Western USA drought worst in modern era

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Interesting article about almonds and water use. The main point is that, while growing them requires a lot of water, they provide more than their share of economic value to the state and nutritional value to consumers. (Disclosure: Our family buys almond milk by the case.) Using water to grow low-value animal feed, however, is another matter.

http://gizmodo.com/seriously-stop-demonizing-almonds-1696065939?google_editors_picks=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
abasile said:
Interesting article about almonds and water use. The main point is that, while growing them requires a lot of water, they provide more than their share of economic value to the state and nutritional value to consumers. (Disclosure: Our family buys almond milk by the case.) Using water to grow low-value animal feed, however, is another matter.
I agree that animal feed, especially water-thirsty alfalfa, is a poor use of water in shortage areas. Here water is used to flood irrigate fields of grass for cows — it is happening now. This is one of the lowest value uses of water that I can think of. Not that sending it to Lakes Powell and Mead to be used to water golf courses in the desert is much better...

I don't much care for your walnuts but I do love almonds!

The snowpack in my local mountains is currently 49% of the thirty year average. Not as bad as California but not all that good either. We need our usual spring rain/snow.


By the way, that gizmodo article is wrong when it says "alfalfa is grass". While it is used for cattle feed it is actually a member of the pea/legume family and not remotely related to grass.
 
dgpcolorado said:
Here water is used to flood irrigate fields of grass for cows — it is happening now. This is one of the lowest value uses of water that I can think of. Not that sending it to Lakes Powell and Mead to be used to water golf courses in the desert is much better...
Not being a golfer, I'm not personally interested in desert golf courses. However, seeing as how a great many "snowbirds" are attracted by nice golf courses in the desert, those courses probably have substantial economic value. Maybe they don't need to be kept emerald green all summer long, though. And the surrounding vegetation need not be water hungry.

Reshaping the natural environment to benefit human beings is quite often a good thing, provided the value derived from so doing is balanced against the environmental costs. The concern is that our current water policies are not sufficient to achieve the balance we need. It's too easy and cheap to grow alfalfa, for instance.

dgpcolorado said:
By the way, that gizmodo article is wrong when it says "alfalfa is grass". While it is used for cattle feed it is actually a member of the pea/legume family and not remotely related to grass.
Thanks for pointing that out!
 
What are we running out of right now that will take care of every human being on the planet long before we reach 2025? Live soil and clean water. What's the relationship between live soil and clean water? They're really one and the same. If you don't have this biology in the soil most of the nutrients wash out of the soil and end up in your drinking water. In the state of Iowa there are no wells that you can drink directly from because they are so high in nitrate and atrazine and Round-Up concentrations. And that's spreading throughout the western United States. I was just at a conference in Burlington, Colorado and when you went to the kitchen or went to the bathroom there were signs posted all over that said "don't drink the water" because it's so high in nitrates. Drink this water and you will no longer have kidneys left...

Lack of clean water is what's going to take us out, not lack of food. So get our priorities right.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXBIxFAxtlQ[/youtube]
 
I may have posted this before, or elsewhere, but I encourage anyone who's interested in soil and loves a good documentary (with great music*) to check out at least the trailer of "Symphony of the Soil" (.com). I'm not sure why it's not on Netflix or Amazon Prime, but you can stream it on vimeo or buy a DVD. Caveat: after watching, you may be even more depressed and/or angry at what "we" have done and are doing to living earth with our chemicals. :-\ :evil: "Why??????!!" :?: :!: :?:


* Aside from her own amazing accomplishments (including directing 2004's The Future of Food), the writer, director and producer is a certain/one-of-a-kind musician's widow...
 
abasile said:
Reshaping the natural environment to benefit human beings is quite often a good thing, provided the value derived from so doing is balanced against the environmental costs. The concern is that our current water policies are not sufficient to achieve the balance we need. It's too easy and cheap to grow alfalfa, for instance.
I don't disagree in principle. Can anyone cite a program, project, or other 'reshaping' that accounts for externalities and even gets within say 80% of balancing the environmental costs?
 
Hi Andy,

AndyH said:
What are we running out of right now that will take care of every human being on the planet long before we reach 2025? Live soil and clean water. What's the relationship between live soil and clean water? They're really one and the same. If you don't have this biology in the soil most of the nutrients wash out of the soil and end up in your drinking water. In the state of Iowa there are no wells that you can drink directly from because they are so high in nitrate and atrazine and Round-Up concentrations. And that's spreading throughout the western United States. I was just at a conference in Burlington, Colorado and when you went to the kitchen or went to the bathroom there were signs posted all over that said "don't drink the water" because it's so high in nitrates. Drink this water and you will no longer have kidneys left...

Lack of clean water is what's going to take us out, not lack of food. So get our priorities right.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXBIxFAxtlQ[/youtube]

Thanks for posting - I will watch this. A point (that I hope she makes) is that when we use synthetic fertilizers and insecticides, etc. this kills off the natural bacterial and fungus etc. and this hurts the soil's ability to absorb water.
 
AndyH said:
I don't disagree in principle. Can anyone cite a program, project, or other 'reshaping' that accounts for externalities and even gets within say 80% of balancing the environmental costs?
Damnation and "militant greenies" be damned, I think a lot of dams have been well worth the environmental costs, especially since they often provide some environmental benefits in addition to their human ones. Most create new habitats for all variety of flora and fauna, as well as providing low-cost and carbon-free energy, irrigation and drinking water, and recreational lakes for humans.

It's very hard to measure value, isn't it? Especially when opposing parties have different ones. The power from Grand Coulee, for example, arguably helped win World War II for US. How valuable was that? Some might say 'priceless'.
 
abasile said:
Interesting article about almonds and water use. The main point is that, while growing them requires a lot of water, they provide more than their share of economic value to the state and nutritional value to consumers. (Disclosure: Our family buys almond milk by the case.) Using water to grow low-value animal feed, however, is another matter.

http://gizmodo.com/seriously-stop-demonizing-almonds-1696065939?google_editors_picks=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I usually prefer hemp milk. Not the sickly sweet stuff that gets put out, just plain unsweetened. Nothing better with oatmeal!

And it doesn't take a lot of water to grow weeds :)
 
NeilBlanchard said:
Hi Andy,

AndyH said:
What are we running out of right now that will take care of every human being on the planet long before we reach 2025? Live soil and clean water. What's the relationship between live soil and clean water? They're really one and the same. If you don't have this biology in the soil most of the nutrients wash out of the soil and end up in your drinking water. In the state of Iowa there are no wells that you can drink directly from because they are so high in nitrate and atrazine and Round-Up concentrations. And that's spreading throughout the western United States. I was just at a conference in Burlington, Colorado and when you went to the kitchen or went to the bathroom there were signs posted all over that said "don't drink the water" because it's so high in nitrates. Drink this water and you will no longer have kidneys left...

Lack of clean water is what's going to take us out, not lack of food. So get our priorities right.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXBIxFAxtlQ[/youtube]

Thanks for posting - I will watch this. A point (that I hope she makes) is that when we use synthetic fertilizers and insecticides, etc. this kills off the natural bacterial and fungus etc. and this hurts the soil's ability to absorb water.
Yessir - I think you'll enjoy the piece. :) I tracked down a couple of the Dr's papers and I'm looking forward to the rest of the videos from this presentation.

I have videos of a 2005 Permaculture class taught by Bill Mollison and Geoff Lawton in Australia and they reported that the world over it's almost impossible to find pure ground water 'today'. That's one of the reasons Permaculture teaches rainwater harvesting. I wonder if anyone's done widespread water sampling to create a 'pollution map' of the US?

[This is my number one problem as I keep learning: Either because of how vast the damage is, or because of what I'm calling 'adult onset ADD' ;), I'm having a very challenging time trying to figure out which problem should be tackled first...especially since they're all intertwined. There aren't enough hours in the day to learn and work on all of them, and groundwater testing isn't cheap. :( ]

edit...typos...ok, class - how many 'p's in 'papers'?...nope, waaaaay too many!
 
Nubo said:
I usually prefer hemp milk. Not the sickly sweet stuff that gets put out, just plain unsweetened. Nothing better with oatmeal!

And it doesn't take a lot of water to grow weeds :)
Sounds good to me. I'm not sure I've seen the unsweetened variety in stores, though. Might take some hunting.
 
U.S. The Parched West

Mighty Rio Grande Now a Trickle Under Siege


FABENS, Tex. — On maps, the mighty Rio Grande meanders 1,900 miles, from southern Colorado’s San Juan Mountains to the Gulf of Mexico. But on the ground, farms and cities drink all but a trickle before it reaches the canal that irrigates Bobby Skov’s farm outside El Paso, hundreds of miles from the gulf.

Now, shriveled by the historic drought that has consumed California and most of the Southwest, that trickle has become a moist breath.

“It’s been progressively worse” since the early 2000s, Mr. Skov said during a pickup-truck tour of his spread last week, but he said his farm would muddle through — if the trend did not continue. “The jury’s out on that,” he said.

Drought’s grip on California grabs all the headlines. But from Texas to Arizona to Colorado, the entire West is under siege by changing weather patterns that have shrunk snowpacks, raised temperatures, spurred evaporation and reduced reservoirs to record lows.

In a region that has replumbed entire river systems to build cities and farms where they would not otherwise flourish, the drought is a historic challenge, and perhaps an enduring one. Many scientists say this is the harbinger of the permanently drier and hotter West that global warming will deliver later this century. If so, the water-rationing order issued this month by Gov. Jerry Brown of California could be merely a sign of things to come...

Across the West, the water shortages plaguing farmers and townspeople alike share many of the same causes. Like the Sacramento River in California and the Colorado River in the Rockies, the Rio Grande gets much of its flow from melting mountain snow — and snowpacks are getting smaller, and melting faster.

Rising temperatures are the reason. The federal Bureau of Reclamation, which manages much water in the West, reported in 2013 that average temperatures in the upper Rio Grande, in Colorado and New Mexico, rose almost 2.8 degrees during the 40 years ending in 2011 — and could rise an additional four to six degrees by 2100.

The 40-year increase, twice the global average, was beyond anything seen in the last 11,300 years. Future warming “has the potential to cause significant environmental harm and change the region’s hydrology,” the bureau’s analysis stated.

A warming climate turns some snow into rain and increases the evaporation and melting rate of what snow remains. And as drought worsens, dust and soot from parched soil and burning forests coat the snow and absorb sunlight, turbocharging the melting...
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/13/us/mighty-rio-grande-now-a-trickle-under-siege.html?_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
NeilBlanchard said:
This video series popped up while I watched the video above:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svNg5w7WY0k&index=1&list=PLCeA6DzL9P4vhMbHjDUmL2hlEPMssyL1i

You will be amazed watching this - it is like a whole TED conference rolled into one, and it's down homey, and no production values.
:)

Add this to your list, then - is a 2002 doc from the BBC. It's amazing what we can learn from people that were improving the environment many years before Christ. ;)

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Os-ujelkgw[/youtube]

This is a must-read article if you're interested in this. The 'biochar' word has been used for a number of different products, including 'activated charcoal' designed for remediation. The product used to make Terra Preta isn't the same.

http://www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/lehmann/publ/Nature 447, 143-144, 2007 Lehmann.pdf
http://www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/lehmann/publ/NatureCommunications 1, 56, 2010 Woolf.pdf
http://www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/... 56, 2010 Woolf supplementary information.pdf

This stuff holds water and nutrients very well and it's very easy to make.
 
LOS ANGELES—Cities and water districts serving 19 million people in Southern California face smaller water deliveries this summer under a plan approved by the region’s water wholesaler in response to ongoing dry conditions.

The Metropolitan Water District, which supplies water to more than two dozen agencies, voted Tuesday to slash regional water deliveries by 15% as California grapples with a fourth year of drought...
http://www.wsj.com/articles/california-water-supplier-cuts-summer-deliveries-1429044013" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Cutbacks, which as the comment below points out, really make no sense from an market economics point of view:

California’s Water Woes Are Priceless

A case study in how politics precludes a rational solution to the problem of drought.

By
Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.

California’s drought is frightful and a challenge for an 800-word column, since the problem can be solved in five words: charge realistic prices for water.

If homeowners paid two pennies a gallon instead of 0.5, they might take shorter showers and be more parsimonious with their lawns, but their lives wouldn’t change materially. If farmers found it remunerative to reduce by one gallon the 3.5 it takes to grow a lettuce, who doubts they’d make it work...
http://www.wsj.com/articles/california-water-supplier-cuts-summer-deliveries-1429044013" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Which of course is correct, in the short term.

But, since homeowners will always outbid farmers for water, the inevitable result of rationalizing the Western USA water market, will be what many would argue is the most irrational result of encouraging millions of more people to build homes in a the (quite possibly expanding) Southwest desert.

For those interested in relative economic water use within agriculture, see the chart at the link below:

We have compiled a table to help answer questions on which crops use the most water and which crops provide the most economic “pop per drop.”

The estimates are very broad because California is so diverse in crop varieties, agricultural practices and local water availability. But the numbers are still useful for comparison purposes.

Note that the amount of water applied to a crop – “gross use” – is not the same as its “net use,” as some of that water seeps underground and replenishes aquifers or is reused downstream.

Some observations about the data:
Vegetables and horticulture (garden plants) have the highest revenues per net water use. They account for nearly 86 percent of all crop revenue, but occupy only 47 percent of the irrigated cropland and use just 38 percent of the water applied to that land.
Fruits and nuts are grown on about one-third of the irrigated cropland and use one-third of the water, but produce nearly 45 percent of the total crop revenue.
Alfalfa, corn irrigated pasture and other livestock fodder account for nearly 37 percent of all net water crop use, but produce less than 7 percent of total crop revenue. However, the ranches and dairies that depend on these foodstuffs generate more than 22 percent of California’s agricultural production value, which totaled $45 billion in 2012.
Rice fields use a lot of water but also provide important bird habitat.

Josué Medellín-Azuara is a senior researcher and Jay Lund is a professor of civil and environmental engineering with the UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences.
http://californiawaterblog.com/2015/04/14/dollars-and-drops-per-crop-in-california/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
Does anyone think that 'economics' is a useful lens through which to analyze and hopefully solve any state's water crisis?
 
Almonds again - from today's Here and Now.

http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2015/04/15/almonds-water-use
Not All Almonds Are Equal When It Comes To Water Use

In light of the critical nature of soil, note the part of the conversation where farmers are consciously irrigating with water known to be damaging soil and crops... If that's not a proper example of "insanity" I don't know what is. :(
 
Seems like the market will sort this out. If almonds take too much water to grow and that water is either unavailable or too expensive, there will be some combination of rising almond prices, declining demand/consumption, almonds being grown elsewhere, or engineering new sources of water (which would also increase the prices). It won't happen all at once and it won't be an almond emergency, unless you have an Almond Joy addiction or you make your living growing almonds
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
Seems like the market will sort this out. If almonds take too much water to grow and that water is either unavailable or too expensive, there will be some combination of rising almond prices, declining demand/consumption, almonds being grown elsewhere, or engineering new sources of water (which would also increase the prices). It won't happen all at once and it won't be an almond emergency, unless you have an Almond Joy addiction or you make your living growing almonds
Fixed that for you. :lol:

Considering that economics assumes an infinite supply of water, an infinite number of customers, and an infinite planet, while all that you said "could" happen, it would turn the ship of food in exactly the opposite direction. The problem is NOT almonds - the problem is annual agriculture. Tree crops are permanent, sequester carbon, require very low chemical inputs, and produce very nutrient dense foods. On a dollar per nutrient basis, nuts are the cheapest foods on the planet. The problem with almonds isn't the almond - it's the concept of 'orchard' and thus how the plants are managed.
 
Back
Top