I may be over-simplifying this but (re: Water Shortages)

[maxrandb]

but is it time that we began thinking of a "Strategic Water Reserve"? I'm not sure how it would work, but it seems that there could be better things to do with all that snow in the Northeast than just plowing it into the ocean or the bay?

Science was never one of my strong subjects, but I guess that most rain and snow eventually works it's way into the aquifers, or is evaporated and gets back into the atmosphere, but it seems like there are areas that have too much rain, snow, etc., and other areas that have too little. If we could somehow capture the excess in one area and use in another, it would seem to make sense.

We have a strategic oil reserve, maybe it's time for a strategic water reserve. You can't drink oil.

[panader0]

1. If they can build this for oil, they could build on for water.

Even if it had a leak, no harm would be done.

[drm604]

7. I don't think that this could be done for the needed amounts of water.

They'd have to pump a lot more water than they do oil. Think about the huge amounts that are used to irrigate crops. I wish this was the answer, but I don't think it is.

[snooper2]

2. As long as we are smart and build the reserve somewhere up North..

So the water can flow downhill to the south/southwest when we need it...

[NM_Birder]

12. LOL<

unless they were all built at the Equator, then water flows down, and North at the same time LOL !

[Yo_Mama]

19. Good one!!! n/t

[hack89]

3. That snow is so dirty that it would be be very expensive to purify.

as a matter of law, it is illegal to dump snow into the bays and rivers due to environmental concerns.

[maxrandb]

5. Understood

but I saw that they were either doing just that in Boston, or at least contemplating doing that.

Couldn't it be cleaned enough to use as gray water for crops, laundry, showers, flushing, etc.,?

As a Navy guy, I can tell you there's nothing quite like a saltwater shower ;o)

[hack89]

6. Who would pay for it?

New England doesn't need the water. Will it be the Federal government picking up the tab or the states that would be using the water? Because it would be expensive as hell.

[maxrandb]

10. I believe the 1%

have some untapped revenue that might be able to be taxed, but again, I was just riffing. Have no idea if it's a good idea, is workable, or could be paid for, but it seems that water shortage is going to be a huge, potential life changing problem if folks don't start doing some "riffing" about it.

[jwirr]

13. If I am not mistaken that is why the dams in the west were built in the first place but not there

Last edited Mon Mar 16, 2015, 01:38 PM - Edit history (1)

is not enough snow/rain to fill them.

[KamaAina]

21. "Damns"?!

Freudian Post o' the Week!

[jwirr]

24. LOL Did not look at what I was typing.

[world wide wally]

4. That would be too logical for Republicans to get a handle on.

The only solution they might respond to might be a tax cut for the wealthy.

[hobbit709]

8. Adopting less wasteful crop watering would help a lot.

Or less water intensive crops in some areas.. Here in TX there are rice farmers complaining about not getting enough water to grow rice in an area that averages just over 30 inches of rain a year.
Anyone that tries to grow rice in a semi-desert is an idiot.

[jwirr]

14. Absolutely - land useage is an important factor in this.

[KamaAina]

22. Thank you.

Rice is grown in northern California as well. And cotton in Arizona!!

[DetlefK]

9. some thoughts

1. Are you talking about (any) water or drinking-water? What is the difference? I little bit of fracking-fluid.

2. You can't just reroute large amounts of water from one place to another: Rivers and lakes are a naturally occuring infrastructure that human infrastructure was built around. If you mess with the water, you mess with a delicate equilibrium.

3. You will need HUGE basins to catch the excess rain-water. That means space and money.

4. You are talking about California, right? California is largely desert-area. It was unsuitable for agriculture or as a metropolitan center and the massive use of water allowed to build this illusion. Now California is reverting to its "natural" state. The real solution would be policies that curb water-consumption. (Seawater-desalination is too expensive. Unpractical at this large scale.)

[maxrandb]

11. Spent some time in the San Jaquin Valley

while I was with the Navy. Folks that have never been to that region would be shocked at the amount of food around their table that comes from that valley.

CA actually did a pretty good job of building an aqueduct system move water around, and actually allow the central valley in CA to produce more cotton (for example) than any southern state could dream of.

The CA Aqueduct system is really an engineering marvel. It takes water from the Sierra Nevada Mountains and delivers it to central and southern CA. It turned an area like Lemoore, and Kern County into agricultural meccas where there was once nothing but desert.

[jwirr]

15. No one is disputing what a marvelous thing they did but the climate has changed all across the

country. The SE including California now have a drought problem and they are not even getting the water in the Sierra Nevada Mountains anymore. The arid regions are also becoming larger and here in MN we often see less snow than they get in the east. We are going to have to find ways to adjust.

I was told by South Dakota natives that their land was never suitable for farming in the first place. Running a herd of cattle maybe but corn farming - not. They based this on the climate patterns that have existed in that area for centuries. There are periotic droughts that make permanent farming an economic gamble every year. Today that drought has been around for quite a while and shows no sign of leaving.

As to the food on our table from California. Yes, unfortunately we have allowed them to put all of our eggs in one basket. Unless we start to produce more locally grown food we are all going to be hurt (by shortages and higher prices).

[B2G]

20. Haven't they reduced the flow to the west side

by like 80% because the delta smelt were suffering?

Maybe it's time to rethink that?

[hunter]

16. Global warming and climate change is relentless.

Sooner or later, even here in the U.S.A., we are going to have to figure out a way to gently and justly relocate entire communities BEFORE disaster strikes.

Once a community is smashed to splinters by surging waters and dead bodies are washing up on the beaches, or people are starving and dying of heat and thirst, it's too late.

Repeating the horrors of U.S.A. "Dust Bowl" migrations would be unconscionable.

A migratory family from Texas living in a trailer in an open field

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust_Bowl

[GreatGazoo]

17. "Reduce" comes first on the strategies for surviving climate change

It is the most cost effective part of the approach.

In the northeast we are trending to "extreme rain events" meaning that we may get the same amount of rain or only a little more but it will come in deluges creating other problems. The jetstream increasingly has less of a west to east pattern and more of north to south jag. This means we get longer durations for heat waves, rain events and cold spells.

Farming will face many new challenges going forward.

[greatlaurel]

18. The problem with water in Cal, is the public financing of the welfare queen agriculture industry.

Pumping water from the Northeast to California would use tremendous amounts of energy. The problem with California is that most water is used for irrigation of crops in a desert climate. This is incredibly wasteful and foolish in the long term. Irrigation leads to the destruction of the soil by salt deposition. It is already a problem in California and other areas. To prevent the accumulation of salt on irrigated lands, the land needs to be flushed with massive amounts of water to wash the salts out and extensive tiling to carry the excess water carrying the salts away. The next biggest user of water is for "environmental" uses which sounds terrible to the average person, but is vital for a number of reasons. The most important reason is to maintain the flow in the rivers, so the salt water from the ocean does not migrate further into the San Joaquin river estuary and infiltrate the groundwater. This has already happened to some extent and a number if water wells have been contaminated with salt water near the mouth of the river. The river needs to maintain flow all the way to the ocean to maintain the native species that are dependent on the river and to maintain water quality for human use. The San Joaquin is now one of the most polluted rivers in the world.

The water issues in California are not going to be solved easily. The entrenched agricultural interests are wealthy and very politically powerful. The agricultural interests are subsidized by the sacrifice of the environment of the San Joaquin and by the massive influx of tax dollars from the state and federal governments. The agricultural interests in California are the ultimate welfare queens.

What needs to done is to stop allowing crops that need intensive irrigation from being grown in desert areas. Growing alfalfa for export to Asia in California using up precious water supplies is absolutely insane. Alfalfa can be grown east of the Mississippi in the corn belt and the Northeast perfectly well. The closed farms and dairies of New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania need to be reopened with government subsidies and it will still be cheaper and more environmentally sound than what is going on in California agriculture.

I would suggest some reading on this issue. The complexities of the water issues in California are vital for every citizen to understand. We need to not allow ridiculous and outrageously expensive water subsidies for the agricultural barons of California.

Here is an interesting blog on water issues in California:
http://californiawaterblog.com/

Here is a link to the Wikipedia article about soil salinity:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil_salinity

The Wikipedia article on the San Joaquin River is very informative:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Joaquin_River

[maxrandb]

23. Thanks. Very informative articles

Once again, it's the short-sightedness of man that is going to bite us in the butt.

We made our own water via desalination plants in the Navy, but the amount of energy to do that makes it almost impractical on a large scale.

America used to come together and tackle problems like this. Thanks to the "CONservative" insurgency, we now have 50% of the population whose primary goal is to ensure we can't come together on anything.

I'm 54. If I make it to 74 I'm declaring "victory"! It's my kids and grandkids that I fear for