Water Wars: Mormons Vs Las Vegas

[BCSpace]

 

Las Vegas is seeking to quench its growing thirst by draining billions of gallons of water from under the feet of ranchers whose cattle help feed the Mormon church's poor.

 

A legal battle across 275 miles of treeless ridges and baked salt flats comes as the western U.S. faces unprecedented droughts linked to climate change.

 

The surface of Las Vegas's main source of water, Lake Mead, is more than 100 feet below Hoover Dam's spillways after reaching the lowest mark last summer since the dam was filled. As it seeks new sources, the city's water supplier is waging a court fight over plans to suck as much as 27 billion gallons a year from the valley that is home to the Mormon ranch and its 1,750-head herd, as well as three other rural valleys.

 

Casino resorts, five of which are Southern Nevada's largest commercial water users, labor unions and the developer of a 22,500-acre mini-city west of Las Vegas argue their future depends on the water supply that the church, Indian tribes and environmental groups say is needed by local communities.

 

The fight, likely to echo across the increasingly arid West, conjures up the Los Angeles water grab that turned the once prosperous Owens Valley into a dust bowl.

 

As cities including Denver and Phoenix look to secure water for growing populations and economies, the prospect of sustained droughts, more severe and sustained than any in the 20th century, looms over Nevada's court battle, with one pipeline opponent calling it the "poster child" for future showdowns.

 

The 7,000-acre Cleveland Ranch, established in Spring Valley in 1873 by Maine native Abner "Old Cleve" Cleveland and bought in 2000 by the Mormon church, sits atop an aquifer a dozen-plus miles to the north of Route 50, known from postcards as "America's Loneliest Highway."

 

The ranch, owned by the Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is worked by a combination of paid employees, church missionaries and other volunteers, according to a history of the ranch. The calves, after they are weaned, are shipped to an Idaho feed lot and then to a processing plant, where some of the meat is frozen or canned as stew and beef chunks for distribution around the world.

 

If the Southern Nevada Water Authority wins in court, its proposed groundwater project may leave the valley to sage brush and coyotes, according to lawyers for the church and environmentalists.

 

"This is a huge project that raises fundamental questions," said Paul Hejmanowski, a lawyer for the church. "Can we sacrifice an ancient way of life for a growing metropolis?"

 

So far, the ranch and other project opponents have fended off Las Vegas, convincing a judge in 2013 that there was insufficient scientific evidence for the state engineer's decision to award the water rights.

 

The Nevada Resorts Association, the Nevada AFL-CIO, representing members of 120 unions, and developer Howard Hughes Corp. support the water authority's and state engineer's petitions to the state Supreme Court for help. A hearing before the court hasn't been scheduled.

 

"There are no other alternatives available, and it would increase the region's water security," said Virginia Valentine, president of the casino and resort trade group. "Our infrastructure needs to be there."

 

The five resorts - the Wynn Las Vegas, Mandalay Bay, Venetian, Bellagio and Caesars Palace - consumed 2.4 billion gallons in 2013, according to the water authority. Other large users include the golf and country clubs that surround Las Vegas, an area whose population has almost tripled since 1990 to 2 million.

 

The leisure and hospitality sector employs 28 percent of Nevada's workforce and the taxes it pays make up 47 percent of the state's general fund.

 

Those economics may doom Cleveland Ranch even if pipeline opponents have a good case, said Jeffrey Dintzer, a lawyer specializing in water-rights issues with Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP in Los Angeles who isn't involved in the dispute.

"Money talks," Dintzer said. "Nevada gets a huge amount of its revenue from gaming."

 

If the Nevada Supreme Court doesn't reverse the December 2013 decision by the state judge who second-guessed the state engineer, the Legislature and governor may step in to draft a compromise to ensure Las Vegas gets the water, Dintzer said.

 

That might not end the lawsuits. If the ranch and surrounding valleys are left dry, the state could face hundreds of millions of dollars in claims, he said.

 

"This will be one of many of these disputes I see coming in the future," said Ed Casey, a water-rights attorney with Alston & Bird LLP, who represented Los Angeles in litigation over air pollution at Owens Lake. "Water is a commonly shared commodity, and as it becomes scarce, we have to face the question who gets priority."

 

Ranchers, farmers and other so-called senior water rights holders may lose their place at the pump to growing cities, Casey said.

 

The Southern Nevada Water Authority is pursuing unassigned groundwater rights to reduce its reliance on the Colorado River, which accounts for about 90 percent of its supply and is subject to new upstream diversions as drought conditions worsen.

 

With Lake Mead - the largest man-made reservoir in the U.S. - at 43 percent of its capacity, the agency already has increased its use of recycled water and cut its per-capita use by 40 percent since 2002, said Bronson Mack, a spokesman for the authority. Still, the agency expects to need new sources by about 2060, based on current estimates, or as soon as 2035 if population growth exceeds forecasts, Mack said.

 

The agency's groundwater project calls for 263 miles of pipelines connecting Las Vegas with four valleys. U.S. approval of the pipeline is subject to a separate legal challenge in federal court.

 

As far back as 1989, the Las Vegas Valley Water District, now part of the Southern Nevada Water Authority, applied for unappropriated water in Cave Valley, Dry Lake, Delamar Valley and Spring Valley. The state engineer didn't rule on those applications until 2007, leading to the first round of litigation, which voided the approvals.

 

In 2012, the state engineer again approved most of the water authority's applications, leading to a new round of court battles.

 

The Nevada case may set a precedent for urban water districts in arid and semi-arid regions looking for groundwater to sustain development, said Simeon Herskovits, a lawyer for counties, water agencies, environmental groups and businesses opposed to the project.

 

"This is kind of a poster child case for pro-development interests in urban centers trying to take water away from rural areas through a large infrastructure project by arguing, based on bad science, that vast amounts of water are available for extraction and export," Herskovits said.

 

A defeat for the project may force water agencies in the West to find other alternatives, he said.

 

If Las Vegas builds the pipeline, an area the size of New England could face the same environmental and socio-economic devastation as California's Owens Valley after completion of the 200-mile Los Angeles Aqueduct in 1913, he said.

 

Cleveland Ranch and other opponents persuaded Senior District Judge Robert Este in Ely, the only city within 100 miles of Spring Valley, that it was premature to approve large-scale pumping before its effects were fully known. He directed the state engineer to further develop mitigation protocols for any "unreasonable" effects of the project.

 

While the church declined to discuss Cleveland Ranch, its lawyer provided a copy of a DVD about the ranch that details its operations and makes the case that an abundant water supply is essential to raising healthy calves. The DVD was submitted as evidence in the court fight.

 

The Nevada Supreme Court on Feb. 6 dismissed the water authority's appeal of Este's decision, saying it wasn't ripe for review because the judge sent the case back to the state engineer without issuing a final judgment.

 

In a second bid, the water authority and the engineer asked the state's seven-member Supreme Court to use a procedure called a writ, which doesn't require a final judgment in the underlying case, to overturn Este's decision. They contend the judge acted "arbitrarily and capriciously" by substituting his judgment for that of the state engineer, an expert in hydrology.

 

"The worsening drought conditions in the West generally, and the Colorado River Basin in particular, do not afford the luxury of time," the water authority said in a Dec. 12 court filing. "This court should hear this petition, and resolve these issues, now."

 

Water grab pits Las Vegas against Mormons

 

 

Seems to me that one should establish water rights and resources before one builds.

[Calm]

Water to feed cattle to feed poor or water for such things as the below….gee, hard decision:

 

[Avatar4321]

Because of climate change? I thought it was because there are millions more people draining the reservoirs.

oh well, it does seem like a no brainer. Feed people or decoration.

[The Nehor]

Note to self: Do not attempt to build a large city in the middle of the friggin desert.

 

Can we just collectively decide that Las Vegas was a bad idea and shut it down?

[ERayR]

Water to feed cattle to feed poor or water for such things as the below….gee, hard decision:

 

 

Not for a politician

[thesometimesaint]

This is also Las Vegas

SEE http://www.ldschurchtemples.com/lasvegas/

[Robert F. Smith]

...................................................................   

 

Seems to me that one should establish water rights and resources before one builds.

 

You be fantasizing, BCSpace.

As Dintzer said, "Money talks."  Sin City will eventually get its way.  Indeed, the water Lost Wages wants to take includes a vast acquifer which extends under Utah territory as well.

 

Lack of planning and unrestrained growth (simply because developers want to make money) is having the same effect in Southern California, where there are no more acquifers to steal.  This is the way of the world, and does not reflect good stewardship in any sense.

 

Even after all the recycling and conservation that is possible has been implemented, they will still need more water.  Where to get it?  Same question other Southwestern states must ask.  Especially California, which is the greatest agricultural hub in the nation, but which doesn't even have enough water to bring in the typical harvest.  Yet, a virtually unlimited supply of water is available worldwide, and the short-sighted denizens of Vegas could permanently ameliorate this stark reality that they will never have enough water from any acquifers -- if they would only think big. 

 

The simplest and most direct solution is to bring in vast quantities of water through canals from the Pacific Ocean to the overlook of the Salton Sea, which is below sea level.  Installing a huge hydroelectric project there, thus allowing the free fall of water to power generators, which would then power a huge water desalination plant, thus allowing Southern California to have the water it needs.  The domino effect would apply all along the great California Aquaduct (which comes from the Sacramento Delta to Southern California), and agriculture could again flourish.  California's share of diminishing Colorado River water would no longer be necessary, and could be parceled out to adjoining states, such as Nevada and Arizona.

 

As the snow packs decline in the Rockies and Sierras (due to global warming), this project will become ever more crucial to mere survival.  The cost will be high, but the same sort of farsighted considerations came into play with construction of Boulder Dam (which created Lake Mead).  Such projects are absolutely essential, and they more than pay for themselves over time.

[Rivers]

When you decide to live in the desert the limiting factor is water. Figure on something else to solve your problems, don't screw everything else up in your short sightedness.  Don't turn the whole surrounding countryside into another Owen's Valley.   What happens in Vegas should stay in Vegas.

[thesometimesaint]

You be fantasizing, BCSpace.

As Dintzer said, "Money talks."  Sin City will eventually get its way.  Indeed, the water Lost Wages wants to take includes a vast acquifer which extends under Utah territory as well.

 

Lack of planning and unrestrained growth (simply because developers want to make money) is having the same effect in Southern California, where there are no more acquifers to steal.  This is the way of the world, and does not reflect good stewardship in any sense.

 

Even after all the recycling and conservation that is possible has been implemented, they will still need more water.  Where to get it?  Same question other Southwestern states must ask.  Especially California, which is the greatest agricultural hub in the nation, but which doesn't even have enough water to bring in the typical harvest.  Yet, a virtually unlimited supply of water is available worldwide, and the short-sighted denizens of Vegas could permanently ameliorate this stark reality that they will never have enough water from any acquifers -- if they would only think big. 

 

The simplest and most direct solution is to bring in vast quantities of water through canals from the Pacific Ocean to the overlook of the Salton Sea, which is below sea level.  Installing a huge hydroelectric project there, thus allowing the free fall of water to power generators, which would then power a huge water desalination plant, thus allowing Southern California to have the water it needs.  The domino effect would apply all along the great California Aquaduct (which comes from the Sacramento Delta to Southern California), and agriculture could again flourish.  California's share of diminishing Colorado River water would no longer be necessary, and could be parceled out to adjoining states, such as Nevada and Arizona.

 

As the snow packs decline in the Rockies and Sierras (due to global warming), this project will become ever more crucial to mere survival.  The cost will be high, but the same sort of farsighted considerations came into play with construction of Boulder Dam (which created Lake Mead).  Such projects are absolutely essential, and they more than pay for themselves over time.

 

The power needed to transport the water would far exceed the power generated by the water falling. There is no free lunch in physics. The Sea of Cortez is a much easier prospect. However large scale(About 20 million people) desalinization is still an unresolved issue.

[Ham Clam]

My friend just got a mission call to the Las Vegas.

Good think he is a really friendly guy. He'll need to be a smooth talker for a while with this. :/

[Robert F. Smith]

The power needed to transport the water would far exceed the power generated by the water falling. There is no free lunch in physics. The Sea of Cortez is a much easier prospect. However large scale(About 20 million people) desalinization is still an unresolved issue.

No power is needed to transport the water, except gravity -- which is free.  That is why hydroelectric projects have always been so popular.  The free-fall of the water powers the generators -- gravity again.  That is why you take the water directly from the ocean to the Salton Sea valley, because it is below sea level.  The cost is in building the aquaducts, drilling through a mountain, installing the hydroelectric spillway (as at any dam), and installing the desalinization plant (powered by the falling water generators).  Otherwise the desalinization would be too expensive.  For example, the desalinization plant on Catalina Island is absolutely essential, but the cost is so high that tourists end up paying for it through all costs associated with visiting the Island -- which is ultimately worth it -- but could not be tolerated for ordinary venues, such as Las Vegas.

 

The cost-benefit analysis tells us whether we can afford to do it, and this was presumably the understanding in deciding to build Hoover Dam and Lake Mead.

 

So you would bring the water in from the Sea of Cortez?

[thesometimesaint]

No power is needed to transport the water, except gravity -- which is free.  That is why hydroelectric projects have always been so popular.  The free-fall of the water powers the generators -- gravity again.  That is why you take the water directly from the ocean to the Salton Sea valley, because it is below sea level.  The cost is in building the aquaducts, drilling through a mountain, installing the hydroelectric spillway (as at any dam), and installing the desalinization plant (powered by the falling water generators).  Otherwise the desalinization would be too expensive.  For example, the desalinization plant on Catalina Island is absolutely essential, but the cost is so high that tourists end up paying for it through all costs associated with visiting the Island -- which is ultimately worth it -- but could not be tolerated for ordinary venues, such as Las Vegas.

 

The cost-benefit analysis tells us whether we can afford to do it, and this was presumably the understanding in deciding to build Hoover Dam and Lake Mead.

 

So you would bring the water in from the Sea of Cortez?

 

There are mountains between the Pacific Ocean and the Salton Sea which you'd have to pump the water up those mountains.

SEE https://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_ylt=AwrTcduiLv9UBi4ARxclnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTB0c2puYm1xBHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2dxMQR2dGlkA1lIUzAwM18x?p=salton+Sea&back=https%3A%2F%2Fsearch.yahoo.com%2Fyhs%2Fsearch%3Fp%3DSaltin%2BSea%26ei%3DUTF-8%26hsimp%3Dyhs-005%26hspart%3Dmozilla&w=1067&h=800&imgurl=littletripsdotcom.files.wordpress.com%2F2013%2F03%2Fsalton-sea-2.jpg&size=129KB&name=salton-sea-2.jpg&rcurl=http%3A%2F%2Flittleusatrips.org%2F2013%2F03%2F01%2Fsalton-sea%2F&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Flittleusatrips.org%2F2013%2F03%2F01%2Fsalton-sea%2F&type=&no=4&tt=120&oid=b5241e817696ce229cd078db53681d5a&***=Salton+Sea&sigr=11girjn42&sigi=11u9tr9c8&sign=10ge0308l&sigt=103vg5ole&sigb=12mtls7r8&fr=yhs-mozilla-005&hspart=mozilla&hsimp=yhs-005

 

Even drilling tunnels won't negate the need to pump. The resultant hydroelectric power would come no where close to the energy needed to jump the water. The California Aqueduct System has many pumping stations. There is no free lunch in physics

 

The Sea of Cortez is closer and because there are no mountain there is less need to pump, but there is still that need.

Edited March 10, 2015 by thesometimesaint

[Robert F. Smith]

There are mountains between the Pacific Ocean and the Salton Sea which you'd have to pump the water up those mountains.

..............................................................................   

Even drilling tunnels won't negate the need to pump. The resultant hydroelectric power would come no where close to the energy needed to jump the water. The California Aqueduct System has many pumping stations. There is no free lunch in physics

 

The Sea of Cortez is closer and because there are no mountain there is less need to pump, but there is still that need.

No one is asking for a free lunch.

Drilling tunnels (and digging) does in fact negate the need to pump, even though it is very expensive.  Once again, the cost-benefit ratios must be calculated, just as they were for the visible pumping stations along the California Aquaduct.  As for the Sea of Cortez, I would include that in with the relative figures, but also ask whether Mexico will be politically stable.

[thesometimesaint]

No one is asking for a free lunch.

Drilling tunnels (and digging) does in fact negate the need to pump, even though it is very expensive.  Once again, the cost-benefit ratios must be calculated, just as they were for the visible pumping stations along the California Aquaduct.  As for the Sea of Cortez, I would include that in with the relative figures, but also ask whether Mexico will be politically stable.

 

Even a sea level trench won't help. It's a small valley where it is below sea level. So it would fill up in a matter of days. Just like when the Colorado River overflowed and created the Salton Sea in the first place. Making hydroelectric power generation impossible. Remember it's the height difference that makes it possible. Plus salt water is highly corrosive to metals. So in effect you'd spend billions of dollars over decades on something that wouldn't last long enough for the politicians to cut the ribbon. Talk about throwing good money after bad. Baja California is just as bad, if not worse, off because of this drought. For better or worse our only viable options are to use less water, make desalinization much much cheaper, and pray for more rain and snow here in the west. 

[Robert F. Smith]

Even a sea level trench won't help. It's a small valley where it is below sea level. So it would fill up in a matter of days. Just like when the Colorado River overflowed and created the Salton Sea in the first place. Making hydroelectric power generation impossible. Remember it's the height difference that makes it possible. Plus salt water is highly corrosive to metals. So in effect you'd spend billions of dollars over decades on something that wouldn't last long enough for the politicians to cut the ribbon. Talk about throwing good money after bad. Baja California is just as bad, if not worse, off because of this drought. For better or worse our only viable options are to use less water, make desalinization much much cheaper, and pray for more rain and snow here in the west. 

I have done archeology there, and it is not as small as you assert, even though it is about 234 feet below sea level.

 

In any case, only a small portion of the desalinated water would find its way into the Salton Sea proper, most of it being immediately piped to other areas of Southern California (which is the whole purpose of the project).  As to the practicality of the project, the generators could easily be built with salt water in mind, and the power produced would enable any pumping stations needed.  The technology is not new, and U.S. Navy ships have been desalinating sea water for generations.

 

We have no other choice, and the prognosis for California grows worse by the month:  Douglas A. McIntyre, “California Is Running Out of Water,” 24/7 Wall St., March 14, 2015, online at http://247wallst.com/economy/2015/03/14/california-is-running-out-of-water/ ,  Perhaps you have an alternative?

[thesometimesaint]

I have done archeology there, and it is not as small as you assert, even though it is about 234 feet below sea level.

 

In any case, only a small portion of the desalinated water would find its way into the Salton Sea proper, most of it being immediately piped to other areas of Southern California (which is the whole purpose of the project).  As to the practicality of the project, the generators could easily be built with salt water in mind, and the power produced would enable any pumping stations needed.  The technology is not new, and U.S. Navy ships have been desalinating sea water for generations.

 

We have no other choice, and the prognosis for California grows worse by the month:  Douglas A. McIntyre, “California Is Running Out of Water,” 24/7 Wall St., March 14, 2015, online at http://247wallst.com/economy/2015/03/14/california-is-running-out-of-water/ ,  Perhaps you have an alternative?

 

I didn't put any dimensions into my claim. The entire catchment area is only a little over 8,000 sq miles and the surface are of the sea itself is far smaller at 343 sq miles. To give you an idea of just how small that area really is the state of California is over 167,000 sq miles. 

 

So you are going to desalinate Pacific Ocean water, then dig sea level trenches with pumps to get it over mountains, then pump it back over mountains to other areas in California. Los Angeles is right on the coast. Why not desalinate the water in Los Angeles for use right there, and avoid all that for nothing extra work/expense?

 

All due deference to the US Navy, but even a big ship is no match for the freshwater needs off even a small town. Plus the US Navy doesn't have to worry about the cost in energy to drive their small desalination equipment, the ongoing cost of maintenance, or the cost of replacing the equipment on a ship. Congress has to worry about it. But not the US Navy directly. Please tell me where we have overcome the problem of salt water corrosion of metals.

 

Yes here in California we face serious problems, but throwing good money after bad never works for very long. The short term solutions are strict conservation with desalination where feasible, and pray for rain/snow. Long term California is going to have to lose about 90% of its population to areas with more fresh water. Maybe James "snow ball" Inhofe can entice a few million of us into Oklahoma.

[Robert F. Smith]

............................................................   

So you are going to desalinate Pacific Ocean water, then dig sea level trenches with pumps to get it over mountains, then pump it back over mountains to other areas in California. Los Angeles is right on the coast. Why not desalinate the water in Los Angeles for use right there, and avoid all that for nothing extra work/expense?

Electric power generation (which can be otherwise quite expensive) at the Salton Sea overlook powers the pumps.  Do it all in L.A. and you get an impossible expense.  Do you predict that L.A. will do so anyway?

 

All due deference to the US Navy, but even a big ship is no match for the freshwater needs off even a small town. Plus the US Navy doesn't have to worry about the cost in energy to drive their small desalination equipment, the ongoing cost of maintenance, or the cost of replacing the equipment on a ship. Congress has to worry about it. But not the US Navy directly. Please tell me where we have overcome the problem of salt water corrosion of metals.

Naval bronze alloy 464 is good.

As for size, a Nimitz class aircraft carrier has on board a full complement of 6,000, much bigger even than your small town.

However, with nuclear fission power, cost is no object.

 

Yes here in California we face serious problems, but throwing good money after bad never works for very long. The short term solutions are strict conservation with desalination where feasible, and pray for rain/snow. Long term California is going to have to lose about 90% of its population to areas with more fresh water. Maybe James "snow ball" Inhofe can entice a few million of us into Oklahoma.

Sounds like no solution at all.  I had expected that you would at least opt for nuclear powered desalination plants up and down the coast.  Of course the cost for nuclear is sky high, while hydroelectric is relatively cheap, aside from the initial investment in either case.

 

Good luck on that "strict conservation" which the State can't seem to implement.

[thesometimesaint]

Electric power generation (which can be otherwise quite expensive) at the Salton Sea overlook powers the pumps.  Do it all in L.A. and you get an impossible expense.  Do you predict that L.A. will do so anyway?

 

Naval bronze alloy 464 is good.

As for size, a Nimitz class aircraft carrier has on board a full complement of 6,000, much bigger even than your small town.

However, with nuclear fission power, cost is no object.

 

Sounds like no solution at all.  I had expected that you would at least opt for nuclear powered desalination plants up and down the coast.  Of course the cost for nuclear is sky high, while hydroelectric is relatively cheap, aside from the initial investment in either case.

 

Good luck on that "strict conservation" which the State can't seem to implement.

 

It takes more energy to pump that water over those mountains than any resultant energy created by the fall of water through those turbines. There is no free lunch in physics.

 

I didn't say LA was to do it all. The vast majority of Californian's live close to the ocean. Desalination near the point of use is cheaper than transporting desalinated ocean water.

SEE http://www.dailynews.com/environment-and-nature/20140615/nations-largest-desalination-plant-looking-to-provide-drought-proof-water-supply-to-southern-california

 

I live in a small town, by California standards. We have over 50,000 residents. That's a bit over your 6000 crew members. Naval brass while good is still subject to salt water corrosion.

SEE http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=191279

 

Nuclear power doesn't solve the problem of salt water corrosion. What the Navy does is replace the machines for water treatment every few years. Plus California is geologically unstable not exactly the best place to put a nuclear power plant. Fukushima?

 

I lived in New Mexico for many years. Strict conservation is just a way of life there. Plus many communities in California have had strict conservation laws for decades.

Edited March 16, 2015 by thesometimesaint

[hagoth7]

Here's an interesting article that could have something to say about water wars.

 

The Drought Fighter:

 

http://craftsmanship.net/drought-fighters/

[sheilauk]

For better or worse our only viable options are to use less water, make desalinization much much cheaper, and pray for more rain and snow here in the west.

for a short term solution, you need to invite Queen Elizabeth ll the British monarch to visit. It frequently rains during or after her official visits! I know the drought is very serious and I'm only partly joking, it really does rain a lot on her visits. Did you see the jubilee celebration? Poured down. And the UK has had a few periods of drought - the Queen toured and it rained! Edited March 17, 2015 by sheilauk

[Robert F. Smith]

It takes more energy to pump that water over those mountains than any resultant energy created by the fall of water through those turbines. There is no free lunch in physics.

 

I didn't say LA was to do it all. The vast majority of Californian's live close to the ocean. Desalination near the point of use is cheaper than transporting desalinated ocean water.

SEE http://www.dailynews.com/environment-and-nature/20140615/nations-largest-desalination-plant-looking-to-provide-drought-proof-water-supply-to-southern-california

 

I live in a small town, by California standards. We have over 50,000 residents. That's a bit over your 6000 crew members. Naval brass while good is still subject to salt water corrosion.

SEE http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=191279

 

Nuclear power doesn't solve the problem of salt water corrosion. What the Navy does is replace the machines for water treatment every few years. Plus California is geologically unstable not exactly the best place to put a nuclear power plant. Fukushima?

 

I lived in New Mexico for many years. Strict conservation is just a way of life there. Plus many communities in California have had strict conservation laws for decades.

You're in denial, good buddy, not only about the gravity of the crisis, but also about the nature of potential solutions.  You offer none.

 

If you had been in the catbird seat, we would never have had a California Aquaduct, and certainly no pumping stations -- because they cost too much.  You would never have allowed the construction of Hoover Dam, due to its outlandish cost. You immediately ignore cost-benefit analysis.

 

When reasonable options are offered, you automatically reject them (Naval bronze alloy 464, drilling instead of pumping, etc.).  There is indeed no free lunch (no one has claimed there is), but offer only failed linear thinking in place of actual options.

[thesometimesaint]

You're in denial, good buddy, not only about the gravity of the crisis, but also about the nature of potential solutions.  You offer none.

 

If you had been in the catbird seat, we would never have had a California Aquaduct, and certainly no pumping stations -- because they cost too much.  You would never have allowed the construction of Hoover Dam, due to its outlandish cost. You immediately ignore cost-benefit analysis.

 

When reasonable options are offered, you automatically reject them (Naval bronze alloy 464, drilling instead of pumping, etc.).  There is indeed no free lunch (no one has claimed there is), but offer only failed linear thinking in place of actual options.

 

HUH? Where have I denied the problem? It a serious problem with painful but effective solutions. Our aquifers are rapidly depleting, and without substantial rain and snow are not likely to  be replenished.  In the short term strict conservation and desalinization seem to me the best of solutions. If this drought continues for decades, which seems likely, massive relocations of people is the only alternative. Praying for rain and snow can't hurt either.

 

I'm not against desalinization, but there are still many hurtles to overcome before that is viable on a large scale.  I've already said that Naval Brass is good. However it is you that have denied the attendant corrosion that DOES OCCUR.

 

You have to drill to something.  Drilling through nearly two hundred miles to bring Pacific Ocean water to the Salton Sea is problematic. Digging a channel to the Sea of Cortez has been suggested before just not in connection with this current drought. At best that would simply decrease but not eliminate the salinity of the Salton Sea. Making that an unrealistic possibility.

[Robert F. Smith]

HUH? Where have I denied the problem? It a serious problem with painful but effective solutions. Our aquifers are rapidly depleting, and without substantial rain and snow are not likely to  be replenished.  In the short term strict conservation and desalinization seem to me the best of solutions. If this drought continues for decades, which seems likely, massive relocations of people is the only alternative. Praying for rain and snow can't hurt either.

 

I'm not against desalinization, but there are still many hurtles to overcome before that is viable on a large scale.  I've already said that Naval Brass is good. However it is you that have denied the attendant corrosion that DOES OCCUR.

 

You have to drill to something.  Drilling through nearly two hundred miles to bring Pacific Ocean water to the Salton Sea is problematic. Digging a channel to the Sea of Cortez has been suggested before just not in connection with this current drought. At best that would simply decrease but not eliminate the salinity of the Salton Sea. Making that an unrealistic possibility.  

So no canal from the Sea of Cortez, no hydroelectric program for the Salton Sea overlook.  No nuclear fission reactors in California due to earthquake threat, and fusion reactors are not yet ready for prime time.  Even though it is adequate, Naval bronze alloy 464 doesn't meet your personal expectations -- perhaps on a par with your personal belief that a city of 50,000 is really just a "town" (nowhere is such a definition accepted), perhaps like Mayberry RFD.  I have lived in towns and cities and I know the difference.

 

Instead, your solutions are:

1. conservation (unworkable)

2. desalination (too costly)

3. massive relocations (to where?)

4. ??

 

Pretty bleak prospects.  California is just not worth saving.  This is what happens when the "nay"-sayers dominate.

[thesometimesaint]

1. http://abc7.com/weather/california-approves-emergency-water-restrictions-due-to-drought/563401/

2. http://www.water.ca.gov/desalination/

3. East of the 50th meridian.

 

I'm no nay-Sayer. Just that your alternatives are not viable.

[Robert F. Smith]

1. http://abc7.com/weather/california-approves-emergency-water-restrictions-due-to-drought/563401/

2. http://www.water.ca.gov/desalination/

3. East of the 50th meridian.

 

I'm no nay-Sayer. Just that your alternatives are not viable.

Not just mine, but no alternatives are viable, according to you.  Unless you are opting solely and only for conservation.

 

So, we just allow California to die, and forget about it.  Costs too much to do anything about the drought.  Hey, who needs a cost-benefit analysis?!  

 

13 Interesting facts about California Agriculture

 (http://www.dairymoos.com/interesting-facts-about-california-agriculture/):

1. California is the world’s 5th largest supplier of food, cotton fiber and other agricultural commodities.
2. California is the largest producer of food in the U.S. yet has less than 4% of the farms in the U.S.
3. The unique Mediterranean climate allows us to grow over 450+ different crops.
4. Some of these crops are exclusive to California: almonds, artichokes, dates, figs, kiwifruit, olives, persimmons, pomegranates, pistachios, prunes, raisins, clovers, and walnuts
5. California is the largest exporter of almonds in the world
6. California is the number 1 dairy state in the U.S.
7. California produces over 86% of all the lemons consumed in the United States.
8. California is the 4th largest wine producer in the world and produces over 90% of the wine in the U.S.
9. 70 to 80% of all ripe olives are grown in California
10. California accounts for 94% of the processed tomatoes in the U.S.
11. California is the nation’s leading producer of strawberries, averaging 1.4 billion pounds of strawberries or 83% of the country’s total fresh and frozen strawberry production.
12. The value of the California strawberry crop is approximately $700 million with related employment of more than 48,000 people.
13. California produces 25% of the nation’s onions and 43% of the nation’s green onions.

But, hey, let's just forget about it.