. I won't stop flushing the toilet so
some guy can refill his pool, an almond farm can expand a couple
acres, or a golf course can keep their fairways green. I would do it for the common good if the state really got serious and asked EVERYONE to make meaningful sacrifices, and not just people like me that they feel they can bully around.

How about mandating all new toilets sold in CA have two flush options? One lower flow option for pee, and a "normal" flush for number 2? If not a mandate, how about giving a generous tax credit for installing one? This is the kind of thing they should do if they are really serious. The results from something like that would be far better than the water savings they get from some 1% of the state voluntarily not flushing their pee.

Good post. Sounds pretty balanced to me.

 

[WATU2]

Another example of the market not pricing in the long term costs.. The almonds are a good example of the wealth and political power created by purchasing an under priced resource. When the market ignores the long term costs of a natural resource, the result is an exhausted resource, pollution, higher prices, or other forms of environmental damage.

In the short term we benefit by ignoring these costs via lower prices, but those long term costs are either irreversible, incredibly expensive to remediate later, or both..Think Wiley Coyote running off a cliff and being suspended mid-air as he realizes what's going to happen next.

 

[lawpoke87]

I look for desalinization plants to begin to come online. Hopefully better techology will accompany these facilities. The price of California agriculture is certainly going up.

 

[2PoorTUFans]

Originally posted by lawpoke87:
I look for desalinization plants to begin to come online. Hopefully better techology will accompany these facilities. The price of California agriculture is certainly going up.

Desalination is just waiting for more efficient power sources at this point. If Lockheed is serious about being under a decade away from a viable fusion reactor, then say goodbye to all water shortages forever.

 

[Clong83a]

Other thoughts (not revolving around toilets) I've often thought about this:

CA has not always had these water problems (at least not this bad), and a lot of high-water usage farmers have been there since before the most recent drought. I'm not sure how long rice paddy farmers have to go at it before turning a profit, but I know an almond tree takes years to reach adulthood and become profitable. The thought has occurred to me that a number of farmers may be willing to get out of that game, but can't. It's not a light-hearted decision to plow under a 20-year old investment that is not easily replaced on a gamble of some other crop you have little experience with. So why not have the state give some incentives for high-water crop farmers to switch to something less water-intensive? Guarantee their farm revenue at $Z% for a $Y-year period at its previous level, as long as water usage is cut by $X%. Just give farmers the time to bring along new crops and build experience with them without fear of going bankrupt. A buyout of sorts. There might be a lot of farmers that would welcome a chance.

 

[TUBballJunkie]

Interesting discussion.

So are almonds heavily subsidized? I know they aren't cheap but it really doesn't seem like they are priced accurately?

 

[WATU2]

Almonds mispriced and actaully pretty cheap because the cost of the enormous amounts of water they need is artfically low.

The real conunfrum for California ( and the rest of us) is that California is a huge producer of the food on our tables and a big driver for the state's economy. Expensive water wiill lead to more expensive food for all of us. Agriculture also uses @80% of Cailfornia's water, so meaningful cut backs on water usage cannot skip agriculture.

 

[aTUfan]

Filling too many swimming pools in Hollywood.

 

[rabidTU]

I kid around with my relatives that live in California about why they still live there and I think its their unrealisitic lifestyle and credit card/high debt mentality. I've been mostly retired for over a decade and most of them are still working their btts off and living paycheck to paycheck in a crappy house and paying for govt they don't need, but want. My cousins are too poor to move their mom (assisted living) to them and she can't afford to live there with the high taxes and "lifestyle" everyone else pays for. Its a real shame. I joke with them that the water problem is payback for the dust bowl days. Who knows, maybe it is.

But I'm waiting for the first ISIS backed governor who would probably win in a landslide. Then he (and it certainly won't be a she) could insititute Sharia, behead all gays and take the drivers licenses away from every female. Thats where they seem to be headed.

 

[WATU2]

Evidently it is not just almonds.

If there is no water, farmers can let wheat, corn, potato and other crop fields go fallow for a year and plant the next. Not so with nut trees. Skip watering them for a year and they die.

Our food, particularly meats, use a lot of water. Here's a list.

Almonds mispriced and actaully pretty cheap because the cost of the enormous amounts of water they need is artfically low.

 

[WATU2]

Agriculture already uses 80% of Cailfornia's water.

They say residential use is 53% outdoors and 47% indoors. Seems maybe farming should get priority. You can't eat your lawn, your trees and shrubs, or your swimming pool. Besides, agriculture is a great first job for illegals.

 

[TUMe]

Agriculture already uses 80% of Cailfornia's water.

There is an extremely popular book called Sapiens by Yuval Noah Harari. The Tulsa Library has a waiting list of about 30 constantly. Although not the main thrust of the book, the author feels that agriculture was where we first went wrong. He is no vegan. He believes that man was much happier as a hunter gatherer. But the Cognitive Revolution began the downfall of the planet long before the Industrial Revolution. Then came fire. You could burn of a forest, eat the animals that got cooked, and then came the Agricultural Revolution. And with fire, things like rice and wheat were much more edible.

Thus begins exploitation. Why should I risk injury killing a dangerous animal or work my back sore with a hoe or plow. I'll make trinkets to sell to those people. Now we got a bigger brain we can dream up religion and some great warrior can tell people that God made him King. The next thing you know the buffalo are almost all gone, George Soros is 7 Billion behind on his taxes, the Koch brothers pick our president, and basketball players make $40 million a year.

Being a sapiens myself, I'm not going to blame the apple [please refer to Genesis] since I like apple pie. Broccoli isn't going to come out as well.

You see we still haven't came that far from serfs an nobles to rich people and influence. The planet was safer where we just needed a bunny rabbit to roast. No taxes, medical care, or budget problems. I doubt there would be 7 billion of us.