Water... diverting from the Mississippi to the SW

Seabeast2000

Deathcult® NPC
Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2018
Messages
4,957
Reaction score
5,712
Cant be any more energy intensive than the proposed regs that all cars in California be electric by 2035. Of course being familiar with how California works I'm sure they will dictate that by 2035 all cars run on almonds

I think most of us are familiar with out CA works. Plans for frosting and decoration but not for baking the cake itself?
 

Grindspine

likes pointy things
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
1,813
Reaction score
1,009
Location
Indiana
I think they need to ban first golf courses and second lawn care in the entire southwest. I think they’ll probably still run out of water sooner or later but it would give them a hell of a lot more to work with. Currently there are tons of like gated communities in places like Utah where you HAVE to water your lawn and keep it green or the homeowners union kicks you out.

Diverting water from the Mississippi or Great Lakes is an absolutely horrible idea that would just make it so the entire country would eventually be screwed as opposed to those who thought living in a desert and treating it like a temperate climate was a good idea. I think the southwest is completely screwed long term and it should be slowly abandoned except for people ready to live there as if it’s really a desert.
Residential lawn care is such a complete waste of time and resources. The amount of fossil fuel, time, and energy that is wasted on keeping a 1.75" manicured lawn is just silly. It really has no function other than aesthetics. It is bad for local pollinators. It harms local ecosystems by often inviting invasive species to be added when landscaping.

I'm not talking about California, I'm talking about full desert states. Most of california is not at all able to be described as desert. IIRC most agriculture in the country comes from California. I think most would disagree with you that we should stop growing food.

California's notorious agricultural waste I've heard about is primarily almonds and soybeans. I guess almonds in particular have insanely high water usage. I would certainly support phasing out almonds.
Conversely, how much water is wasted on a dairy farm vs farming almonds and soybeans for milk alternatives?

Fuck em all. There's always some dickhead from a desert state talking about diverting midwest aquifers and rivers for their benefit. It's a horrible idea as those water sources feed into multiple states and are integral to the local environment here.
Southern California in particular is reaping what they sowed 170+ years ago when they drained a bunch of their local lakes and dammed the rivers to create farmland.
Lake Mead shouldn't even exist. It's an abomination created due to the Hoover dam.

Also if people care about water usage in agriculture, don't buy or plant avocados. They're insanely water hungry compared to other plants.
But... guacamole!
 

SpaceDock

Shred till your dead
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
3,774
Reaction score
2,071
Location
Windsor, CO
I think the biggest problem with this plan is trying to pump the water from 1000 ft elevation at the Mississippi up to 9000 ft where the Colorado river is. It would be moving the water not only across the country but either over or through the Rocky Mountains.
 

Adieu

SS.org Regular
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
3,659
Reaction score
3,089
Location
California
Cant be any more energy intensive than the proposed regs that all cars in California be electric by 2035. Of course being familiar with how California works I'm sure they will dictate that by 2035 all cars run on almonds

Almond-hempoil blend
 

Glades

Down in the Everglades
Joined
Sep 8, 2016
Messages
681
Reaction score
555
Location
Florida
Nope.

What certain lobbies don't want you to know:

View attachment 109977

Why the fuck are we farming in the desert, anyway? Not like America is short of underutilized land in other areas.

The California Central Valley has been a rich agricultural area for a long time. I know they grow a lot of rice in the Sacramento Valley, which is a crop that requires a lot of water to farm.
 

mmr007

(anti)Social Influencer
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Messages
1,632
Reaction score
3,270
Location
SoCal
You know what....I changed my mind. As I sit here watching this bullshit reasoning governors in the middle America states use to justify denying abortions to victims of rape and incest...I realize I don't want their water. There's clearly something in it.
 

jaxadam

SS.org Regular
Joined
Aug 14, 2006
Messages
4,225
Reaction score
4,798
Location
Jacksonville, FL
You know what....I changed my mind. As I sit here watching this bullshit reasoning governors in the middle America states use to justify denying abortions to victims of rape and incest...I realize I don't want their water. There's clearly something in it.

That’s why I always read my local water report!

 

wheresthefbomb

SS.org Regular
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
2,772
Reaction score
4,175
Location
Fairbanks, AK
As someone who's spent like half my life, maybe more, in Cali, I am well-placed to state the obvious: beaches are overrated.

The vast majority of people living in their vicinity haven't been in YEARS. And generally only go there to drink, do drugs, or fuck, and only when they are officially closed.

I grew up on an island. it really depends on the beach.

What was it Lex Luthor said, something like "learn to swim, see ya down in Arizona Bay"?

Anyway, as a Canadian, I don't relish the idea of the water wars to come.

glad someone picked it up I didn't think I was being that cryptic :lol:
 

Drew

Forum MVP
Joined
Aug 17, 2004
Messages
31,851
Reaction score
8,538
Location
Somerville, MA
I'm not talking about California, I'm talking about full desert states. Most of california is not at all able to be described as desert. IIRC most agriculture in the country comes from California. I think most would disagree with you that we should stop growing food.

California's notorious agricultural waste I've heard about is primarily almonds and soybeans. I guess almonds in particular have insanely high water usage. I would certainly support phasing out almonds.
Inland California, where most of the agriculture is, is extremely arid. The south is outright desert, but central inland is onlt slightly better. And the fact we use heavily subsidized water to primarily grow high water intensity crops there like alfalfa (which, in turn, is also price subsidized) and almonds is absolutely insane.

To the OP (and wankerness, if you're curious) - this is a fascinating book on the history of and current state of water policy in the US:

Cadillac Desert

It's a much more sordid story than you might imagine - LA's water supply was basically secured with a war, which is something our history books tend to gloss over. We talk about water wars like they're waiting for us in the future, but they've been a part of American history since our country was founded.
 
Last edited:

bostjan

MicroMetal
Contributor
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
19,726
Reaction score
10,772
Location
St. Johnsbury, VT USA
Fuck that noise. California likes to try to dictate to the rest of the nation what products are toxic or what causes cancer, whether it's scientifically backed or not. They have their own separate EPA, even. Yet they are the most environmentally irresponsible state, of course.

Arizona and Nevada are just California lite.

I don't want them to not have water, but if we just burn up a bunch of energy creating some wasteful stream of water from the midwest to the southwest, it'll just end up costing a ton of money, and then either California will decide that the leaded water from Michigan is not up to their standards, or they'll accidentally dump it in the Pacific, or the pipe will spring a leak or they'll dump all of that water on stupid jungle crops they are trying to grow for hipsters in the desert. Any outcome just means more waste and more irresponsible usage. It's not like anybody right now has a bounty of clean water. Figure out a better way not to squander resources, take the chip off of your shoulder, and then, if you need help, and we are able to provide, we'll try to come to the rescue. Otherwise piss off.
 

Drew

Forum MVP
Joined
Aug 17, 2004
Messages
31,851
Reaction score
8,538
Location
Somerville, MA
Yet they are the most environmentally irresponsible state, of course.
You're thinking of West Virginia, I think. :lol:

I think if we stopped subsidizing the delivery of water, then a lot of this usage problem in California would fix itself. They'd pretty much have to turn to low water intensity, high value crops to make it work economically.
 

wankerness

SS.org Regular
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
7,255
Reaction score
1,883
Location
WI
Fuck that noise. California likes to try to dictate to the rest of the nation what products are toxic or what causes cancer, whether it's scientifically backed or not. They have their own separate EPA, even. Yet they are the most environmentally irresponsible state, of course.

Arizona and Nevada are just California lite.

I don't want them to not have water, but if we just burn up a bunch of energy creating some wasteful stream of water from the midwest to the southwest, it'll just end up costing a ton of money, and then either California will decide that the leaded water from Michigan is not up to their standards, or they'll accidentally dump it in the Pacific, or the pipe will spring a leak or they'll dump all of that water on stupid jungle crops they are trying to grow for hipsters in the desert. Any outcome just means more waste and more irresponsible usage. It's not like anybody right now has a bounty of clean water. Figure out a better way not to squander resources, take the chip off of your shoulder, and then, if you need help, and we are able to provide, we'll try to come to the rescue. Otherwise piss off.
Fortunately there are treaties and legislation in place to prevent the great lakes from being drained by the richer states no matter if they try to pay for it or not. It's only allowed to be used by the bordering states/provinces. Not that these rules will probably stand as soon as the supreme court gets to hear anything related to it.
 

Adieu

SS.org Regular
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
3,659
Reaction score
3,089
Location
California
You're thinking of West Virginia, I think. :lol:

I think if we stopped subsidizing the delivery of water, then a lot of this usage problem in California would fix itself. They'd pretty much have to turn to low water intensity, high value crops to make it work economically.

With a tiny population of 1.8 million, WV couldn't screw up much of anything even if it wanted to
 

bostjan

MicroMetal
Contributor
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
19,726
Reaction score
10,772
Location
St. Johnsbury, VT USA
With a tiny population of 1.8 million, WV couldn't screw up much of anything even if it wanted to
0.5% of the USA's population, but still 2% of the USA's Senate power, just like every other state. California might have 12% of the US population, but same 2% of the upper house.
 

mmr007

(anti)Social Influencer
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Messages
1,632
Reaction score
3,270
Location
SoCal
Fuck that noise. California likes to try to dictate to the rest of the nation what products are toxic or what causes cancer, whether it's scientifically backed or not. They have their own separate EPA, even. Yet they are the most environmentally irresponsible state, of course.

Arizona and Nevada are just California lite.

I don't want them to not have water, but if we just burn up a bunch of energy creating some wasteful stream of water from the midwest to the southwest, it'll just end up costing a ton of money, and then either California will decide that the leaded water from Michigan is not up to their standards, or they'll accidentally dump it in the Pacific, or the pipe will spring a leak or they'll dump all of that water on stupid jungle crops they are trying to grow for hipsters in the desert. Any outcome just means more waste and more irresponsible usage. It's not like anybody right now has a bounty of clean water. Figure out a better way not to squander resources, take the chip off of your shoulder, and then, if you need help, and we are able to provide, we'll try to come to the rescue. Otherwise piss off.
So is that a hard no or do I need to read between the lines?
 

mmr007

(anti)Social Influencer
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Messages
1,632
Reaction score
3,270
Location
SoCal
Once I move to Tennessee this state and its water problems can go fuck itself along with all the other problems it brought on itself
 


Top